I seem to really like holes where you have about 250 - 300 feet of field and the basket sits 70 - 100 feet further down in the woods.

These are such great holes - why do so many designers seem to only want to design open and wooded holes and holes out of the woods into the open?

I'd love to see more of these.

What types of holes would you like to see designed that don't get designed much?

I love holes where you are forced to tee with a mid or putter then you have to throw a DRIVER second shot!!! Like a nice 250 ft landing zone then a nice 350 ft shot to the basket!!! And I also love the kind of holes your talking about as well!!! Oh and I just want more par 4s and 5s in general no matter how they are set up...........Real golf takes more than 2 shots to get a birdie!!!

A hole that is wide open all around you, wall of trees 60-70 feet off the pad with a 10-12 foot wide gap straight ahead, then 250 more to the basket. Wide open after the wall. A really big arm or a thumber expert can try to take the trees out of play, but a park job is relatively easy if you can throw dead on straight.


-Chris.

I like holes that are different from the last one in ways you couldn't guess from playing the last one.

I think Mullet's hole is like #5 at Willow Brook in Byron, except the guys who can throw 500 feet on a right turning shot can by-pass the landing zone, clear the water and set up an easy birdie-three. And the ones that only think they can are soggy toast! Lay up and you have to park that 350 footer for the birdie-3. Or hole out from 350 and win the Eagle Pool!!! Yeah baby! Gimme that money.

I love that hole. It is also nothing like the previous one.

Pre-reg is open by the way. Be the first.

I like holes that are different from the last one in ways you couldn't guess from playing the last one.


This was one of the best things about the Gran Canyon course. You'd play a great hole, a hole that all by itself could be a signature hole for many other courses, then you'd get to the next tee and there was another signature hole, over and over and over again.

I like holes that are different from the last one in ways you couldn't guess from playing the last one.


This was one of the best things about the Gran Canyon course. You'd play a great hole, a hole that all by itself could be a signature hole for many other courses, then you'd get to the next tee and there was another signature hole, over and over and over again.



Hawk Hollow in Virginia. I have not yet played the course, but I've heard many renowned players voice a similar description of the design quality.

agreed on Hawk Hollow - theres 7 holes I could easily say are signature holes.

...finished up putting the baskets out for the extra 9 holes just minutes ago- chris french and co. put in a new bridge today too!!! (3 down, 2 to go)

we'll play all 27 at spotsy winter league next saturday.


more on topic- i like par 4 holes which require you to throw 2 distinctly different types of shots on the same hole- both mtl and mullet have the right idea.

Fairway management holes, where your first shot needs to do more than just hit the fairway---your second shot depends on where on the fairway your drive lands.

Holes with multiple routes on the second shot, to add to the decision-making.

Holes with multiple routes on the second shot, to add to the decision-making.



I actually don't like holes like this simply b/c you can throw a bad shot trying to set up one of the 2nd shots but you miss your line. But you land in an area still gives you a chance at a 3 going the other route that you never intended to throw.

I was thinking more of holes with an assortment of trees, tree islands, and other obstacles after the first 300' or so, where no matter where your drive lands, you have to create a challenging route and then execute it. Some of the longer holes at Trophy Lakes come to mind.

Some of the longer holes at Trophy Lakes come to mind.



which ones?

I seem to really like holes where you have about 250 - 300 feet of field and the basket sits 70 - 100 feet further down in the woods.

These are such great holes - why do so many designers seem to only want to design open and wooded holes and holes out of the woods into the open?

I'd love to see more of these.



MTL,

Maybe designers don't like those type of holes because hitting a narrow corridor into woods from 300 feet out and having the disc continue to carry straight forward to the polehole for another 100 feet is a challenge for too many golfers. For many golfers, their discs are already starting to lose speed and hyzer out at that point. Maybe it seems like it's too much of a crapshoot whether a disc can reach the polehole through the woods, and this luck factor is undesirable.

I personally don't agree with that, think it's a skill that should be acquired, and love these types of holes myself, but maybe that is the line of thinking from course designers.

I'm just getting tired of holes with little skill seperation....and agree that these holes require lots of skill.

Some of the longer holes at Trophy Lakes come to mind.



which ones?



Sorry, I was only there once and don't remember the hole numbers.

Wish I could come up with other examples off the top of my head, but there are too few of these holes. Par 4s & 5s where you have to study the situation before the second shot and be creative and then execute (but not to the point of being unfair or just random luck).

I seem to really like holes where you have about 250 - 300 feet of field and the basket sits 70 - 100 feet further down in the woods.

These are such great holes - why do so many designers seem to only want to design open and wooded holes and holes out of the woods into the open?

I'd love to see more of these.

