-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
Mullet Hall reviews
8
0
DiscGolfCraig
Diamond level trusted reviewer
Premium Member
Experience:
20 years
603 played
546 reviews
Business in the Front (5), Party in the Back (4)
Reviewed:
Updated:
Played on:Jan 2, 2021
Played the course:once
Pros:
This could be an excellent nine hole course, one of the top ones I've played. A little gets left on the table as the layout tries to be a tad too cute.
- Holes #1 - 4 are great. They're a perfect example of what low country courses can look like. They look and feel like an extension of Trophy Lake.
- #3 is fun, challenging, and nerve-wracking. It's a 510-foot hole that starts out as a simple, open layout. Your approach shot, however, becomes interesting as you're throwing to a narrow piece of land with unprotected water on the left and thick rough on the right. A disc coming in hot may have a challenge slowing down in time.
- #4 is a fun, short, dogleg left that has some of the same challenges as #3. The same pond is 20 feet past the basket. This is an easy par 3, but a birdie will require more risk off the tee or with your putt.
- #7 is the best of the longer holes. A dogleg left, par 4 with the basket tucked behind a small mound and on the edge of the woods. No matter how good or bad your tee shot is, assuming you're not throwing 500 feet plus, your results on this hole will be based on your approach shot. A shot too low, and you're hitting the mound. Off line left, right, or long, and you're in the woods. Overall, a quality design.
- Lots of room to air out some massive drives. If you throw 400 or 500 feet, you will love the long, open layouts. Six holes are more than 500 feet long. All but #3 & 8 start/play predominantly in the open fields.
- Holes #1 - 4 are great. They're a perfect example of what low country courses can look like. They look and feel like an extension of Trophy Lake.
- #3 is fun, challenging, and nerve-wracking. It's a 510-foot hole that starts out as a simple, open layout. Your approach shot, however, becomes interesting as you're throwing to a narrow piece of land with unprotected water on the left and thick rough on the right. A disc coming in hot may have a challenge slowing down in time.
- #4 is a fun, short, dogleg left that has some of the same challenges as #3. The same pond is 20 feet past the basket. This is an easy par 3, but a birdie will require more risk off the tee or with your putt.
- #7 is the best of the longer holes. A dogleg left, par 4 with the basket tucked behind a small mound and on the edge of the woods. No matter how good or bad your tee shot is, assuming you're not throwing 500 feet plus, your results on this hole will be based on your approach shot. A shot too low, and you're hitting the mound. Off line left, right, or long, and you're in the woods. Overall, a quality design.
- Lots of room to air out some massive drives. If you throw 400 or 500 feet, you will love the long, open layouts. Six holes are more than 500 feet long. All but #3 & 8 start/play predominantly in the open fields.
Cons:
The entire layout is just off a beat. #1 & 6 are mirror images of each other with #1's entrance into the woods along the right side of the fairway while #6's is to the left side. #5 is either meant to throw over the edge of the water, in which case there isn't a clear route. Or, it's meant to play around, which means is an awkward, bad layout.
- #8 might be the worst of the entire lot. It's a 711 foot wooded layout. 250 feet into the hole, there's a 90-degree dogleg right. From there, you've got a straight fairway for another 400 feet, before another dogleg right to the basket for the final 50 - 75 feet. It's pointlessly overcomplicated. You could have a suitable, challenging design instead of a bad one.
- The problem with playing in open fields is that you're at the mercy of how often the grass is cut. When I played, the grass was pretty short. Even then, on some of the field holes, it was hard to located a disc until I was within 20 - 40 feet. Trying searching for one when the grass is 8 - 12 inches tall and feel like an idiot trying to find a disc in a field with no clear landmarks as points of reference where it landed.
- Natural tee pads. May be an issue on a longer run-up.
- Tee markers are simple blue-markers in the ground. On top of them are small, hard to interpret maps of each hole's layout. They would be helpful if they didn't have moisture under their plastic covers.
- Not a con per se, more of something that could put a damper on your round. There are multiple warning signs for alligators around the pond. I'd use caution if I were trying to fish a disc out of the water on #3, 4, or 5.
- #8 might be the worst of the entire lot. It's a 711 foot wooded layout. 250 feet into the hole, there's a 90-degree dogleg right. From there, you've got a straight fairway for another 400 feet, before another dogleg right to the basket for the final 50 - 75 feet. It's pointlessly overcomplicated. You could have a suitable, challenging design instead of a bad one.
- The problem with playing in open fields is that you're at the mercy of how often the grass is cut. When I played, the grass was pretty short. Even then, on some of the field holes, it was hard to located a disc until I was within 20 - 40 feet. Trying searching for one when the grass is 8 - 12 inches tall and feel like an idiot trying to find a disc in a field with no clear landmarks as points of reference where it landed.
- Natural tee pads. May be an issue on a longer run-up.
- Tee markers are simple blue-markers in the ground. On top of them are small, hard to interpret maps of each hole's layout. They would be helpful if they didn't have moisture under their plastic covers.
- Not a con per se, more of something that could put a damper on your round. There are multiple warning signs for alligators around the pond. I'd use caution if I were trying to fish a disc out of the water on #3, 4, or 5.
Other Thoughts:
This is close to being a good course, but it's just off a beat or two. It really comes down to the redundancy of the open layouts.
- On a nine-hole course, having four open field holes is a bit much. Throw in the blah feel on #5 and 8, and you're not left with a lot of creativity.
- #5 could be a solid hole by simply being a straight line layout. You'd still have water to the left, trees and rough to the right, and a lower ceiling due to trees/branches.
- #9 is a 975 foot, wide open layout. Big arms will be at the basket in one or two fewer strokes than noodle arms. Not a lot else to this layout than that.
- The course does run out of steam pretty fast. #1 - 4 are really good. #5 could be good. I already played #6 when I played #1. #7 is really good. Then you're just playing out the string to wrap up your round.
- All that said, this is a nice layout. You've got several other nice layouts in the area, plus Trophy Lakes. That's the course everyone should play first. After that, this is a good one to follow up at.
- On a nine-hole course, having four open field holes is a bit much. Throw in the blah feel on #5 and 8, and you're not left with a lot of creativity.
- #5 could be a solid hole by simply being a straight line layout. You'd still have water to the left, trees and rough to the right, and a lower ceiling due to trees/branches.
- #9 is a 975 foot, wide open layout. Big arms will be at the basket in one or two fewer strokes than noodle arms. Not a lot else to this layout than that.
- The course does run out of steam pretty fast. #1 - 4 are really good. #5 could be good. I already played #6 when I played #1. #7 is really good. Then you're just playing out the string to wrap up your round.
- All that said, this is a nice layout. You've got several other nice layouts in the area, plus Trophy Lakes. That's the course everyone should play first. After that, this is a good one to follow up at.
