Course Design Discussion

[scoot_er]

Ok so after having 30+ Rec-level courses do you think Houston should focus on installing quality courses meant to challenge Adv level players?

I have been saying this for 5 years.,.........and we have had only 1 course since then that even comes close to this.

[bmugwump]

Which course are you talking about, Matt? Windwood or the new course at Brooks? I would think that both of those qualify...but you're right, there is a huge glut of "rec" courses in H-town! I guess it's because the developers don't have anybody in their orginizations that actually play? Or maybe they play, but haven't been playing for very long? Wish I knew the answer to that one...of course I also wish I was a better player!

[scoot_er]

Which course are you talking about, Matt? Windwood or the new course at Brooks? I would think that both of those qualify...but you're right, there is a huge glut of "rec" courses in H-town! I guess it's because the developers don't have anybody in their orginizations that actually play? Or maybe they play, but haven't been playing for very long? Wish I knew the answer to that one...of course I also wish I was a better player!


I am talking about Brooks which I personally think could be a lot better with some specialized work on a few holes....basically I don't think it is ready for an A-tier or NT yet especially when coupled with the original course which I thought was better without the extended tees.

Windwood is a good course but with every hole being a hyzer it is far from challenging for a good Adv player.

[bmugwump]

You should've come out to play Bassackwards...The Wilmont was especially fun (five anhyzers around the wetlands!)...the flags are still there if you're in town & want to check it out!

[ERicJ]

Windwood is a good course but with every hole being a hyzer it is far from challenging for a good Adv player.

If you want to rip on their spittin' baskets, that's fair game. But your quote above isn't very accurate.

[FlyinBryan]

http://www.airwarfiles.com/TempFiles/Huge_Manatee.jpg

[ChaseTheAce]

If you want to rip on their spittin' baskets, that's fair game. But your quote above isn't very accurate.

the natural line on most of the holes at Windwood is a hyzer

2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 17, 18 are all hyzers

1, 12, 16 have hyzer routes but could really go either way

although most holes have multiple lines to the basket, the course does tend to favor the right handed player

[ChrisMacG]

Houston should focus on installing quality courses meant to challenge Adv level players?

This is my new year's resolution; more challenging courses.

I'm in talks with two parks departments about installing some more challenging courses down here on the south side. With luck at least one will pan out.

[FlyinBryan]

I'm pretty new to this sport so I'd like to ask what the more talented/experienced players are looking for to make a course challenging?

[ChaseTheAce]

I'm pretty new to this sport so I'd like to ask what the more talented/experienced players are looking for to make a course challenging?

a course should be balanced with various types of shots (left, right, and straight), challenging lines, and difficulty that is both fair and challenging

more importantly, holes on a course should have score separation with opportunities for "risk and reward." a good hole might have two separate lines to the basket, giving a player the choice between a risky route for 2 but having the consequence of a bad kick that would card a 4, or a safer line to the basket to take a three.

John Houck writes some very good articles about course design for the PDGA's Disc Golfer magazine. he gives insight and explanation into what makes a good hole, risk and reward, etc.

[Suemac]

a course should be balanced with various types of shots (left, right, and straight), challenging lines, and difficulty that is both fair and challenging

more importantly, holes on a course should have score separation with opportunities for "risk and reward." a good hole might have two separate lines to the basket, giving a player the choice between a risky route for 2 but having the consequence of a bad kick that would card a 4, or a safer line to the basket to take a three.

John Houck writes some very good articles about course design for the PDGA's Disc Golfer magazine. he gives insight and explanation into what makes a good hole, risk and reward, etc.

Good answer college boy!;) :p ;)

[FlyinBryan]

Thanks Chase. What is an ideal distance? I get the impression that pro's like 400-500ft holes but what would the distances be on a dedicated Gold course? Is 18 holes still the standard? Lets say a TPC designed specifically for A-tier / upper echelon players.

