Rating Feedback

[Olorin]

This is an awesome site that's incredibly useful. I can't believe how much time and work that Tim puts into this. As such, I think we should all try to make it as good as we can.

Sometimes courses are rated with numbers that a majority of other people would have a hard time agreeing with. When that happens this site loses credibility. This most common occurrence is when people rate a course as a 5 when it certainly isn't. A 5 should be a world class course that it's worth planning a trip to go to. But it's also conceivable that someone who is new and enthusiastic might rate a course a 4 when it's really only a 2. It's even possible that someone could rate a course a 2 when it's really a 4.

This thread is an an effort to allow us to give each other feedback. Sure, the ratings might balance out over time, but maybe I might need to reconsider an unreasonable rating number. So it you have any concerns just list the course, the evaluator, and the rating. I guess you should also give some reasons for the rating to be reconsidered.

I hope that no one's feelings will be hurt if their rating number is put up for question. We're just seeking to make these ratings as accurate as possible. If you must question someone please keep it polite and civil. Stick to the facts and don't attack the person.

 

[bfaslewis]

rating guidelines

Perhaps, there should be guidelines to the rating process. I myself haven't played a lot of courses, and any time i read a post about "grade inflation" or a similar post, i become very self conscious of what i graded, why i graded it that, and if my comments were okay.

Maybe if we set up some guidelines as to what elements make a course a 2, 3, 4, or 5 then maybe there wouldn't be the grade inflation, or inept reviews due to inexperience. I have read posts from different people and everyone seems to have their own opinion of what makes a course a 5. So maybe the answer is to have a uniform set of standards.

For example: any new course you play would start at a 5 and every key element that it is missing would cost it half a point. Some elements that i have found to be particularly important to most reviewers are: bathrooms; a pro shop; separate loops for the front and back 9; any easy to follow course; a well marked course; a variety of holes (lefties, righties, up hill, down hill, wooded, open); and a bulletin board with a course map, and scorecards. If then an 18 hole course were missing all of these elements it would lose 7 marks and be a 1.5.

I'm just spit-ballin an idea to help with course evaluation. Obviously there may be some other elements i missed that are important to other players, and some of the ones i listed may not matter to others.

 

[timg]

I definitely wouldn't second guess your review scores. The grade inflation that is often mentioned is blatantly obvious when you see it.. mostly reviews that give out 4.5 or 5's and don't have a written part that gives you a clue as to why it is a 5. If someone at least backs up their score then that's fine, I probably would have ranked Ellison as a 5 when I first started playing but now that I've got more courses under my belt, I wouldn't give it a 5/5. Thanks to some convincing by people here when I first started the site (thanks ), players can now adjust their scores as they get the chance to play more courses and improve their game. I don't know how many people will actually go back and adjust the scores but the option is there.

The criteria thing has been brought up before but at that point you start over-complicating the process which is one thing that I want to avoid. I want the review process to be accessible and unintimidating to any level of player.

In the end, I think MattK had the best idea of just kind of overlooking not so good reviews. The good reviews outweigh the bad by a strong margin. I think the guidelines I placed above the review form have helped to generate some better reviews as well. Maybe a thread with general review tips would be useful. Something that expands the guidelines I have posted above the form.

 

[jessepittman]

I wouldn't worry about it so much. If you see a review that doesn't sound right to you, just post one with your thoughts. If someone says a course was a 5 and you think it was a three, then you'll balance out the rating to a 4. They're not wrong, you just disagree with their opinion.

Just say why you thought so and let people make their own decision on whether they want to play it or not.

The only thing the site needs is more people to post ratings/reviews of the courses they've played. Not too much participation on that yet.

 

[timg]

Jesse,

That seems to be the common opinion of most people on the site (as more reviews come in, things will balance out). Like you said, we just need more reviews. There are around 700 on the site now but a lot of courses still only have 1 or 2 reviews.

I did just buy some advertising on the PDGA newsletter so I'm hoping some new people will discover the site through there.

 

[Olorin]

For example: any new course you play would start at a 5 and every key element that it is missing would cost it half a point.

FWIW, I consider 2.5 to be average, so I start a course off at 2.5, then I decide if it's above average, average, or below average. If it's above or below I then try to determine how much by comparison to other courses I've rated. I "grade on the curve" so really good or really bad courses can push my old ratings down or up. When I step onto a new course I always hope that I'll be on that rare jewel of a World Class course.

