People always seem to want to know the highest SSAs ever recorded. I happened to be in the database this morning, so here's an update through the July 2004 ratings update.

8 courses have had SSAs over 65. These 8 courses account for the top 26 SSAs recorded.

<table border="1"><tr><td> Name</td><td>SSA*
</td></tr><tr><td>Winthrop Univ. Rec. Area Regular Hole 12 R3 (2003 USDGC)</td><td>71.61
</td></tr><tr><td>Winthrop University - Gold (2001 USDGC)</td><td>69.97
</td></tr><tr><td>Winthrop Gold (2002 USDGC)</td><td>69.02
</td></tr><tr><td>Winthrop Univ. Rec. Area Regular Hole 12 R4 (2003 USDGC)</td><td>68.40
</td></tr><tr><td>Winthrop Univ. Rec. Area Alt Hole 12 R1 (2003 USDGC)</td><td>68.06
</td></tr><tr><td>Winthrop Univ. Rec. Area Alt Hole 12 R2 (2003 USDGC)</td><td>66.97
</td></tr><tr><td>
</td></tr><tr><td>Ozark Mountain (2001 Ozark Open)</td><td>71.29
</td></tr><tr><td>Ozark Mountain (2002 Fall Harvest)</td><td>68.73
</td></tr><tr><td>Ozark Mountain R2 (2003 Ozark Mountain Fall Harvest)</td><td>68.60
</td></tr><tr><td>Ozark Mountain R1 (2003 Ozark Mountain Fall Harvest)</td><td>68.57
</td></tr><tr><td>Ozark Mountain (2003 Ozark Mtn Open) (Rd 2)</td><td>68.22
</td></tr><tr><td>Ozark Mountain Championship (2000 Ozark Open)</td><td>67.93
</td></tr><tr><td>Ozark Mtn (2002 Ozark Mt Open)</td><td>67.44
</td></tr><tr><td>Ozark Mnt. (2001 Ozark Mnt Fall Harvest)</td><td>67.17
</td></tr><tr><td>Ozark Mountain (2003 Ozark Mtn Open)</td><td>65.84
</td></tr><tr><td>
</td></tr><tr><td>El Rio Golf Course Long tees R2 (2004 Tumbleweed Open)</td><td>71.28
</td></tr><tr><td>
</td></tr><tr><td>Renaissance Park Gold R1 (2003 Disc Landing Fall Finale)</td><td>69.93
</td></tr><tr><td>Renaissance Park Gold R2 (2003 Disc Landing Fall Finale)</td><td>67.58
</td></tr><tr><td>
</td></tr><tr><td>Sarasota Golf Club Blue Course R2 (2004 Sarasota Sky Pilots Open)</td><td>69.61
</td></tr><tr><td>Sarasota Golf Club Blue (2003 Sarasota Sky Pilots Open - Pros)</td><td>69.59
</td></tr><tr><td>
</td></tr><tr><td>Idlewild Longs Minus #2 R3 (2004 Disc \'n Dat Bluegrass Open)</td><td>68.49
</td></tr><tr><td>Idlewild Longs (2003 Disc n Dat Bluegrass Open)</td><td>67.44
</td></tr><tr><td>Idlewild Longs Plus #2 R4 (2004 Disc \'n Dat Bluegrass Open)</td><td>67.16
</td></tr><tr><td>Idlewild Longs (2003 Disc n Dat Bluegrass Open) (Rd 4)</td><td>66.80
</td></tr><tr><td>
</td></tr><tr><td>Silver Creek East (2000 CO Champ)</td><td>67.30
</td></tr><tr><td>
</td></tr><tr><td>The Crucible - Round 1 (2003 Flying Eye Invitational)</td><td>65.53
</td></tr><tr><td> </tr></td></table>

*SSA is adjusted to 18 holes if more or less than 18 actual holes.

Thanks for the info, Rodney.

Since courses like the USDGC layout and Ozark Mountain aren't available to me, as well as those geographically distant such as those in Florida, Colordo, Kentucky, etc., could you also list the top 27-100 or so SSAs recorded? I'm interested in the next 20-30 or so courses with SSAs near 65.

Okay Jeff, how about the highest 31 courses, covering the highest 89 SSAs recorded, which covers everything over 60.

These are, of course, subject to reporting and recording errors. Especially with respect to number of holes, since I'm querying for SSAs adjusted to 18 holes.

