course design

[Marmoset]

I don't think I have seen a thread about course design and the search function seconded me.
So here it is.

I am in the thick of building a new course and I think I have some really solid holes. I know that some could be better because they were made purely as "connector holes" to fluidly bridge the long gap between the basket of one strongly designed hole to the tee of another strongly designed hole.

My question is this:
In the courses that have little to no elevation or trees, how are your holes made difficult? I have been playing with wind direction, strict OB lines, man-made obstacles (similar to hole 7's bamboo fence @ Winthrop), etc.

After looking back at all the courses and holes that I have played I realize that the most challenging and enjoyable holes are the 2 shot holes that require a short to medium length throw that HAS to land in a desired landing zone (LZ). Missing the LZ by a little makes your second shot more difficult, missing the LZ by a lot makes it really tough. Then your next shot if it is well thrown should give you a putt. Each of the throws aren't long but they require great control.

Hole 4 at Winthrop is an exceptionally well designed hole that illustrates this design philosphy↑↑↑. The LZ is only 290' away but the obvious line to it is protected by a low hanging tree that is 200' out. Midranges like to get too high and hit the tree (at least mine did both times I played it) but a driver that would stay lower under the branches would be much more likely to overshoot the LZ. Great, great hole design.

I want to figure out how to design holes like this when there are no obstacles provided by the natural environment.

 

[wdb4th1]

Mandos are a lot of fun to mess with. I do lean to using OB more though. One of the last courses I did has a 180' hole on it. A few trees line the right OB side of the farway and trees pepper the left. The best line is over a walking path (not used often) and let the disc fade in. But, overshoot my more than 20' OB, off the path to the right OB, too far left (there is a building here) OB. It isn't tough but I have seen a few people throw OB on their first 2 shots. Gets pretty tough.

 

[ryankilgore]

I'm not sure if I can give a great answer to your specific question, but one thing I've noticed about good holes is that they provide more than one option. E.g., you can take this route, or this LZ, which will reward you if you succeed, but punish you hard if you fail. Or you can take this other route/LZ, which is easier to achieve, but doesn't reward you as greatly. I guess my suggestion is simply to keep multiple options open and balance the risk/reward factor for good hole design.

 

[Aubin1]

I had the same problem with my local course; probably not what you want to hear, but I solved it by moving the whole thing to a different location.

If you're stuck where you are... are you allowed to plant anything? some fast growing bushes and trees will change the course, over a few years anyway.

Can you possibly truck in some dirt to create mounds for elevated tees or pins? A basket on a hill could add a half stroke to the hole's scoring average. Ask around the town's maintenance department, they probably have a dumping ground for soil and debris to use.

Oh and if you haven't already, check out http://www.houckdesign.com/.

 

[Marmoset]

I built an 18 holer around my office building complex (underground-league urban disc golf is fun).
The problem is that the holes are fairly short so I have included a ton of "gimmicks" like super tight OB, island rules, bunCRs, mandos, crowded/restricted tees, penalty rules for hitting buildings or cars, etc.

I was showing some of my friends the course for their first time and at one point they came up to the tee, saw the basket and said, "so what's the catch here?"

Is it considered bad form to have too gimmicky of a course? Is it cheating if you have to resort to gimmicks to make a hole more difficult? How many easy-breather holes should you pepper in to the mix to give players a hole to recuperate?

My main goal is to create a solid course that is short but demandingly tough. Tough but not overbearingly tough for tough's sake.

 

[AciDBatH666]

You should read John Houck's article on hole design. Basically it says you should build the hole backwards. Find a good space for a basket, and work backwards to find where a good angle would come from to approach the basket. And then work from that area to see where to work in the drive for that approach's landing.

http://www.houckdesign.com/dumbholes.html

Check his page. He's got tons of insight on design with lots of things to consider. Even if you don't plan on using it it's a great read to sort of analyze how you may want to change up your own local courses.

 

[RAWB]

we had a similar problem with a course that our club just put in. it's built on a river bottom so it's super flat, but we had tons of trees and vegetation to work with. so we just made up creative lines and we also have a hanging basket for "elevation".

