2017 Idlewild Open Aug. 17-19 Burlington, Ky

[sidewinder22]

Can't answer fairly.

Rephrased question - what would the ideal Fish tour consist of including courses you have not played?

 

[DGStein]

Fred Salaz a true visionary!

And that may be true, but if the vision for future disc golf is fake mini-golf greens, then I would have to disagree. I would rather see the course closed for a summer to grow some real grass. It should never even be considered an option. It looks like garbage.

Just my opinion.

 

[Old Bassman]

And that may be true, but if the vision for future disc golf is fake mini-golf greens, then I would have to disagree. I would rather see the course closed for a summer to grow some real grass. It should never even be considered an option. It looks like garbage.

Just my opinion.

The course has been there for almost two decades and nothing grows down there. So one summer will not change anything.

Come down and play the course and not judge it by a video.

 

[Orioles_Lefty]

Here's my question on 16. If the deep stuff left of the fairway was not played as OB, would landing there provide a better angle for the second shot?

If the answer is yes, then is the OB manufactured simply to make the hole harder? If the answer is no, is the OB merely intended to force players to not land in an area simply because it is marked OB?

Related, the "barely" OB discs could have been helped, perhaps, with a medium cut of rough between the fairway and the deep OB stuff -- something to better help differentiate truly bad throws from bad rolls/skips.

 

[DGStein]

The course has been there for almost two decades and nothing grows down there. So one summer will not change anything.

Come down and play the course and not judge it by a video.

The course looked wonderful! Never said it didn't.

But I just can't agree with laying out a rug for a putting green in a natural setting. To me, it looks awful.

 

[JC17393]

Here's my question on 16. If the deep stuff left of the fairway was not played as OB, would landing there provide a better angle for the second shot?

If the answer is yes, then is the OB manufactured simply to make the hole harder? If the answer is no, is the OB merely intended to force players to not land in an area simply because it is marked OB?

Related, the "barely" OB discs could have been helped, perhaps, with a medium cut of rough between the fairway and the deep OB stuff -- something to better help differentiate truly bad throws from bad rolls/skips.

The last time I played the course (10 years ago), there was no long grass there. The entire field was mowed. On one hand, it was in stark contrast with the style of the rest of the course that required accurate throws through precise lines in the woods since you could just crank a drive as far as you could with no real concern for precision. On the other, frankly, it was a boring hole only made interesting by the last 100 feet or so (the wooded green featuring the OB creek).

But yes, the approach to the green from the left side of the field was usually the more ideal way to attack the hole, IMO. Making that OB does add to the challenge of approaching the green. But moreso, I think the OB makes the hole better fit the spirit of the course than it otherwise would. Obviously with no trees, it can't really restrict how the disc flies, but the OB forces players to be accurate with their landings and, as in the woods, placement trumps distance.

I don't buy into the notion that OBs like this are flukey in that they can punish "well-executed shots" if the disc happens to slide a foot OB. One of the overlooked skills of our game, and it's in part because few courses demand it, is the ability to control the landing of the disc. By which I mean throwing a shot that doesn't skip or slide or roll once it hits the ground. It's a matter of angle usually. If the disc lands relatively flat, it's not going to skip (absent a random rock or root or something changing its trajectory). This is a skill that is highly tested at USDGC with how low they cut the fairway grass, especially in spots where discs might tend to skip toward OB. Hole 16 here brings that skill into play.

The instinct of players facing a 1000 foot hole with no trees is to take out their longest driver and bomb away. Really good players can often throw those discs with enough accuracy to land them in a relatively narrow window. They're not going to land them on a dime, but given a 40' X 40' square, they can land somewhere in it more often than not. The problem is that discs that fast going that far are usually going to be fading out as they land. In other words, hitting the ground at an angle. Angled discs skip and slide and rarely come to rest where they first hit the ground.