<table border="1"><tr><td> Rank</td><td>Name</td><td>SSA18
</td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>Winthrop Univ. Rec. Area Regular Hole 12 R3 (2003 USDGC)</td><td>71.6
</td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>Winthrop University - Gold (2001 USDGC)</td><td>70.0
</td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>Winthrop Gold (2002 USDGC)</td><td>69.0
</td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>Winthrop Univ. Rec. Area Regular Hole 12 R4 (2003 USDGC)</td><td>68.4
</td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>Winthrop Univ. Rec. Area Alt Hole 12 R1 (2003 USDGC)</td><td>68.1
</td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>Winthrop Univ. Rec. Area Alt Hole 12 R2 (2003 USDGC)</td><td>67.0
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Ozark Mountain (2001 Ozark Open)</td><td>71.3
</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Ozark Mountain (2002 Fall Harvest)</td><td>68.7
</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Ozark Mountain R2 (2003 Ozark Mountain Fall Harvest)</td><td>68.6
</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Ozark Mountain R1 (2003 Ozark Mountain Fall Harvest)</td><td>68.6
</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Ozark Mountain (2003 Ozark Mtn Open) (Rd 2)</td><td>68.2
</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Ozark Mountain Championship (2000 Ozark Open)</td><td>67.9
</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Ozark Mtn (2002 Ozark Mt Open)</td><td>67.4
</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Ozark Mnt. (2001 Ozark Mnt Fall Harvest)</td><td>67.2
</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Ozark Mountain (2003 Ozark Mtn Open)</td><td>65.8
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>El Rio Golf Course Long tees R2 (2004 Tumbleweed Open)</td><td>71.3
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Renaissance Park Gold R1 (2003 Disc Landing Fall Finale)</td><td>69.9
</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Renaissance Park Gold R2 (2003 Disc Landing Fall Finale)</td><td>67.6
</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Renaissance Park Gold R1 (2003 Points Bonanza III - Renaissance)</td><td>63.7
</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Renaissance Park Gold R2 (2003 Points Bonanza III - Renaissance)</td><td>63.2
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Sarasota Golf Club Blue Course R2 (2004 Sarasota Sky Pilots Open)</td><td>69.6
</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Sarasota Golf Club Blue (2003 Sarasota Sky Pilots Open - Pros)</td><td>69.6
</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Sarasota Golf Club Red (2003 Sarasota Sky Pilots Open - Pros)</td><td>64.1
</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Sarasota Golf Club Red Course R4 (2004 Sarasota Sky Pilots Open)</td><td>63.4
</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Sarasota Golf Club par 72 R3 (2004 Sarasota Amateur Championships)</td><td>60.9
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Idlewild Longs Minus #2 R3 (2004 Disc \'n Dat Bluegrass Open)</td><td>68.5
</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Idlewild Longs (2003 Disc n Dat Bluegrass Open)</td><td>67.4
</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Idlewild Longs Plus #2 R4 (2004 Disc \'n Dat Bluegrass Open)</td><td>67.2
</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Idlewild Longs (2003 Disc n Dat Bluegrass Open) (Rd 4)</td><td>66.8
</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Idlewild Shorts (2003 Disc n Dat Bluegrass Open)</td><td>60.8
</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Idlewild Shorts (2003 Disc n Dat Bluegrass Open) (Rd 2)</td><td>60.0
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>Silver Creek East (2000 CO Champ)</td><td>67.3
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>The Crucible - Round 1 (2003 Flying Eye Invitational)</td><td>65.5
</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>The Crucible - Round 1 (2003 Flying Eye Invitational) (Rd 3)</td><td>63.7
</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>The Crucible - Round 1 (2003 Flying Eye Invitational) (Rd 2)</td><td>63.6
</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>The Crucible Long R1 (2004 Flying Eye Invitational)</td><td>62.2
</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>The Crucible Long R3 (2004 Flying Eye Invitational)</td><td>62.0
</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>The Crucible - Long with Short #1 (2003 Flying Eye Invitational)</td><td>61.8
</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>The Crucible Long R2 (2004 Flying Eye Invitational)</td><td>61.1
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>Warwick Town Park - Blue-Blue (2002 NYDGC)</td><td>64.9
</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>Warwick Town Park B-B (2003 New York State DGCs final round)</td><td>64.5
</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>Warwick Town Park - Blue-Blue (Animalfest IV)</td><td>64.0
</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>Warwick Town Park Animal Blue - Blue R2 (2004 Animalfest VI)</td><td>63.9
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>Canton - Long (2003 Hall of Chains Classic)</td><td>64.8
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>Patapsco Long-C (2002 Patapsco Picnic Rnd 1)</td><td>64.4
</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>Patapsco Valley State Park Blue-C R1 (2003 Patapsco Picnic)</td><td>64.1
</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>Patapsco 2000 Long to C</td><td>64.0
</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>Patapsco 2001 Long to C</td><td>63.8
</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>Patapsco Valley State Park Long to C R1 (2004 Patapsco Picnic)</td><td>63.1
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>Brakewell Animal-Long (2000 AnimalFest)</td><td>64.3
</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>Brakewell Rec-Long (2000 AnimalFest)</td><td>60.3
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>Hoover Dam, Brent Hambrick Me BHMDGC regular 18 hole short tees R2 (2004 Brent Hambrick Memorial - A</td><td>64.1
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>Knob Hill Blue Tees to C Pins (2003 Pittsburgh Flying Disc Open)</td><td>64.0
</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>Knob Hill blue-C (2002 Pittsburgh Flying Disc)</td><td>64.0
</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>Knob Hill Park Blue tees/C Pins R2 (2004 Pittsburgh Flying Disc Open)</td><td>62.3
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>Woodshed Long (2000 W VA Open)</td><td>63.7
</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>Woodshed Medium (2000 W VA Open)</td><td>62.0
</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>Woodshed 27 plus 2 (2002 WV Open)</td><td>61.3
</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>Woodshed Short (2000 W VA Open)</td><td>60.8
</td></tr><tr></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>Thorpe (18+4 temp) (2003 Teva Treebash Rnd 4)</td><td>63.4
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>La Mirada Regional Park Golden State Classic 2004 R2 (2004 Golden State Classic)</td><td>63.1
</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>La Mirada Regional Park Golden State Classic 2004 R1 (2004 Golden State Classic)</td><td>62.2
</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>La Mirada Regional Park Golden State Classic 2004 R3 (2004 Golden State Classic)</td><td>61.7
</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>La Mirada - Long 18 Holes (2003 GSC)</td><td>61.2
</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>La Mirada - Long 18 Holes (2003 GSC) (Rd 4)</td><td>60.9
</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>La Mirada - Long 18 Holes (2003 GSC) (Rd 2)</td><td>60.8
</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>La Mirada - Long 18 Holes (2003 GSC) (Rd 3)</td><td>60.7
</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>La Mirada Regional Park Golden State Classic 2004 R4 (2004 Golden State Classic)</td><td>60.5
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>Richlands/Steed Pk Regular (2003 Coastal Plains)</td><td>62.8
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>Flip City Pro (2003 MDGO at Flip City) (Rd 2)</td><td>62.6
</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>Flip City Pro (2003 MDGO at Flip City)</td><td>62.5
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>Lake Russell 24 R1 (2003 Lake Russell Open (5th))</td><td>62.0
</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>Lake Russell 24 R2 (2003 Lake Russell Open (5th))</td><td>61.2
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>Whippin\' Post (2003 West Virginia Open)</td><td>61.9
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>Cain Park Tournament (2003 Paul Giles Rnd 3)</td><td>61.8
</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>Cain Park Tournament (2003 Paul Giles Rnd 2)</td><td>61.1
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>23</td><td>Cameron East Normal R4 (2004 Waco Charity Open)</td><td>61.8
</td></tr><tr><td>23</td><td>Cameron Park East Reg (2003 Waco Charity Pros) (Rd 2)</td><td>61.0
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>24</td><td>River Park Long r2 (2002 Tumbleweed Open)</td><td>61.8
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>25</td><td>Sioux Passage Blue (2002 St. Louis Classic)</td><td>61.3
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>26</td><td>The Woodshed Long (2003 West Virginia Open)</td><td>61.1
</td></tr><tr><td>26</td><td>The Woodshed Short (2003 West Virginia Open)</td><td>60.4
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>27</td><td>Borderland State Park Blue tees/long baskets R2 (2004 Borderland Spring Fling)</td><td>61.0
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>28</td><td>Seneca Creek Red-C (2002 Seneca Soiree)</td><td>60.7
</td></tr><tr><td>28</td><td>Seneca Creek Red Tees to C (2003 Seneca Creek)</td><td>60.3
</td></tr><tr><td>28</td><td>Seneca Creek Red to C (2001 Seneca Soiree)</td><td>60.2
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>29</td><td>Chestnut Ridge Blue (2003 Open)</td><td>60.7
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>30</td><td>Edora Park Long (2002 Grateful Disc)</td><td>60.7
</td></tr><tr><td></td></tr><tr><td>31</td><td>George Barret (2001 Graceland Open)</td><td>60.2
</td></tr><tr><td> </tr></td></table>

