• 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)

Best Places to Live

Thanks for the great map -- I love data crunching and this is fun to see.

But, responding to the comments on factoring in subjective weather, distance, etc... -- of course, if you are going to do that, then traffic needs to become a factor. For me, the most frustrating thing about living in Northern VA/DC-area isn't the lack of courses -- I've got half a dozen awesome courses within an hour drive, assuming no traffic. It's the fact that on a weekday with local traffic, it takes 30 minutes to get to the closest 9-hole course after work, and any of the good 18 hole courses are a complete impossibility, because it would take 2-3 hours to get there.

And even if I could get off work early and get to a good 18-hole course, it might take 2 hours to get home at dusk based on traffic, so one round of golf could end up costing me 6 hours of time. At that point, I might as well take up real golf -- several real golf courses much closer and easier to access than the disc golf, and less time consuming (though not as much fun).

Even on weekends, it can be awful. Heading out of the city on a Saturday morning or back into the city on a Sunday evening can be just as bad, because of the interstate bottlenecks around D.C. Courses 50-miles south can be a waste of time on a summer saturday if you try to leave after 8 a.m. because traffic can be so backed up.

Admittedly, the DC-metropolitan area will never be on that list of top 10 places to live and play disc golf -- land values are just too high to ever expect a density of A-list courses -- but I do think in a perfect (though unattainable) formula, traffic patterns for cities would factor in. Because it's not about DISTANCE from a course as much as it is TIME, and those two factors are not in a fixed relationship.

For those reasons, I would actually give preference to more rural areas that have great concentrations of disc golf, because the accessibility of courses becomes higher. I'd vote the Allentown area of PA pretty high on that list for a lot of reasons -- lots of courses, the courses are very different from one another, and the travel times are minimal and traffic is hardly an issue.
 
Despite the snow and cold, crappy weather, people play in the Northeast all year long.

"Play" That kind of play only keeps you busy but it isn't productive or useful. We showed some guys from Canada around. They still had flagging tape adhered to their discs so that they could find them in the snow. Umm, sure playing in 3' of snow makes your hardier, but I'd prefer the practice potential of a 50 degree January day; when you can play your normal game.

Charlotte!
 
Don't worry, Charlotte will jump to the top with 4 courses being added in April.
 
One other factor to consider would be course and shot variety -- again, very difficult to calculate -- but being near a lot of courses that are similar isn't as good as being near a lot of courses that have very distinct shots and personalities that appeal to a lot of players and styles. Again, why I like Allentown, PA as an example -- courses ranging from awesome 9-holes (Unami) to friendly beginner courses to ridiculous tournament courses (Nockamixon) to more open bomber courses (Lehigh Valley), to well-rounded courses that you want to play daily (Jordan Creek), etc... one of the best varieties of any place I know of, all in close quarters.

I don't know the courses in Charlotte as well, but the ones I've played (and knowledge of the ones I haven't played) makes me think that Charlotte would hold up very well in terms of course variety).

Lots of places with courses I find they have similar personalities to one another because of the local terrain and because of the dominant influence of a prominent local course advocate/course-designer. And in some areas, the available geography makes courses likely to be similar to one another, or at least designed for a similar skill level.

I'd take a city with 5 great courses with very distinct personalities and skill levels over a city with 20 courses where few were exceptional.
 
Very, very cool map. Thanks, Steve.

Thank you for the compliment.

The weather is pretty subjective. What's too hot the Carolinas? Too cold in Minnesota? Answers different depending on where you are---I'd set the threshholds at 105F and 25F, but my recent Gopher State visitor seemed to feel differently. And how do you factor in precipitation? I'll be Tucson gets fewer washouts.

For the weather factors, I obtained proprietary data about disc golf activity from these two stores: www.clearwaterdiscgolfstore.com in Clearwater, FL and www.fairwayflyerz.com in Little Canada, MN. I then related these to Heating Degree Days and Cooling Degree Days for the two locations. So, it's "too hot for Florida", and "too cold for Minnesota".

Actually, there isn't a strict cut-off. The number of players diminishes proportionately as the temperature gets higher or lower than 72 degrees. Interestingly, each degree of extra heat keeps twice as many people indoors as each degree of cold.

I ignored precipitation, because that would have been too difficult. Besides, it seems that for any given place, either the percent of time it is actually raining is small, or it is raining all the time but people go out anyway.

On the other hand, the number of baskets is not very subjective.

You'd be surprised.

All baskets and courses aren't created equal. Not to mention the diminishing value as you reach large numbers in a given area.