[griff]

Thanks Chase. What is an ideal distance? I get the impression that pro's like 400-500ft holes but what would the distances be on a dedicated Gold course? Is 18 holes still the standard? Lets say a TPC designed specifically for A-tier / upper echelon players.
gold courses i've played have not only been long, but mostly tight. ask around about ingleside gold in chorpus. 400 to 800 ft holes with carved fairways , most zig zag thru tight woods . not many 2nd chances. stay on the fairway or your pitchin out. 400 to upwards of 800 i would say is common, but also allow a player to be creative,placement shots setting up for smart 2nd shots,etc. 18 holes or 21 ? if you have room for 21 ,great. but i wouldnt sacrifice the integrity of a great 18 to make three more holes. chase said it ,risk/reward even on the short stuff.

[derek]

Thanks Chase. What is an ideal distance? I get the impression that pro's like 400-500ft holes but what would the distances be on a dedicated Gold course? Is 18 holes still the standard? Lets say a TPC designed specifically for A-tier / upper echelon players.

Theres not really an ideal distance for each hole, and you dont want every hole to the be same distance. Variance of distance is probably the best situation. Longs, mediums, a couple of shorts. Whatever fits the specific property the best. Theres no formula because every site is different and the good designers can make the best of what is available and hopefully not come out with a pitchandputt or a course full of dog-legs and ridiculous tight fairways.

The PDGA does have some guidelines on course distance I believe. Over 7000ft total length could be 'gold' level IIRC

[tarazarr]

I have been saying this for 5 years.,.........and we have had only 1 course since then that even comes close to this.

Scoot_er...
I apologize for putting in yet another "Rec" course at Windwood - if you feel we didn't maximize the propery to it's fullest potential..

Doug and I worked very hard to lay it out... scrap it.... re-work the plans... scrap it..... re-walk it.... replan it.....re-walk it...put it in.... throw it.... dig it back up.....cut out more.....re-stretch it and re-stretch it again.... then replant baskets again.... with little to no working capital and only a handful of people willing to cut, clear and drag trees, vines and brush away instead of playing disc golf.. It's hard work and that's not for everybody.. Players have no idea how thick and impassable that property was in the beginning. It's easy to come in afterwards and see things you couldn't even get to before they were uncovered through days and days of hard work. On several holes things were changed after we cleared areas out and the boundries were pushed even further.

Hole 12 comes to mind specifically... It took well over an hour to just climb through the dense thorns from T-box to basket, much less trying to survey what was inside there and about 3/4 of the way to the basket you simply had to fight your way back out to the ditch line as it was impossible to climb through the fairway any further.

I think we did the best job possible with the given property to design and install good, challenging yet realistic and legitimate lines for each hole, incorporating as much risk-vs-reward and elevation changing looks as the property would allow

We bought the best baskets we could with a zero budget - the money started coming in when we offered sponsorships on the holes when it was time to pour concrete boxes..chain can be added to baskets....donated chain would certainly not be turned away... That would be awesome...

It's not a Pro level course obviously. It was never set out to be one. The property as much as anything dictates what can be accomplished and what can't. I agree Cedar Hills has come closer than anything else around to being pro level difficulty.

I'm a little biased for sure. but I think Windwood is a fair course, a fun course, a challenging course with lots of risk vs reward. And that the property was maximized to it's fullest potential allowable. I'm not sure what more could be asked of any property

I appreciate and welcome your opinions and I greatly appreciate the support you and your family have given to Windwood. It was and continues to be a grass roots, community effort, future improvements (such as added chains) come from donations.

I think the top scores from the Open/Adv division during the BagTag Tourney (63's on a par 63 course) speak more to the balance and the risk vs reward factor designed into it than anything..

A few more chains??? Yeah it could use a few....got any?

[ThePatrick]

a course should be balanced with various types of shots (left, right, and straight), challenging lines, and difficulty that is both fair and challenging

more importantly, holes on a course should have score separation with opportunities for "risk and reward." a good hole might have two separate lines to the basket, giving a player the choice between a risky route for 2 but having the consequence of a bad kick that would card a 4, or a safer line to the basket to take a three.

John Houck writes some very good articles about course design for the PDGA's Disc Golfer magazine. he gives insight and explanation into what makes a good hole, risk and reward, etc.
Your math is a little off. That should be a four, six, or eight.

