Sounds like the guy that gave Mt Airy a 3 because it was too hard...
I gave Airy a 3.5....
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
Sounds like the guy that gave Mt Airy a 3 because it was too hard...
No kidding. Generally speaking there isn't a whole lot that can be done about them either, at least from the course management perspective.
It's handy to know if a course is particularly buggy in terms of preparing to play it, but I don't see where it should be a big con in a review. Cons, IMO, are typically things that can at least theoretically be fixed...lack of signs, broken targets, trash everywhere, unsafe design, etc.
To me, bugs go right in the same category as bad weather. If you're there on the wrong day, you just have to deal with it, but it isn't the course's fault.
While I disagree with your rating at least you gave reasons other than it being too hard like this guy did:I gave Airy a 3.5....
Other Thoughts: I rated this course lower than most, because of the heavy traffic and outrageous difficulty. Coming here without doubles, an amateur player will expect to shoot well over and experience a major level of frustration. I am normally not a player to get angry on the course, but this one is just relentless between the length and tree coverage. Rolling terrain and heavy wooded holes provide a very well made professional level course. I am an established player in my area, but this course KICKED MY ASS. WIll not be returning here without a partner.
Isn't there a rule about having to at least played the whole course in order to write a review?
Sounds like the guy that gave Mt Airy a 3 because it was too hard...
Probably an 878 player. Around that level most think they're better than the are.
So what course was it?
Good to know. Then I'm sure you won't mind when someone nitpicks the grammar in your subject heading.
... If the course in question were transported to an area with zero mosquitos, say Arizona, shouldn't the course then be reviewed and rated better, with all things being equal besides the mosquitos?
Location, bugs, weather, among many other things, should all go into a review and rating.
Good to know. Then I'm sure you won't mind when someone nitpicks the grammar in your subject heading.
As for the review in question, I probably wouldn't rate and review a course I hadn't played at least one complete round on. However, I disagree with the folks who think a bothersome presence of mosquitos should be ignored when writing a review of a course. If the course in question were transported to an area with zero mosquitos, say Arizona, shouldn't the course then be reviewed and rated better, with all things being equal besides the mosquitos?
Location, bugs, weather, among many other things, should all go into a review and rating.
Don't mean to nitpick, but:
4 deaths in Arizona prompt mosquito concerns
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news...mosquito-prevention-after-outbreaks/32064249/
... Grammer...
Lol, my bad. I had no idea the mosquito problem was worse in the desert SW than it was in Florida.
It would have to be a reaaaaally severe situation to affect a course rating in my book...maybe if the clouds of mosquitoes were so thick that it affected the flight of my disc.
Couple years ago the 4 wooded holes at cap springs were damn near this bad. You'd set down your bag and in seconds there were literally hundreds of mosquitoes on it. You couldn't stop moving for a second, no matter how thick the layer of Deet on your clothes was. Most people just skipped those holes, those that didn't ran them.
When its that bad, I would count it as a con for sure.