Rodney, #22, Cain park used 24 holes.

He said he adjusted it to 18, but I have played Cain Park, and unless they used some really long temp tees, it appears that he has the 24 hole score there, but that would translate to about a 9 down, does that read right?

could you tell me the SSA for V.A. Barrie park here in St.Thomas???

The course SSA for V.A. Barrie, or any other course that has held a PDGA event within the last few years, can be found here. (http://www.pdga.com/tournament/course_ratings_by_course.php?RatingCourseID=2487)

It would not be considered a course with a high SSA.

what is an average ssa?

V.A. Barrie is about a 50

V.A. Barrie is about average. A 50 is what the average 1000 rated player (playing his normal game) would shoot at the course.

World class courses with many par 4 and par 5 holes and a higher degree of difficulty will generate a much higher SSA. The 2003 USDGC featured the highest SSA ever for an eighteen hole course: 71.6!

take #10 off. Canton is a 24 hole course.

warwick/brakewell= same course.

it appears TCFKAPR (formerly pleasant run) will fit in somewhere in the mid-20's once we hold a sanctioned event as SSA comes in at 61+.

Hey everybody, thanks for the corrections and the additional info.

Both Canton and Cain are in as 18 hole courses, so I'll submit those to the database guys for correction.

I'll try to remember to combine Brakewell and Warwick in any further fun facts.

Thanks Jeff for answering where to find SSAs for St. Thomas and others.

I did some very rough queries, and found the average SSA to be somewhere between 49.5 and 50.0 for 2001 through 2004 so far.

Anybody know if the same exact layout was used for the quoted Senaca figures from 2001, 2002, and 2003? I find it pretty amazing how consistent the SSA is. It would be less amazing if several of the tees or pins changed from one year to the next.

i believe a couple of holes changed during that period (#'s 1 &2). someone from MD (especially craig) can likely give better info as to when precisely.

Hole 2 definitely changed. How did hole 1 change?

didn't they remove the old c pin for the new tee of 2?

nice to see a course from calif made it(la mirada) :cool:

I'm surprised DeLa didn't make it...I've never played La Mirada, is it really harder than DeLa?

I'm surprised DeLa didn't make it...I've never played La Mirada, is it really harder than DeLa?



LaMa Golden State Classic layout takes all the land of the entire 27 hole layout but only has 18 baskets. You can't play that layout normally.

What is cool, though, is to be on the regular #10 teepad but to have only played 4 holes. :)

I've played the Sarasota course, Winthrop and Renny.

I would say Renny is the easiest to blow up on. Every hole is a challenge.

Sarasota is fairly easy to score on (fly 18). Every hole is birdieable (in proportion to 72) The challenge of the course is putting your second and third shots close - that killed me.

Winthrop - well everyone knows something about that

no way dela rules but like rhett said they take a 27 hole course and turn it into a 18 hole course i.e. everything is really,really long :eek:

Ahhhhh, now I see, thank you for clarifying...I wonder why they don't do something like that for DeLa to keep it up to "par" (pun intended) with these other ridiculously difficult courses?

I just love responding to myself...anyways, I also think DeLa having 27 holes is killing it, from what I can tell it's un-adjusted for 18 holes SSA is as follows:

DeLaveaga Park 04 Masters Cup Long R1 (2004 Masters Cup) Masters Cup 27 81.27
DeLaveaga Park 04 Masters Cup Long R2 (2004 Masters Cup) Masters Cup 27 80.68

I wonder what it would come out to when adjusted?

lmbo
if you turned dela into a 18 hole course everyone you came across would be saying "did you see my disc" or "did my disc come this way"

DeLaveaga Park 04 Masters Cup Long R1 (2004 Masters Cup) Masters Cup 27 81.27
DeLaveaga Park 04 Masters Cup Long R2 (2004 Masters Cup) Masters Cup 27 80.68

I wonder what it would come out to when adjusted?



For some reason I'm thinking "54".

I just love responding to myself...anyways, I also think DeLa having 27 holes is killing it, from what I can tell it's un-adjusted for 18 holes SSA is as follows:

DeLaveaga Park 04 Masters Cup Long R1 (2004 Masters Cup) Masters Cup 27 81.27
DeLaveaga Park 04 Masters Cup Long R2 (2004 Masters Cup) Masters Cup 27 80.68

I wonder what it would come out to when adjusted?



Divided 81 by 27 holes and you get an SSA of approximately 3.0. The SSA adjusted for 18 holes would be around 54. Many of the courses mentioned above have an SSA greater than 60 for only 18 holes.

I love DeLa and found it to be one of the greatest courses I've played. It features elevation changes, tight woods, and fast greens like I've seen nowhere else! But with the possible exception of "I-5," it features no par four or par five holes. Almost the entire course is comprised of drive/putt holes, which is why the SSA of the course is so low.

jeff
just for the record what did you shoot at dela,i don't know to many people that can shoot par on it?

Hey Jeff,

Are tracking the hits on your bunny trail ?

jeff
just for the record what did you shoot at dela,i don't know to many people that can shoot par on it?



