Firemen's Park reviews
1
7
ZombieAssaultTeam
Experience:
53.9 years
9 played
3 reviews
Ok course for new players 2+ years drive by
Reviewed:
Played on:Jun 7, 2017
Played the course:once
Pros:
its free...
Cons:
Almost everything.
So many low laying trees its nearly impossible to get an ace on any of the holes. so unless you can throw 500+ at waist level, you don't have a chance in hell of aces these holes. Not to mention the 1st hole doesn't even have a tee off spot, just a post. Then its total confusion as you try and navigate your way around the 9 holes trying to figure out where the next tee is.
So many low laying trees its nearly impossible to get an ace on any of the holes. so unless you can throw 500+ at waist level, you don't have a chance in hell of aces these holes. Not to mention the 1st hole doesn't even have a tee off spot, just a post. Then its total confusion as you try and navigate your way around the 9 holes trying to figure out where the next tee is.
Other Thoughts:
Its an ok course to go and toss a disc if you leave in the city, but i live 5 miles away and i wouldn't bother making another trip if that says anything. the park itself is very nice, running river/creek along it. nicely maintained but all the low laying tree limbs and branches get in the way of almost every tee. If they did something about that, would bump the rating up higher. Also there are no signs as to where the 1st tee is or which direction to go to find the next tee.
4
3
Spike Hyzer 23
Experience:
30.8 years
92 played
88 reviews
The Hardest 9 Hole Course in the World? 2+ years drive by
Reviewed:
Played on:Jul 5, 2015
Played the course:5+ times
Pros:
The course is exceptionally challenging, there is great elevation change, a lot of well spaced mature trees (including a willow tree) and the park is quite beautiful.
The 1st hole is an incredibly easy deuce and the 2nd hole is a beautifully designed hole that makes you earn a tough par. The 3rd hole is a really nice hole that can yield a deuce, but can also leave you on the side of a difficult slope either approaching or putting for deuce. The 4th hole is another nicely designed hole that rewards great shots with deuce, good shots with par, and mediocre shots with 4 (or worse). The 5th hole is perhaps the most challenging hole under 200' that I've ever played (the few birdies I've had felt amazing, and it's a lefty hyzer that plays to my strengths, the guarded green making it incredibly difficult).
It all goes downhill (and uphill) from there.
The 1st hole is an incredibly easy deuce and the 2nd hole is a beautifully designed hole that makes you earn a tough par. The 3rd hole is a really nice hole that can yield a deuce, but can also leave you on the side of a difficult slope either approaching or putting for deuce. The 4th hole is another nicely designed hole that rewards great shots with deuce, good shots with par, and mediocre shots with 4 (or worse). The 5th hole is perhaps the most challenging hole under 200' that I've ever played (the few birdies I've had felt amazing, and it's a lefty hyzer that plays to my strengths, the guarded green making it incredibly difficult).
It all goes downhill (and uphill) from there.
Cons:
It's an incredibly long, backtracking (over the fairway you just played) walk to get from the 2nd to the 3rd tee.
The 6th hole is nightmarishly long, extremely uphill, and sloping through a very wooded aspect of the park. I've played the course well over 10 times and had a single 3 on that hole. Listed at 375 and plays like 550. This is not what you want for a city park that should be for beginners (great guarded green though).
The 7th is a pretty cool slightly downhill hole that is listed at 417, but it still plays every bit like 350. It's again not the type of hole that is conducive to a short city park.
The 8th hole is a 375 foot hole that drops immediately off a plateau and gives you no advantage of an elevated tee. The main reason is that there are enormous mature trees blocking any sort of reasonable path to the fairway (there is no lefty route, and the single time I got close was a lucky accidental roller).
The 9th hole is a reachable distance, but the uphill slope makes this 299 play more like 360 and it's just not much fun.
So, I would rate the first 5 holes 3.0 and the last 4 holes 1.0, which gives my cumulative rating at just over 2.0, but I'm docking it a full point for lacking flow and other design elements AND the fact that it could be a great 18 hole course and not a punishment.
