Four Biases in Course Evaluation

[John Kirk]

Thanks for the responses, Jason and Tom.  I gotta go for a few hours, but I'll respond then.

[Richard Choi]

John,

You are missing a couple of very influential (and proven) biases that all humans have;

1. Bias toward more expensive items - A recent study has shown that a brain physically enjoys things more when a person believes that the item is more expensive (even if there is no other difference other than the price). Probably explains why the top 100 lists are always peppered with over-priced public courses and ultra-exclusive private clubs.

2. Bias toward what you know - this is probably part of your "local bias", but the studies have also shown that people have affinity toward items that they have more information of.

These biases are scientifically proven and I am pretty sure they have great influence on how people evaluate golf courses.

[JWinick]

The legendary New Yorker film critic Pauline Kael was famous for only watching a movie once, believing that a great movie should be apparent to the viewer after one viewing.   Does that apply to reviewing golf courses?   I disagree, but I think a course should lose some points if it requires multiple playings in order to appreciate it.

[George Pazin]

And George most definitely did have bias as pertains to Black Mesa - he made it very clear he doesn't like desert golf in general.

You know, I'm getting a little tired of you misquoting me like this. I have said many times before that I HATE desert golf - if you're going to quote me, get it right!

 

I thought more about my comments earlier on play bias and I think I was misreading JK's initial post; elements of player bias and play bias are mostly encompassed by his other categories.

And for the record, I didn't disagree with you, you disagreed with me.

 

(Sorry about the 2 smileys, for those annoyed... )

[JWinick]

Performance Bias.   A review of a golf course can be skewed by how well you played that day and the relationship with your playing partners.   For example, I believed Arcadia Bluffs was overrated, but I didn't enjoy my playing partners and I played poorly that day.   I still may feel the same thing after a return visit, but a reviewer has to be conscious of these biases.

In fact, I think performance bias might be the most common bias for a competitive golfer.

[Tom Huckaby]

George - that all works for me.  Apologies for using you as the example.  It just worked so well!

JW:  George listed out that performance bias before.  I do think it exists, but it's also pretty easy to ignore or get beyond, if one chooses to do so.  Many don't.

TH

[Kalen Braley]

I too think player bias is easily overcome and I present the following two examples:

A couple of years ago I played a local course here that I was flirting with breaking 80, (which would be a first for me, until I hit a couple of ganked tee balls on 17 and 18).  I was playing well, getting par after par, doing great.  And you know what, the course is an absolute bore and I will likely never play it again it neither recommend it to anyone.

On the flip side when I played Pacific Dunes, I was enjoying every last minute of it even though I got my ass handed to me and I shot 94.  Great course, totally loved it.

In light of those, I think its not hard to evaluate a course in a mostly objective way, despite how well it may or may not fit ones game.  And I'm pretty sure I could play courses like Shinnecock, ANGC, and Oakmont and love getting it handed to me there as well!!   

[John Kavanaugh]

Date:  Thu, 21 Aug 2008 11:39:24 -0500
From:  "Gillette Silver" <raterking@gmail.com> Add to Address Book    Block Sender Allow Sender
To:  spooon@usa.net
Subject:  John Kirk bias thread  Allow Subject
MIME-Version:  1.0
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding:  7bit
Content-Disposition:  inline
 
   
     
     
Buddy,

One last thing today and I will let you get back to work. Working as
an overseas flight attendant I became familiar with the bias of fear.
When our vessel would reach the point of no return over open waters I
would notice an improved attitude among the patrons. This was unlike
the nervousness found during takeoffs or landings and not found on
intracontinental flights. The absence of a safety net (land) created
a special environment of perceived happiness and courtesy.

I find the same thing in reviewing championship courses or courses of
renowned difficulty. My fear of the impending disaster heightens my
nerves for days before the round. Once the round commences nothing
can disappoint me because every possible tragic scenario has been run
though my mind. Even the simple act of getting the ball off the
ground on the first tee becomes an achievement. Nothing ever so
tragic as I had imagined happens and I walk in triumph off the 18th
green. I may not kiss the ground or break out in applause when the
final putt is holed but when I am able to let go of my fear, happiness
fills my heart.

In golf as in life,

Gillette Silver

[Wyatt Halliday]

The architectural pedigree bias is of the most interest to me.

As with many on this site, I travel often. While it is predominately business travel, the destination dictates the decision to pack my clubs. I will not pack them simply because there are a few hours to kill. I will certainly not pack them if my choices are limited to certain architects. However, I will gladly seek out my preferred architect’s lesser known work over playing the reputation course in the area. Hosting a bevy of major events or being on television matters not. I believe this constitutes an architectural pedigree bias.

When I plan golf trips I receive plenty of static from my group for the inclusion of a lesser known course over something with a higher Top 100 ranking. I will also choose to decline invitations to trips based purely on the course/architect list. I believe this further exemplifies my bias.

I often wonder the percentage of travelling GCAers who would pass on Torrey to play Barona, play Tobacco Road in lieu of Wade Hampton if given just one round to choose.

In addition I think firm and fast would fall under conditioning which allows for too many variables to be considered a bias. Besides, there is a healthy chunk of us who rarely see true firm and fast conditions on an everyday basis.

[Kalen Braley]

John,

FFS if you want to pollute the site with your lame imaginary friend BS, then fine, but keep it on your lame Gillette thread.

Just don't drag down a terrific topic like this because your completely bored out of your skull, sitting in your office alone, and have nothing better to do with your time.