That's not the point; it's what a 1000 rated player would shoot on it, which is 81. If Dela were 18 holes, that would be around 54. Look at the chart above and you will see literally dozens of courses where 1000-rated players would shoot in the 60s or even 70s (USDGC) on an 18-hole course. Like or not, DeLa is not as challenging as those courses. Not even close.

For the record, I played the course about 4 years ago and averaged around 90 for 27 holes. It tore me up, but I loved it!

Hey Jeff,

Are tracking the hits on your bunny trail ?



No, but I guess I could ask the NEFA webmaster to find the stats out.

I'm an unofficial assistant TD for this tourny being run by Bill Newman and I'm trying to drum up business. It will be played at one of the best courses in the world, Warwick, and will also feature the Pro2 format. It will be two one-day events (Ams on Saturday, Pros on Sunday) so there is little chance we will fill. Maybe the "bunny trail" will prove me wrong though!

Heres an intresting aspect I was thinking about.

Obviously the reason a course like Sarasota has such a high SSA is length (longest permament course in the world).

But if you take the distance of a course and divide by the SSA, what would be the hardest course. I bet Richlands from Coastal Plains Winter Open 2003 will beat everything.

I can't really figure out a way to compare this idea - but its a cool way of looking at things - takes this distance of a course out of the scoring average on focuses directly on course difficulty. Obviously scoring is going to be high if the course is over 10000 feet

Ozark has one of the highest foliage factors which is the element with the most impact in raising SSA after length. I'm sure NC has other courses with high foliage factors that make them tougher per 100 feet of length than many courses.

But if you take the distance of a course and divide by the SSA, what would be the hardest course. I bet Richlands from Coastal Plains Winter Open 2003 will beat everything.




Robert, this is actually a factor we have considered quite a bit.

As I've posted a couple times before, I continue to believe that lower-rated players perform worse (compared to their own rating) than higher-rated players on courses that have a high SSA for their length. (I think this would be very similar to the Slope factor in ball golf, which is a bit questionable in itself.) We haven't been able to show this with the data yet, but I keep trying.

Below is a table from the database, with the length divided by the SSA labeled as the MTL column.

As you might guess, accurate reporting and entry of the length is one of the largest limiting factors in trying to study such numbers. I personally would have to seriously question several of the lengths recorded here.

<table border="1"><tr><td> Rank</td><td>Name</td><td>Holes</td><td>Length</td><td>SSA</td><td>Len/Hole</td><td>SSA/Hole</td><td>MTL
</td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>Seneca Creek 3378 ft layout (1999 Sen. Creek Open)</td><td>18</td><td>3378</td><td>55.1</td><td>188</td><td>3.06</td><td>61.26224157
</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Rogers Lakewood Park SP (2003 Lakewood Fall Open)</td><td>21</td><td>3823</td><td>58.2</td><td>182</td><td>2.77</td><td>65.69857364
</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>N.E. Lions Park Norman Layout R2 (2004 Norman ProAm (26th))</td><td>18</td><td>3569</td><td>50.1</td><td>198</td><td>2.78</td><td>71.26597444
</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Farmlife - Alternate - 5th Annual Open, June 2000</td><td>18</td><td>3580</td><td>48.8</td><td>199</td><td>2.71</td><td>73.33060221
</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>N.E. Lions Park Norman Layout R4 (2004 Norman ProAm (26th))</td><td>18</td><td>3569</td><td>48.4</td><td>198</td><td>2.69</td><td>73.69399133
</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Shoaff Park</td><td>27</td><td>5070</td><td>68.4</td><td>188</td><td>2.53</td><td>74.15533129
</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>BH Memorial - Hoover Long (2001 Ams)</td><td>24</td><td>4982</td><td>66.9</td><td>208</td><td>2.79</td><td>74.43597789
</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>Pohick Bay Regional Park 24 hole tournament layout R2 (2003 Pohick Bay)</td><td>24</td><td>4526</td><td>60.5</td><td>189</td><td>2.52</td><td>74.82228468
</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>Montgomery County Park - Blue (2001 Blue Ridge)</td><td>18</td><td>4039</td><td>53.7</td><td>224</td><td>2.98</td><td>75.25619527
</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>N.E. Lions Park Norman Layout R1 (2004 Norman ProAm (26th))</td><td>18</td><td>3569</td><td>47.4</td><td>198</td><td>2.63</td><td>75.3112471
</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>Pohick Bay Regional Park 24 hole tournament layout R1 (2003 Pohick Bay)</td><td>24</td><td>4526</td><td>60.0</td><td>189</td><td>2.50</td><td>75.38307795
</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>N.E. Lions Park Norman Layout R3 (2004 Norman ProAm (26th))</td><td>18</td><td>3569</td><td>47.3</td><td>198</td><td>2.63</td><td>75.45454545
</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>Golden Hills White (2003 Blue Ridge Open)</td><td>18</td><td>3538</td><td>46.5</td><td>197</td><td>2.58</td><td>76.0533104
</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>Chestnut Ridge Red (2003 Open)</td><td>18</td><td>3576</td><td>46.9</td><td>199</td><td>2.61</td><td>76.19859365
</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>Montgomery County Park - White (2001 Blue Ridge)</td><td>18</td><td>3538</td><td>46.3</td><td>197</td><td>2.57</td><td>76.39818614
</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>Knollwood Long (2002 Kalamazoo Champ)</td><td>18</td><td>3457</td><td>45.2</td><td>192</td><td>2.51</td><td>76.44847413
</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>Golden Hills - White Tees (2002 Blue Ridge Open)</td><td>18</td><td>3500</td><td>45.6</td><td>194</td><td>2.53</td><td>76.72073652
</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>Jacques Cartier Red (2003 Capital Classic)</td><td>18</td><td>3186</td><td>41.4</td><td>177</td><td>2.30</td><td>76.91936263
</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>Cornwallis Original (2002 Bull City)</td><td>18</td><td>3300</td><td>42.6</td><td>183</td><td>2.37</td><td>77.39212008
</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>Vollrath Park (2000 Pickle Open, Rnd 2)</td><td>20</td><td>3800</td><td>48.9</td><td>190</td><td>2.44</td><td>77.72550624
</td></tr><tr><td>21</td><td>Vollrath Park (2000 Pickle Open, Rnd 1)</td><td>20</td><td>3800</td><td>48.8</td><td>190</td><td>2.44</td><td>77.88481246
</td></tr><tr><td>22</td><td>Veterans Park Short-Short (2003 Fahrenheit Fling)</td><td>18</td><td>3275</td><td>41.9</td><td>182</td><td>2.33</td><td>78.25567503
</td></tr><tr><td>23</td><td>Golden Hills Blue (2003 Blue Ridge Open)</td><td>18</td><td>4039</td><td>51.2</td><td>224</td><td>2.85</td><td>78.85591566
</td></tr><tr><td>24</td><td>Basil Marella Park championship 18 R2 (2004 Lilac Open)</td><td>18</td><td>4231</td><td>53.6</td><td>235</td><td>2.98</td><td>78.92184294
</td></tr><tr><td>25</td><td>Richlands/Steed Pk Regular (2003 Coastal Plains)</td><td>18</td><td>4974</td><td>62.8</td><td>276</td><td>3.49</td><td>79.19121159
</td></tr><tr><td>26</td><td>Red Tees (2003 Fools on the Hill)</td><td>18</td><td>4288</td><td>54.1</td><td>238</td><td>3.01</td><td>79.20206871
</td></tr><tr><td>27</td><td>Kollwood (2003 Kalamazoo Open)</td><td>18</td><td>3457</td><td>43.5</td><td>192</td><td>2.42</td><td>79.43474265
</td></tr><tr><td>28</td><td>Seymour Smith B-B (1999 Call To Arms)</td><td>18</td><td>4302</td><td>53.8</td><td>239</td><td>2.99</td><td>79.90341753
</td></tr><tr><td>29</td><td>Oak Springs (2003 Steady Ed\'s Birthday Memorial (1st))</td><td>18</td><td>3300</td><td>41.1</td><td>183</td><td>2.28</td><td>80.2724398
</td></tr><tr><td>30</td><td>Folsom Lake, lower</td><td>18</td><td>4200</td><td>51.9</td><td>233</td><td>2.88</td><td>80.90926604
</td></tr><tr><td> </tr></td></table>