[ChrisMacG]

Thanks Chase. What is an ideal distance? I get the impression that pro's like 400-500ft holes but what would the distances be on a dedicated Gold course? Is 18 holes still the standard? Lets say a TPC designed specifically for A-tier / upper echelon players.

One element that makes for a challenging hole is to make the hole require a placement shot in there. Say you have a hole with a 150' long open fairway that doglegs to a tight 200' long wooded tunnel to the hole. The player has to put their first throw is good position to throw the 200' long section, if they miss that placement shot they won't have a good look at the 200' long tunnel.

[ERicJ]

the natural line on most of the holes at Windwood is a hyzer

2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 17, 18 are all hyzers

1, 12, 16 have hyzer routes but could really go either way

although most holes have multiple lines to the basket, the course does tend to favor the right handed player
How often do you land in the fairway throwing a hyzer on #10? :confused:

I agree that it favors righties, but saying every hole is a hyzer just isn't correct.

[Smokin' Joe]

How often do you land in the fairway throwing a hyzer on #10? :confused:

I agree that it favors righties, but saying every hole is a hyzer just isn't correct.

I like throwing ROLLERS! :D

[ERicJ]

more importantly, holes on a course should have score separation
This is probably the most overlooked aspect of tournament layouts. And that's because it's probably one of the the most difficult aspects to correctly design.

A hole with good scoring separation will separate the top 1/3 of the players from the bottom 2/3. That's the established rule of thumb. So you're looking for holes with average scores of X.6 to X.8, e.g. 2.6-2.8 or 3.6-3.8.

What makes this difficult is that it really only works for one skill division. If you design a 340' hole on which MA1 players average 2.65 that's a good birdie hole for them. But when MA2 players play that same hole and average 2.95 then it's a very bad tournament hole for them. MA3 players might average 3.3 on that hole and it's a bad tournament hole for them too. Now you might get lucky and MA4 players average 3.7 and it ends up being a good tourney hole for them too, but that's lucky it happened that way.

You can deal with that utilizing separate tees for each division, but that becomes a logistical nightmare and subject to course misplays by the players. So everyone typically plays from the same tees, or maybe you utilize two sets of tees. But the end result is that some group of players are more than likely playing a less than ideal tournament layout.

If courses are designed for 1000-rated player tournament play they have a probability of being poor tournament courses for lesser skilled players. That's not to say they won't be fun courses, they might be. And certainly not saying they won't be challenging courses, they certainly will be.

To get scoring separation data you have a chicken vs. egg problem. You need to play the course a decent bit to get that data. Often courses are designed and installed without any significant play to gather such data. The Windwood guys did a good job of installing the course necessities and letting the course get some play, analyzing the feedback, and making changes. When they got the course they wanted then they poured the concrete tee pads.

[ChaseTheAce]

How often do you land in the fairway throwing a hyzer on #10? :confused:

I agree that it favors righties, but saying every hole is a hyzer just isn't correct.

yea, 10 is more of a straight shot, but after watching most people throw into the creek on the left, one would think that it were a hyzer hole. you get the point though. there are a lot of right hand dominant straight/hyzer holes

i still feel that Windwood is a fun, fair, challenging course with a decent amount of score separation between players. the front 9 plays nothing like the back 9 and 2 of the 3 new holes offer an added challenge at the end of every round. i dont think the land had potential to be a phenomenal course by any means, so to have scott and doug create a solid course in Houston amongst all of the pitch and putts is an effort that should be acknowledged

[SlammingSheldon]

I think that one of the things to consider is that the amount of land required to have 18 smoking holes in some areas (say a metropolitan area like H-town) would require some serious dough. Dough that none of the disc golfers I have met have. So we are relegated to primarily relying on those that would let us share the use of their land. (Park departments, churches, some private individuals that have ranches or land)

So I would say to anyone that wants to put a new Adv level course in close with sweet baskets and great tee pads make it happen and we will all come and play it.

And even if it costs you a lot of money to get it in the ground please don't make it pay to play :)

[FlyinBryan]

This was going to lead to the next question of how many acres would a serious Gold course require? This then leads to how many parcels of land meet this requirement, that are available, within a 20 mile radius of downtown?

