What do we want in Member Reviews?

[STUDque]

"Hmm... I wonder why MGS is doing a TM R9 driver test in 2017..."

 

Sent from my SM-T580 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

 

Exhibit A:

https://forum.mygolfspy.com/topic/1581-announcement-mygolfspy-lottery-product-list/?p=327815

 

 

 

For those history buffs, I'm pretty sure this was the first MGS forum test.

 

 

Sent from carrier pigeon using MyGolfSpy

[yungkory]

I think the selection process is fine. You can't please everyone, and there are going to be folks who are disappointed they're not getting some free (to a certain extent) gear. MGS does a great job keeping the selection completely transparent, and I think that's all we could ask for as testers

[kardboard.kid]

So stage 3...... This is the wrap up, should be the deal maker or breaker. I really feel this stage is critical as it lends credibility to the entire review. I think stage 3 could become a 3-6 month follow up. I know for me once winter has moved on, I will be pushing myself to prove or disprove my decision on the putter I tested. I plan a follow-up to stage 3. Either yes it's still great, or no, things changed and offer reasons to back it up. As a community we must keep this activity alive. Ultimately it's not about me but the products we review. MGS keep challenging us. Make it difficult. That's the only way to improve

 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[djahubes]

As a previous reviewer, here's my thoughts:

 

I think the 3 stage is a bit much. Depending on how people consume the information, phone, tablet, computer, it is cumbersome to get to the “meat” of the review. I'm a bit biased being a military guy, but I am used to synthesizing information down to its key components and presenting in its most basic form to get the point across. Going back and forth through comments, stages, etc is challenging and probably misses a lot of great info especially on the mobile platform. I would turn off comments completely on the review topic and set a Q&A separate.

As some previously said, what I really want answered is the equipment good, does it do what it claims, and will you game it. This does not need pages of narratives, tons of pics etc. relevant data, photos, are great, all the fluff is nice filler but doesn't give me any information.

 

All this said, I will admit, when I first joined up I put my name in the hat for everything. Who doesn't like free stuff. Well after that first go round and the time I put in, I thought about every test I signed up for. If I don't honestly think I will game it I will wait for the reviews.

 

I really think condensing stage 1&2 into a single segment, then A follow up is the way to go. I also think that a mechanism to give the equipment to an alternate should the reviewer chose to would be good as well.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[SuperDave]

I think the format for the stages need to change. Example on any particular review, my stages 1, 2 and 3 are consecutive. I think it would be good to have everyones stage 1's first, then all stage 2's and finish with everyones stage 3's.

Example: Instead of...

Golfer 1 - Stage 1

Golfer 1 - Stage 2

Golfer 1 - Stage 3

Golfer 2 - Stage1

Golfer 2 - Stage 2... etc

 

It should be...

Golfer 1 - Stage 1

Golfer 2 - Stage 1

Golfer 1 - Stage 2

Golfer 2 - Stage 2

 

I think it would be better to get to know all reviewers first, then read their reviews. If we have 5 reviewers, that's a lot of reading. I may read all stage 1's and pick one or two to trust and read those reviews instead of reading through all of them.

 

 

On the matter of stage 3, maybe we should use that part to answer questions that readers may have. I last reviewed the Skycaddie Linx GT and haven't been asked to do my stage 3. Thought about doing it anyways, but not sure if it was a good idea.

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[cnosil]

I am in the midst of doing a review;  we have had some issues getting started.  The templates provide a nice guideline on how to format the review.  I think it is okay to let the reviewers personality show threw but it shouldn't detract from the review.  All-in-all the process is pretty good as it stands;  perhaps as I move through the various stages of my review I will have some more constructive feedback.

[SuperDave]

I think the selection process is fine. You can't please everyone, and there are going to be folks who are disappointed they're not getting some free (to a certain extent) gear. MGS does a great job keeping the selection completely transparent, and I think that's all we could ask for as testers

As far as the selection process goes, I completely agree. However, I think people should only put their name in the hat if they think they can do a good and thorough review. Not every time just to try and get something free.

In my own opinion, I made that mistake with the Skycaddie Linx GT. I had thought of just the watch and not the tagging and dealing with 2 apps and a website. It became a little overwhelming. I do still think I did a good job, but I'm gonna try and just do reviews I think I can do a great job on regardless if I want or need the product. I'd review an umbrella, even though I prefer to play in the rain. Given there is no lightning.

