Discussions in --- Use This to POST ---
Moderated By JohnnyGK

Forums
Greenskeeper.org
--- Use This to POST ---
Layout ratings
YOUR SETTINGSLIST FORUMSLIST TOPICSSEARCH

TOPIC: Layout ratings

PRINT TOPICSEND THIS TO A FRIEND

Listing 1 to 10 of 22 Replies

PAGES: 3 1 2 3
roarksown1
Layout ratings
GK Event: Played in a GK Event Birdie Chain: Stake Holder BCB Birdie Chain GKGC Par: GKGC Par Supporter

Member Since:
    January 6, 2013


Favorite Golfer:
    Ty Webb
Favorite Golf Course:
    Bighorn Golf Club


RPGC MAIL USER VIEW USER REGISTRY ADD USER TO BUDDY LIST
Monday December 28, 2020 2:52 PM
After playing a nice round at Rancho del Sol this weekend, I was thinking while writing my review that it would be nice to have a 'Layout' option for the GK course ratings. We have options for how much we enjoyed it, the challenge, and of course all the conditions, but nothing for how we liked the layout. In the case of this course, it's an amazingly fun and challenging layout, but current dry conditions in the fairways and poor golfer etiquette in terms of ball marks affected the rating as well, but I would have loved to have given this course a 9 or 10 in terms of layout. I just thought it's such an important part of the golf experience but isn't reflected in the review ratings. Thoughts?

[[Edited by roarksown1 on Monday December 28, 2020 2:53 PM]]
REPLY
 Message #97403
Nickesquire
RE: Layout ratings
GK Event: Played in a GK Event SCGA GK Golf Club: Member GKGC EAGLE: GKGC Eagle Supporter

Member Since:
    August 11, 2007


Favorite Golfer:
    Jack-Freddie-Tiger-Rory
Favorite Golf Course:
    Pebble Poppy Maderas


RPGC MAIL USER VIEW USER REGISTRY ADD USER TO BUDDY LIST
Monday December 28, 2020 3:37 PM
Wish it were more clearly defined, but if you rate the course, it does provide layout ratings on GK.

Click on the golf course, then more detailed ratings under course statistics. Layout gets a rating for enjoyment and challenge (1-5 stars) in addition to POP.

I would make the layout rating much more prominent and have a 0-10 numerical scale (like playing conditions) rather than just the basic 1-5 stars. The quality of the layout is very important to me.

I'll go play a really good or great layout in so-so playing condition. But if it's a mediocre or poor layout, it better be in really good playing condition to be worth equal play in my mind.
REPLY
The goal has always been long and straight! But since I can no longer hit them long, hopefully straighter could be achieved more than occasionally?
 Message #97404 - This was a reply to message #97403
roarksown1
RE: Layout ratings
GK Event: Played in a GK Event Birdie Chain: Stake Holder BCB Birdie Chain GKGC Par: GKGC Par Supporter

Member Since:
    January 6, 2013


Favorite Golfer:
    Ty Webb
Favorite Golf Course:
    Bighorn Golf Club


RPGC MAIL USER VIEW USER REGISTRY ADD USER TO BUDDY LIST
Monday December 28, 2020 3:58 PM
That's good info, Nick, but I just mean on the very first page we get when we post a review. I will always fill out that page and then do a written review, but that's about the extent of it for me (and I suspect many more). I think an added criteria there for Layout would go a long way.
REPLY
 Message #97405 - This was a reply to message #97404
Alex326
RE: Layout ratings
GK Event: Played in a GK Event Birdie Chain: Stake Holder BCB Birdie Chain GKGC EAGLE: GKGC Eagle Supporter

Member Since:
    November 20, 2015


Favorite Golfer:
    N/A
Favorite Golf Course:
    Pebble Beach


RPGC MAIL USER VIEW USER REGISTRY ADD USER TO BUDDY LIST
Monday December 28, 2020 5:08 PM
I consider the layout the biggest factor for the "Enjoyment" category. Similar to the "fun factor" someone mentioned before. All different names for the same thing (in my book) . For me in order to get a high "enjoyment" or "fun factor" rating a course has to have elevation changes and water hazards (forced carries) within the layout.