[ChrisMacG]

This was going to lead to the next question of how many acres would a serious Gold course require? This then leads to how many parcels of land meet this requirement, that are available, within a 20 mile radius of downtown?

Within the city? Not many. We are going to be limited to areas that have no commercial or residential potential. In Houston that pretty much relegates us to flood prone areas. The nice thing about that is there's usually terrain to work with.

There are spots along Cypress Creek near 45 that could potentially be excellent for courses (NE of Cypress Trace (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=77090&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=41.360684,77.607422&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Houston,+Texas+77090&ll=30.034641,-95.439241&spn=0.011072,0.018947&t=h&z=16) for example) but who owns them? How do we get that sort of land set aside for recreational use? Then how do we get that land set aside for disc golf?

With two major PDGA events in the area this year the profile of disc golf will be raised int eh area. If you want disc golf in your area it's a great time to start bringing it up to your local parks folks.

[FlyinBryan]

How about the watershed just south of West Houston Airport just west of Highway 6? Might be a mosquito invested zone....

The ideal piece of property is on the west side of I-45 right at the Harris-Montgomery Co. line. I'm just not sure who owns it but there's at least 300 undeveloped acres there with nice elevations and right along Spring Creek.

[bmugwump]

ERic, thanks for moving this forum to an appropriate place...all of this discussion started on a thread for a mini!:rolleyes:

[tarazarr]

the natural line on most of the holes at Windwood is a hyzer

2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 17, 18 are all hyzers

1, 12, 16 have hyzer routes but could really go either way

although most holes have multiple lines to the basket, the course does tend to favor the right handed player

Chase thanks for the kind words...much appreciated.:cool:

I would agree with you on the hyzer statement above on the following holes...2..5...6...8....9...17 those are definate hyzer routes but to end it with "those are all hyzers" falls far short of it being an accurate description.

Holes 8..9.. I think actually favor the LHBH. even though they have the "appearance" of an easy hyzer shot... skipping and sliding is very dangerous to your chances for birdie.

Hole 9...Cirlce 3 is easy so why go for the ace, but I give the advantage of birdie to the lefty

Holes 11...14....15....18. I don't think favor RHBH or LHBH. fair game. 18 only slightly to the RHBH hyzer if you have the monster arm

Hole 4 - ace run- fair either way... favors accurate distance.. overshoot the basket by +20 feet and the "pucker" factor coming back at it... priceless...;)

Hole 5... second shortest hole on the course...213' easy birdie right? Yeah.. if you can park it within 10' of the basket.... watch the meltdowns occur here... I've seen more bags get kicked, discs slammed...profanities yelled...you could write a book..."How to turn a birdie into double bogey in 3 easy steps" :D

Hole 6... gets my vote for coolest hole in Houston... hyzer route...yes hands down. add to that... Raised T-box towering over the perfect tunnel shot, drive it under the wildest looking, completely arched Pine you've ever seen, skip it up to green for a possible "ace"... or perfect line should card a 2....But watch out, that green is a 2 sided cliff.... well that's the shot most of us are dreaming about on the t-box, but can't ever actually execute..

You called hole 7 a hyzer.... well that's kind of a half truth.. It's a hyzer for a true advanced RHBH player who can bend the shot right to begin with and then back left after about 250' and land it across the ravine up the hill onto a green that is tightly protected.. Fail to execute any part of that shot and you stand to lose any advantage over a LHBH player who throws out a fairly easy placement shot, short of the ravine, to have a clean look at the basket with a 100' upshot. I give the advantage here to the Adv RHBH or Rec LHBH player equally. everyone else has trouble.

IMO Holes 1..3..8..12..13..19.. clearly favor the LHBH player.

As ERic would say....Balanced...


As far as Bryans question on which properties have potential for a pro level course.... The Telge "Property" has the potential... My hope is the designer takes full advantage of it and pushes the envelope even further than Cedar Hills, cause I agree with scoot_er... Houston has more than enough Rec level courses... the advancement of the game and discs have turned a majority of Houston courses into pitch and putt courses.

