Spock

Re: peer pressure.
You write "In case you haven't noticed, I'm not the only one voting your review down. Sawyer is a 2.5 course, not Chili."
You've tried to make this point several times. Your point is that nobody should ever be allowed to differ from the crowd. And that your friends constitute an authority that can't be questioned. The so-called Argument From Authority never really carries any weight and never wins any arguments. It's the specifics themselves that matter. Who cares whether an idea is popular? What matters is whether it is right.

Re improvements: you know, the new rubber tee mats at Ellison are kind of nice. I like them better than cement (obviously). But even though the rubber surface is great, I can still find something to complain about: they're too short. I bet everyone you know starts their run-up in the grass behind the mat.
Moral: just because you like something doesn't mean it can't be better.
Finally, Sawyer: I've never played it. My guess is that I'd give it a 1, not a 2.5, based on comments I've read. I'll almost certainly never play it, though.

This forum should be a great place to discuss how different people see course design, so we can change our courses and make them better. If you're just going to use it to swear at people who disagree with you, you're not helping anybody. I'm guessing you personally know the course pro's at Chili. Do you ever make suggestions for improvements? You can't improve something if you think it is perfect.

I would have guessed that Chili #11 was too open for you: it's pretty hard to find those trees on the left, and it's also pretty hard to go OB on the right except on the very windy days. I agree that it should be a par 5: about 3 300' drives, and 2 putts seems to be the PDGA standards. I think the "pro" level average there is probably about 4.5, meaning it could go either way.
You say we're allowed to have one giant hole in Roch. But actually, course designers are allowed to do anything they want... the PDGA has no authority of any kind regarding course design, and they know it. The question is: can you make a better course than the one that exists? I say yes, you say no. But still, since you claim that it is impossible to improve Chili in any way, I have to wonder why you don't rate it as a 5 yourself. Can you think of anything that could be improved (i.e., other than signage, bathrooms, and other irrelevant stuff)? If so, what are they?

Re: fairways: it seems that for ball golf, fairways are about grass. But, for disc golf, fairways are about *air*. Does a space exist that you can visualize a well thrown disc by a competent player travelling without hitting anything? If such a space doesn't exist, then you don't have a fairway. If the best players (i.e., people who can throw a 45 at Ellison, so not me) can't find these holes on a consistent basis (say, 90% of the time), then the fairway is too crowded. In ball golf, it seems that the pros hit the fairways 95% of the time.

Based on the real estate available, it seems the churchville designer did about the best that could have been done: he mostly stayed away from the public areas and roads and used the foliage that was available. One thing about churchville is that the designer(s) seem to know it has weaknesses, and course changes happen frequently, mostly for the better. I'm sure you've played the new version (i.e., on the other side of the main road). Are any of those holes any good?

Never having played ball golf, i guess I can't identify with your description as a "ball golf style course". I don't know what that means.
Yes, I've played churchville, but not for a few years. I know it's been revised recently, and I haven't played the most recent incarnation. BUt you're right: there are some things I liked about it. On the old numbering system, I liked hole 6 (uphill towards the tennis courts), 16 (long uphill, tight at the tee, loose in the middle, and tight at the end), and 17 (open at the front, crowded in the middle but with more than one option, and medium foliage near the basket). I think it was hole 13 that I also liked (drive from the woods through some medium narrow fairway towards a medium-crowded putting green). But I agree, a lot of the other holes were boring.

Speaking of anhyzer, even though it's kind of easy and short, I like hole 11 at Ellison... it's hard to imagine a more carefully placed hole on that particular piece of real estate.

When we played Parma this summer, we didn't see any signs. Of course, being responsible adults, we printed the map from the web page before going. We were lucky to find hole 1 because some blackberry pickers pointed it out to us. I guess it had been moved recently. But, the map was good enough for us even though we found the signs unhelpful. As I've mentioned before, I can't imagine complaining about a course based on the signs rather than the layout itself.

Hey great! We're talking disc golf instead of (just) bashing me. Of course, we're still doing some bashing. I'm sorry for having opinions different than yours.
I looked at your courses played, and saw idlewild on your wish list, so i assumed you hadn't played it. Sorry for the error. In any case, I haven't played it.
Re: your discussion of Chili hole 5. it sounds to me like you're describing hole 4. Were the holes been renumbered late this summer, because this is the second time I was confused by this?
In any case, I also like hole 4 (start at the edge of the woods, over the creek, and end up not far from the hole 2 basket). I usually throw big Hyzer, starting to fall somewhere near the hole 2 basket.
Re: chili hole 1: I already posted last week that I like this hole.
Now why do you have to go being childish again and bringing insults about whether you think I can throw anhyzer? Just when I thought we were talking DG for a change. It's not about me, it's about the courses.

Hole 11 is amazing. Is it far? Yep. But it also has great gaps and traps all the way up the fairway. Find one tree, and you'll likely find more. I feel it should be a par 5, and it was during the Worlds. We're allowed to have a giant hole in Rochestern and Chili is perfect for it.

And HOW can you say there are no fairways at Chili of all places. The grass is always mowed, and shaped fairways are visible throughout.