What types of holes would you like to see designed that don't get designed much?



This is exactly Hole #3 at New Quarter. The last 80' +/- is in the woods. First 300' is wide open. Place your drive correctly or you won't have a clean shot at the wooded tunnel. Hole #18 is similar but it has almost twice as much real estate between the tee and the woods line. Again the placement of the approach is critical in getting into the wooded tunnel.

Mike,

When I started that post those two holes at New Quarter were EXCACTLY what I was thinking of as an example.

I love your course and I love your design!

Please design more!!!

I love holes where you are forced to tee with a mid or putter then you have to throw a DRIVER second shot!!! Like a nice 250 ft landing zone then a nice 350 ft shot to the basket!!! And I also love the kind of holes your talking about as well!!! Oh and I just want more par 4s and 5s in general no matter how they are set up...........Real golf takes more than 2 shots to get a birdie!!!



You've just described Williamson County Disc Golf Course in Leander, TX.

I love holes where you are forced to tee with a mid or putter then you have to throw a DRIVER second shot!!! Like a nice 250 ft landing zone then a nice 350 ft shot to the basket!!! And I also love the kind of holes your talking about as well!!! Oh and I just want more par 4s and 5s in general no matter how they are set up...........Real golf takes more than 2 shots to get a birdie!!!



You've just described Williamson County Disc Golf Course in Leander, TX.



True and the longer you try to throw your drive the better look you will have but getting farther down the fairway isn't easy.

I freaken love that course.

I seem to really like holes where you have about 250 - 300 feet of field and the basket sits 70 - 100 feet further down in the woods.



We had a hole like this up here in Montana for a couple tournaments last summer. The first was for the Zoo Town Open. It was about a 300-325 ft shot to about a 30 ft gap in the trees, mando to the left of a big tree on the right. Then the basket was about 50 ft in on the left. The second was at the Blue Mountain Benefit. Same hole except the basket was straight back about 130 ft. I liked the hole. It definitely required some skill to get it within par, which I believe was 4. There definitely should be some more holes like this. It would definitely help people with their accuracy, or else they would have to pay the consequences.

I seem to really like holes where you have about 250 - 300 feet of field and the basket sits 70 - 100 feet further down in the woods.





sounds like #12 at Highbridge Gold, which is one of the most rewarding 3's i've ever gotten

I seem to really like holes where you have about 250 - 300 feet of field and the basket sits 70 - 100 feet further down in the woods.





sounds like #12 at Highbridge Gold, which is one of the most rewarding 3's i've ever gotten



Consider though that Robert's example would likely be a 320-400' gold level par 3, with a rare deuce possible.

From the gold tee, #12 at Highbidge Gold is a 605' pro par four, which is likely why that score of 3 was so rewarding. :cool:

Played a new course in Dover, Ohio a week or so ago that was fantastic, made my Top Ten: Reis Hill Park. It has to be the toughest course in Ohio, and the toughest I have ever played. A couple of holes there were like this ideal one.

Hole 13, starts out in the open but with some woods close enough to the right to eliminate a straight-forward hyzer, so you are forced (RHBH) to do some turnover.

The problem for the golfer is that you are throwing over 700 uphill across wide open (we're talking Toboggan-like elevation) with the slope of the land going left to right, downhill, and turning over too much can lose a lot of ground.

At the end you have to be in position for 2-3 spots from which you have a shot at a pin, in the woods, that is pretty protected from straight on approaches.

Ben had maybe a 60-foot third shot while I had about a hundred foot fourth shot and I was very glad to card the 5, because there is enough slope at the pin that discs could roll waaaay downhill.

Great course, lots of brains went into the design, and it is very long. Ben and I shot the middle tees (three on most holes) and I ended up +19 where Ben was +11. I shudder to think of my score from the longs.

I seem to really like holes where you have about 250 - 300 feet of field and the basket sits 70 - 100 feet further down in the woods.





sounds like #12 at Highbridge Gold, which is one of the most rewarding 3's i've ever gotten



Consider though that Robert's example would likely be a 320-400' gold level par 3, with a rare deuce possible.

From the gold tee, #12 at Highbidge Gold is a 605' pro par four, which is likely why that score of 3 was so rewarding. :cool:



both are great holes.

HG 3 and 12 were both holes that had both open and woods and I thought were great disc golf holes and examples of the types of holes we need more of to seperate skill.

Ben and I shot the middle tees (three on most holes) and I ended up +19 where Ben was +11. I shudder to think of my score from the longs.



That would be Deis Hill Park. And though it appears you are reporting scores as if all holes are par 3, judging from the map posted here (http://www.doverohio.com/New%20Site/Forms/disc_golf_map2.PDF), it looks like there were several pro par four and pro par five holes, including the referenced hole#13 which plays as a 800' pro par five.