There's talk about concreting Moffit... My suggestion would be forget the shorts, pour concrete on the long boxes to get the most bang for your buck out there...jmo

[slowmo]

You know, I have seen these discussions for years about the design of disc golf holes and how they should have a "spread" of scores. Being an avid ball golfer this theory makes absolutely no sense to me. Par is the score a GOOD player is supposed to shoot...IE a "scratch" golfer should shoot par. They then make a birdie when they have a great approach shot or a great putt, they make a bogie when they make a mistake. I"ve never understood why if every MPO makes a 3 on that hole it's a bad hole, to me that's a good hole. Not every hole on a course should be a birdie hole, par should be a goal, not an afterthought. A large spread of scores from 1000 rated players on a single hole tells me that is a bad hole with to much luck involved.

PGA ball golf tournaments are always showing stats for a hole where there 4 birdies, 57 pars, 6 bogies, and 2 doubles and discuss why that is such a good hole. They don't talk about a hole like that being poorly designed because the stroke spread is more spread out.

That said, my idea of a good hole has to do with layout, shape, obstacles, and fairness. How many shots should it take a 1000 rated player to get to that 10m putting circle (though this should probably be more of a 20m circle)? Doglegs that force layups to a certian position, obstacles that force a particular shot shape. OB and water to penalize errant shots with a penalty stroke (I don't think there are enough penalty strokes in disc golf)

I also believe that these tight holes with 1 or 2 trees randomly in the middle of the pathway are bad holes. When the hole is only 15 - 20ft wide to have a random obstacle like that turns the hole more in the direction of luck IMHO.

1000+ rated players IMHO should shoot anywhere from 4-6 under to 4-6 over par on a given course, depending on how well they are playing that day. The world comes to a stop if Tiger Woods shoots a 78...that's only 6 over par! The reverse is also true, when Tiger shoots a 66 (6 under) everyone talks about what a great day he had on the course. Hell no professional golfer has ever shot below a 59 (13 under) in history of golf and that has only been done 10 times in the history of the PGA tour.

[LOU18132]

A few more chains??? Yeah it could use a few....got any?

Sure do, not enough for the whole course, but a few baskets.:cool:

You would have to pick them up in Willis. I have them in the shop somewhere. :eek:

[ERicJ]

You know, I have seen these discussions for years about the design of disc golf holes and how they should have a "spread" of scores. Being an avid ball golfer this theory makes absolutely no sense to me. Par is the score a GOOD player is supposed to shoot...IE a "scratch" golfer should shoot par. They then make a birdie when they have a great approach shot or a great putt, they make a bogie when they make a mistake. I"ve never understood why if every MPO makes a 3 on that hole it's a bad hole, to me that's a good hole. Not every hole on a course should be a birdie hole, par should be a goal, not an afterthought. A large spread of scores from 1000 rated players on a single hole tells me that is a bad hole with to much luck involved.

Scoring separation is relevant to tournament play. The goal of a hole in tournament play it to separate the top 1/3 of the players from the bottom 2/3. Over a course of 18ish holes the cream will rise to the top. That's the goal of a good tournament layout.

PGA ball golf tournaments are always showing stats for a hole where there 4 birdies, 57 pars, 6 bogies, and 2 doubles and discuss why that is such a good hole. They don't talk about a hole like that being poorly designed because the stroke spread is more spread out.

That's an awful tournament hole. 83% of the players all carded the same (par) score. How do you know who the good players are? The onesy-twosy amount of players going under or over on that hole isn't statistically significant. You want a bigger sample size to eliminate the luck factor.

If you have 2/3 of the players carding a par, and 1/3 of them bogey, well you've separated the really bad players from the field, but you still don't know who the good ones are... they're all lumped into that top 2/3.

A good hole will separate the top 1/3 of the good players from the rest of the field. The 1/3 metric ties in nicely in that MPO tournament fields are usually paid out to the top ~1/3 of entrants.

Lastly, "par" in tournament disc golf... Unless you show up late for the start of a round and are carding "par+4" scores: par is completely 100% irrelevant, it does not matter.

[tarazarr]

Thanks Lou.. I'd love to come up next time I'm up north...

