Ask John Houck about Course Design & Development

[Dave242]

John - in conjunction with mhulkman's question about adding intrigue to an otherwise featureless piece of land, might it make sense to do something creative like partially blocking off one side of the basket to make it more directional?

In my mind it adds the requirement of accurate placement to an otherwise bland hole. And.....accuracy is a real disc golf skill, so directional baskets might have their place in the scenario mhulkman describes.

I experimented with some tournaments I ran to add shields to one side of some baskets. I basically just hung a 1"x6" board down the side of the basket. You could see them clearly from the tee on the holes they were used so you knew where the more challenging landing area was.....and if you were good, you did not land in that area.

With only a 5.5" shield, there was no place that you were completely blocked, but you did have to either straddle putt or hyzer/anhyzer putt if landing to the side of the shield.

 

[mashnut]

You don't even have to block off the basket itself, you can just make putts and approaches from that side more difficult. One hole at Brent Baca in NM put railroad ties vertically around the green, they're dense on one side and sparse on the other. It creates the effect of tree "jail" off to one side of the hole but in the desert they don't have the luxury of actually using trees. Here's a picture, it doesn't quite capture it but it's the best I could find with a quick look:

 

[BogeyNoMore]

John - in conjunction with mhulkman's question about adding intrigue to an otherwise featureless piece of land, might it make sense to do something creative like partially blocking off one side of the basket to make it more directional?

In my mind it adds the requirement of accurate placement to an otherwise bland hole. And.....accuracy is a real disc golf skill, so directional baskets might have their place in the scenario mhulkman describes.

I experimented with some tournaments I ran to add shields to one side of some baskets. I basically just hung a 1"x6" board down the side of the basket. You could see them clearly from the tee on the holes they were used so you knew where the more challenging landing area was.....and if you were good, you did not land in that area.

With only a 5.5" shield, there was no place that you were completely blocked, but you did have to either straddle putt or hyzer/anhyzer putt if landing to the side of the shield.

^ I see what your after, and like the concept. I would applaud it if you could use something natural, like a bush, to achieve it. If it must be artificial, at least make it make it cute (if not somewhat gimmicky)... Don't take this personally, but to put a board on the basket just seems crass - I wouldn't like it. I admit at this point, I'm talking about style points, bcause artificially obstructing part of the basket is still artificial. But just as "It's not what you say, but how you say it," it's also Not what you do, but how you do it. Cute and unique touches can add something if well executed and not overdone

Just my $0.02 worth.

 

[mhulkman]

Thanks! You guys are awesome and I plan on using all of these suggestions in one way or another. It will definately be a unique course at the least. One great feature is the gradual and steep elevation change so Stans idea will certainly come into play. Plus there are some gorgeous views of the valley and surrounding mountains from the top of the hill so a nice 400-600ft "Top of the World" shot will be an absolute. I to like the idea of a wide open birdie hole with ace potential. There arent alot but enough bushes that stand 5-7ft tall for hiding or shielding one side of the basket "naturally" as Dave suggests. I also plan to use the severe slope for a few baskets to where you are punished for missing on the wrong side. I also like the idea of punishing aggresive shots such as a downhill par 3 with the basket 10ft in front of the wash. To long and your birdie put is from the wash and its 10-15ft bank or layup to short and get to aggresive with your birdie putt and now your par putt is from the wash. The wash can come into play on a few holes and I can mix it up with the basket on the left or right of it so you cant throw the same drive everytime. I was even thinking of maybe making some tall mounds of brush from some of the bushes and dirt we will be pulling out for trails and tee pads. I also mentioned the prevailing winds here and they can be a steady 10-20 mph from about 1pm-5pm in spring and summer but almost non existant in the morning and for most of fall/winter. So if you played 36 holes one day it would be two entirely different courses. I think Nov-April is when this course will see most action. Most people (myself included) will be playing one of the 6 courses around Lake Tahoe the rest of the yr. Thanks for the support guys, you helped take away the worries of this course being to boring.

 

[grodney]

Has somebody already come up with some joke about all the John's in here and what they're full of? Yes? Okay, good.

