Poor Adam_Valk gave Flip City a less than 5 review

[tallpaul]

Just because Adam only gave a 4.5 out of 5 total for Flip City; he's getting the severe thumbs down treatment. Only thing he said was that there is no water there. I personally, have only given one 5 rating so far; and part of the reason is because water IS IN PLAY on nearly half the holes of a 24 hole layout. Now, I have yet to play Flip City; though, I am hoping to remedy this in 2010...hopefully by meeting a bunch of my fellow DGCR members at a big get together. But, if one is considering a 5 to be perfect....wouldn't water shots have to be included? Thoughts???

 

[steven2361]

I gave him a thumbs down because the review was not helpfull, not because I disagreed with the content of the review.

 

[BrotherDave]

Hmmm, at first I felt inclined to agree with you but I don't think a course should be knocked for lacking a certain environmental feature. I don't think water should be a requirement of the 5 disc ideal, but what water represents, a hazard where you are sure to lose discs, should be. It just seems preposterous to think that courses in the deserts and other regions couldn't be 5s b/c they lack water hazards.

 

[tallpaul]

If ball golfers were rating the best of their best; the ones that would be chosen; would certainly have serious water features. True???

 

[Flies to the Left]

I have to disagree about water being required for giving a 5 rating.
Water is one item that if it is not there already, it's not going to be put in for a disc golf course. The same thing could be said for hills and valleys.

Course design and upkeep makes a 5 rating. Water is not required, but it makes course designs so much better.

 

[valkyrie]

I don't think water HAS to be present for a 5 on a course, it depends on the person. I know people who HATE water and will skip those holes, and i know some people who love water holes. If a course has some awesome elevation, shot selection, good tees/sighns/baskets, its fun...etc it can still get a 5. Im sure some peopleow uld rate down for water, because they are afraid to loose some discs.

 

[Frank Delicious]

What is going on here? Why do I keep seeing all these thread about "well I disagree with so and so's review don't you guys agree with me"?

 

[srm_520]

I like the fact that he mentioned the lack of water, but that one point doesn't make it a good review.

Now if it had been a detailed review that covered multiple points of the course and then gave it a 4.5 and got marked down - then I would have an issue.

 

[ejvogie]

Well Frank, some people just like to stir the (poop)

 

[Frank Delicious]

I'm just saying these threads seem like thinly veiled cries for validation.

 

[tallpaul]

I understand what folks are saying regarding the non helpful info., but a course such as Flip; which has umpteen reviews already...I mean, what are you going to add to the info? In the case of courses with lots of reviews; people that are still submitting reviews are doing so basically to influence the ratings. My major question has not to do so much with this particular review; but rather is an intro to the question of whether or not water is a requirement for a 5 rated course.

I don't think water HAS to be present for a 5 on a course, it depends on the person. I know people who HATE water and will skip those holes, and i know some people who love water holes. If a course has some awesome elevation, shot selection, good tees/sighns/baskets, its fun...etc it can still get a 5. Im sure some peopleow uld rate down for water, because they are afraid to loose some discs.

I, personally, have debated on this issue as well. In my younger years, I thought, "Why don't more courses have water shots, like bolf courses?" Later on, I thought, "Man, I hate losing discs in the water. This can get expensive quick." I think, I've now come full circle, and while I prefer water features that allow you to retrieve discs; I just think, that when thinking of "the best of the best" or "the perfect course, with nothing I would want to change;" that water would have to be in the equation.

 

[tallpaul]

I

'm just saying these threads seem like thinly veiled cries for validation.

I don't know Adam. I just happened to notice he had given Flip a less than five review; and said to myself, I bet he's getting thumbs down. I went and checked, and sure enough; he was. So, I read review, and biggest piece of info he seemed to be stressing, was that due to lack of water; he was knocking off .5.

 

[Disc Golf Cowboy]

Adam_Valk wrote.....Cons: I know there have been obstacles built to replace the lack of water,
I've played Flip and really don't remember any obstacles built. I guess if you consider a pile of rocks a built obstacle then there are a few.

 

[optidiscic]

Again your all arguing the rating...I found it helpful to know there is no water there...I hate water holes where I can lose discs. (don't mind streams and shallow pools) So in essence there was haelpful info there. I am sure if he gave it a 5 he'd be getting the flip thumbs up treatmnt and the Idle down trtmnt. I don't vote here I never played the course. But to me theres a nugget of helpful there..unless theres a stream or pond that he somehow missed!

 

[REDARMY]

Hmmm, at first I felt inclined to agree with you but I don't think a course should be knocked for lacking a certain environmental feature. I don't think water should be a requirement of the 5 disc ideal, but what water represents, a hazard where you are sure to lose discs, should be. It just seems preposterous to think that courses in the deserts and other regions couldn't be 5s b/c they lack water hazards.

bullseye.

and as steven said, adam's review wasn't helpful. it didn't tell me anything i didn't already know.

 

[srm_520]

When you think about it - it is a little weird that the "best" course in the nation has no water features. I guess one just assumes the best course will have every type of hazard.

Of course Beaver Ranch is top 5 and it doesn't have any water either. Of course - it's on top of two Colorado mountains, so that is a little more understandable.

hrrmmm. No water at Idlewild either...that one seems like a typo.

Just some food for thought.

 

[buzzinb]

I'm just saying these threads seem like thinly veiled cries for validation.

"Yeah, but it would have been an ace if the basket was designed correctly!"

 

[REDARMY]

I'm just saying these threads seem like thinly veiled cries for validation.

then what do you call your rampant post whoring that includes no relevant information about, or point to be made, to the topic at hand?

 

[Frank Delicious]

bullseye.

and as steven said, adam's review wasn't helpful. it didn't tell me anything i didn't already know.

Is a review only useful if it tells you something you don't already know? Wouldn't one well written review for each course do the job then?

then what do you call your rampant post whoring that includes no relevant information about, or point to be made, to the topic at hand?

Spicing this place up. you never answered my question to you in the other thread about which style communism you like the best. It's impolite to not answer a question directed at you.

 

[Dave242]

and as steven said, adam's review wasn't helpful. it didn't tell me anything i didn't already know.

I suppose with attitude, there will not be another helpful review of Flip. What more meaningful tidbit can be added that has not been included in the 71 reviews so far?

And, he does include helpful info: lots of shots required, no water but other interesting obstacles and bugs in the summer.