I'm going to agree for the most part with slowmo here. I don't think every hole has to separate the top third. The course should be challeging enough where over the course of a round, a few players, rated equally, in say a group of 10, having a hot round will separate themselves. But the group should stay tight, meaning random trees that require luck, not skill, aren't really the deciding factor and shouldn't be there. Tight lines are fine IMO as long as there is a defined legitament line, that when hit properly doesn't result in the disc or ball being unable to continue safely into and or thru the next section. Having to split 2 trees with no legit continuation because it's just random is silly IMO. Having to split two trees, with a realistic line to continue is fine. Not hitting that line is unfortunate but not bad design.

I do believe luck has it's place in the game. You never hear player complain about getting some good tree love on a bad throw, but a touch of bad luck on an otherwise decent throw??? You'd think the world had it in for him... I think it's ok to have spots where you must hit the correct line or else suffer the pain... As it's ok to have spots where even a bed rip finds that elusive local route and leaves you just fine...

[ChaseTheAce]

going to have to agree with Eric on this one

it's a really simple idea. a good/challenging hole should reward a great drive and punish a bad one. if a player throws a bad shot off the tee then there shouldn't be a routine upshot to the basket for a 3.

great example would be hole #8 at Spring Valley. tight line tunnel shot on the left side and a bail out shot to the right. the hole gives the player a thin line for success on the left side if a well played turnover fairway disc or turnover sidearm is thrown. if the player kicks an early tree, he or she may find themselves looking at a couple upshots before carding the typical 4 or 5. the safe line to the right side is just a putter to the gap or mid around the corner, followed by a short upshot with a putter, and then an easy putt to card the 3

[ThePatrick]

going to have to agree with Eric on this one

it's a really simple idea. a good/challenging hole should reward a great drive and punish a bad one. if a player throws a bad shot off the tee then there shouldn't be a routine upshot to the basket for a 3.

great example would be hole #9 at Spring Valley. tight line tunnel shot on the left side and a bail out shot to the right. the hole gives the player a thin line for success on the left side if a well played turnover fairway disc or turnover sidearm is thrown. if the player kicks an early tree, he or she may find themselves looking at a couple upshots before carding the typical 4 or 5. the safe line to the right side is just a putter to the gap or mid around the corner, followed by a short upshot with a putter, and then an easy putt to card the 3
You mean finesse 8?

[ChrisMacG]

I'm with Eric on this one too. Score separation is something that course designers need to think about when they are setting up holes. The problem is that a hole that separates a Rec player isn't going to separate the Advanced players.

Take hole 17 on Cedar Hills; it's the shot over the pond to the basket on the hill. For Rec players that far side is a long way off and a big risk. That water shot will separate the rec field. Now an Advanced player should be hitting the other side without issue and maybe 1 in 10 will miss because they're having a bad day. A hole that separates Open players is going to average higher scores for the lower rated players (5 on Cedar Hills for example).

As a course designer you have to think about the different skill levels of players and create holes that test each of the different groups.

Plus you have to make it fun. :D

[ERicJ]

I don't think every hole has to separate the top third. The course should be challeging enough where over the course of a round, a few players, rated equally, in say a group of 10, having a hot round will separate themselves. But the group should stay tight, ...

But a tournament is not intended to identify only the top few players. You need to think about the entire field, or at least those that are going to "cash" (top 1/3 (Pro) to 1/2 (Am)). At the end of the day you want a mostly accurate ranked list of players from the best-of-the-day to the worst, not just the few who had hot rounds.

[griff]

You know, I have seen these discussions for years about the design of disc golf holes and how they should have a "spread" of scores. Being an avid ball golfer this theory makes absolutely no sense to me. Par is the score a GOOD player is supposed to shoot...IE a "scratch" golfer should shoot par.

PGA ball golf tournaments are 1000+ rated players IMHO should shoot anywhere from 4-6 under to 4-6 over par on a given course, depending on how well they are playing that day.
if i shoot par at mac g or moffet, i'm pissed, 54 on the willy is a different story. wonder how tiger would feel about a 27 at green caye, a 9hole pitch and putt in dickinson.

[ChaseTheAce]

You mean finesse 8?

yes, for some reason i typed 9

[slowmo]

Lastly, "par" in tournament disc golf... Unless you show up late for the start of a round and are carding "par+4" scores: par is completely 100% irrelevant, it does not matter.