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[gaussman1]

I think the format for the stages need to change. Example on any particular review, my stages 1, 2 and 3 are consecutive. I think it would be good to have everyones stage 1's first, then all stage 2's and finish with everyones stage 3's.

Example: Instead of...

Golfer 1 - Stage 1

Golfer 1 - Stage 2

Golfer 1 - Stage 3

Golfer 2 - Stage1

Golfer 2 - Stage 2... etc

 

It should be...

Golfer 1 - Stage 1

Golfer 2 - Stage 1

Golfer 1 - Stage 2

Golfer 2 - Stage 2

 

I think it would be better to get to know all reviewers first, then read their reviews. If we have 5 reviewers, that's a lot of reading. I may read all stage 1's and pick one or two to trust and read those reviews instead of reading through all of them.

 

 

On the matter of stage 3, maybe we should use that part to answer questions that readers may have. I last reviewed the Skycaddie Linx GT and haven't been asked to do my stage 3. Thought about doing it anyways, but not sure if it was a good idea.

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using MyGolfSpy mobile app

I like this idea of lumping all the stage 1s and 2s together so that we can see what all testers thought at these points in one place.

 

Sent from my Pixel XL using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[revkev]

I've had opportunities to do you reviews under several formats - thank you MGS!

 

To me it seems as if the selection process is fair and balanced - my guess is that there are times where the OEM has added instructions (here is the handicap range we are targeting for this product).

 

Stage 3 would seem more necessary for the reviewer than the reader. If the reader wants to know - he will ask.

 

I've pondered this a lot but in the end it's the questions that reveal the excitement around a product not the number of people applying.

 

I think the addition of some personal information in stage one is brilliant If I'm reading a review I want to know about the playing ability and style of the person writing the article.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[BigtazzGolf]

This thread was fun to read. Reminded me of all the fun I had this year in doing my reviews.

I think the only thing I'd tweak would be the stage 3 section. I think it could be absorbed into stage 2 or with a good discussion in the review thread. Every thing would be covered.

I'd kinda like a way for Spies to submit questions to the reviewers. Maybe this could be the stage 3 for us.

 

 

Tazz

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[ole gray]

Good read and awesome input!

 

1.  Reviewers must be a contributing member of no less than 30 days with a minimum of 30 posts.  This would weed out people who are only interesting in a freebie.  Reviewing is a cool opportunity however it involves getting your hands dirty and putting in the hours.  Weed out the free product junkies and allow those who are truly interested in putting out their best review a chance to do the job.   

 

2. Combine stage 1 & 2 with custom formats for each type of equipment.  A one size fits all can get confusing. 

 

3. Have a follow up thread for everybody to post in. It would be easier to look in one thread than jumping all around to read final thoughts. 

 

4. Sometimes you put in for equipment and find out it's a total misfit for your style of play. Maybe have an option to allow someone down the list to take over.  Pay it forward (shipping) if you know in your heart this is not your cup of tea.  

 

Thanks to MGS for so many great opportunities for the members here!

[JAGolfore]

1. I feel the process is great.  Everyone is different and it is always interesting to see how everyone does a review.  I think this leads to very honest reviews and it shows as we do have a template but we are still writing and showing our individuality.

 

2. Not my first year reviewing.  I think the templates could use work for different categories.  Clubs should have a standard, and then we could go into the GPS/Rangefinder category. Its a fine line but the more detail you can get out of us the better the reviews are.

 

3. This is a hard one to determine.  3/4 testers is usually probably enough.  With clubs you can get someone in every range of handicap (if intended). And with the other products 3 to 4 people will show the high and lows of each product well.

 

4. Stage 3 I think should happen naturally.  If we can get the discussions going at the 1st stage and lead them into the 2nd stage, I feel the 3rd stage will just happen.  I know the test I did this summer the conversation is still going and could continue.  I enjoy reading everyone's thoughts after a full summer of play.

[chemclub]

One way to motivate good reviews (and bestow some bragging rights on selected reviewers) would be to have an "editors choice"by the mods/admins to highlight really good ones. Even have a mention on the main blog.

 

I thought it was cool to see some the EVNROLL reviews curated for the main blog. Maybe do the same with other member reviews.