That looks like one heck of a course. I'm jealous. :cool:

The thing I like about these types of holes is that they combine the two key categories of disc golf holes; wooded holes and open holes. Some courses are entirely open, some entirely wooded. Then you have some courses that have wooded and open holes. But you rarely see these hybrid holes.

I think this fits with the open then wooded hybrid concept:
Hole 14 on the Red Hawk, 760 ft., par 4.
The tee shot appears to be wide open. In practice, though, the longer the tee shot carries the more accurate it needs to be. A 550 ft. crush that isn't accurate can leave a player blocked off to the tunnel to the basket with virtually no chance at a birdie. (unless you've got a super-sick arm like Double G or Markus and can throw a monster spike hyzer over the 50 ft. tall trees.)


http://www.playerscup.org/images/cs_14_01.jpg

http://www.playerscup.org/images/cs_14_02.jpg

http://www.playerscup.org/images/cs_14_03.jpg

That looks like one heck of a course. I'm jealous. :cool:



Unfortunately, it's a 3.5 hour drive for me, but if there is a large sanctioned event there this year, I'm going to make that drive.

...looks like a great hole denny- does the redhawk course stay set up in players cup configuration year round? (my inlaws are moving to brooksville next month)

...looks like a great hole denny- does the redhawk course stay set up in players cup configuration year round? (my inlaws are moving to brooksville next month)


until this year the answer was yes. now we added two temporary bunCR's on holes 1 and 16 that aren't up for casual rounds, but the rest stays the same.

I love holes where you are forced to tee with a mid or putter then you have to throw a DRIVER second shot!!! Like a nice 250 ft landing zone then a nice 350 ft shot to the basket!!!


Those kind of holes are my least favorite. For the simple reason that the tee(debris free, traction ready) surface isn't really needed to throw 250, then go get up in some sticks or on a slope, with mud and try and really throw with some torque??? Sounds like adding alot of liability to the game and wasting the use of a tee pad. I am in favor of par 4's and 5's, I just hope designers can keep tee pads for teeing off instead of throwing up-shots.

A hole that is wide open all around you, wall of trees 60-70 feet off the pad with a 10-12 foot wide gap straight ahead, then 250 more to the basket. Wide open after the wall. A really big arm or a thumber expert can try to take the trees out of play, but a park job is relatively easy if you can throw dead on straight.


-Chris.



This is Hoel 2 at MAPLE HILL, MA. marshall street. check youtube for a video of it being played.

I love holes where you are forced to tee with a mid or putter then you have to throw a DRIVER second shot!!! Like a nice 250 ft landing zone then a nice 350 ft shot to the basket!!!


Those kind of holes are my least favorite. For the simple reason that the tee(debris free, traction ready) surface isn't really needed to throw 250, then go get up in some sticks or on a slope, with mud and try and really throw with some torque??? Sounds like adding alot of liability to the game and wasting the use of a tee pad. I am in favor of par 4's and 5's, I just hope designers can keep tee pads for teeing off instead of throwing up-shots.



This is a valid point. I think the problem, though, isn't with having a shorter 1st shot than 2nd, but rather with the fact that disc golf "fairways" often leave less than desireable footing for run-up's. Many are the equivalent of a ball golf fairway half-full of unrepaired divot holes.

It's a challenge for us to move forward and have maintained primary landing areas with good footing. If we are to continue to push forward we've got to admit that designing, constucting, and maintaining awesome disc golf courses requires money. Grees fees are essential to having superior GOLF courses to play on.

I love holes where you are forced to tee with a mid or putter then you have to throw a DRIVER second shot!!! Like a nice 250 ft landing zone then a nice 350 ft shot to the basket!!!


Those kind of holes are my least favorite. For the simple reason that the tee(debris free, traction ready) surface isn't really needed to throw 250, then go get up in some sticks or on a slope, with mud and try and really throw with some torque??? Sounds like adding alot of liability to the game and wasting the use of a tee pad. I am in favor of par 4's and 5's, I just hope designers can keep tee pads for teeing off instead of throwing up-shots.



This is a valid point. I think the problem, though, isn't with having a shorter 1st shot than 2nd, but rather with the fact that disc golf "fairways" often leave less than desireable footing for run-up's. Many are the equivalent of a ball golf fairway half-full of unrepaired divot holes.

It's a challenge for us to move forward and have maintained primary landing areas with good footing. If we are to continue to push forward we've got to admit that designing, constucting, and maintaining awesome disc golf courses requires money. Grees fees are essential to having superior GOLF courses to play on.