One of the problems with using this sort of calculation is that it doesn't take into account close range shots (i.e. putting). A 300' hole is usually par 3 (100' per shot), while a 600' hole is par 4 (200' per shot). Perhaps subtracting 18 or 27 (for 1 or 1.5 close range shots per hole) from the SSA before doing the division would give a more accurate representation of difficulty compared to length. You might see more tightly wooded courses of greater length show up on the list.

Technically Richlands should not even be in the list. The only reason the SSA is high is because of the 50 mph sustained winds that weekend. Normally the SSA would probably be around 43. On another note, that distance for the 5th Farm Life Open is incorrect. It should be 4212ft.

The proper number to subtract from SSA, before dividing that result into the length, is 30. The SSA formula for courses with an average amount of foliage is: 30+(length/285). The 30 constant is the number of throws "around the green" in disc golf. (In ball golf, the constant is 40.9)

What Rodney's exercise is determining is essentially what we call the Foliage Factor among course designers. A factor greater than 285 is a course with less than average foliage. The lower the number, the more dense the foliage, most of the time. It's possible that high winds, as mentioned, or extensive OB can reduce the factor also.

One of the problems with using this sort of calculation is that it doesn't take into account close range shots (i.e. putting). A 300' hole is usually par 3 (100' per shot), while a 600' hole is par 4 (200' per shot). Perhaps subtracting 18 or 27 (for 1 or 1.5 close range shots per hole) from the SSA before doing the division would give a more accurate representation of difficulty compared to length. You might see more tightly wooded courses of greater length show up on the list.



Good point Drew. That's actually the more common way that we look at this factor.

Chuck proposes a formula of 30+(len/285) to predict the SSA of a course based on its length. (I think similar formulas with slightly different numbers actually fit the known data set a little better (since that formula is based on numbers from a year or two ago), but they all work about the same for this exercise.)

Once you apply the formula, you can compare the known SSA to the predicted SSA. Those courses that come in way above what is predicted are the ones you might expect, as shown below.

<table border="1"><tr><td> Rank</td><td>Name</td><td>SSA18</td><td>Predicted</td><td>CDR
</td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>Richlands/Steed Pk Regular (2003 Coastal Plains)</td><td>62.8</td><td>47.5</td><td>1.32
</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Idlewild Longs (2003 Disc n Dat Bluegrass Open)</td><td>67.4</td><td>51.1</td><td>1.32
</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Hoover Dam, Brent Hambrick Me BHMDGC regular 18 hole short tees R2 (2004 Brent Hambrick Memorial - A</td><td>64.1</td><td>48.7</td><td>1.32
</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Seneca Creek 3378 ft layout (1999 Sen. Creek Open)</td><td>55.1</td><td>41.9</td><td>1.32
</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Idlewild Shorts (2003 Disc n Dat Bluegrass Open)</td><td>60.8</td><td>49.3</td><td>1.23
</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Chestnut Ridge Blue (2003 Open)</td><td>60.7</td><td>49.9</td><td>1.22
</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>Montgomery County Park - Blue (2001 Blue Ridge)</td><td>53.7</td><td>44.2</td><td>1.22
</td></tr><tr><td>8</td><td>Red Tees (2003 Fools on the Hill)</td><td>54.1</td><td>45.0</td><td>1.20
</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>Rogers Lakewood Park SP (2003 Lakewood Fall Open)</td><td>49.9</td><td>41.5</td><td>1.20
</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>River Park Long r2 (2002 Tumbleweed Open)</td><td>61.8</td><td>51.7</td><td>1.20
</td></tr><tr><td>11</td><td>Basil Marella Park championship 18 R2 (2004 Lilac Open)</td><td>53.6</td><td>44.8</td><td>1.20
</td></tr><tr><td>12</td><td>Seymour Smith B-B (1999 Call To Arms)</td><td>53.8</td><td>45.1</td><td>1.19
</td></tr><tr><td>13</td><td>Doggy Woods F9 Alt/B9 Orig (2002 Dead Dog Fall)</td><td>54.2</td><td>45.8</td><td>1.18
</td></tr><tr><td>14</td><td>N.E. Lions Park Norman Layout R2 (2004 Norman ProAm (26th))</td><td>50.1</td><td>42.5</td><td>1.18
</td></tr><tr><td>15</td><td>Idlewild Longs Minus #2 R3 (2004 Disc \'n Dat Bluegrass Open)</td><td>68.5</td><td>58.4</td><td>1.17
</td></tr><tr><td>16</td><td>Ozark Mountain (2001 Ozark Open)</td><td>71.3</td><td>61.1</td><td>1.17
</td></tr><tr><td>17</td><td>Lake Russell 24 R1 (2003 Lake Russell Open (5th))</td><td>62.0</td><td>53.2</td><td>1.17
</td></tr><tr><td>18</td><td>BH Memorial - Hoover Long (2001 Ams)</td><td>50.2</td><td>43.1</td><td>1.16
</td></tr><tr><td>19</td><td>Basil Marella Park championship 18 R1 (2004 Lilac Open)</td><td>52.2</td><td>44.8</td><td>1.16
</td></tr><tr><td>20</td><td>Wolfe Woods Wolfe Pro R1 (2004 Animalfest VI)</td><td>58.0</td><td>49.9</td><td>1.16
</td></tr><tr><td> </tr></td></table>

