Unlike most practice areas, Wilson Park has a real course feel, in a 3-hole bite. Unlike a real course, Wilson Park's design was given about 2 minutes of thought.
- Each of the three holes has all aspects of an actual layout: tee pad, tee sign, well designed fairway, putting green, and numbered basket. Essentially, it's as if you played the first three holes then walked off the course.
- Holes #1 & 3 are open fairways with nary a tree or obstacle between tee and basket. Hole #2 has several trees that could come into play. And, now you're ready to play here.
- Holes have room around them to make good practice areas. All the large field between #1 & 2 is perfect for driver practice.
- Field was recently mowed. Only other park amenity here is a simple, neighborhood ball field. There's also a portion of the greenway that winds through the park. Not sure why this course couldn't turn into a full 9-hole layout.
- Baskets are in good shape. That's probably a sign the park & rec department hasn't hit them with mowers. And, more likely, the baskets get very little usage.
- Tee pads are suitable for run ups. For only three holes, a fair amount of resources went into the course.

Only three holes. This is less a practice area and more an incomplete course. That's especially obvious when you're making long walks between holes.
- For a 3-hole course, why in the world is there a 1,000-foot walk between two holes? The walk between #1 & 2 is longer than all three holes combined. You could easily put multiple holes in between #1 & 2, if for no other reason than to break up the walk. And, if you opt to walk on the path instead of a straight line across the field, your walk is even longer.
- Why have one hole on one side of the field and the other two on the complete other side? It really does feel as it these are the last remaining holes of a now defunct course.
- Who is this course appealing to? Meaning who is going to come here with the layout in its format? As mentioned, even having 3 holes in the wide-open field would be better options than simply having a long walk between 1 & 2. There's just no reason for this to happen.
- Not a lot of variety or challenge. I mean, with two wide open holes you could alternate between forehand and backhand. Grass was thick when I played, eliminating any skips, so rollers would probably be out of the equation.

If you didn't have a long walk between holes #1 & 2, rather you had all three holes lumped together, this would be a solid 3-hole loop. As is, it's just a waste of anyone's time.
- Course bagging visit only. I knew driving away I'd never be back to play disc golf here. Maybe one day would use the greenway. As is, I'll just come within a mile or so of it when driving on 321.
- I go back to the idea that there's enough room here for a passable 9-holer. Nothing great but when the holes are spread out as much as they are, make the best of bad situation.
- Very scenic, quite park. Throw in the Foothills locale, 30 minutes from the mountains and life is good here. Consider this 15-minutes of serenity.
- Course can't be rated properly as there's nothing to rate. I'm begrudgingly giving this a 0.5 as to avoid giving it a zero. Give me 9-holes of this quality and it's a good practice course.
- Heading north on 321 or west on 40, and you're heading towards true bliss and the great outdoors. Enough said.