I totally agree. At Riney B we have a hole with a layup point 150 feet off the pad then another 150 feet to the basket. One of the big problems in the area is drainage and making a controlled approach shot uphill in mud is not good. The good thing is the ground right now seems pretty solid and we might be able to get away with just putting in grass seed. Other stuff will take alot of time and money (thank goodness for the parks dept.)

The only trick is the switch from free play to pay to play (on new courses over all) smoothly without ruffling alot of feathers.

The only trick is the switch from free play to pay to play (on new courses over all) smoothly without ruffling alot of feathers.


Ruffle away, baby!
Our current player base represents only the tip of the iceberg of future players of the sport.

We should stop making the majority of our decisions to appease those that refuse to consider a $5-10 greens fee.

In the mainstream public's eye, free isn't worth anything. Look at how much use those park VITA courses get.

I just want to play sweet par 60+ courses, with multiple sets of tees, signs, benches, trash cans, pro-shops, good footing, and nasty schule that only comes into play on a BAD shot. I'm more than willing to pay $10 for that experience and I know I'm not the only one.

You guys should check out The Crucible in Athens, GA. It's only a temp course that gets set up a few times a year for tournaments but it is top notch! Ask any pro around Atlanta. There is a tournament there Feb. 16th. It's a par 68 (or 69) and has (obviously) true par 4's and 5's. It's got everything you can think of... bring your A game. Anyone in the surrounding cities or states should seriously considering checking it out - just to get a chance to play the course! I highly recommend not playing it blind either...

http://www.pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=5759
http://www.pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=6529

There is also an A-tier October 22-25 - Flying Eye Open !!!!!!!!!!
You have plenty of time to plan for it!

!!!!!!!!!! October 22-25 - A TIER!!!! Flying Eye Open !!!!!!!!!!

I seem to really like holes where you have about 250 - 300 feet of field and the basket sits 70 - 100 feet further down in the woods.

These are such great holes - why do so many designers seem to only want to design open and wooded holes and holes out of the woods into the open?

I'd love to see more of these.

What types of holes would you like to see designed that don't get designed much?



5 of the new alternate pin placements at Winter Park will have this setup. You'll play 250-300' in the open ski lanes, then have to upshot into the surrounding woods to the basket. This will allow the course to stay open all year too.

I'd like to see more wooded gauntlet holes and narrow gaps that you have to thread. I like the thrill that comes from rifling a disc through a narrow opening.

I just want to play sweet par 60+ courses, with multiple sets of tees, signs, benches, trash cans, pro-shops, good footing, and nasty schule that only comes into play on a BAD shot. I'm more than willing to pay $10 for that experience and I know I'm not the only one.

[/QUOTE]

Soon to have our third par 70 overlay of an existing disc golf course here in Charlotte. Renaissance and Hornet's Nest and soon the par 70 overlay of Kilborne. I love the golf in disc golf. Oh, and they are free to play, and born of blood, sweat, and tears and a lot of love.

I just want to play sweet par 60+ courses, with multiple sets of tees, signs, benches, trash cans, pro-shops, good footing, and nasty schule that only comes into play on a BAD shot. I'm more than willing to pay $10 for that experience and I know I'm not the only one.



Soon to have our third par 70 overlay of an existing disc golf course here in Charlotte. Renaissance and Hornet's Nest and soon the par 70 overlay of Kilborne. I love the golf in disc golf. Oh, and they are free to play, and born of blood, sweat, and tears and a lot of love.

[/QUOTE]

stan:
i can't wait to get back up there to play sometime (i played the regular hornet's nest once and loved it).

from what i've seen, i'm a fan of your concepts and work ethic. i love getting dirty/sweaty/bloody and then getting to see/play the fruits of my labors. i still think, however, that "free" is holding us back.

I don't know about the free thing, and really don't have enough information to have an educated opinion. It seems that free disc golf is working here, although, it would be nice to have funds available to have Pablo y Enrique and their compadres on the payroll for building the next course. Anyway, I saw the fruits of pay to play at last years MSDGC and it was working well for them. (Although I found it odd that those who pay to play there went mostly to the easier course,Pyramids, than Maple Hills. It seemed out of balance. But I digress.) There are constraints in large cities , like Charlotte, where most of the activities in parks are free to residents and there will always be a number of free courses. So for a pay to play to work it would really have to offer something spectacular. But property values are so high that you could not afford to purchase land for a course for the pittance that it would return compared to the value of the land. Anyway, we'll see how the whole thing develops. I'm in no hurry as I am over the hill and kind of on the outside looking in these days and have so many courses to choose from here within an hour of my house that it would take more than two weeks of playing one a day to play them all. What a delightful dilema.