 

[Mason65]

COURSE DESIGN??? What do ya think this is, DGCR? :wink:

 

[JHern]

One of our local courses has a problem that the big oaks that populate the park are dying off, and falling over. Over time, this will lead to a dramatic decline in quality of the course...and there is only about 10 ft of elevation change in the course. One thing I noticed is that, after a good rain, some of the holes develop ponds around the basket, which increases the challenge quite a lot. This made me think about maybe getting out a digger from the city and building some more permanent ponds around holes.

For example, on the 1st hole (330 ft distance), you have 2 lines to choose from: a RHBH hyzer flip line through/under the coiling branches of a big oak about 60 ft from the tee (an arch, and about 10 ft diameter), or a RHBH anhyzer line that has to clear two smaller trees but is relatively open. The first line is tough to hit just right, and you risk hitting a branch and falling way short. The second line is too easy when the course is dry, until the rain comes and all of a sudden a large-ish pond forms in front of and left of the basket...which then juts out on a sort of peninsula. This pond changes everything: the first line is still available, but for the second line you have to clear the pond as well as get the proper amount of left->right play in the throw to stay dry.

So, if you have little else to work with...see if you can dig some ditches/ponds in your course. Make some tight landing areas, etc..

 

[SkaBob]

There's a converted ball golf course here that's just used for disc golf now. The challenge is made by placing baskets in ways that you HAVE to place your shot well, or you're taking another shot to get around what few trees interfere with play.

 

[what'shisname]

One of our local courses has a problem that the big oaks that populate the park are dying off, and falling over. Over time, this will lead to a dramatic decline in quality of the course...and there is only about 10 ft of elevation change in the course. One thing I noticed is that, after a good rain, some of the holes develop ponds around the basket, which increases the challenge quite a lot. This made me think about maybe getting out a digger from the city and building some more permanent ponds around holes.

For example, on the 1st hole (330 ft distance), you have 2 lines to choose from: a RHBH hyzer flip line through/under the coiling branches of a big oak about 60 ft from the tee (an arch, and about 10 ft diameter), or a RHBH anhyzer line that has to clear two smaller trees but is relatively open. The first line is tough to hit just right, and you risk hitting a branch and falling way short. The second line is too easy when the course is dry, until the rain comes and all of a sudden a large-ish pond forms in front of and left of the basket...which then juts out on a sort of peninsula. This pond changes everything: the first line is still available, but for the second line you have to clear the pond as well as get the proper amount of left->right play in the throw to stay dry.

So, if you have little else to work with...see if you can dig some ditches/ponds in your course. Make some tight landing areas, etc..

Our local course has gone through some pretty big changes over the last few years because of dying poplar trees. It's a private course and 2 years ago they decided to flag and cut all affected trees which were a huge majority. This really changed up a few holes making them a lot easier. The park had a plan in place to replace every tree that they took down though and consulted with the disc golf community as to where to plant them, etc. They ended up planting more than they took out and used some decent sized trees to do it with which has definitely improved the course. It will only get better too as the trees grow.

 

[JHern]

One of our local courses has a problem that the big oaks that populate the park are dying off, and falling over. Over time, this will lead to a dramatic decline in quality of the course...and there is only about 10 ft of elevation change in the course. One thing I noticed is that, after a good rain, some of the holes develop ponds around the basket, which increases the challenge quite a lot. This made me think about maybe getting out a digger from the city and building some more permanent ponds around holes.

For example, on the 1st hole (330 ft distance), you have 2 lines to choose from: a RHBH hyzer flip line through/under the coiling branches of a big oak about 60 ft from the tee (an arch, and about 10 ft diameter), or a RHBH anhyzer line that has to clear two smaller trees but is relatively open. The first line is tough to hit just right, and you risk hitting a branch and falling way short. The second line is too easy when the course is dry, until the rain comes and all of a sudden a large-ish pond forms in front of and left of the basket...which then juts out on a sort of peninsula. This pond changes everything: the first line is still available, but for the second line you have to clear the pond as well as get the proper amount of left->right play in the throw to stay dry.

So, if you have little else to work with...see if you can dig some ditches/ponds in your course. Make some tight landing areas, etc..