 

[optidiscic]

Has somebody already come up with some joke about all the John's in here and what they're full of? Yes? Okay, good.

:clap:

 

[New013]

I want some thoughts on how this hole should play out. I've got three possible tees I'm looking at you can see in the pic. Two would par 3's (Red and Purple) and the Blue would be a par 4.

Red: 450' total. 400' from tee to the far bank. 35' drop in elevation from the tee to the water. 12' rise in elevation from the water up to the basket.

Purple: 450' total. 395' from tee to the far bank. 38' drop in elevation from the tee to the water. 12' rise in elevation from the water up to the basket.

Blue: 626' total. 365' from the tee to water with a 40' drop. 265' from the near side of the water to the basket on the blue line. 15' rise from the water up to the basket.

Both basket placements are about 35' from the water.

I want this to be an epic water crossing and personally I can make it across but I'm not sure if it creates a really boring shot for those who couldn't. It's 400' or 395' from either red or purple to cross but there is a nice drop in elevation from the tee so that would help. If you do layup your throwing less than 260' from either tee and then throwing 180'+ on approach. Purple would be the hardest of those two because of the tree to the left of the flight path and the fact that any discs that fade out will likely splash.

Then you got the possible par 4 blue which takes away the dramatic water crossing off the tee and gives you still a big drive towards water and downhill which might make you splash or layup to short and create a riskier crossing on your second shot.

Thoughts, opinions, objections?

 

[Sadjo]

I want some thoughts on how this hole should play out. I've got three possible tees I'm looking at you can see in the pic. Two would par 3's (Red and Purple) and the Blue would be a par 4.

Red: 450' total. 400' from tee to the far bank. 35' drop in elevation from the tee to the water. 12' rise in elevation from the water up to the basket.

Purple: 450' total. 395' from tee to the far bank. 38' drop in elevation from the tee to the water. 12' rise in elevation from the water up to the basket.

Blue: 626' total. 365' from the tee to water with a 40' drop. 265' from the near side of the water to the basket on the blue line. 15' rise from the water up to the basket.

Both basket placements are about 35' from the water.

I want this to be an epic water crossing and personally I can make it across but I'm not sure if it creates a really boring shot for those who couldn't. It's 400' or 395' from either red or purple to cross but there is a nice drop in elevation from the tee so that would help. If you do layup your throwing less than 260' from either tee and then throwing 180'+ on approach. Purple would be the hardest of those two because of the tree to the left of the flight path and the fact that any discs that fade out will likely splash.

Then you got the possible par 4 blue which takes away the dramatic water crossing off the tee and gives you still a big drive towards water and downhill which might make you splash or layup to short and create a riskier crossing on your second shot.

Thoughts, opinions, objections?

Let me start with this disclaimer: I am not John Houck.

This would be a great hole to discuss in the Fair or Foul thread.

I like the options you've suggested. It looks like there is an option to not cross water at all and in each case players have the option of throwing short of the water then crossing.

 

[superberry]

I want some thoughts on how this hole should play out. I've got three possible tees I'm looking at you can see in the pic. Two would par 3's (Red and Purple) and the Blue would be a par 4.

Red: 450' total. 400' from tee to the far bank. 35' drop in elevation from the tee to the water. 12' rise in elevation from the water up to the basket.

Purple: 450' total. 395' from tee to the far bank. 38' drop in elevation from the tee to the water. 12' rise in elevation from the water up to the basket.

Blue: 626' total. 365' from the tee to water with a 40' drop. 265' from the near side of the water to the basket on the blue line. 15' rise from the water up to the basket.

Both basket placements are about 35' from the water.

I want this to be an epic water crossing and personally I can make it across but I'm not sure if it creates a really boring shot for those who couldn't. It's 400' or 395' from either red or purple to cross but there is a nice drop in elevation from the tee so that would help. If you do layup your throwing less than 260' from either tee and then throwing 180'+ on approach. Purple would be the hardest of those two because of the tree to the left of the flight path and the fact that any discs that fade out will likely splash.

Then you got the possible par 4 blue which takes away the dramatic water crossing off the tee and gives you still a big drive towards water and downhill which might make you splash or layup to short and create a riskier crossing on your second shot.

