The course is located on an interesting piece of property and has potential to become a good course with a lot of work. There is nice variety between power and technical requirements, providing a challenge that is well-rounded.

Several of the holes are nicely secluded and there is a nice shade canopy of a good portion of the course.

The course is adjacent to a large subdivision and thereby introduces many new players to the sport.

This course really doesn't know what it wants to be. While its location brings many new players to the game, it is very unfriendly to beginners in several aspects. On the other hand, while many of the holes provide an expert level challenge, some are just dinks. (i.e. the 94 ft. jump-putt hole 8) The course screams for two tee areas per hole.

The course is poorly marked and the flow is difficult to follow at several points. Most holes have a basic placard with a distance listed and directional arrow, but several are missing. Many of the baskets are tucked blindly, necessitating a long walk-up to visualize the hole before proceeding. The tee areas are natural. The areas that are most frequently used are often uneven. (not a major issue as long as you allow yourself some liberty to throw from a nearby flat spot.)

The course needs an extensive amount of additional clearing. The potential to lose discs is very high for beginner or expert player alike. The areas immediately off the fairways are dangerous with thorns, burrs, hidden drop-offs, and a variety of dangerous snakes.

While the shape of the plot of land doesn't immediately lend itself to easily constructing two loops of nine holes which allow players the option of returning to their vehicle or playing half a round, it is possible. I recognize that many players don't see this as a con, but I find no compelling reason to not employ this concept at every possible opportunity. Imagine bringing the wife and kids out for a leisurely disc golf experience and after 9 holes you've gotten cut by thorns, rattled at by a snake, lost all your discs, and find yourself ¾ of a mile from your car.

Some particular hole concerns:

Hole 1: The smart play is to bomb a hyzer line down the walking path, which crosses the hyzer line on hole 2.

Hole 3 is blind from the tee, but points in the direction of hole 16's basket. The hole itself is a classic par 3.5 that would be better 50 feet shorter or 125 feet longer.

Hole 4 and hole 15 are jammed dangerously right on top of each other. (the map indicates the "old" hole 15, which appears to have been much safer.)

Hole 5 is fun concept for a short, expert-level par 4, but the landing area at the basket is insufficient even for top players. For beginner to intermediate-level players the hole is a 50/50 lost disc proposition as there is very little area to bail out left of the pond on the approach shot. Following hole 5, the walking path takes you out within 15 feet of hole 13's basket, oops, double back through the woods.

Hole 6 has a blind basket, but the tee points right at hole 7's basket.

Hole 7 is a blind, overhand/giant spike-hyzer mandatory hole which virtually assures that beginners will lose a disc and/or skip the hole. After teeing, players must walk back within 20 feet of hole 6's basket to get to the "fairway" of this hole.

Hole 8: As mentioned earlier, it's a straight jump-putt 94 foot par 2.

Hole 11: I couldn't find the tee area, so just made up a wide-open hole to follow up the wide-open hole 10.

Hole 16 is another par 3.5. A perfectly placed drive sets up a 100 foot dump shot.

Hole 17 brings the walking path into play too much. Also, after teeing on hole 17, players must walk back within 15 feet of hole 16's basket.

Hole 18 is a nice concept for a short par 4, but the second shot needs some additional clearing to make it really viable without throwing forcing a huge overhand shot.

Please leave the course cleaner than the way you found it and allow faster players to play through.

The fairways were mowed nicely and the baskets were quality. Some of the holes had some challenging risk/reward shots but most of these could be easily played around without costing a stroke.

You have to walk every hole to see where the pin is located prior to teeing off. There are a number of very tight tunnel shots and if your disc goes into the rough you can spend quite a bit of time looking for them in the undergrowth. We played as a twosome at Int-Adv skill level and probably spent 45 minutes looking for discs in the rough. There are a few spots where you have to pass by a basket to get from another teepad to basket so if this were ever heavily played there could be some issues with discs flying at you.

I played almost a 3rd of the course with a Buzzz and there was 1-2 which a putter can be used to drive with.

There are a number of holes where water can come into play. I really wouldn't recommend this course for a beginner or someone just starting as an intermediate, not really due to difficulty, but because you'd probably spend more time looking for discs than playing.

I'd play again in a tournament setting, otherwise, probably not worth the drive past Wilco or Cat Hollow.