Over-rated and Under-rated courses

[Innovadude]

I find it very interesting to see what some courses get rated and why. Sometimes it blows my mind that people say "THE best course of all time" or something along those lines, and give it a 5-star rating, for a course I wouldn't even put in my top-25 list. (DeLaVeaga)

Other times someone gives a course a 1 star, and I think it deserves 3 stars.

Will be interesting to see when more courses get rated more often..I attempt to rate each course I play that is not yet rated on here.

 

[ERicJ]

I find it very interesting to see what some courses get rated and why. Sometimes it blows my mind that people say "THE best course of all time" or something along those lines, and give it a 5-star rating, for a course I wouldn't even put in my top-25 list. (DeLaVeaga)

Okay, someone has to ask... what is your top 25 list?

Will be interesting to see when more courses get rated more often..I attempt to rate each course I play that is not yet rated on here.

Why confine it to just courses that are not yet rated? The more ratings we get from experienced players the more accurate this site will become.

ERic

 

[PhattD]

I see a few course that a rated funny. Some are ones I've played and just disagree with the rating. And some I haven't played but I can be pretty sure from the description that 5 discs is too high of a rating. I figure I will rate the courses I'm familiar with and let the ratings average themselves out. I would recommend to anyone that has only played a fe courses to avoid extremme ratings, 1 or 5, until you've seen more courses. If you've only played 5 or 6 mediocre course then finding a course that blows those 6 away isn't nessesarily a 5 disc course. By the same token I'm not lord high mucky muck in charge of course ratings so if you feel your local 9 hole object course deserves a 5 disc rating go right ahead.

 

[Innovadude]

I think I'll be waiting til 1,000 courses to write any more top-lists.
Idlewild, Toboggan, Highbridge Hills, HMO (Hudson Mills Original- pre-last couple years of overgrowing and pay-to-play), Pickard, Whistler's Bend, Milo McIver, Morraine State Park, Patapsco, Flip City, Hickory Hills, Kensington Tunnel, Tower Ridge, Keriakes..etc make the top 25 list.

 

[Innovadude]

Okay, someone has to ask... what is your top 25 list?



Why confine it to just courses that are not yet rated? The more ratings we get from experienced players the more accurate this site will become.

ERic

I barely have enough time each night to clean up, plan, do picture cataloging, blog on dgrus, update pdga.com directions and review courses. Someday I can add more, but usually I want to watch tv/sleep/relax for a few minutes each day too.

 

[DGtourist]

Here's my top ten, I've only played 73 though, I imagine I'll play 500 before I'm done. I hope to get to the point where Dela isn't even there, but I doubt that will ever happen since it rules.

De Laveaga Santa Cruz CA
Colorado Mountain College Glennwood Springs CO
Borderland State Park Easton MA
Beaver Medows Red Feather lakes CO
Cottonmill Kearney NE
Pease Park Austin TX
Thunderhead Steamboat Springs CO
NAD Park Bremerton WA
Sundance Trail Ranch Red Feather lakes CO
Casper DGC Casper WY

 

[DannyM]

I think that it is personal preferance on a lot of these ratings. I saw someone that had given my home course a 1 disc rating , and a cousre that is not far from here that I have played a higher rating. My home course is very technical, and not rally a "long" course, but the one rated higher is almost ALL wide open, and average 400+ ft per hole. Personally I prefer technical holes, not ones you just rip every hole 2-3 shots and putt in. I would say that my top courses are mostly technical courses, or, a mix of some open holes, with tight, technical holes as well. I'm not one of those "long arm" players that can throw 400ft, so my game is mostly accuracy, therefore those types of courses are what I give higher ratings on.

 

[Olorin]

HBB

I find it very interesting to see what some courses get rated and why. Sometimes it blows my mind that people say "THE best course of all time" or something along those lines, and give it a 5-star rating, for a course I wouldn't even put in my top-25 list.

HBB (Home Boy Bias) is probably the biggest reason that people give 4.5 or 5 discs. I appreciate when people tell you it's their home course so that you can take it with a grain of salt.

 

[Olorin]

Other times someone gives a course a 1 star, and I think it deserves 3 stars.

Probably lots of reasons for this...