The 6th hole is nightmarishly long, extremely uphill, and sloping through a very wooded aspect of the park. I've played the course well over 10 times and had a single 3 on that hole. Listed at 375 and plays like 550. This is not what you want for a city park that should be for beginners (great guarded green though).
The 7th is a pretty cool slightly downhill hole that is listed at 417, but it still plays every bit like 350. It's again not the type of hole that is conducive to a short city park.
The 8th hole is a 375 foot hole that drops immediately off a plateau and gives you no advantage of an elevated tee. The main reason is that there are enormous mature trees blocking any sort of reasonable path to the fairway (there is no lefty route, and the single time I got close was a lucky accidental roller).
The 9th hole is a reachable distance, but the uphill slope makes this 299 play more like 360 and it's just not much fun.
So, I would rate the first 5 holes 3.0 and the last 4 holes 1.0, which gives my cumulative rating at just over 2.0, but I'm docking it a full point for lacking flow and other design elements AND the fact that it could be a great 18 hole course and not a punishment.
Other Thoughts:
There is an enormous amount of land in this area for a city park. Hole #2 is the only one on the right side, the only one that utilizes the water that runs through, and there would be room there for many holes.
A redesign is in order. Hole 5 should be the starting hole, as it is the most visible from the street where many park (most don't park in the lot in the park, which is far from the #1 tee). Hole 6 should be dramatically shortened and angled way to the right (there isn't that much technical shot making, and it would be a great 240 foot hole that plays like 320 and is now #2). Utilizing the original protected green for #6, we would then create a new #3 by putting a tee to the right and behind our new #2 pin. #7 would be turned into two holes then and would be #4 and #5. #8 would be turned into two holes as well, the first pin being short and to the far left, and then have a short open tee to the original green (now #s 6 and 7). #9 remains the same and is now #8.
Then we get really creative with our redesign. Play hole #3 backwards and call it #9. Hole #4 remains the same and we call it hole #10. Hole #1 is played backward and is now #11. The biggest advantage to this part of the redesign is that the overall design of the course flows better, it's obvious where to go next, and there are no long confusing walks between holes (as from 2 to 3 and 5 to 6 are currently). It actually plays like a track now.
Hole #2 remains the same and is now the finishing hole #12 IF we want to stop there (and this is absolutely the risk/reward type of finishing hole that you'd want).
The truth is, however, that there is plenty of room on that side of the road AND a very nice wide creek to work with that has bridges and other obstacles that could be worked into the design. We might not have to stop at 12 and could easily create 6 holes that finish with an 18th that has a basket on the shore by the bridge (which brings us back to the start).
A redesign is in order. Hole 5 should be the starting hole, as it is the most visible from the street where many park (most don't park in the lot in the park, which is far from the #1 tee). Hole 6 should be dramatically shortened and angled way to the right (there isn't that much technical shot making, and it would be a great 240 foot hole that plays like 320 and is now #2). Utilizing the original protected green for #6, we would then create a new #3 by putting a tee to the right and behind our new #2 pin. #7 would be turned into two holes then and would be #4 and #5. #8 would be turned into two holes as well, the first pin being short and to the far left, and then have a short open tee to the original green (now #s 6 and 7). #9 remains the same and is now #8.
Then we get really creative with our redesign. Play hole #3 backwards and call it #9. Hole #4 remains the same and we call it hole #10. Hole #1 is played backward and is now #11. The biggest advantage to this part of the redesign is that the overall design of the course flows better, it's obvious where to go next, and there are no long confusing walks between holes (as from 2 to 3 and 5 to 6 are currently). It actually plays like a track now.
Hole #2 remains the same and is now the finishing hole #12 IF we want to stop there (and this is absolutely the risk/reward type of finishing hole that you'd want).
The truth is, however, that there is plenty of room on that side of the road AND a very nice wide creek to work with that has bridges and other obstacles that could be worked into the design. We might not have to stop at 12 and could easily create 6 holes that finish with an 18th that has a basket on the shore by the bridge (which brings us back to the start).