lefty holes

lefty holes



So true.
Even most holes that start left and end to the right are designed for rhbh turnover shots. You don't see too many straight shots (or right to left curves ) that end in a pocket on the right.
Whats up with the "Every hole must be 80 % duceable/aceable" design theory? ;)

Whats up with the "Every hole must be 80 % duceable/aceable" design theory? ;)



It's still used in some parts of the country where counting past three is frowned upon. :D

You guys should check out The Crucible in Athens, GA. It's only a temp course that gets set up a few times a year for tournaments but it is top notch! Ask any pro around Atlanta. There is a tournament there Feb. 16th. It's a par 68 (or 69) and has (obviously) true par 4's and 5's. It's got everything you can think of... bring your A game. Anyone in the surrounding cities or states should seriously considering checking it out - just to get a chance to play the course! I highly recommend not playing it blind either...

http://www.pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=5759
http://www.pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=6529

There is also an A-tier October 22-25 - Flying Eye Open !!!!!!!!!!
You have plenty of time to plan for it!

!!!!!!!!!! October 22-25 - A TIER!!!! Flying Eye Open !!!!!!!!!!



I have to vouch for the crucble in Athens GA. I've only played 30 or so courses in my 15 year career but of all the ones that I have played this is either #1 or #2 on my list. It is a super course with numerous par 4's and par 5's. Lots of variety. Lots of risk/reward and multiple avenues of play on certain holes.

Atlanta is working on installing another one of these "super courses"- Perkerson Park. Once again plenty of variety and a beautful setting. Par 61 when it is set up. There will be a sanctioned Icebowl event in two weeks. Definetly worth the trip for those looking for something new and different.

http://www.pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=7477#Advanced

On a side note I believe courses should be designed with as much variety as possible. The type of hole described earlier in this thread 300 open to 100 in, is a great hole. A good counterbalance would be that the next hole be designed so that it throws out of the woods for the first 100 ft or so then finishes in the open abour 200-300 ft away.

Whats up with the "Every hole must be 80 % duceable/aceable" design theory? ;)



Most courses that have been designed (or will be designed) are working with limited space. In some cases a truely great par 4 or 5 has to be split into two holes so that the adaquate number of holes will be represented on the golf course.

A U-shaped hole.

I am in the process of designing a temporary 10,000 ft course on a permenant course that rests at 7500 ft. I had to omit one hole and come up with a temporary hole that is 1000 ft long but still remains in the flow.

My solution? A U shaped hole in a relatively passive field in front of the existing course. The field has no trees, some elevation change, but would be inadequate for two holes that make up an out and back (they would be boring, uninspiring and I only need one hole). So I came up with a u-shaped hole. In order to make this work I had to make Mandos for the hole. I will be using two of the larger orange caution cones with tall pvc flaged poles inserted through thier tops to make mando obstacles that are visibly obvious once a player passes them. The tee will be approx. 75-100 ft from the temp basket, but because of the mandos a player must transverse at least 650+ ft before making their approach to the basket. And because this will be a temp hole with a temp basket, teepads and baskets can be switched b/t rounds so that both hyzer & anhyzer mandos are used in the course of play.

My friend and I were discussing this hole. I have never played one like it He said he played one in Houston where players had to play a U-shaped hole that went around a "preserved" swamp.

Have many of you seen or played a hole like this?

There's a thread on it somewhere in this topic.

Hole #3 at Charlotte's Web (the par 70 layout at Hornet's Nest) is U'ish with one mando to keep folks playin the hole as designed. It too plays around a swampy area.

Whats up with the "Every hole must be 80 % duceable/aceable" design theory? ;)



Most courses that have been designed (or will be designed) are working with limited space. In some cases a truely great par 4 or 5 has to be split into two holes so that the adaquate number of holes will be represented on the golf course.


OR we can quit trying to jam 18 holes into a space that should only have 9.

I see time and time again courses that are crammed and don't have proper amenities. Save the $4,000 on 9 baskets and put that money into the tee, sign, bench, trash can, landscaping budget instead. Design sweet courses with all the bells and whistles.

C'mon folks: either we're GOLF or we're frisbee in the park. Pick a side, get off the fence.

Big and real rulz!!!
(And so does our next president: Barack O'Bama)

Whats up with the "Every hole must be 80 % duceable/aceable" design theory? ;)



Most courses that have been designed (or will be designed) are working with limited space. In some cases a truely great par 4 or 5 has to be split into two holes so that the adaquate number of holes will be represented on the golf course.


OR we can quit trying to jam 18 holes into a space that should only have 9.

I see time and time again courses that are crammed and don't have proper amenities. Save the $4,000 on 9 baskets and put that money into the tee, sign, bench, trash can, landscaping budget instead. Design sweet courses with all the bells and whistles.