Thoughts, opinions, objections?

From the Blue tee, IMO this is not an epic hole to play, but maybe to look at. A 365' drive to the front edge of the water is a simple easy controlled midrange throw. Then another even easier midrange throw to clear the 265' water crossing for an easy 3 every time. It would be better to tempt a water throw off the drive with about 375' crossing, but then again the basket placement still calls for an easy upshot and putt for another three. If you backed the tee up 500-600' from the water, you may give a long range thrower to be over in two throws, but many blue players may take 3 throws to get from tee to the pin with the 265' water crossing at the end.

My thought process with water or other OB is that if used to make a par 4 hole, it needs to be placed somewhere that an average blue level player would land most of the time. Thus, really good players could clear the OB, while others lay up and play for par. Or in a simpler case like with a creek or river on a par 3 hole, if it were 375' to cross the water and the green was the other side, better players would drive across and play for deuce while others would either layup or simply not even come near the water with a full power drive, still need to clear it with an upshot, and have leave a decent putt

 

[johnrhouck]

hey John, thanks again for fielding questions on here as time permits. Have you or anyone else on this board designed a course with NO trees? We are about to break ground on the 1st course in the Carson City/Carson Valley, Nv area and there is nothing but sage brush. The property sits on the foothills of the Sierras so there is a lot of elevation change along with a small canyon and dry wash. Some of the sage brush is 6ft tall so there are definately options for hiding baskets, placing them on slopes, and having them near the edges of the wash. We can probably utilize the canyon/wash for 6-9 holes for throwing over and around and making risk/reward shots but other than that we are finding a hard time making tee shots a challenge when there is no wind. The prevailing afternoon winds will definately make it a challenge. the plan is to have 12 par 3's and 6 par 4's. Any tips or advice from anyone would be highly appreciated!
Thanks, Mike

Mike, no trees is a tough situation. At least you have the canyon and wash to work with. 6' sage brush won't do you much good on the tees, but it can be a good putting hazard. I would think of it more in terms of obstacles for someone to put around if they don't make a god drive. Also as "sand traps" on par fours (not sure they'd quite qualify as PITTSBOROs).
Stan's idea sounds good, too.
And definitely make sure you mix up the wind direction -- that's going to be your last key element.

 

[New013]

well the water carry doesn't really play like 400' cuz you're elevated. I picked those spots for tees cuz the ground is mostly level there, I can move those tees up but I'd have to level off the ground. my thought is that the distance is a bit to much, I threw 3 discs from the red and purple and I got across every time but only one of my drives from the red was inside the circle.

i can't back the blue tee up really that much because it would interfere with another hole.

 

[anborn]

I want some thoughts on how this hole should play out. I've got three possible tees I'm looking at you can see in the pic. Two would par 3's (Red and Purple) and the Blue would be a par 4.

Red: 450' total. 400' from tee to the far bank. 35' drop in elevation from the tee to the water. 12' rise in elevation from the water up to the basket.

Purple: 450' total. 395' from tee to the far bank. 38' drop in elevation from the tee to the water. 12' rise in elevation from the water up to the basket.

Blue: 626' total. 365' from the tee to water with a 40' drop. 265' from the near side of the water to the basket on the blue line. 15' rise from the water up to the basket.

Both basket placements are about 35' from the water.

I want this to be an epic water crossing and personally I can make it across but I'm not sure if it creates a really boring shot for those who couldn't. It's 400' or 395' from either red or purple to cross but there is a nice drop in elevation from the tee so that would help. If you do layup your throwing less than 260' from either tee and then throwing 180'+ on approach. Purple would be the hardest of those two because of the tree to the left of the flight path and the fact that any discs that fade out will likely splash.

Then you got the possible par 4 blue which takes away the dramatic water crossing off the tee and gives you still a big drive towards water and downhill which might make you splash or layup to short and create a riskier crossing on your second shot.

Thoughts, opinions, objections?

this is going to be highly (if not totally) dependent on what level of player the course is geared towards. gold? blue? white?

for the par3s, you're asking whether whether the level of player can regularly and accurately clear 395-400ft', and whether or not they would regularly risk an OB penalty to do so in a tourney. If there is too much risk, or the regularity isn't there, you're setting up a situation for a layup, clear, putt for a (easy) 3.

given the apparent width of the OB, I imagine you'll need multiple pins to create "good holes" for different classes of players.