So if they're fading toward the OB line and hit 5-10 feet away, there's always a chance they'll skip OB. That is something that players can control but rarely try to. Throwing a more controlled shot or a slower/smaller-winged disc that will land flatter is always an option. Not every tee shot has to be max distance. 450+250 = 350+350 and puts you in the same place.

 

[GMcAtee]

And that may be true, but if the vision for future disc golf is fake mini-golf greens, then I would have to disagree. I would rather see the course closed for a summer to grow some real grass. It should never even be considered an option. It looks like garbage.

Just my opinion.

I believe the turf was intended to help with erosion. Grass never grows in those shady areas well and there wouldn't be much of a green left after 10 years had they not put down that turf for the foot traffic.

 

[lyleoross]

Actually, I liked the turf around the baskets. The guys who did the work around the greens did a great job. I could tell it was a wear issue and they made it look as good as you can make such a thing look. Which quite frankly was very good.

Compare those greens to greens at other events. You might not like the turf, the overall presentation was awesome IMO.

 

[brutalbrutus]

Yea, there are four greens along that part of the creek 2 turf and 2 "grass". The two on 17(old16) that are natural, are basically just mowed crab grass and wild onions. The turf greens would have looked a lot better if it hadn't been for the storm that rolled thru Thursday. They were nice and clean before it dumped a bunch of wet leaves on them.

 

[brutalbrutus]

On top of that, that creek occasionally turns into a river when there is a big storm or melt off from a heavy snow. If they were to try to plant grass, it would likely be washed away before getting a chance to take root.

 

[BuiltTooLong]

Funny, I didn't hear Paige or Sarah or Lisa Fajkus complaining about Idlewood...

Some like open courses, some (see: Michael Johanson) love playing in the woods. It is what it is, Cat.

Funny, you didn't hear Cat complaining about Idlewood either! Just because a professional athlete is talking to them-self during a rough stretch, doesn't mean they are complaining about the course or any other external factor. And that's just hearsay anyway, so to take that and make a post to try to make her look bad is just pathetic.

 

[DGStein]

On top of that, that creek occasionally turns into a river when there is a big storm or melt off from a heavy snow. If they were to try to plant grass, it would likely be washed away before getting a chance to take root.[/QUOTE

It can and has been done before on other courses.

It just takes time. Meaning that no one walks on that area for a long time (mid summer when it's dry to following summer). And keeping up on maintenance of establishing new grass.
Most people don't want to close the course for that long. Or spend the time, money, and resources. I get it.

Idlewild likes to lay down carpet in the woods. In Wisconsin, a lot of places lay down woodchips or mulch. Both solutions, to me, are not aesthetically pleasing.

 

[Oldalan]

Thanks to all the spotters last weekend. Long hot days with a lot of leg work on some holes. Even saw some players say thanks to them. Nice.

 

[lyleoross]

Funny, you didn't hear Cat complaining about Idlewood either! Just because a professional athlete is talking to them-self during a rough stretch, doesn't mean they are complaining about the course or any other external factor. And that's just hearsay anyway, so to take that and make a post to try to make her look bad is just pathetic.

Cat, under her breath. "Cripes I'm stinkin' it up and I know exactly what those guys at DGCR are gonna write.". Whiny voice on - she doesn't look like she's having fun. - whiny voice off.

"I need a ."

 

[SD86]

Funny, I haven't read anything that Cat said about the course, so why do you need to kick her when she's down? I know you don't feel she smiles enough for your liking (the women are expected to be in good spirits at all times-according to some). Is there some other reason you feel the need to be on her case?

Funny, you didn't hear Cat complaining about Idlewood either! Just because a professional athlete is talking to them-self during a rough stretch, doesn't mean they are complaining about the course or any other external factor. And that's just hearsay anyway, so to take that and make a post to try to make her look bad is just pathetic.

I was not trying to make Cat look bad. I was trying to say "play the course as it lies, woods or no woods", which really applies to all....

 

[BuiltTooLong]

I was not trying to make Cat look bad. I was trying to say "play the course as it lies, woods or no woods", which really applies to all....