I could go on, but really. This isn't about who can better describe every hole in Rochester. It's about your 2.5 review making no sense. In case you haven't noticed, I'm not the only one voting your review down. Sawyer is a 2.5 course, not Chili.

Hole 1 at Chili forces a long s-curve for those like myself that can't get there with a giant hyzer. I've hit metal there, and the throw was amazing to watch take shape.

Chili is the ball golf style course in Rochester. We have a tight course in Basil (BTW, hole 2 gets aced all the time there. Not the course's fault you can't throw anny), a wide open course in Chili, a rounded, challenging course in Parma (which has signage to help you find your way), and a phenominal beginner friendly course in Ellison.

Have you played Churchville? It's really boring and straight forward. You'd like it.

I have played Idlewild, thank you. Let's talk about hole 5 at Chili. It opens up across a field for the first 200', leaving you a gap. Miss the gap and hit the trees, and you'll likely land OB in the stream. Hit the gap straight, and your disc should fade, wrapping around the big tree and landing just outside the green. That's only with a 350' slightly downhill throw. Is it there? Yes, and it's awesome if you hit it. Is it easy? No.

FWIW, I've played Idlewild, Moraine, Deer Lakes, Beaver Ranch, and Phantom Falls. All are top ten courses on this site, and Chili is as good as any of them.

Hole 8 at Chili is also a great hole. It's reachable with a midrange, but throwing too low will hit the windmill, going left or right finds the trees, and overthrowing will leave a long recovery.

No, I'm not going to give you a hole by hole of every course in Rochester explaining how I feel it is illegal. You've killed enough of my brain cells as it is. I don't know what you expect, I guess. Every hole is either too long, too short, too open, or too crowded. I've not seen or heard of one person who would agree with about anything you have said. NO course is perfect, but you seem to relish in bitching about course design. What baffles me is that you can then say a shoddy pitch and putt, with little to no variety ranks better than courses that exceeded the PDGA's expectations during this year's Worlds. With that, I'm done with your ramblings. Good day, and have fun with your solo rounds, and newbies who never take enough interest to join any of the local clubs or tourneys. Again, with your vast experience and expertise on disc golf, it's amazing that you've never played with anybody from one of the most historic clubs in the country. Call the nurse for your meds, and good day.

Wow what a conversation. Genesseo is a relatively open simple course. Nothing special. It was nearly un-navigable until I added the large green stakes and added markers to point the way to the next tee. The new changes at Chili make this course rival Parma.
Rating ANYTHING in Rochester lower than GCC is insane (except Sawyer)

accidental double post

Watch the video of the '99 worlds and you'll hear them state that the course will be amazing in 15 years once the trees fill in... And it is, except to you I guess. If you have some minor gripes, fine. But to rate that course as you did, and say something a stupid as "I like to wear cleats, so concrete tees are no good" is a shortcut to thinking. Oh, and I've never lost a single disc there. Don't hate the course 'cause you can't watch your plastic. As for the bunkers: do you think bunkers in ball golf make the course seem "artificial"? It seems you're back to 350' holes, where you can see the basket, there's nothing in the way, and it should have muddy, natural tees so you can wear cleats... Gimme a break.

It's called variety. Some holes are long, some are short. If you want a cookie cutter hole on every tee-pad, so be it. If you think hole 5 is too crowded, how do you like Basil... Or Parma? There are blind holes on both of those courses, and far more short holes with less defined fairways. The proof is in the pudding; check out the feedback on your review. Hole 5 at Chili is a great hole. It's a hard shot, but it's there if you flip a disc through the gap. Hole eight is one of the very few short holes at Chili... But it's too short for you??? What about Idlewild and Moraine, both of which feature 1000' holes? 15 at Idlewild has been called one of the greatest holes in the world by almost any disc golf authority you can name. Fact is, I played Chili during the AmWorlds with players from all over the globe, and it was completely and totally regarded as a gem. Continued...

You're shot, dude. We should just make everything 350' and straight in front of you with no obstacles to impede your greatness. I know everyone has an opinion, but yours makes no sense. The proof is in the pudding. If it was such a terrible course, would it have hosted the Worlds twice? Would it have been hailed as the gem of Rochester throughout this year's tourney? It may not be perfect, but for you to give it a 2 of 5, while rating courses that are clearly not even in the same class higher just proves that you know not of what you speak.

Two holes get soggy in the spring, so you don't like concrete pads because you wear CLEATS!?!?! Seriously?!?!

Late response: Bull****. Who are you? If you're throwing an average of 55 at Chili, I'm sure the Rochester dg scene is familiar with you. There's one or two spots that get soggy after rain at Chili. I'll take the tee pads. There's one blind hole on the course (hole 5), and it's a par 4 dog leg. It should be blind. The raised tee on 8 adds a challenge to one of the few ace runs on the course (to us mere mortals who don't 2 every hole...) I'm really not going towaste any more time with this, your review has been voted unanimously as ****, and you make zero sense. Let's just say I know most of the masters in Rochester, and you sir, are full of ****.

Your review of Chili is the most horrible representation of a course I've ever seen. The fact that you rate Geneseo over it makes me wonder if you've been playing another game for the last 33 years.