:notadesigner:

 

[New013]

For now it'll be a temp course on private land and geared towards blue level and up players. Again, the water crossing definitely doesn't play like 400' cuz you're throwing off a 35' hill. I threw fairway drivers across so it's more the ability to accurately make a shot at that distance that is my concern.

 

[mashnut]

Red and Blue look like fun shots, but blue looks a bit boring. It's a layup off the tee to the water, and even if you come up short it's just a pitch across to the pin. It would be a lot more exciting if you didn't expect a 3 every time you walked up, either moving it back to make it more difficult to accurately lay up to the water or moving it up so that there is a chance of clearing it off the tee will make a much more interesting scoring spread.

 

[Dave242]

Mash - since you are a moderator, you might know this: Isn't this thread supposed to be a place where John Houck can interact with the general members and thereby become a repository of his wisdom/thoughts? Isn't it inappropriate for all these posts to be here? Shouldn't this otherwise worthy discussion be moved to another thread?

 

[superberry]

Mash - since you are a moderator, you might know this: Isn't this thread supposed to be a place where John Houck can interact with the general members and thereby become a repository of his wisdom/thoughts? Isn't it inappropriate for all these posts to be here? Shouldn't this otherwise worthy discussion be moved to another thread?

Mashnut, can't you moderate Dave's statistical ramblings about mathematically theorized disc golf play? Go fling Frisbees (aka discs)!

 

[jongoff09]

New-I agree that the Blue tee looks pretty boring. #3 at Selah Ranch-Creekside is similar length, with similar distance to the water at the drive's landing zone, but I think it is one of the best holes I have played because there is a premium placed on the accuracy of the drive. The water wraps around and comes into play on the drive, and there are trees that mess with your approach to the basket.

I think the Purple looks the most exciting, the angle of the downhill nature to the water from the basket means landing the drive at the right angle is important. Seems like from the red you could just throw a low shot that hits the side of the hill in any way and have it stick. You could go either way depending on whether you want it to play easier or tougher.

I could be wrong without playing it. I'm sure whatever you do will be better than most holes.

 

[New013]

Thanks for the responses, I'm thinking when I go back I'll relook at red and purple and think about moving them up so it's around 380' to cross. It makes more sense to make this a par 3 because the next hole will possibly be a par 4 that crosses the water on the second shot.

I would still like to know what John thinks, paging Mr. Houck.

 

[roclover]

Disc golf on the beach

Hi John. This is somewhat of an obscure/unique situation. I have a temporary course here where I live in Saipan (small island in the pacific). Several of the holes come into direct contact with the ocean, which is great because the water here is clear enough that you don't have to worry about losing a disc, but you still get the rush from throwing out over water. The tricky part... High tide and low tide make a HUGE difference on the course. I played yesterday and the tide was higher than I've ever seen it before. One of the holes that is usually about 40 ft away from the water was now only about 8 ft away from the water!

This got me thinking about tournament play. How would you deal with a situation like this in a tournament. The course is significantly harder at certain times of the day/tides. Obviously this has happened many times before with wind, rain and other weather, but tide is something I haven't heard of before. Are there other courses that have been designed near the ocean that have had similar issues? What are your thoughts on this John? I had the idea of roping off an "average" tide height to make a more definite OB line, but I think that would still leave players playing at high tide with a psychological disadvantage because the course just looks way more intimidating at high tide.

Let me know what you think. Thanks!

 

[Cgkdisc]

Ideally, the water line should never be used as an OB line if there are alternatives. We've had to deal with this issue on the Steady Ed course at the IDGC - not with tides but with varying water heights in an "artificial" lake whose height is controlled by the dam. The "permanent" shoreline is not completely staked but that's the plan so the course always plays the same from an OB standpoint.

With regard to waves, I know John and I use the rule that a disc is only OB if it's in a position where it's always wet regardless of the wave action. If the disc is partly wet and partly not when the waves recede, then it's not OB.