A flat parkland track absent water hazards will always be a ho hum layout/enjoyment/ fun factor.
REPLY
 Message #97407 - This was a reply to message #97405
Nickesquire
RE: Layout ratings
GK Event: Played in a GK Event SCGA GK Golf Club: Member GKGC EAGLE: GKGC Eagle Supporter

Member Since:
    August 11, 2007


Favorite Golfer:
    Jack-Freddie-Tiger-Rory
Favorite Golf Course:
    Pebble Poppy Maderas


RPGC MAIL USER VIEW USER REGISTRY ADD USER TO BUDDY LIST
Monday December 28, 2020 5:50 PM
QUOTED  That's good info, Nick, but I just mean on the very first page we get when we post a review. I will always fill out that page and then do a written review, but that's about the extent of it for me (and I suspect many more). I think an added criteria there for Layout would go a long way.


Robert, so it's there, but you choose not to use it because you do not see the value in it seems to be what you are saying? As I stated earlier, I think MANY out there think the layout makes the course. I have advocated for a much more expanded layout rating for years. Walkability, POP, fun factor, challenge, strategy etc. all factor into my personal layout rating.


QUOTED  I consider the layout the biggest factor for the "Enjoyment" category. Similar to the "fun factor" someone mentioned before. All different names for the same thing (in my book) . For me in order to get a high "enjoyment" or "fun factor" rating a course has to have elevation changes and water hazards (forced carries) within the layout.

A flat parkland track absent water hazards will always be a ho hum layout/enjoyment/ fun factor.


While a basically flat, parkland layout with no or little water (Marine Memorial comes to mind) can still be an excellent layout, basically agree with Alex. Tough to get overly excited about a bunch of "been there, done that" holes with nothing overly distinctive. The more variety and "fun factor" there is, the better I am going to like the layout.

What Alex said, and I would add beauty, risk/reward holes, really tough holes equally mixed with more scoreable holes. Trees to keep people honest, multiple fairway sand traps on the par 4/5 holes, challenging but not ridiculous greens and no holes that make you go... WTF??? Check all those boxes, it's probably a superior layout in my book.

Personal layout pet peeves:

1) In course OB. If they need in course OB, they have one or more holes that are poorly laid out.

2) Lack of variety on the par 3's. Prefer hitting a different club into every par 3.

3) More than a couple of par 4/5 holes that the average player could not hit Driver on if they choose to.

4) Any hole that because of slope or tiers is making a mockery of things. Balls should not be rolling 50 yards back toward the tee. Putts should not be rolling off the green 30 yards down the fairway as examples.

5) A gimmicky par 5 that almost all players HAVE to hit an iron off the tee on.
REPLY
The goal has always been long and straight! But since I can no longer hit them long, hopefully straighter could be achieved more than occasionally?
 Message #97408 - This was a reply to message #97405
roarksown1
RE: Layout ratings
GK Event: Played in a GK Event Birdie Chain: Stake Holder BCB Birdie Chain GKGC Par: GKGC Par Supporter

Member Since:
    January 6, 2013


Favorite Golfer:
    Ty Webb
Favorite Golf Course:
    Bighorn Golf Club


RPGC MAIL USER VIEW USER REGISTRY ADD USER TO BUDDY LIST
Monday December 28, 2020 5:59 PM
QUOTED  Robert, so it's there, but you choose not to use it because you do not see the value in it seems to be what you are saying? As I stated earlier, I think MANY out there think the layout makes the course. I have advocated for a much more expanded layout rating for years. Walkability, POP, fun factor, challenge, strategy etc. all factor into my personal layout rating.


That's not what I'm saying at all. I want it on the first page because the detailed ratings requires a whole other amount of commitment but if you simply add 'Layout' to the Conditions section for example, and let me give it a 1-10 rating, then I will use it. I already spend more than enough time writing as detailed of reviews as possible, so the ease of getting the 'Layout' added to the first page when creating reviews imho would be a nice addition.
REPLY
 Message #97409 - This was a reply to message #97408
Nickesquire
RE: Layout ratings
GK Event: Played in a GK Event SCGA GK Golf Club: Member GKGC EAGLE: GKGC Eagle Supporter

Member Since:
    August 11, 2007


Favorite Golfer:
    Jack-Freddie-Tiger-Rory
Favorite Golf Course:
    Pebble Poppy Maderas


RPGC MAIL USER VIEW USER REGISTRY ADD USER TO BUDDY LIST
Monday December 28, 2020 7:24 PM
QUOTED  Robert, so it's there, but you choose not to use it because you do not see the value in it seems to be what you are saying?