C'mon folks: either we're GOLF or we're frisbee in the park. Pick a side, get off the fence.

Big and real rulz!!!
(And so does our next president: Barack O'Bama)



How true!

Every piece of land that is offered to you is not a potential disc golf course. Sometimes, you just have to say "NO THANKS" or downsize. I have heard "lack of space" as an excuse for crossing fairways or all holes under 300 feet, but I'm not buying it. If all they have to offer is 15 acres, then put a really nice 9-hole in with some par 4's.

I agree that cramming holes into an inadequate amount of land is a waste of time and money. As for 9 hole courses, they have not worked in Charlotte. Even a wonderful course with challenging terrain did not work. Our 9 holers get almost no play at all. Therefore we don't even consider investing our money there. But we have the luxury of other options. Kentwood, in Raleigh, is a bit all over itself. It is crammed into a space where you could have gotten some longer more strategic holes if you didn't put in 18. It is also the most heavily played course I have ever seen. What I am saying here is that until you have tried it, your theories may or may not hold water and what works in one place may not work in another.

9 hole courses DO NOT WORK and are a waste of time.

Have you ever played/seen Roosevelt Park in Albuquerque, New Mexico? A 9 hole course near the University of NM, in a park with lots of big trees and steep slopes. It's been set up since the early 80's, and I'm sure the locals would argue your point about it NOT WORKING, and most of them would take offense to your comment about it being a WASTE OF TIME!

There are situations when that's ALL you get, and being overly negative DOES NOT WORK and is a MAJOR WASTE OF GOVERNMENT GENEROSITY!!

I agree that cramming holes into an inadequate amount of land is a waste of time and money. As for 9 hole courses, they have not worked in Charlotte. Even a wonderful course with challenging terrain did not work. Our 9 holers get almost no play at all. Therefore we don't even consider investing our money there. But we have the luxury of other options. Kentwood, in Raleigh, is a bit all over itself. It is crammed into a space where you could have gotten some longer more strategic holes if you didn't put in 18. It is also the most heavily played course I have ever seen. What I am saying here is that until you have tried it, your theories may or may not hold water and what works in one place may not work in another.



I check on a regular basis and haven't detected any water leaks.

9 hole courses DO NOT WORK and are a waste of time.



I think 9-hole courses have their place and can be used at school sites to get kids interested in the sport. For elementary school kids with short attention spans, 9 holes may just be the right thing. For sanctioned tournaments though, their practicality is extremely limited.

bluemont park in arlington va would be an example of a 9 hole course which definitely works. 2 tees and 3 pin positions per hole- far and away the best course in northern virginia. (of course most of the others are 18 holers on 9 holes worth of land)

Have you ever played/seen Roosevelt Park in Albuquerque, New Mexico? A 9 hole course near the University of NM, in a park with lots of big trees and steep slopes. It's been set up since the early 80's, and I'm sure the locals would argue your point about it NOT WORKING, and most of them would take offense to your comment about it being a WASTE OF TIME!

There are situations when that's ALL you get, and being overly negative DOES NOT WORK and is a MAJOR WASTE OF GOVERNMENT GENEROSITY!!



I'm sure there are exceptions to this as there is with everything in life.

In my experience, every nine hole course I have seen has been a complete waste of time and that is pretty much the way it is across North Carolina.

every 9 hole course i have seen besides bluemont fits your previous description.

More often than not, the popularity or usage of 9-hole courses are relative to the existence of 18 hole courses within the same city or town. Who wants to play a 9-holer if there are 18-hole courses nearby?

very good point.

In Michigan we have a golf course that is installing 18 baskets permanently for the 08 season. The name is the Willobrook Golf Club, in Byron, MI. Currently the course is a par 72, with an equal number of par 4's and 5's on the front and back nine. The course is a very mature course with lots of elevation changes and water hazards, when harnassed for disc golf, makes a one of a kind disc golf experience with carts.

Yes, there is a small fee, but it is worth not having to think about casuals damaging your course. The use of carts and the clubhouse or beercart on the course, well what else can be said. Please come check us out! The website will be updated by the end of the week is what I've been told.

The best 9-holers I've encountered have 2 sets of tees.....not a long and short set, but tees at different angles on every hole, so the holes play quite differently, and you can play one round from one set, one from another, to get 18 in. A better alternative than a poor 18-holer squeezed into a too-small tract, if that's all that's available.

For our North Carolinians---as for here, south of the border---where 18-holers, and good 18-holers at that, are plentiful, it's hard to see 9-holers getting much use.

More often than not, the popularity or usage of 9-hole courses are relative to the existence of 18 hole courses within the same city or town. Who wants to play a 9-holer if there are 18-hole courses nearby?