• One of the biggest is that people don't understand the idea of course playing levels (Gold, Blue, White, Red, Green). This is roughly analogous to the colored tees in traditional golf. It especially occurs if a Blue level player plays a Red or Green level course. For them the course is way to easy, so they give it a low rating, whereas for others of lower skill it may be just right. The same can happen if a Red level player plays a Gold level course (like Renaissance Gold, Nockamixon, Winthrop Gold).
• Personal preference. Some like more open courses, some like more wooded technical courses. I love water holes so I always rate those courses higher.

 

[Olorin]

By the same token I'm not lord high mucky muck in charge of course ratings ...

If you're not Lord High Mucky-muck then who is? Any nominations?

([energetically waving hand like Horshack] Oo, oo! Pick me! Pick me!)

 

[magictenor1]

I have seen a lot of courses rated differently than I would rate them. There are a lot of courses I have played but not reviewed because I have only been rating courses as I play them and not going back to courses played previously. Some courses that I don't like enough to even go back to them are getting 4 stars and some I play every chance I get are getting lower ratings. I don't feel that I have any "homer bias" but it probably creeps in to some reviews. Mostly it comes down to personal preference and after all a review is just that, your opinion. If you describe a course well the reader can form their own opinion on whether they want to play a course irregardless of the actual rating you give a course.

 

[agentdozzer]

I agree i only reviewed a few courses and after i found no one was finding mine usefull i decided to wait awhile before my next review. I have only golfed around cincy, Idle wild is the only five i gave out and since it is been #1 on the site since i started coming i guess it deserves it. I cant wait to make a trip to some of the others in the top ten to compare.

 

[timg]

Just because nobody clicks helpful doesn't mean people aren't finding them useful so don't let that stop you. Only registered members can say whether a review is helpful or not and there are way more people that aren't registered visiting DGCR so chances are your review is being read and helping someone out.

 

[Greg Weleski]

I agree with Magictenor1. Reviews are just opinion and are based on many different aspects such skill level and ability to play technical holes well versus distance you can throw for open holes, whether you can put up with crazy amounts of shule or bugs, whether you are left handed or right handed, the season you play a course i.e. summer months are hot and dry/ winter months are cold and wet causing muddy and wet playing conditions and muddy or wet conditions can totally botch an otherwise good rating of a course. The main thing is to give a complete description of your experience of a course so others that read the reviews can have an idea of what to expect. The reviews I think are most beneficial are the long ones with pros and cons and other thoughts, not just a sentance or two and a rating of 0 to 5. Either way people have different preferences and will rate/review courses differently; however the more people that take the time to review a course the better. Whether a course gets a few bad ratings or good ratings won't really make a difference if enough people review it. The most accurately rated courses are the ones with a ton of reviews because one bad review won't really hurt the overall rating if it had 50 other good ratings. But people should definately try to avoid a DG course version of ethnocentrism. Just because a course is dear to your heart since its your home course or where you learned to play doesn't mean it should get a higher rating. I'm going to leave some reviews but only after I've played more courses and gained more experience and insight to what makes a spectacular course. Sorry if I ranted at all. I just don't find the short, vague reviews very helpful.

 

[Texconsinite]

I agree Greg. The really short reviews tell very little, and force you to play guessing games with the star rating. You read them and you wonder, why exactly did this person give this course 3.5 stars, instead of 4 or 3? But you just don't really know.

 

[adam423]

nevermind...

 

[dela]

Don't knock Delaveaga. There is not a single hole on that course that doesn't challenge you. And you must love trees. Yeah, its satisfying to air it out down a big open fairway, but when you nail that perfect 350 footer down a narrow fairway, it feels and looks some much sweeter.

And one more thing: Its Nate Doss's home course.

 

[tomjulio]

but usually I want to watch tv/sleep/relax for a few minutes each day too.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU!? ;-)

And one more thing: Its Nate Doss's home course.

OH, HBB-Pro! Really though. I believe that Dretzka here in Milwaukee is Barry Schultz's home course, but I wouldn't don't give that course more than a four if in perfect condition.

 

[Olorin]

Flip City.

You decide if it's over or under.

(Just razzing the FC Zealots b/c it's so fun to jerk their chain. It's all meant in fun guys, so please put the lynching rope away!)

 

[sidewinding]

This is probably not the correct thread to bring this up in but here's a question for timg. On the course rating chart if 2.5 is average then can we change the wording beside 2.0 from average to below average and change the wording beside 3.0 from good to above average. I think it would make more sense because "average" and "good" do not correctly represent these levels.