Our local course has gone through some pretty big changes over the last few years because of dying poplar trees. It's a private course and 2 years ago they decided to flag and cut all affected trees which were a huge majority. This really changed up a few holes making them a lot easier. The park had a plan in place to replace every tree that they took down though and consulted with the disc golf community as to where to plant them, etc. They ended up planting more than they took out and used some decent sized trees to do it with which has definitely improved the course. It will only get better too as the trees grow.

That sounds ideal, and of course illustrates the benefit of having a course on private land. In Sacramento I think every little tree planted, every pile of dirt moved, every branch trimmed, etc., needs to go through review by several sub-committees, sent out for prepared environmental impact statements, approved by the full city council and mayor's office, etc., etc..

 

[nohr]

distance....

I would think adding a couple hundred feet to every hole would make it play harder.

 

[Gator]

distance....

I would think adding a couple hundred feet to every hole would make it play harder.

I've played courses that are long just to be long and while par might be 67 its still a weak course. Shear distance doesn't add quality to a course.

 

[nohr]

Agreed but it does make it more difficult.

 

[Gator]

I have to disagree that it universally makes a course more difficult. It will seperate the players with big arms from those without. Most importantly difficulty doesn't equal enjoyment in courses, if it did you would have more courses in the woods without clear fairways. I believe people want something challenging, but it can't be challenging at the price of fairness.

 

[Marmoset]

Shear distance doesn't add quality to a course.

100% agreed.

 

[DiscGolfTeeSigns.com]

my advice is to pull your answers from something you've done more problem-solving with -- the graphic design / art stuff. you can make correlations and find a lot of insight there. for instance, the gimmicks on your urban course... think of those as a twirl filter, the kind of rookie move that viewers fall over themselves for, but that you know has little merit (distance = fisheye .. but but it's fisheye man). also think of building mass from the inside out and not laboring on the outlines and edges. also focus on the linear experience of the course, where one killer hole followed by a dud is worse than a consistent sequence of challenges. and remember that nobody will play your early drafts, they will experience only your final presentation.

so take your example of an area that bridges a few really solid holes. for the sake of balance, are there any concessions/sacrifices you can afford with the good ones that would benefit the weaker ones? you can evaluate their individual component qualities, and see if you can design another hole there that uses some of the same features, but works better within the whole.

this might be an over-simplification, but it sounds like part of the design has become precious, while other parts are completely without a satisfying solution, with the result being that you're composing filler for filler's sake. as you know in design it's a valuable trait to be able to throw away precious elements and rebuild for a better composition. that might mean keeping a green or LZ, or changing that area entirely. or do like John does, make a long walk to the next (awesome) hole. as an exercise, go out and design for that area of the course with the assumption that the solid holes are no more, it's back to a blank slate, and keep an eye out for answers that could not have existed within the framework of those awesome holes. (i think the article "from 1,000 holes to one" talks about that ... read ALL those articles, they're good)

i think the reason there are so few really top-notch course designers is that people don't apply preexisting design theory. my first time playing DG was on a John course and i could instantly read his design like a book. it's a whole lot of linear balance and contrast, from hole to hole and from line to line. if you have an eye for design you'll see the crafting immediately, as sublime as it is -- and that kind of gestural, non-labored feel is part of the intangible 'wow' factor. imo you can apply a ton of visual design constructs as well as musical and literary, whereas course design theory is still a gelatinous mythology, sort of floating on its own, away from established theories of design and composition.

go to some art/music theory resources.. you'll find gold that they never intended. and for more literal interpretation, read up on ball golf design.

 

[JHern]

distance....

I would think adding a couple hundred feet to every hole would make it play harder.

I've played courses that are long just to be long and while par might be 67 its still a weak course. Shear distance doesn't add quality to a course.

Indeed.

I played a course near St Louis MO that was like this. Just totally ridiculous length on almost every hole, and not much else going on besides. Some big trees but they were not used wisely.

Anyways, I think you have to give most players a chance to birdie a few holes on the course in order for it to be considered a fun course for most players.

 

[Pwingles]

COURSE DESIGN??? What do ya think this is, DGCR? :wink:

well played, sprinkle in a little random racism and some really dumb requests and you have yourself a generic DGCR topic in the course design thread there