Originally Posted by Patrick P
I've watched about 20 or so hours of the Worlds on discgolfplanet.tv. At first, I thought wow these are some amazing tough courses in a forest that look challenging and fun. Then after hearing the chatter online and talking to players in person who played the event, I've had some reservations. One player told me that he threw only one driver off the tee during the entire tournament. The rest of his drives were putters and midranges on 250ft holes and that most of the holes finished to the right, over and over and over.
When I first heard Avery complaining about this, I chalked it up as a player who was a little bitter with his performance. But I have to come to summize that the Worlds courses in Charlotte possibly did not provide an overall playability of all skills. I believe that if you are to host a Worlds, there should be a mix of different courses challenging all levels of skill. That includes tight wooded courses, big open fairway courses, and a mix of elevation, OB or water coming into play. An ideal course would have a mixture of all these elements.
The three courses played by MPO in the first six rounds weighed in like this:
Par 58, 6725 feet (~373 feet per hole)
Par 63, 7110 feet (395 feet per hole)
Par 67, 8843 feet (491 feet per hole)
Just on the surface, none of those courses strike me as being constituted of 250-foot putter/midrange holes one after the other. A few of those types of holes are surely part of the mix, but by no means the majority.
Of those courses, I've only played Renny (the par 67), and that course offers the players everything
all by itself. There are open field bomber holes 600-1000+ feet in length, short (<300 ft) and tightly wooded holes, two-shot placement holes, OB and elevation change galore, and everything in between. You need a full complement of shots and discs to score well on that course.
From watching the online coverage, the other two courses weren't quite as diverse as Renny, but each did have a blend of a few open air but controlled distance shots and tightly wooded finesse shots.
In my experience over the years, there seem to be quite a few players "on tour" who aren't happy unless they can get through the majority of tournament course/courses by throwing hyzer bombs and making their putts. Basically, the objection is to courses that they have to learn and "figure out" to any extensive degree.
I don't think it's an accident that Ricky Wysocki and Michael Johansen played so well all week, or that Sarah Hokom won FPO. They're from the area or moved to the area and have been playing those courses for a while. They "learned" the line to hit to negotiate the hole best. Not that there are any great tricks to the holes, but it's the difference between throwing a Roc on a hole because you *think* it's the right play and throwing a Roc because you *know* it's the right play. That subtle difference in comfort/confidence makes a difference in the execution.
In general, it strikes me that if a player is complaining that "too many" holes require a certain type of shot that it is not the holes or the course that has short-comings, it's the player. I think anyone who found the Worlds courses inadequate only found them lacking in enough of the shots that they themselves are most comfortable with, because the diversity was certainly there.