Thanks, Rodney...that makes more sense.

That 2nd list sounds a lot better, there are some hard courses on there. I have no clue how you got Vollrath Park on that first list, I think the footage is for a 18 hole layout or something. That is the easiest course in the state and doesn't have any tight holes on it.

The list makes great sense. Courses like South Mountain Park - Red Tees (2003 Fools on the Hill), Basil Marella Park - championship 18 R2 (2004 Lilac Open), and French Creek State Park - Doggy Woods F9 Alt/B9 Orig (2002 Dead Dog Fall) have VERY tight fairways and dense foliage off the fairways. Other courses such as Warwick's Wolfe Woods may also feature doglegs and pro par 4 and par 5 holes which, despite a short overall course length, masks their high SSA and degree of difficulty.

Ahhhhh, now I see, thank you for clarifying...I wonder why they don't do something like that for DeLa to keep it up to "par" (pun intended) with these other ridiculously difficult courses?



Semantics gripe here, but higher SSA doesn't really equate to difficulty. As DG is finally breaking out of the "everything is a par-3" paradigm, we'll learn that difficulty should be measured with respect to par.

Ozark and Winthrop Gold are only difficult if you think everything is a par-3. DeLa is a difficult course because it's SSA is high relative to it's designed-par. Golf course length courses with SSAs of 68-70 aren't difficult if you realize they are designed as par-72s.

Ahhhhh, now I see, thank you for clarifying...I wonder why they don't do something like that for DeLa to keep it up to "par" (pun intended) with these other ridiculously difficult courses?



Semantics gripe here, but higher SSA doesn't really equate to difficulty. As DG is finally breaking out of the "everything is a par-3" paradigm, we'll learn that difficulty should be measured with respect to par.

Ozark and Winthrop Gold are only difficult if you think everything is a par-3. DeLa is a difficult course because it's SSA is high relative to it's designed-par. Golf course length courses with SSAs of 68-70 aren't difficult if you realize they are designed as par-72s.



Thanks Jim, for bringing up that semantics gripe. I agree. A further and related gripe is that even if your SSA is really high relative to designed par, it might just mean that your course is stupid, not difficult.

But on your 2nd paragraph, let me point out that Ozark has one of the highest SSA-to-par ratios ever. So does Winthrop Gold, though with the use of artificial obstacles. So does Renaissance. (Interestingly, Renny Original has an SSA closer to par than does Renny Gold. So in that sense, Renny O is "more difficult" than Renny G.)

In my experience, there are very few par-54 or par-55 courses (nearly everything reachable) with an SSA anywhere near the par. (This is where we cue the par-2 lovers along with the tweener-hole design arguments, and where I exit the discussion.)

A further and related gripe is that even if your SSA is really high relative to designed par, it might just mean that your course is stupid, not difficult.



That depends on your preferred course design philosophy. Unless you are talking about the USDGC or a course with a plethora of OB, a high SSA relative to designed par usually means tightly wooded holes. Some people don't prefer these types of courses and would call them stupid, but many people's preferred course design philsophy is punishment of inaccuracy/poor control.

I understand that golf course length courses with high SSAs aren't difficult if you realize they are designed as high par courses, but I still prefer them greatly over courses with low SSAs merely because they aren't drive/putt courses. I've grown tired of the latter, and think that disc golf needs to progress to the next level and feature more pro par four and pro par five holes and high par courses.

That depends on your preferred course design philosophy. Unless you are talking about the USDGC or a course with a plethora of OB, a high SSA relative to designed par usually means tightly wooded holes. Some people don't prefer these types of courses and would call them stupid, but many people's preferred course design philsophy is punishment of inaccuracy/poor control.




I agree. The stupid I'm talking about is beyond skill tight, it is stupid luck tight. This probably never happens on a whole course basis, but it could.

The other type of stupid is inappropriate length stupid (touched on in other thread about different tees for different divisions). A course of 18 wide-open holes that are barely unreachable (for your target skill of players) would be stupid. The designer might call each a par 3, thus par 54. And if the target players are 1000-rated players, the SSA would be about 54, because there won't be any 2's, and there won't be any 4's.

Either way produces a high SSA relative to par, but it doesn't mean the course is difficult. (Well, semantically, the stupid tight course is difficult, like *insanely* difficult.)



I understand that golf course length courses with high SSAs aren't difficult if you realize they are designed as high par courses, but I still prefer them greatly over courses with low SSAs merely because they aren't drive/putt courses. I've grown tired of the latter, and think that disc golf needs to progress to the next level and feature more pro par four and pro par five holes and high par courses.



On this we don't disagree. There's a reason I spend several days at Houck's ranch each year, and play Renny Gold and Winny Gold any chance I get.

But on your 2nd paragraph, let me point out that Ozark has one of the highest SSA-to-par ratios ever. So does Winthrop Gold, though with the use of artificial obstacles.



Oh yeah, you're right. What the design par of Ozark? I think Winthrop is mid 60's, so yes, you are correct. I can tell you that El Rio golf course was designed a par-72.

Oh yeah, you're right. What the design par of Ozark? I think Winthrop is mid 60's, so yes, you are correct. I can tell you that El Rio golf course was designed a par-72.