 

I don't know how the companies that donate goods would feel about not being picked but - power to the player. 

[STUDque]

I thought about something to add today.

 

The whole mantra for MGS is the datacentric approach. But the member reviews are only data centric if the reviewer chooses to add that as a bonus. Even then, is whatever format the reviewer chooses so there's no consistency across the board.

 

 

Maybe the template can add a standardized way to collect data for those with access to a LM and another for those without. The specifics of the forms can be hashed out later but I've got a decent idea of where to take it. Then make a different one for each type of club.

 

This way, the readers can have a way to compare apples to apples across the reviews within and the models in that market. I just think any way we can make the member reviews closer to the Most Wanted test is a good thing, even if it's modified slightly to account for the different accommodations the testers may have.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[yungkory]

I thought about something to add today.

 

The whole mantra for MGS is the datacentric approach. But the member reviews are only data centric if the reviewer chooses to add that as a bonus. Even then, is whatever format the reviewer chooses so there's no consistency across the board.

 

 

Maybe the template can add a standardized way to collect data for those with access to a LM and another for those without. The specifics of the forms can be hashed out later but I've got a decent idea of where to take it. Then make a different one for each type of club.

 

This way, the readers can have a way to compare apples to apples across the reviews within and the models in that market. I just think any way we can make the member reviews closer to the Most Wanted test is a good thing, even if it's modified slightly to account for the different accommodations the testers may have.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

 

Hard to maintain consistency across different situations. MGS controls a lot of the variables by using the same ball, same launch monitor, etc. The variable that the lab tests adds is the golfer. I like the forum reviews because it's honest, and it's a real world on-course test. The lab is great for what it provides, but to quote this wise man:

 

"you don't play golf on launch monitors"

[STUDque]

Hard to maintain consistency across different situations. MGS controls a lot of the variables by using the same ball, same launch monitor, etc. The variable that the lab tests adds is the golfer. I like the forum reviews because it's honest, and it's a real world on-course test. The lab is great for what it provides, but to quote this wise man:

 

"you don't play golf on launch monitors"

I'm not saying we should make the whole test this way. Just add one data component but largely leave the rest of the review template the same.

 

As for consistency, you definitely have a valid concern. I just think brainstorming could boil it down to an acceptable level of control.

 

Then as far as LM, that's the point I made that you could have one standard test for those that do have access to one and one for those that don't. Maybe your testers can be 2 "with" and 2 "without" to give results for each.

 

 

Sent from carrier pigeon using MyGolfSpy

[MDGolfHacker]

Not necessarily a review, but you can do a day in the life segment. Interview different staff members at a golf course and write what they actually do on a day to day basis throughout the season.

 

MDGolfHacker

[yungkory]

Not necessarily a review, but you can do a day in the life segment. Interview different staff members at a golf course and write what they actually do on a day to day basis throughout the season.

 

MDGolfHacker

 

Interview CG2 - I'm convinced all he does is test new irons to put in his bag 

[MDGolfHacker]

Interview CG2 - I'm convinced all he does is test new irons to put in his bag

Uh yep. I've been in his office. No where to sit, unless you want to sit on a staff bag I kid, I kid... Not really 😂

 

MDGolfHacker

[Golfspy_CG2]

Interview CG2 - I'm convinced all he does is test new irons to put in his bag

LOL!!

 

Not surprisingly,there are a few part time employees at our course, that actually think I'm a rep for Titleist and Mizuno. They never come into my office snd most times they see me, Im on the range or course with both bags taking pictures. Im sure it was this way for you guys as well, but for every picture i posted, i have about 20 for that one that i didn't post.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[null]

I thought about something to add today.

 

The whole mantra for MGS is the datacentric approach. But the member reviews are only data centric if the reviewer chooses to add that as a bonus. Even then, is whatever format the reviewer chooses so there's no consistency across the board.

 

 

Maybe the template can add a standardized way to collect data for those with access to a LM and another for those without. The specifics of the forms can be hashed out later but I've got a decent idea of where to take it. Then make a different one for each type of club.

 

This way, the readers can have a way to compare apples to apples across the reviews within and the models in that market. I just think any way we can make the member reviews closer to the Most Wanted test is a good thing, even if it's modified slightly to account for the different accommodations the testers may have.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

Interesting thought, but no. Just simply not enough data points and way too many variables.

