Have a week long stay in St. Louis coming up. Deciding between the Renaissance St. Louis Grand and the Union Station Marriott, which are both the same price for me and equidistant from where I need to be. Using tripadvisor.com reviews, the Marriott appears to be average with some good and some so-so reviews. As for the Renaissance however, there is no shortage of vitriolic, downright angry reviews. I've excerpted some of the more colorful headlines here:

"Convenient but unsanitary"; "Worst hotel stay ever"; "Worst Marriott experience, terrible customer service"; "Rooms not worth the price"; "Front desk slow and ignorant"; "Not worth the price"; "Would never stay here again"; "I went to college to deal with people like you"; "Brutal"; "Built by giants, decorated by midgets"; "Service isn't their strong point"; "Horrid"; "Service shocking"; "Bar staff and managers need to be fired"; "Great hotel; old beds"; "Bitten by bedbugs"; "A basic Marriott property, at best"; "Not 4-star"; "Never ever ever ever again; beware travelers"; "Not so grand experience, at a grand price"; "I'd never consider this hotel to stay, ever"; "Unacceptable experience"; "Attendants were just rude"; "Sub-par service"; "There's gotta be better places"; "You can do better"; "Dirty dirty bathroom"; "Not impressed"; "Bad stay"; "Stay someplace else, where the staff actually cares"; "Awful staff"; "Go someplace else".

Now, truth be told, there were also many positive reviews, and I understand that some tripadvisor reviewers sometimes post with axes to grind. But I don't ever remember reading so many negative reviews for a downtown city center full service Renaissance or Marriott. Normally, older renovated Rens appeal to me. But I'm thinking of playing it safe in St. Louis and choosing the Marriott at the train station.