 

[timg]

I rate pretty much the same way as Olorin, with 2.5 being average and then going from there.

 

[MattK]

Olorin??? Is Lowe incognito?

 

[timg]

Shhh..

 

[Olorin]

Olorin??? Is Lowe incognito?

Yup. Actually, Lowe is really only a made up name to disguise my true identity. (Who would have a name like that anyway?) "Olorin" is a clue to who I REALLY am. I'll only say that I love to wear grey and I have a really cool ring. Beyond that I dare say no more...

 

[MattK]

Yup. Actually, Lowe is really only a made up name to disguise my true identity. (Who would have a name like that anyway?) "Olorin" is a clue to who I REALLY am. I'll only say that I love to wear grey and I have a really cool ring. Beyond that I dare say no more...

Not to worry, Stormcrow, your secret is safe with us.

 

[Olorin]

Not to worry, Stormcrow, your secret is safe with us.

Thank you for your discretion. Yes, I am known by many names. And I can only say that there far weightier matters afoot here any of us dare speak of.

 

[magictenor1]

I think of 3 as average with 1 & 2 below and 4 & 5 above.

 

[timg]

That's the way I see the rating scale as well. 3 isn't a bad score at all.. it just means the course wasn't bad but it wasn't great. Still worth a play most of the time.

 

[John Merhi]

Anonymity is the key for writing a bad review. If I honestly say how I feel about a course, especially a local course, you know that someone who put a TON of effort into the course is now put off. And in my case, they've got a real name to attach their anger to.

Think I'm going to be giving out reviews of 0.5, 1.0, or 1.5 using my real name? Think again. I like disc golfers and I don't like losing friends or making enemies.

 

[timg]

I don't think a poor score would make you any enemies. Normally if you're giving out a .5 or a 1 then the fact that a course isn't so hot is pretty common knowledge among everyone.

I've given out a 2 in the past that caused a bit of an uproar locally but the course was 90% throwing discs in an open field without even a tree most of the time. Not every course can be good. I suppose you could just not rate courses that you don't like but many players would like to know that a course isn't really worth a long drive, etc.

I've even given out 3.5's and had people (ok, not people, just one guy) go ballistic. There's always someone out there that will disagree with you

 

[John Merhi]

Not every course can be good, but almost every course has good people that work very hard to maintain it, usually on their own time for free. It doesn't matter how honest or polite you're review is, nor how crappy the course truly is..... if you diss on a course, you're going to offend those who call it home.

There is no doubt in mind that if I give out a review of 2 or less to a local course, I'm going to hear about it from someone. It may not be a friendship ender, but it would certainly create hard feelings amongst those who maintain it.

Conversely, go on this site and rant and rave about a course and it's maintainers, and see how well you're received next time you play there. Flattery usually gets you somewhere.

In hindsight, I should have created a pseudonym rather than use my real name. I could always create an "evil Spock" account and write my negative reviews with that.

Tim... anyway we could get 10 minutes to edit posts? 5 minutes is kinda quick. Once the site gets popular, you could be bombarded with "edit my post" requests.

 

[magictenor1]

I had a thought about the review process. When a person does a review have the site automatically show how many courses they have played. To me that is a great indicator, much more so than years playing. A player who has seen 30 courses as opposed to one who has only seen 5 has a much better chance of understanding where a particular course might fit into the grand scheme of things. Of course people will still bring their own criterion and biases to a review.

 

[timg]

I'd argue if your criticism was constructive then there shouldn't be hard feelings. Perhaps it could help improve the course and you can go back later and update your review based on the changes. While a glowing review might make the people that maintain the course feel warm and fuzzy, the guys that drove 3 hours to get there and find a fairly mediocre course which was rated highly here probably won't like you so much and they'll probably be less trusting of the reviews in general at that point.

 

[John Merhi]

I wasn't implying that people should intentionally gloat to win favor. I agree that would be bad for the reputation of this site. I'm just saying that human nature is what it is. If you deservedly praise someone, you gain favor. If you give constructive criticism, you could easily upset those who put forth lots of effort. Passion clouds judgement.

I would not agree that if the criticism is constructive, there shouldn't be hard feelings. That's true in theory, but not practice. My wife is pretty cool and we get along well. That doesn't mean I can gently remind her to eat Lean Cuisines. If I ever reminded my wife to eat a Lean Cuisine, I'd catch a frozen one to the head as hard as she could throw it!

It's been my experience that people don't take criticism well, myself included. Your experience may be completely different.