[MGoBlue100]

I'm REALLY not sure how I missed this thread, but I certainly did.  To barbajo's question, I think the stages are good, but could be modified as some have noted earlier.  Some consolidation of 1 & 2 could be done, and making 3 more of an entire season recap.  Also as was noted, however, people move on, and forget what was being reviewed when, and by whom.

Regarding number of testers, I agree that it kind of depends on the product.  For a ball, I'd like to have a lot of testers, of varying handicaps playing in various locations.  Perhaps everyone doesn't need a dozen to test?  How about 6?  I'm interested how a ball reacts in wind and temperature, and what different types of players think after they've played the ball.  Some of the best ball reviews on the site have been informal reviews.  For clubs it's harder.  I'd love to see ten reviewers test a driver, built to their specs.  Kind of hard to ask Brand X to throw MGS $4-5k worth (street value) of product.  But, we can dream.

I've been lucky enough to do a couple reviews (Snell MTB ball; I hated it.  However, I must have described WHY I hated it pretty well, I got another shot...) and what I'll say is most important is that these are a LOT OF WORK.  They take time and hours and hours of effort.  You don't have to be a great writer, just put down the truth, as you see it.  That's the whole idea of a forum member review, in my opinion.  If you don't think you'll have the time to do a proper job, then please pass.  There have been more than a few opportunities that I would have loved to have a chance at, but knew I couldn't do a good job because of timing, schedule, etc etc.  Even when I've committed to one, it's actually hard to live, work, play, test, photo and write.  I don't know how the MGS guys that have other day jobs do it.

As always, keep up the good work, y'all. #PowerToThePlayer

[null]

Interesting thought, but no. Just simply not enough data points and way too many variables.

 

To expand on this - what MGS does it statistically relevant.  They have a process, they have controls, and they have excellent analytics.

 

It would be impossible for one tester to come up with anything close to that sort of data.  That being said, numbers are important to some people and there is nothing wrong with having some numbers from launch monitor sessions in the review (much like CG2 and I did in our Mizuno reviews).  However, that information is simply for a baseline/reference point and should not be used to make any sort of statistically relevant conclusions.  Forcing reviewers to somehow capture certain data would be a huge step in the wrong direction

[HeathS16]

As a first time reviewer in the RTX-3 review I thought the template was clear enough but I will say I was SUPER NERVOUS. I think the stages work well though may be cutting stage 3 and incorporating it into stage 2 would be better. In the RTX-3 review I think I was the only one to complete stage three and I felt like I was just repeating myself. Thank you for the opportunities!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[golfinnut]

LOL!!

 

Not surprisingly,there are a few part time employees at our course, that actually think I'm a rep for Titleist and Mizuno. They never come into my office snd most times they see me, Im on the range or course with both bags taking pictures. Im sure it was this way for you guys as well, but for every picture i posted, i have about 20 for that one that i didn't post.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

It helps that your JOB is at a golf course. Enables you to have the time to review things a lot more often than most on MGS I would think

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Golfspy_CG2]

It helps that your JOB is at a golf course. Enables you to have the time to review things a lot more often than most on MGS I would think

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Yep and no. I actually don't spend a lot of work time on the range, whether it's for testing or just practice. I don't want to abuse the privilege.

 

But yes it does make it more convenient to practice/Test before or after work. No commute/traffic to deal with.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[Golfspy_CG2]

Yep and no. I actually don't spend a lot of work time on the range, whether it's for testing or just practice. I don't want to abuse the privilege.

 

But yes it does make it more convenient to practice/Test before or after work. No commute/traffic to deal with.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

 

Although I know some friends who don't work at a course who practice and play a lot more than I do.

[golfinnut]

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

 

Although I know some friends who don't work at a course who practice and play a lot more than I do.

That's hard to believe. When I worked at a course, when I wasn't working, I was always playing or practicing. Day off ... golf.

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Golfspy_CG2]

That's hard to believe. When I worked at a course, when I wasn't working, I was always playing or practicing. Day off ... golf.

 

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Yeah. Most times I'm just being lazy. Nothing from preventing me from hitting the range or putting green an hour before or after I finish work. Seems like I think, well there's always tomorrow. Ha

 

As for day offs. It's a 40 minute drive each way and we often have things planned on the weekends.