El Rio would be right near the top then.

I'm not sure on Ozark, but I think it's a designed par 70, but might be 71 or 72.

Winthrop Gold has been designed par 68 for the last couple years. (By the way, I've done a little studying that puts Winthrop Gold around SSA 63 (with designed par 68) without the rope and hay bales and picket fences.)

Renny Gold is designed par 70, but I think this year's tournament points to an SSA of "only" about 66 or 67 (still waiting for final numbers).

I think evaluating design par versus SSA doesn't make a lot of sense unless you first start with a consistent definition of par for setting "design par". But I'm not going there for now.

If you have a course with 18 holes where the SSA for each hole is X.5 (where X is 2, 3, 4 or 5) or maybe X.55, it could have the highest ratio of par versus SSA if all pars are set at the rounded up value. Plus, it could be a wide open course. So, a course with say SSA around 46 could have a par set at 54 and you couldn't derive any more info about the nature of the course terrain or OB structure. If I see courses like this (and there are many), I'm more likely to suspect there are several par 2s in there with scoring averages under 2.5, but I'm not going there either for this discussion.

So, design par / SSA ratio = mostly meaningless

Hey Chuck,

think you'll get a chance to visit Idlewild this year? The course has become more and more groomed and there are 18 other courses in the Cinci area too.

Idlewild not likely this year. May try to get there next year on the way driving to Allentown Worlds.

So, design par / SSA ratio = mostly meaningless



I'll agree with you here only because we don't have a good consistant definition of design par. And yes, you're right, that should be a topic for another thread.

OTOH, SSA / design par is an indicator of difficulty. Following your examples, a course with an SSA of 2.55 on every hole, is easy if every hole is considered a par-3. Or an SSA of 3.49 (all par-3s) would be very difficult. Alternately, as Rodney points out, courses like that could be considered stupid.

BTW, it was fairly windy at El Rio, so that's the main reason SSA was as high as it was. It was designed such that every hole could be birdied. I'm pretty sure there were some holes where the vast majority of scores were over par.

Idlewild not likely this year. May try to get there next year on the way driving to Allentown Worlds.



Okay. It's waiting for you :D

I had a chance to Play Idlewild this morning.
It is probably the best disc golf course I have ever played in a park. It has everything I would want in a disc golf course and more > It also has room for more pin placements too.

It was dizzling so I could get off any really big drives on the longer holes. I was with Fred Salaz( the Course designer) so I had a pretty good guide.
We are playing all long tees to long pins and I was sitting 6 under with 5 holes to play. Fred was running a little late so I hurried some throws and my phone wouldnt stop ringing. Good excuses for the blow ups and finishing at -2 (70) when I could have easily been 10 and tied the course record.
For thos of you who have never played this course your missing out and something very special.

Of course I am still partial to The KIng of all courses Ozark Mountain.

What I can't understand in this WCP ranking system is that the Course = Average for ALL pro players who have played there is well over 72 and there have only been 4 scores EVER under 65, yet the WCP is 64 or something like that.
Chuck or somebody can you explain this to me?

The latest SSA value from this year's event shows the SSA at 68. That's what a 1000 rated player would expect to average over say 10 rounds.

http://www.pdga.com/tournament/course_ratings_by_course.php?RatingCourseID=1745

That sounds about right based on your experience. Typically, the course record for a course that tough should eventually be around 57-59. Winthrop Gold has an almost identical SSA to Idlewild and the record there was 56.

Rodney,

The second round of the Brent Hambrick Memorial for AMs was 27 holes from the short tees (unlike the 3rd which was only 18 holes).

jeff
just for the record what did you shoot at dela,i don't know to many people that can shoot par on it?



I bet many people can shoot under par at DeLa, even if not many can shoot 81 (for 27 holes).

I can tell you that El Rio golf course was designed a par-72.



Where is El Rio?

I think evaluating design par versus SSA doesn't make a lot of sense unless you first start with a consistent definition of par for setting "design par". But I'm not going there for now.




So when is the PDGA going to come up with a consistent definition of par? and how? This is fundamental to golf.

In stick golf, most pars are considered based on distance and the degree of dogleg on the hole.

This is similar in disc golf, but there is a huge x factor that stick golf does not have, TREES!

There has been many courses I have played where the fairways were only 10-15ft wide for 300ft. Not a terribly difficult hole in disc golf. Par would be 3 right? There would also be alot of two's maybe a few shanked 4's. Guessing SSA at 2.6-2.75?

Compare this to stick golf in similar proportions. The hole would only be 10-15 INCHES wide, and approximately 25ft long. And surrounded by trees. That is a difficult putt.

Until disc golf holes come out of the pitch and putt phase, SSA and designed par will never be the same. A hole in one, should be just as difficult in disc golf as it is in ball golf.

This is a dated list (to Dec 04) that I don't have time to keep updated, but at least it's a start:

<table border="1"><tr><td>Rank</td><td>Course</td><td>Event</td><td>City</td><td>State</td><td>SSA
</td></tr><tr><td>1</td><td>Renaissance Park</td><td>2003 Disc Landing Fall Finale</td><td>Charlotte</td><td>NC</td><td>69.9
</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Sarasota Golf Club </td><td>2004 Sarasota Sky Pilots Open </td><td>Sarasota</td><td>FL</td><td>69.6
</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Idlewild </td><td>2004 Disc \'n Dat Bluegrass Open </td><td>Burlington</td><td>KY</td><td>68.5
</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Warwick Town Park </td><td>2002 NYDGC </td><td>Warwick</td><td>NY</td><td>64.9
</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Patapsco Valley S.P. </td><td>2002 Patapsco Picnic Rnd 1 </td><td>Ellicott City</td><td>MD</td><td>64.4
</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Knob Hill Park </td><td>2003 Pittsburgh Flying Disc Open </td><td>Warrendale</td><td>MD</td><td>64.0
</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>Tyler State Park </td><td>2004 Eric Yetter Memorial </td><td>Newtown</td><td>PA</td><td>63.7
</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>The Woodshed </td><td>2000 W VA Open </td><td>Paw Paw</td><td>WV</td><td>63.7
</td></tr><tr><td>9</td><td>Whippin\' Post </td><td>2004 Morgan County Hoedown</td><td>Paw Paw</td><td>WV</td><td>63.1
</td></tr><tr><td>10</td><td>Still Waters Farm </td><td>2004 TPC at Stillwaters Farm </td><td>Govan</td><td>SC</td><td>63.0
</td></tr><tr><td> </tr></td></table>

The latest SSA value from this year's event shows the SSA at 68. That's what a 1000 rated player would expect to average over say 10 rounds.

http://www.pdga.com/tournament/course_ratings_by_course.php?RatingCourseID=1745

That sounds about right based on your experience. Typically, the course record for a course that tough should eventually be around 57-59. Winthrop Gold has an almost identical SSA to Idlewild and the record there was 56.