Par is completely irrelevant in ball gall also. At the end of the day a player cards a 70, not a -2. It's a means of keeping score easier for the TV audience so that they can compare someone who is 16 holes into the round and one who is 2 holes into a round.

[tarazarr]

I'm with Eric on this one too. Score separation is something that course designers need to think about when they are setting up holes. The problem is that a hole that separates a Rec player isn't going to separate the Advanced players.

Take hole 17 on Cedar Hills; it's the shot over the pond to the basket on the hill. For Rec players that far side is a long way off and a big risk. That water shot will separate the rec field. Now an Advanced player should be hitting the other side without issue and maybe 1 in 10 will miss because they're having a bad day. A hole that separates Open players is going to average higher scores for the lower rated players (5 on Cedar Hills for example).

As a course designer you have to think about the different skill levels of players and create holes that test each of the different groups.

Plus you have to make it fun. :D

I agree with you Chris. These are both good example holes.
Hole 17: Adv/Open players probably do not get seperated to much on this hole overall. The pond isn't that great of a factor for this division and other than that it's wide open. However in the Rec division, you'll probably see some seperation here, most will lay-up infront of the water but still it's more than just a pitch up to the hole from there, the hole requires 2 pretty accurate shots from this group. add the wind to the mix and the putts are no longer gimmes for this group either.

Hole 5: is a hole that will probably separate each group (Rec-vs-Open)even further. Also it should seperate within as well. Since it requires much more accuracy added to the distance to be in a good position for your next throw. I'd expect to see a 1-2 shot swings possible in open scores here and 3-5 shot swings on this hole alone in the Rec division. It's easy to get into trouble and stay in trouble

I like holes that have landing zones.. Like WW hole #2 (which btw Chris you described pretty accurately in your earlier post) you need some distance after negotiating a fair line, not wide open but fair... but you need to land it in a certain area to have a good look and then you need an accurate up shot. Hole 2 doesn't see a lot of birdies outside of the Adv/Pro div. For other divisions, par is a solid score. Bogeys are pretty common

Ridiculus tight lines take away that "fun" factor you mentioned - which i agree is very important.

[ChrisMacG]

Ridiculous tight lines take away that "fun" factor you mentioned - which i agree is very important.

After playing Timber Lane on Saturday I have to say that some tight fairways can be fun. Hole 8 out there is a short hole (158'?) with a very tight fairway. I managed to nearly ace it and took a 6 the second time through (couldn't miss a tree). Hole 7 is also pretty tight and great fun. There is a path through the trees to the basket but it's a hard path to hit perfectly and this makes the hole challenging. On most of the holes at Timber Line we saw score separation; Billy and I had different scores on 6 of the nine holes each time through and we have the same rating.

Both of these tight fairway holes were short. I believe this makes them more fun for players rather than a 400' tight fairway. A short tight fairway can separate players just as effectively as a longer one.

[ERicJ]

Hole 17: Adv/Open players probably do not get seperated to much on this hole overall. The pond isn't that great of a factor for this division and other than that it's wide open. However in the Rec division, you'll probably see some seperation here, most will lay-up infront of the water but still it's more than just a pitch up to the hole from there, the hole requires 2 pretty accurate shots from this group. add the wind to the mix and the putts are no longer gimmes for this group either.

I'd be interested to see the score average on Cedar Hills #17 for MPO after the NT. At 421' I can see that being a decent tournament hole for them with the basket on the hill. Lot's of 3's carded with 2's going to the top 1/3ish or 1/2ish of MPO. Advanced division probably not so much with too many 3's and too few 2's and 4's.

[tarazarr]

to clarify... I meant the Open group stays tight together as a group on this hole. The Adv group stays tight together as a group on this hole...
The Rec group (not sure if Rec is going to be offered though) but that group will see bigger seperation within it's group, because it takes more than one solid shot. It requires 2 solid shots for a close par shot given the typical windy hill.

[ERicJ]

"Scoring separation" does not imply or require that the distribution of scores spread across three or four different scores. A hole where 33 of 100 players card a '2' and the other 67 card a '3' works just swell as a tournament hole. The distribution is tight but serves the purpose of a tournament hole.