You singled out Cat by name, chiding her for complaining about something she never complained about, then pat other players on the back for not complaining about something that Cat never even complained about.

You also stomped all over her on the Catrina Allen Castration thread as well. So your posts tell me that you ARE trying to make her look bad.

 

[SD86]

You singled out Cat by name, chiding her for complaining about something she never complained about, then pat other players on the back for not complaining about something that Cat never even complained about.

You also stomped all over her on the Catrina Allen Castration thread as well. So your posts tell me that you ARE trying to make her look bad.

That's your opinion, have fun believing it.

 

[discNDav]

I have played Idlewild 5 times (all casual) and like the artificial greens, they take out the would be mud factor.

 

[Turnipseed]

I'm debating whether I should post a review of the course, since I only played 19 of the 24 holes, and looked at three others, and there were a couple modifications (raised baskets, pin location change on 4, etc). The holes that were in play gave a severe advantage to the lefty. (I'd say holes 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 17 had a distinct advantage to CCW spin, and 6, 12, 13 had a distinct advantage to CW spin.) If I do, I think it'll be a 4, which is totally a dissenting opinion to what is currently on this site. However, this has little to do with the trees and faaaar more with the OB lines, greens, and fairways approaching the greens. Hole by hole on the tournament layout:

1. Fine hole, nothing wrong with it. I thought the OB line to the left was a little unnecessary, but I can understand it since hole 8 parallels it (and no OB here would incentivize cheater routes on 8 far more). Pin placement was great, relative to the grabby cedar on the edge of the circle. In a perfect world I'd send it down the slope a little to make it play faster, but that would interfere with 2's fairway.
2. Again, fine hole, nothing wrong with it. Going into the tournament I thought it would play really easy but I saw a handful of big numbers on it. Turns out it plays easy when you don't overcomplicate it.
3. A sneakily demanding drive. I had three putts inside the circle and felt like I'd had to throw a great shot for all of them.
4. This was a stupid hole. The shorter pin position (425ish) would have made so much more sense (at least for MPO). So many quality players laid up, laid up, and tapped in a 3. I heard of just a couple 2s and some 4s and an 8, but soooo many "birdie" 3s.
5. Great tee shot, not-great green. I say that because the result of what you get at the landing zone, 400 off the tee, is a bunch of randomly spaced trees without a really preferential route. So I saw very similar, well-executed tee shots wind up with a perfect putter shot to the green (great!) or a layup to 40. It's super-pretty but I didn't feel it fairly determined "good shot = good result". This is a theme along many of the holes along the creek.
6. Fine. No major comments. Wish it didn't throw at a walking path.
7. One of the best par 4s I've ever seen. I hate mandos, but I want a way to prevent players from trying to throw over the top.
8. Probably should have been labeled a par 5 because the two shots that have to be executed to get there are so demanding, but that's not a big deal. I think I really like this hole, I just played it poorly.
9. Fine, no issue. Fits well between two long holes.
10. Weird distance, I saw only one player get inside circle 2 in three rounds. More of a 3/4 separator. I think it would make sense if a couple of trees were removed at a couple locations on the fairway.
11. Good choice for elevated basket, definitely messed with some players. Somehow I'm dumb and didn't even get to putt on it twice. Nothing really special though.
12. I really liked this hole. I think it favors the righty more because the second shot is more demanding, and a hyzer there plays for speed control better than a turnover or lefty BH roller. I wish 13's teepad was further from the basket, as I saw multiple shots skip or roll and interfere with a card standing at the bench.
13. Ugh. The defining feature (Y mando) is fine. I hit that Y mando perfectly all three rounds, moved left with fairway driver fade, and had not much to work with. This is another case (like hole 5) where so many players end up laying up to 40. And making the hillside a "bailout zone" above the green didn't seem to factor into play, because if there wasn't a line to approach the green through the trees, the bailout zone wasn't any more accessible.
14. This is a near-perfect disc golf hole. I would like it more if the right side (approaching the A-pin) was a little more closed off. I saw several players miss the intended line by several feet and sneak through and get waaaaay down the fairway, while near misses squared up the trees defining that gap. Although I am not enthused about several of the turf greens on other holes, I liked that this hole offered adequate room both before and over the creek to land flat and safely.
15. Another of the best par 4s I've ever played. If you execute good shots, it plays well. If you don't, scrambleville.
16. Ugh. I don't understand why holes like this exist. I had 5 bonus strokes on this hole in three rounds. Two of them were OB by less than a foot. (Two of them were definitely my fault, and landed way out. One was kinda in-between; I didn't see the ground play but it finished in the creek) I really hate artificial OB that was arbitrarily decided (e.g. not a creek), because it makes a foot out count the same as 300 feet out. This green would have been okay if the backslope had been safe (as on 5 and 13), but instead it led to either 18-foot comeback putts after throwing long OB, or players laying up to 60 and pitching over. Holes like this make me not want to come back to courses.
17. Ugh. This is such a pretty hole, and it makes so little sense as a disc golf hole. The most effective shots I saw were the ones that got lucky after trying to attack way down the fairway. The least effective, including three of my own, were those that played to the safe right side of the creek, and then attempted to approach (again, to 40 feet or so, or, like me, skip to 16 feet away... OB). "Lol whatever" is a great attitude for a casual round, but the randomness of this hole shouldn't determine winners of big disc golf tournaments.
18. Great finishing hole! It puts a premium on playing backwards--land flat in the center with a putter or mid, and then try to attack from further away. The further down the fairway you try to go, the more randomness and risk you introduce.