[Tom Huckaby]

I often wonder the percentage of travelling GCAers who would pass on Torrey to play Barona, play Tobacco Road in lieu of Wade Hampton if given just one round to choose.

GCAers?  Few.  The architectural pedigree bias exists here big time.

Real world?  Most.  Real world golfers don't tend to know who architects are and don't care.  What they see on TV and how much a place costs matters A LOT more.

[Wyatt Halliday]

Tom,

I must respectfully disagree. I know several non-GCA folk who say: "It's a good course, it's a Trent course", or "I don't like Dye courses, they're way to hard".

Although I must admit to never hearing "That's a Doak course, you can tell by the shaping".

[Wyatt Halliday]

edit

[Tom Huckaby]

Real world?  Most.  Real world golfers don't tend to know who architects are and don't care.  What they see on TV and how much a place costs matters A LOT more.

I must respectfully disagree. I know several non-GCA folk who say: "It's a good course, it's a Trent course", or "I don't like Dye courses, they're way to hard".

Although I must admit to never hearing "That's a Doak course, you can tell by the shaping".


[/quote]

I'd agree that there are exceptions.

But let's just say this:  in general, this group is WAY more interested in who the architect is than the common golfer outside of this forum.  Disagree?

TH

[Wyatt Halliday]

I don't necessarily disagree, I'm just not sure that the architectural pedigree bias is as strong in our fair burg as you might think.

Example A: Offer someone here a free spin at either Trump or Rustic, but not both. Are we naive enough to think that most folks (even here) would not take the Trump ticket? The justification is up to the prize holder, and who wouldn't want a crack at the best course in California?

[Tom Huckaby]

I don't necessarily disagree, I'm just not sure that the architectural pedigree bias is as strong in our fair burg as you might think.

Example A: Offer someone here a free spin at either Trump or Rustic, but not both. Are we naive enough to think that most folks (even here) would not take the Trump ticket? The justification is up to the prize holder, and who wouldn't want a crack at the best course in California?

Hmmmm... my experience with this forum would tend to differ from yours.  I guess I'll leave it at that.

TH

[Wyatt Halliday]

I say we are an open minded group, with little preconception.  We want to enjoy the new golf experience, and start with a positive attitude.

Tom,

I understand where you're coming from, and I hope you know the best course in California quip was in jest.

I'm normally not a fan of broad generalizations, but I fight it tremendously when it comes to architects. I guess I'm trying to get the nerve to stay open minded.

[Carl Nichols]

I don't necessarily disagree, I'm just not sure that the architectural pedigree bias is as strong in our fair burg as you might think.

Example A: Offer someone here a free spin at either Trump or Rustic, but not both. Are we naive enough to think that most folks (even here) would not take the Trump ticket? The justification is up to the prize holder, and who wouldn't want a crack at the best course in California?

I would take Trump and pay for Rustic myself!   

[Tim Pitner]

John (or others),

Currently, one of my strongest biases is toward certain kinds of courses--one might call them minimalistic or naturalistic; I think of them as not trying too hard.  They are harmonious with the land (although not strictly natural) and aren't over-bunkered, over-watered or over-manicured.  They could be links, heathland or parkland courses.  They might be designed by well-known classic-era architects, Doak or Coore & Crenshaw, or by no one of any renown.  Where does this sort of bias fit in with the biases identified by Mr. Kirk and others or is it too obscure to care much about?

[Garland Bayley]

Has not someone mentioned the maintenace meld bias?

Where is TEP when important topics such as this come up?

[Bill_McBride]

With regard to the "Remote" bias, I would say those courses are great because you will travel so far to play them, not because they are so far away.  Does that make any sense?

[Garland Bayley]

I remember the discussion about whether Ash Towe should travel with his wife to Bandon to play, or to the Monterrey peninsula. He chose Monterrey, because of the metroplitan access for his wife over the back to nature Bandon choice.

What shoudl be call this? There herding bias?
 

[Tom Huckaby]

With regard to the "Remote" bias, I would say those courses are great because you will travel so far to play them, not because they are so far away.  Does that make any sense?

'

That does make sense.
But it also doesn't deny what John called the psychological need for the effort to be worth it... which is more what I was getting at.  That is, if one makes the effort to go to a remote place for golf, one is likely to want to say the effort was worth it, so as not to appear a fool or acknowledge wasting one's time.

TH

[Jim Franklin]

First, I can't believe Huck out drove anyone by 50-60 yards . As for remote bias, I drove a LONG way to play Lakota Canyon, and, quite frankly, I did not like it. I had hoped it was going to be special as a lot of respected GCAers raved about it. I am a fan of Jim Engh, but that one did not live up to my expectations.

There are a lot of courses that I have played that are remote, but I liked them because there was quality to the course and not just remote.

[Tom Huckaby]

First, I can't believe Huck out drove anyone by 50-60 yards . As for remote bias, I drove a LONG way to play Lakota Canyon, and, quite frankly, I did not like it. I had hoped it was going to be special as a lot of respected GCAers raved about it. I am a fan of Jim Engh, but that one did not live up to my expectations.

There are a lot of courses that I have played that are remote, but I liked them because there was quality to the course and not just remote.

Jim:  it is hard to believe.  So don't believe it.  Kalen was just being nice.

As for my remoteness thing, well... you travel a LOT and thus are likely quite less effected than others.  There are also always exceptions to all rules. 

TH

[Tags:]

Tags: