Course design gripes and ideas

[Brian]

I'm going to have to disagree about Round Lake being one of the best courses in IL.  However, I would love to see the changes.  Maybe if they happened I would come down from Kenosha more often.

[Mike S]

I'm going to have to disagree about Round Lake being one of the best courses in IL.  However, I would love to see the changes.  Maybe if they happened I would come down from Kenosha more often.

Ive got to agree with brian on this one.  Its an alright course but I enjoy the Peoria and Joliet courses the most.  Anyone taking down trees is really hurting the Round Lake course.  It needs all the obstacles it can get.

[Cannon Boy]

I have not played any courses in Joliet yet, but I do not see how you can say that Fairfield is not one of the best in the state.  It has got a little bit of everything.  Up hill right, down hill left, the longest hole in the state, open holes, wooded holes, swamps, and a river.  That is a lot more than all of the courses I have played.  I hated playing at Rockford just because of some of the holes that horseshoe around and have close to no chance at deuce.  The heavy rain from the thunderstorm did not help though.  At Fairfield most of the holes are tough but have legit deuce opportunities.  I have almost deuced 18 even.  Andy was with me when I shot just over the basket for a deuce on 18.  I still got par with a 15-foot putt to.  I want to play at Kenosha but I have not made it out there yet.  I think that it is funny that the first tourney of the Illinois Open Series was in Wisconsin though.          

[Jon Brakel]

Having holes that you CAN'T deuce is what makes great courses! We need more courses that are not only challenging threes but challenging fours also.

Round Lake does not have the longest hole in Illinois anymore.

[Guest]

I have not played any courses in Joliet yet, but I do not see how you can say that Fairfield is not one of the best in the state.  It has got a little bit of everything.  Up hill right, down hill left, the longest hole in the state, open holes, wooded holes, swamps, and a river.  That is a lot more than all of the courses I have played.  I hated playing at Rockford just because of some of the holes that horseshoe around and have close to no chance at deuce.  The heavy rain from the thunderstorm did not help though.  At Fairfield most of the holes are tough but have legit deuce opportunities.  I have almost deuced 18 even.  Andy was with me when I shot just over the basket for a deuce on 18.  I still got par with a 15-foot putt to.  I want to play at Kenosha but I have not made it out there yet.  I think that it is funny that the first tourney of the Illinois Open Series was in Wisconsin though.

Try Northwoods park in Morton or McNaughton park in Pekin.  Those courses are so much better than just about everything else ive played in IL (Mokena is very close and West Park is fun but you can only throw your roc so many times before it gets boring).  I havent played Rockford so I dont know.  Fairfield is too open in the front, and then makes up for it with a couple throw-and-pray holes at the end.  I feel like if I'm not at least 5 down by the time i get into the woods my round is screwed.  Not exactly a great flow.  Staying on topic, none of the Joliet or Peoria courses see the amount of vandalism and damage that I see at all the north suburb courses.  Buffalo Grove has signs broken and missing all the time.  Baskets stolen from the course in Wildwood killed it.  Look at the condition of Adler sometimes.  Even Streamwood had a basket stolen.  People wonder why there arent championship-caliber courses around here...

[damonshort]

I've never been crazy about Fairfield myself for the same reasons, although I rarely shoot well there anyhow. There are a lot more interesting courses, even in NE Illinois.

They did a heck of a job at Mokena so I hate to criticize, but I think they could have built a terrific 18-hole course there instead of cramming in 27. As it is it's good, not great, although I rarely shoot well there anyhow. Finding your disc there in the fall is a real challenge too; they don't call it 'The Oaks' for nothing...  

The courses around Peoria are definitely worth a trip more than once a year, although I did shoot a little better there the last time I went down.

(edit) ....thread drift in progress.....

[Cannon Boy]

I agian am going to have to disigree with jon.  I think that it is better when there is a very small chance of duece but it is still there.  Having holes that are not even possible and have more luck than skill involved is not good golf and does not give the advantage to the better golfer.  I dont know just what I think.

[CEValkyrie]

Personally, I like a good mixture. I think that is why I liked all 3 courses we played at Mid-Nationals & many of the courses in Des Moines. There is nothing more satisfying than taking a 3 on hole #16 at Granite Ridge. It takes 2 perfect drives to take a 3. 75% or more of the field probably took a 4 which is a par. Those courses can kick your butt if you are having an off day. There are birdie holes scatter throughout the courses but they still take quality shots. It takes skill & you have to be able to work a disc to play these courses.

I cannot stand playing Fairfield often. Any player that throws 350ft & in hyzers can score well on this course. 1,2,3,4,5,7,,8,9, 11, 13, & 14 are all right hyzer holes. Even #6 is a righty hyzer if you can throw far enough. Hole 12 in my mind is an example of poor design. That hole is out of range of most pros unless they are hitting 75 to 100ft upshots. Even the top pros cannot consistently drive 537ft. For most advanced/pro players this is a simple three with a very occassional birdie by someone. I would rather see it lenghtened to make it a hard 3. You do not need to be a good player to shoot well at Fairfield.

[mirth]

I'd rather play holes that challenge me on every shot than deuce or die type holes.

[Bruce Brakel]

I agian am going to have to disigree with jon.  I think that it is better when there is a very small chance of duece but it is still there.  Having holes that are not even possible and have more luck than skill involved is not good golf and does not give the advantage to the better golfer.  I dont know just what I think.

I think you are assuming that an undeuceable hole is a hole with no route.  Jon is thinking an undeuceable hole is a hole that most players cannot reach in 1 throw.  

If you read the USADGC thread on PDGA.com you can find some descriptions of undeuceable holes.  #2 is 750 mostly up a very steep hill.  Very few players ever score a three there, but a player who can throw 500 feet on flat can get up the hill in two throws if both are in the fairway.  #3 is about 900 feet long back down the same hill and up the next hill.  A deuce requires a 600-700 foot drive down and a long fairway ace.  That hole has been deuced by cannon-boy types getting well placed 800+ foot drives, but deuces are few.  #5 is only about 600 feet long but a well placed, well thought out drive is going to leave you 300 feet from the basket.  Maybe it has been deuced.  I've seen some players hit the landing zone and get threes.

In real golf only four of the 18 holes should be reachable in one shot and four should not be reachable in two shots unless they are really, really long shots.  What we play is modeled after putt-putt golf rather than real golf.  Even the USADGC course is mostly par 3s.

[Cannon Boy]

I agree, but disc golf is not real golf.  There are many differences, and why should you make it the same way.  It is a different sport with the same concept, but I do not see why we should model are courses of theirs.  You need to be a trend starter not follower.  Again just my 2 cents  

[Jon Brakel]

I agree, but disc golf is not real golf.  There are many differences, and why should you make it the same way.  It is a different sport with the same concept, but I do not see why we should model are courses of theirs.  You need to be a trend starter not follower.  Again just my 2 cents

Because all par 3 golf is not as fun as a good mixture of more challenging holes. Again, I would like disc golf to grow into a well respected sport. I think holes that can differentiate between mediocre and good play is essential. If you have never played anything but par 3 golf you will not understand. I didn't understand until I played courses with pars that were 60+.

[shawn]

There are very few holes around here that have any challenge to them at all..  I'd say that on the average you could change at least a third of the holes on any given course to a par 2..  WI and IL have to change their design attitudes when we put new courses in, we need championship callibor courses.  

Check out http://www.charlottedgc.com/renaissance.htm   It is a par 70 18 hole course...  you just have to use your head to play well at a course like this..  Take the virtual tour on this site and see for yourself...  This is not a ball golf course this course is designed for discgolf... we don't need more ball golf courses that let us on to there courses..


This topic needs it own thread

[Clonefan94]

I think the focus should not necissarily be on length, as much as accuracy. Look at #15 at Streamwood. It's around 750 ft. without a hugely lucky shot, I'll never get a 3 on that hole. I still don't consider it a fun or challenging hole though, because I also never get in trouble there. It's a wide open long hole. You can step up and rip it with little concern for where the disc goes. It rewards a long shot not necissarily a good shot. I am not very good, but, I know for sure, I always have a better time on a more challenging course that I score badly on rather than an easy course I score well on. I always feel I'm working on my game at a challenging course, where easy courses tend to make me feel like I've regressed after playing them. One thing, I feel each course should have at least a couple of holes you have to make 2 long shots on a single hole. I know this contradicts my first statement, but, I feel the biggest problem around here is too many pich and put. Even the longer holes can usually be parked, or close enough that the second shot is always a put. If anything, I'd like to see tighter fairways with a lot of trees on either side.


Thank goodness I am making a trip to Des Moines this weekend. I'm looking to get in at least to rounds and Ewing and Grandview. Hopefully I can slip some more time in there. I should move back there.

[Jon Brakel]

Mirth, could you please move all these course design posts to a new thread in Courses? Maybe call it Course Design? Thanks!

[Bruce Brakel]

I agree with Shawn that long, par 70+, 18-hole courses are more fun on courses designed for disc golf than on courses designed for ball golf.  Unfortunately, there are almost none of those.  

There is not a tour in the PGA for players who want to play executive courses with 12 par 3s and 6 par 4s, but that is what passes for a top notch course in our game.  

We shoot ourselves in the foot by starting off with a format that is laughable, if we want this sport to get any respect.

[Chainmeister]

I think that disc golf, like ball golf will need differnt course for different types of players.  In ball golf a course like Edgebrook is for hackers.  A hacker can shoot ok at Edgebrook but would have a hard time on a country club course and would get killed on a championship course.  We have  hacker courses (Glencoe, Lippold, Buffalo Grove etc) and country club courses (Anna Page, Parkside, Madison Meadows and a few of the others on Brett's list in another thread). We really don't have much, if anything, in the way of championship courses in the area.  Illinois has all kinds for ball golf.  Cog Hill, Medinah etc are championship courses for ball golfers.  

There is a place for all kinds of courses.  I like Lippold, I can score there.  It makes me feel good.  I play a course like Anna Page and score lousy but do great things for my game.  I suspect that a true championship course would just be an ego deflater for me and I wouldn't learn much either.  I think this is no different from an ok country club type player going to Cog Hill.  He would likely get a rude awakening.  Perhaps a year or so from now I will be able to score at Anna Page and want to play the types of courses that we lack.  Certainly, advanced and over players will be bored with the same old same old that we have anywhere near Chicago.  

Fly 18 is not really the answer.  Sure, it takes more throws, but its just heaving it a few more times. A long, challenging disc golf course would be way more interesting, and way tougher than Fly 18.  I guess the challenge in design would be to have a hole that plays one way for me on the shorts and a completely different way for advanced players from the longs.  If the design is right all disc golfers will want to go there.  It would be an easier sell to whoever builds it.  If the course is only for a select group of golfers it would be cool, but maybe not cost effective.

If disc golf ever came anywhere near the popularity of ball golf we could afford to have pure championship courses.  I don't think we're there yet.

[Bruce Brakel]

The one thing that does not seem to be getting through is that even our country club courses are par three courses.  You won't find a country club built around a par 3 course.  It is a silly game.  It is our game.

[Brian]

I totally agree with you Bruce.  

[Chainmeister]

Bruce

You are right.  Par 3 ad infinitum is silly.  We need to mix it up.  However, it depends on the player.  Pitch and putt courses are just that.  It seems that you are looking for courses with a drive, an approach and pulling out the putter.  On a 400 ft. hole I drive, throw a Roc or similar disc on the second throw and then putt.  In ball golf a 400 yard hole would be driver,  medium range iron, putter.  However, Tiger Woods would go 3 wood, sand wedge, putt.  His second shot is really a putter in our bag. A 900 disc golfer would drive then putt on a 400 ft. hole. One other difference is that ball golf looks at two putts once on the green.  What's the green in disc golf?  25 ft? a 900 golfer looks to hit in one, not two, from this distance.  Me, I just hope I have enough fingers to keep count. In any case, your point is well taken.  Enough with pitch and putt.  It is more fun to have at least two throws before taking out the puttnapproach disc.