Chuck, that was pretty good prognosticating given that you posted it in 2004 and then Gateway's Justin Bunnell set the Idlewild course record last year at 58 (Idlewild Longs, round 4, 2005 Disc 'n Dat Bluegrass Open).

Idlewild Course Statistics (http://www.pdga.com/tournament/course_ratings_by_course.php?RatingCourseID=1745)

Hole 4 has been moved 64 feet back and more to the right now, and there are now walls marking OB on both sides of the creek on 3 and 15 so it will be interesting to see how long that record stands. Justin Bunnell and Chris Heeren teamed up in best shot doubles to set the Doubles Course record at 53 last year at the KY States. How does a 5 stroke difference between the doubles and singles course record jive for a couse with an SSA of about 68?

2006 Disc 'n Dat Bluegrass Open May 6 &amp; 7 (http://www.pdga.com/schedule/event.php?TournID=5500)

Masters at Idlewild June 10 &amp; 11, 2006 (http://www.pdga.com/schedule/event.php?TournID=5617)

You can actually calculate the SSA for doubles. Just enter the scores in the League Excel SSA template you can download from this site. Then, enter the average rating for each team (where both are propagators). That will give you the BSSSA (Best Shot SSA) for the course. Then, the doubles record should end up around 5-7 shots below that.

You can actually calculate the SSA for doubles. Just enter the scores in the League Excel SSA template you can download from this site. Then, enter the average rating for each team (where both are propagators). That will give you the BSSSA (Best Shot SSA) for the course. Then, the doubles record should end up around 5-7 shots below that.



i could, but it would be sooo much easier to defer to your expertise and have you tell how many strokes better you'd expect the doubles record to be than the singles record at an 18 hole course like Idlewild Longs. :D

the singles record at Idlewild is about 10 strokes better than the course SSA of 68. presently, the doubles record is 15 strokes better...

If the BSSSA is around 60, the record should end up around 50-52. But you have to calculate the BSSSA like I said to see if it's near that.

Add the Moraine State Park course in Portersville, PA to the list.

Results from the Ironwood Open this past weekend (http://www.pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=5644&year=2006&includeRatings=1#Open) show an SSA of about 67.5 from the long tees in the first round, and 62 from the short tees in the second round.

I can tell you that El Rio golf course was designed a par-72.



Where is El Rio?


A bit of a late answer, but El Rio is a BG course in Tucson. We rented it and played 1 round there back in '04. IIRC all the par 3's were under 400', par 4's between 700-800 and par 5's around 1000'.

It followed the BG course. Pretty flat, relatively open not much water (though we did play traps and greens as OB), just long, and it was windy.
http://www.tucsoncitygolf.com/images/rioholemap.jpg

And for the record, the round at Moraine still had 8 holes at the easiest pin locations!!!!!!!!!!!!! Hopefully, they will all be in the C-pin location for the PFDO. And to think that we thought we had made the course to easy. :)

Preliminary Results look like Idlewild Longs played at an SSA of about 70.1 during round 1 and an SSA of 69 during round 4 of this past weekend's Bluegrass Open A tier event

view Results here (http://www.pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=5500&year=2006&includeRatings=1#Open)

Add the new summer Campgaw layout in Mahwah, NJ to the list.

Results from The Mighty Gaw tournament this past weekend (http://www.pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=5948&year=2006&includeRatings=1#Open) show an SSA of about 66.0 for The Mighty Gaw layout (long tees) in the second round.

[/QUOTE]

Jeff, do you know how the layout was changed for this year? I couldn't see a map online other than the Winter Gaw.

Willow Brook [not Willow Metropark, contrary to the PDGA record] had an SSA of 64.95 in a format where everyone got one mulligan per hole, that format for the odd man in Best Shot leagues sometimes called California. When I was 930ish rated the best I ever shot it in singles was an 80, I think. It was intended to be a par 72, 18-hole course, where "par" is defined as "what an expert player would shoot for an average good round."

And it was a SWEEEEET course. I wish you could put that in again, Bruce.

Jeff, do you know how the layout was changed for this year? I couldn't see a map online other than the Winter Gaw.



Chuck,

Here is a description, if you can remember last year's layout.

hole#1: last year's hole#1, pro par 4
hole#2: last year's hole#2, pro par 4
hole#3: last year's hole#3, par 3
hole#4: last year's hole#4, pro par 5 (severe uphill hole)
hole#5: new par 3 that breaks up the walk between the polehole of #4 and the tee of #5.
hole#6: last year's hole#5, pro par 5 (long downhill righty hyzer)
hole#7: last year's hole#6, pro par 4
hole#8: last year's hole#7, pro par 4
hole#9: last year's hole#8, pro par 4 (radical downhill shot)

Front nine par = 36

hole#10: last year's hole#9, par 3
hole#11: last year's hole#10, pro par 4
hole#12 last year's hole#11, although with shorter long tee, pro par 4
hole#13: new hole that traverses the walk up the slope. Par 3
hole#14: along the top of the ski hill. New par 3
hole#15: basically last year's hole#13 (over the halfpipe) with shorter polehole, par 3
hole#16: new hole, uphill par 5
hole#17: new hole, uses last year's #16 tee, par 4
hole#18: new hole, from top to bottom about 1200 feet, pro par 5

Back nine par = 34

Total par = 70

It plays two strokes, possibly three, easier in par than last summer's layout and eliminates having to walk from the base lodge to the top of the mountain and back again just to play holes 15-18.

Sounds good with removing the additional traverse uphill.