Course flow:
Worked pretty well with 15-minute tee times, but 8, 12, 13, and 16 were consistently backed up for at least one card. Most of these were because there is significant variation in how far the subsequent card can throw off the tee. I did not like that holes 13 and 17 had to wait on each other for the drive and putt, respectively. Hole 8 was occasionally disruptive to 9's teepad. 12's basket and 13's teepad were occasionally disruptive to each other.

Overall, I had a positive experience. I think if I was in the area, I would LOVE to go play Idlewild casually. It was a challenging woods course, and I like that style. However, I am iffy over whether I would travel to play a big tournament there again, because I didn't feel that several of the holes (and especially the greens near the creek) fairly rewarded what I felt were well-executed shots. That made me outwardly grouchy, which I really hate doing--it probably makes spotters, scorers, and other tournament volunteers feel like the course and their efforts aren't being appreciated.

I welcome your comments, especially from locals.

4 is a bad hole, no question. Probably the worst on the course.
Opposite your suggestion, I reckon the way to make it better would be to make it longer and nearer the water. This would incentivize more risk-taking off the tee (almost no one went in the water) and require quality approach shots.


Good drives on hole 5 almost always have a fair line to the green. Drives that didn't weren't good drives. As has been mentioned by a few clear heads already, placement is a priority on this course and many gifted players failed to recognize this. This was evidenced by the many rollers, which offer zero advantage 99% of the time, thrown on 5. The ideal shot, playing for three, is simple, straightforward, controlled and within the skillset of most competitors.

Hole 13, likewise, has plenty of lines to the basket, given a decent drive. The bailout zone is useful, if you learn how to use it. Many were so distracted by its designation as a par 3 that they failed to accept 3 as a good score, and fell apart under aggressive pressure.

Holes like 16 exist to give players a chance to be smarter than the hole. If it's as stupid as you claim, that shouldn't have been difficult. The fairway is massive and no good drives were ob. The fact that one ob shot was closer than another ob shot is immaterial, they were both bad shots. Again, the fact that the hole was played so poorly is evidence of an unwillingness to play adaptive, intelligent disc golf.

Hole 17 is very difficult and the ob is problematic and probably completely unnecessary. Ob long of the pin only would add color to the already touchy approach, punish aimless blasts at the basket, and keep players from setting up in 13's fairway. This is the best compromise I can come up with.

 

[Steve West]