I still hear the same thing in your message Robert. It's not worth your time if it's on the 2nd page and a 1-5 star rating. It would be worth your time if it was on the first page and layout was a 0-10 rating like the playing conditions are.

From what I remember John saying when I brought up greatly expanding this type rating years ago, it is not an easy change to expand it and move it to a different page on GK.

John?
REPLY
The goal has always been long and straight! But since I can no longer hit them long, hopefully straighter could be achieved more than occasionally?
 Message #97410 - This was a reply to message #97409
Itslikeimsayin
RE: Layout ratings
GK Event: Played in a GK Event GKGC BIRDIE: GKGC Birdie Supporter

Member Since:
    July 21, 2003


Favorite Golfer:
    Phil Mickelson
Favorite Golf Course:
    DragonRidge CC


RPGC MAIL USER VIEW USER REGISTRY ADD USER TO BUDDY LIST
Monday December 28, 2020 8:02 PM
Introducing "layout" as a category would bring too much subjectivity to GK ratings, imo. The number value is meant to reflect course conditions, but courses with a nice layout would get an unfair boost in their rating. Just add comments about the layout to your review. My 2 cents, anyway.
REPLY
 Message #97411 - This was a reply to message #97410
Nickesquire
RE: Layout ratings
GK Event: Played in a GK Event SCGA GK Golf Club: Member GKGC EAGLE: GKGC Eagle Supporter

Member Since:
    August 11, 2007


Favorite Golfer:
    Jack-Freddie-Tiger-Rory
Favorite Golf Course:
    Pebble Poppy Maderas


RPGC MAIL USER VIEW USER REGISTRY ADD USER TO BUDDY LIST
Monday December 28, 2020 8:47 PM
QUOTED  Introducing "layout" as a category would bring too much subjectivity to GK ratings, imo.


I think Robert and I are both wanting it to be a separate rating from playing conditions Mark. Leave playing conditions as they are.

I would like to see numerical ratings for both categories. If course A is a 6.8 for playing conditions and a 7.8 on course layout from all the people who played it, that would assist people who have not played it to know it's better than average on both. Not really that comparable to course B that was rated 6.9 for playing conditions but the masses thought it was a 3.4 for layout as an example.

And no more subjective than any of the the current playing condition ratings. Awhile back, I played a course that was IMO about the 61st best for playing conditions out of the 66 I have played this year. Not long afterward, someone else rated it much higher and talked about how good the fairways were? Good is in the eye of the beholder because there were numerous places about the size of an average convenience store parking lot that were hardpan on that course. And I know they did not suddenly grow grass in all the bare areas between those reviews.
REPLY
The goal has always been long and straight! But since I can no longer hit them long, hopefully straighter could be achieved more than occasionally?
 Message #97413 - This was a reply to message #97411
roarksown1
RE: Layout ratings
GK Event: Played in a GK Event Birdie Chain: Stake Holder BCB Birdie Chain GKGC Par: GKGC Par Supporter

Member Since:
    January 6, 2013


Favorite Golfer:
    Ty Webb
Favorite Golf Course:
    Bighorn Golf Club


RPGC MAIL USER VIEW USER REGISTRY ADD USER TO BUDDY LIST
Monday December 28, 2020 8:59 PM
QUOTED  From what I remember John saying when I brought up greatly expanding this type rating years ago, it is not an easy change to expand it and move it to a different page on GK.


Obviously if this was a major financial/programming burden, then scrap it - not the end of the world. We'll live!

QUOTED  Introducing "layout" as a category would bring too much subjectivity to GK ratings, imo. The number value is meant to reflect course conditions, but courses with a nice layout would get an unfair boost in their rating. Just add comments about the layout to your review. My 2 cents, anyway.


It's a fair point, Mark ... however I find all things in reviews pretty subjective, like seeing all the reviews after a GK Plays and sometimes the fluctuations are quite drastic. How about if you skip putting it by the 'Conditions' but instead where you have options for 'Value' or 'Challenging' - those are also pretty subjective, yet have a place on the main review page. Just thinking out loud!
REPLY
 Message #97414 - This was a reply to message #97410

Listing 1 to 10 of 22 Replies

PAGES: 3 1 2 3

[ Community Page ]