If the 9-holer is a REAL GOLF COURSE with all the amenities vs. crammed 18-holers with rutted out tees, no direction signs, and a bunch of wasted litterbug "pros" then the choice is obvious:

Play the 18 holer and complain that the PDGA isn't doing
enough to take the sport where it needs to go.

9 holers have thier place but they should be designed for the new player in mind not the pro golfer.
9 hole courses = easy learning courses
and 18 hole courses = challenging tournament style course

building a 9 hole course with the upper level player might be good if your very limited to the number of courses in your area. But if there are already a few 18 hole courses and you are stuck building a 9 hole because of space please make it an introductory course.

Ok enough repeating my self back on topic..... :D

We are almost done with Riney B and have quite a few holes that are out of the ordinary.
We have a short 300 foot up hill hole through the woods in which you have to throw a short tight 150 ft hyzer to a landing area then a "get outta trouble shot" up to the basket. Its layout bugged me at first but the more I played it the more I understood my problem with the hole. Its backwards. I can regularly get a 3 on it (its a par 4) but if you miss the mark the worse off you are on the up shot. Its a good hole in the fact that it makes you learn how to throw controlled upshots instaed of just having to throw "In that direction" shots. Hopefully it'll grow on the rest of the players as a challenging and out of the ordinary hole.

Oh and we have one of those drive from the open and then into the woods holes. :D

The best 9-holers I've encountered have 2 sets of tees.....not a long and short set, but tees at different angles on every hole, so the holes play quite differently, and you can play one round from one set, one from another, to get 18 in. A better alternative than a poor 18-holer squeezed into a too-small tract, if that's all that's available.

For our North Carolinians---as for here, south of the border---where 18-holers, and good 18-holers at that, are plentiful, it's hard to see 9-holers getting much use.




http://www.pdga.com/course/courses_by_city.php?id=2866

Camp Catalpa
9 holes with 2 sets of baskets and you play it twice to the red baskets then to the yellow for 18 holes. Cool design and fun to play. Only drawback is that for tournament purposes your restricted to 45 players.

Drive across open area then into woods?

Check out Stoney Hill #1, #10, #15 (with elevation changes included) in my signature.

Unusual holes?

Stoney Hill #18: 200" down a straight, grassy fairway lined by woods....200' across wide open area.....through one of 3 gaps in a dense line of trees....across a 60' wide, deep OB hole in the ground....to a basket on a 10' mound.

Holes I'd like to see more of?

Holes along a hillside. Not just up and down, but where the flightpath is more or less on the contour line with the hill rising on one side, dropping off on the other, and the basket on the slant. You not only have to worry about getting there, but the angle your disc hits the ground when it arrives.

building a 9 hole course with the upper level player might be good if your very limited to the number of courses in your area. But if there are already a few 18 hole courses and you are stuck building a 9 hole because of space please make it an introductory course.


totally disagree with the prevalent philosophy that a course should be created with one specific user group in mind. we're way too small to divide ourselves into such subsets. we need expert players to be present on site when beginners come onto a course for the first time. beginners need to come onto real courses and see what expert players can do to immediately realize that our best players are trained athletes and there's more to the sport than simply frisbee in the park.

we need our courses to showcase real golf with multiple tees that accomodate a wide spectrum of players. we need to have have courses that are usually busy and not just when we've got an organized tournament.

I'd prefer a variety of courses.

12 years ago I started as "frisbee in the park", and was intimidated and put off by the "serious" players I ran across. I swore I'd never get to where I demanded silence while putting, or carried a bag full of discs. Today I own and live on a course, and will be running or help run 4 tournaments in a 2-month stretch. I think we're way too small to limit ourselves to one track of player development, or one type of course.

Though I do agree with the high value you place on interaction between top players and beginners. Around here informal, weekly local events foster that.

One reason to add 9 hole courses is to give the less developed or less competitive player a place to play without having to squeeze in on a crowded 18 hole course.

The 9 hole courses are generally less crowded. I think there should be a few fairly long 9 hole courses in areas with several courses to choose from. We're putting one in that runs about 3700' as part of the same project that is adding one near an elementary school that is around 2200'.

I have to disagree with you MTL. 9 hole course work great in heavily populated areas where land is a premium unlike in NC.

To just say they are a waste is an insult to the designers and the areas where the courses are. I know many great courses have started as 9 holes, Tyler State Park, Brandywine and Tinicum to name a few.

My daddy always said that an empty barrel makes alot of noise!! :D

I understand your point.

I guess it is all about your own area.

In NC, every 9 hole course has failed. Every one of them is now one of three things :

1. Empty
2. Gone
3. Converted / Being converted to an 18 hole b/c of reason number 1

I .

