Ahhh...gotcha
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)
Gotta think of this too...if 30 people sign up so they can review flyboy and find the process fun maybe they will start reviewing other courses, using the other features etc...
Next thread: Valkyrie...girl disc or world record monster driver?
Unless this changes:
"Absolutely no walk-ons. Contact owner for permission to play and directions."
it should not be a true 5. I think a course regularly accessible to the public with normal hours, whether pay for play or not, should be worth a quarter to half a disc, at least on the overall scale used here. As usual, the design and amenities get jammed together so you don't know if a 4.5 star course like FlyBoy (IMO) has a 5-star design and 4-star amenities or vice versa.
There are other things that keep this from a 5 level course even using the relativistic versus absolute scale we use here. No dual tees. The rubber is okay but concrete would make it feel like the design had been perfected and was more permanent.
It feels a little unsettling shooting around all of the private property of other residents there. And, this is personal preference not specifically related to these ratings, but I like courses that can be well groomed but in a more wild environment without homes or commercial areas in view. About half the course has that wild look and is awesome.
No other course requires you to move away from your lie due to occasional air traffic. Interesting diversion for rec play but not necessarily for tournament play. Tom Monroe and I had several design suggestions from our September visit which could improve the layout (some may already have been done since then).
I can understand why so many 5s have been awarded because it feels like that when you're there and playing. It's only on reflection afterwards that some of these elements need to be considered where maybe it doesn't get all the way there, at least yet.
Unless this changes:
"Absolutely no walk-ons. Contact owner for permission to play and directions."
it should not be a true 5. I think a course regularly accessible to the public with normal hours, whether pay for play or not, should be worth a quarter to half a disc, at least on the overall scale used here. As usual, the design and amenities get jammed together so you don't know if a 4.5 star course like FlyBoy (IMO) has a 5-star design and 4-star amenities or vice versa.
There are other things that keep this from a 5 level course even using the relativistic versus absolute scale we use here. No dual tees. The rubber is okay but concrete would make it feel like the design had been perfected and was more permanent.
It feels a little unsettling shooting around all of the private property of other residents there. And, this is personal preference not specifically related to these ratings, but I like courses that can be well groomed but in a more wild environment without homes or commercial areas in view. About half the course has that wild look and is awesome. I'm not sure there was a portolet at the far reaches of the course which could make it a little tougher with all the neighbors around.
No other course requires you to move away from your lie due to occasional air traffic. Interesting diversion for rec play but not necessarily for tournament play. Tom Monroe and I had several design suggestions from our September visit which could improve the layout (some may already have been done since then).
I can understand why so many 5s have been awarded because it feels like that when you're there and playing. It's only on reflection afterwards that some of these elements need to be considered where maybe it doesn't get all the way there, at least yet.
Does flyboy have a nice downhill bomber (or at least a touch shot down some extreme hill)? Does flyboy have some very unique terrain like washout ravines and ridges that offer sharp and drastic elevation changes that require shot placement or areas for risky pin placements? Does it have tight tunnel wooded shots?
If not, it's probably not gonna get a 5 from me if (when) I get to play it. BUT, that's because of my preferences and I'll make sure to describe why in detail during my review. The text is what will count.
To me, driving 1660' (or whatever) down a runway isn't like playing real disc golf. It's just like throwing at a driving range if you ask me. Even the long 1300' hole at highbridge feels like this, but the elevation off the tee makes it cool at first, and the trees near the pin offer some shot shaping. It's just my preference that long 1000'+ long, flat, and open holes without obstacles and then wide open greens are lame. Maybe others have the same opinions. Maybe not. It's cool.
To me, driving 1660' (or whatever) down a runway isn't like playing real disc golf. It's just like throwing at a driving range if you ask me. Even the long 1300' hole at highbridge feels like this, but the elevation off the tee makes it cool at first, and the trees near the pin offer some shot shaping. It's just my preference that long 1000'+ long, flat, and open holes without obstacles and then wide open greens are lame. Maybe others have the same opinions. Maybe not. It's cool.
Reminds me of Idlewild in I thought that 1000 foot open hole would be dull but then there were slihght undulations that were optimal landing zones and I was actually thinking it was one of the more interesting holes Ive played. Pictures and stats sometimes dont capture the thrill of playing a specific hole.
The lake shot is downhill, 16 is a big down hill, 10 is a big uphill, 4 is a big uphill, 11-12-13 are up and down.
Terrain- Fields, runways, woods, lake sides, streams, swampy areas, wooded paths.
Tunnels- Yes
Pin positions- on a fallen tree, on the sides of the lake, on an outcropping, in front of a stream etc..
There are 27 holes...I would go out on a limb and say you could throw every shot in your bag and every disc (if it truly has a purpose) at least once.
And BTW, I have no problems with the 4.5s just usually the reasoning behind them. I don't think the place deserves anything under 4.5 but again, not going to give you bad feedback if you did. One of Avery's cons was too many holes...c'mon dude...really?
Oh and don't forget the runway is a 95' affair with OB on either side that surprisingly is not easy to stay on so its not like you are throwing full steam without worries.
Does flyboy have a nice downhill bomber (or at least a touch shot down some extreme hill)? Does flyboy have some very unique terrain like washout ravines and ridges that offer sharp and drastic elevation changes that require shot placement or areas for risky pin placements? Does it have tight tunnel wooded shots?
If not, it's probably not gonna get a 5 from me if (when) I get to play it. BUT, that's because of my preferences and I'll make sure to describe why in detail during my review. The text is what will count.
To me, driving 1660' (or whatever) down a runway isn't like playing real disc golf. It's just like throwing at a driving range if you ask me. Even the long 1300' hole at highbridge feels like this, but the elevation off the tee makes it cool at first, and the trees near the pin offer some shot shaping. It's just my preference that long 1000'+ long, flat, and open holes without obstacles and then wide open greens are lame. Maybe others have the same opinions. Maybe not. It's cool.