I'd love to see someone with plenty of time---Steve? STeve?---compile a weighted map, based on course ratings and distances from a location. Yes, I know the course ratings aren't completely objective or reliable, but they're the best gauge of quality at hand. So a 4.0 course has a higher value than a 2.0 (probably more than double, at that), and a course 10 miles away a higher value than one 30 miles away, and see what comes of that. Those factors would be subjective, of course, but it would be interesting. To me, anyway.

That is what the map already is. I didn't use Rating exactly, but I did take into account the features of the course. I found that the variation in the average Rating of a course is almost entirely dependant on the number of holes, type of tee pads, etc.

Also, by using course features rather than rating, I can plug hypothetical courses in and see how popular they would be – without the need to guess at what the Rating would be.

The weighting I used for distance sets the value of a course 3 miles away at 97% of the value of a course next door, 10 miles at 77% 30 miles at 30%, and 100 miles at 5%

The value of 9 holes is 65% of the value of 18, and 27 holes is 128%.

These were all set to best fit the level of activity on DGCourseReview.

If you want more details, including how I chose the parameters to best fit the data, read "Predicting the Popularity of Disc Golf Courses" here http://stevewestdiscgolf.com/citygraphs.aspx
 
Steve, you always have fantastic information, thanks! Agreed, too bad there's not more in WY, but no demand always beats scenery.
 
In that case, I take back the "very, very cool map" part and replace it with "incredibly phenomenally cool". Though I'm not sure how well the "course features" relate to quality---I've been skeptical of attempts to boil quality down to numbers, i.e. PDGA, since the results don't seem to match which courses I or people I know most like---but it sure beats my assumption that you were going on "total baskets" alone.

Precipitation I was addressing as much to other posters as you. I'd look at number of days of rainfall, add in number of days of snow cover, to determine which days all or part of the day are encumbered by precipitation.
 
"Play" That kind of play only keeps you busy but it isn't productive or useful. We showed some guys from Canada around. They still had flagging tape adhered to their discs so that they could find them in the snow. Umm, sure playing in 3' of snow makes your hardier, but I'd prefer the practice potential of a 50 degree January day; when you can play your normal game.

Charlotte!

When the boots,ribbons, heavy cloths and snow are done,everything improves.It's almost like cheating when the tennis shoes go on.;)
 
t i m -

Good point about traffic. There is information about travel times, and ideally I would use it instead of just distance. It would recognize airports, lakes, bays and other things that one must drive around. But, I haven't found a free source. Since I would need millions of travel times, I don't plan to pay for the data anytime soon.

As for variety, even if we could quantify it, I'm not sure what the ideal level would be. It seems that a lot of similar courses that are just my style could be better than an eclectic mix of courses where only a fraction of them are something I would want to play.

Anyway, this stuff about computing the best place to live is just a by-product which makes for some lively discussion.

The main purpose of the formula is to locate new courses within a limited area. For that, I really don't need to include climate or the relative speed of local commutes.
 
Gotta love the eastern pa love. I've traveled a bunch of places and I keep coming home and realizing my region is phenomenal.
 
37XX Madison Ave, Kansas City, MO 64111 . Service Level = 115.8
Nearest course is Rosedale Park

If I ever moved to the KC area, this would so NOT be the neighborhood I'd want to live in.

:( :eek:
url


Give me a nice suburban house in Overland Park where its safe. Prairie Center and Shawnee Mission are close. The extra drive to Rosedale or Water Works, or even to the east suburbs will be worth not getting robbed or shot.
 
wondering if you can update this as some new courses have popped up in Eastern PA...also wondering if you can adjust for 3+ rated courses maybe?
 
wondering if you can update this as some new courses have popped up in Eastern PA...also wondering if you can adjust for 3+ rated courses maybe?

No plans to update it at this time. New courses have popped up everywhere, so the look of it doesn't change much. I do it in winter because the rate of new courses slows down, and I have more time. Also, there is no practical reason to compare cities. The formula was designed to find optimal locations for a new course within a target area. See Minneapolis.

As for including ratings, I'm not sure that would be an improvement. It already counts bigger (more holes) courses more than smaller courses, and that's a major factor in the rating of a course. Also, there are surprisingly many courses with no ratings, or so few as to be unreliable. Especially new courses. If I did include ratings, it would not be an all-or-nothing cutoff point. Surely that little 6-hole 1.5 rated course next door has SOME value.
 
Does anyone else feel like Steve is going A Beautiful Mind on us?
 

Latest posts

Top