In NC, every 9 hole course has failed. Every one of them is now one of three things :

1. Empty
2. Gone
3. Converted / Being converted to an 18 hole b/c of reason number 1



Not true!
NC does have a WESTSIDE
Black Mountain has a strong core of players
Also the new course in Morganton
Fletcher too
Just because YOU don't play them doesn't mean others don't

I understand your point.

I guess it is all about your own area.

In NC, every 9 hole course has failed. Every one of them is now one of three things :

1. Empty
2. Gone
3. Converted / Being converted to an 18 hole b/c of reason number 1




Are you kidding me? Where do you come up with this amazing research for your statements. Mint hill, Veterans, Fewell, Bailey Road, Stumpy Creek, Shelby, Lincolnton, Fletcher, Morganton, Black Mountain and Gardner Webb are all nice nine holers I play near where I live in NC, as well as numbers of others obviously since the parks exist with nice baskets. Where do you develop these ludicrous opinions from?

Stumpy will not much longer be a 9 holer! Soon, very soon, it will be an 18 holer with the teeth and flavor of a crossbreed of Renny and the Nest.

So it obviously didn't succeed as a 9-holer then, right? :D

That or it was successful enough to warrant more holes! :)


As for holes you rarely see designed... how about holes that you get to design from the ground up! Our local metroparks purchased a massive amount of farmland and is going to plant a forest of trees native to the area, we're going to try to get in on the ground level and be able to put together fairways with the future in mind!


-Chris.

That eco-conscious, pro-active approach could probably assist in getting approval for some courses as well.

Stumpy happened b/c I was able to find a receptive P&R department that sees the growth and value of disc golf as a sport. Slowly but surely I have plowed through the woods and by this spring it should be playable with natural pads on the new nine holes. And to every course designer/worker out there I have a new appreciation of how much work you put into making a course. As the Mule stated to me you have enough work out here for the next 2-3 years.

I understand your point.

I guess it is all about your own area.

In NC, every 9 hole course has failed. Every one of them is now one of three things :

1. Empty
2. Gone
3. Converted / Being converted to an 18 hole b/c of reason number 1




Are you kidding me? Where do you come up with this amazing research for your statements. Mint hill, Veterans, Fewell, Bailey Road, Stumpy Creek, Shelby, Lincolnton, Fletcher, Morganton, Black Mountain and Gardner Webb are all nice nine holers I play near where I live in NC, as well as numbers of others obviously since the parks exist with nice baskets. Where do you develop these ludicrous opinions from?



I think he should change it to "most 9 hole courses has failed"
Mint Hill doesn't get much play, but it's the best of the bunch, and Veterans- you can't be serious. Homeless guys out there aren't playing disc golf. Stumpy Creek gets little play, will be 18 holes soon. The others- how much play do they really get? I don't know, because I've never been there/ wanted to go there. And in the past 5-6 years that I've been playing, except for Stumpy Creek (once) and Mint Hill (just a few times), I never hear "Let's go play (insert 9 hole course)" In this area, 9-hole courses just don't work out, until they are made into 18-hole courses. Sugaw Creek would be a prime example. Maybe in the western part of NC and in other areas of the world 9-hole courses are seen as the greatest places on earth. Just not here, where you can drive 15-30 minutes to play a 18-hole course that's just as well designed, more fun to play, has 18 holes and other people to play disc golf. IMHO

So it obviously didn't succeed as a 9-holer then, right? :D



Right!

for those that have played it... where would a course like Cam Yards fit into this equation?

I think most that have played it in Charlotte find it to be different enough than the rest of our courses (and you get to throw over water) that they have fun and like to play it.... although im sure the fact that its lit @ night helps too.

For those that aren't familiar... its a 3 basket course in my neighborhood... 9 sets of short pads and 9 long pads (most of which change the shot entirely... not just longer versions of the same shot).

website --> http://home.earthlink.net/~ekbbbb1288/index.html

If you remove the one night a week that an 8-some or 10-some walk around drink lots of beer and throwing disc, how much play does it get? That should give you your answer.

well... for a course thats not quite really a course and hidden in a neighborhood that doesnt get much exposure... i think it gets its fair share. There hasnt been a day that i've seen in the past 3+ yrs (other than torrential downpours) that someone hasnt been on the course. I'd say it gets a decent amount of play and possibly more than some of the other 9 holers in charlotte that dont get love.

When I go over there, there's a 50% chance I will run into someone playing. Granted, that's usually about dinner time, which I would guess is when a neighborhood course would have peak activity, but still, for a course that cost about $900, it gets a fair amount of play and I think the ROI is definitely in the positive. On the contrary, I have only seen people playing tennis twice, and playing on the baseball field once.

who likes 69-holers?

I do, I do...........