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[Golfspy_CG2]

I think somehow I missed replying to this one Barbs...sorry but here you go.  

Thanks for posting this -- at the end of the year we generally rip up the blueprint and start with a clean slate by asking "if we were start a forum member review program, what would it look like?"  I think you'll see some tweaks and changes next season, but let me start by asking some questions...

 

1. For those of you who have reviewed - is the process too involved, too superficial or just right? I think it's just about right.  No complaints at all from the couple I have done.   

 

2. Are the templates too complicated? Do we ask too much of you? If this year was your first time reviewing, was the process clear enough? I think as reviewers from the couple I have done, we get a template saying what we should include in the review, and from there it's up to us individually as to how detailed we get. 

 

3. How many testers do you think is the right number for each review? Good Question, I think it depends on the product.  For a driver that offers different models like the F8 and F8 Plus, I'd like to see two reviewers for each models.  And don't always limit the lower spin type driver to a lower handicap or vice versa.  Spin is not necessarily an indication of handicap.  Not saying you've done this, but just something I've noticed elsewhere.  

 

4.What are your thoughts on the 3-stage process? Do we need Stage 3?  I think Stage 3 should be as intended, a check in 3 to  4 months down the road, to see how the product is doing longterm and if you are still liking/disliking it.  For some products such as wedges or irons with black finishes, it would be good to know how they are holding up after a lnog period.  I think the current Stage 3 template for clubs is about right, short and simple. 

 

Any thoughts you have, please  post - we'd love to hear your feedback.

 

Some personal observations....

 

1. In each of the past 3 years, we've started out like gangbusters with lots of enthusiasm for new equipment and the new golf season.  Seems only natural, I think the Site has done a good job of keeping the products going out for review coming quickly and often during the first 7 or 8 months of the year.  Maybe would like to see some earlier in the year, like immediately post PGA Show if the manufactures make them available.

 

2. That enthusiasm does start to wane as we get into late summer. We like to spread out the reviewers and give as many people as we can a chance, but we also like to reward loyal and active forum participants.  Later in the year the review items aren't quite so brand new as they were in the spring, and the enthusiasm for doing the reviews and reading the reviews, I think, starts to dwindle.  Interesting thought, I hadn't thought that would be the case.  I know if I'm picked in September or October, I'll be just as excited as I would be in April/May and still give it 100%

 

3. The links - oh yes, a pet peeve of mine as well.  Enough said there!

 

4. 2017 was a banner year for review opportunities - we had one a week for a period of about 4 months. That's a lot of reviews, and a lot of reviewers needed.  We have a lot of members, and this year the number of active members grew substantially, which is great - thank you all for that!  Through it all, we've been very lucky that only a very few have taken their products and disappeared - scummy thing to do, but don't worry, we have a "no fly" list    It can't be an easy task to sort through the hundreds and in many cases thousands of submissions.   I was fortunate this year to get a highly desired product to test, and was honestly shocked when selected.  I don't take the opportunity for granted or the responsibility lightly.  You can't guard against less than ethical people 100% of the time, as sad as that might be, but MGS seems to do a good job of it. 

 

5. We're going to simplify things like ball tests and other accessories - I'm thinking quicker, shorter, faster and easier to read. Tech stuff like GPS and shot tracking gear will necessarily be a little in depth, and clubs will be the most in-depth. Sounds about right.  

 

6. Did you guys enjoy the Cobra Connect Challenge? I think that was a slightly different way of doing a review, and the interaction was fun. Would you like to see  more of that? I don't think it can be every review, but it might be a fun way to spice of a few during the season...let me know what you think...I enjoyed it tremendously.   I followed along both on the forum and in SM.  I would love to see more of it. I think three of them a year would be pretty much ideal.  I love the fact that there were prizes for forum participation, a great way to keep as many people involved as possible. 

 

7. Thoughts on the application process? I think it's fine.   Simple and any qualifications or restrictions seem to be laid out in the thread.  You can't help it if some people skim the application post and don't follow along, or realize when testers have already been selected and keep applying...ha

 

Any other ideas you guys have - please share them either here or send me a PM. This is a process that's constantly evolving and  we're trying to keep things in balance with a largely volunteer staff. We try to do our best for you guys - sometimes we stumble tho, and there are always ways to improve. 

 

Thanks!!!