What’s the criteria for retiring layouts? (Castle Hayne)

[KenanFlagler01]

I saw that one of my favorite courses, Castle Hayne, was RIP'd. I knew that some park development was going to force 2-4 holes to get pulled, but I didn't realize this would result in an RIP. Luckily, there's already a new course page up for a new layout, so I assume the track is open.

This got me thinking: what constitutes a big enough change to a course to deserve an RIP-Old Layout, and start a New Layout?

And secondly, I'd love to hear about the specifics at Castle Hayne. How many holes are different?

Thanks!

 

[davetherocketguy]

IMHO if the scores are going to change significantly for those holes then yes, RIP the old layout. Not for the sake of the scores but because that's an indication of how much the hole has changed. I am not aware of any standards for when a course needs to be RIP'ed. It's a good question for timg really as it is his database that is being affected. I would think changing 2-4 holes would not constitute entering a new layout.

 

[DavidSauls]

I don't know if you can draw a distinct line. But it seems to me that if the course experience is generally the same, it shouldn't be RIP'd; those old reviews still give a potential visitor an idea what to expect.

Stoney Hill has changed incrementally over the years, so that it's substantially different than the early reviews. We've just updated the hole information and kept going.

 

[scarpfish]

I'd suspect a lot of it has to do with what the person reporting the change says to Timg.

 

[dreadlock86]

I'd suspect a lot of it has to do with what the person reporting the change says to Timg.

definitely


when you go to update basic course info on the main course page this message appears at the top

If this course has been pulled or closed, please do not update this page. Contact us to retire the course.
If this course has undergone a major redesign, please do not update this page. Contact us to retire this page and then we will create another page for the new layout.

what exactly does "major redesign" mean? that's not really quantified and that's where what scarpy said comes into play.



personally, i feel like the RIP option is overused when relatively little has changed on a course. especially redesigns where a lot of fairly obvious looking changes have occurred but those changes actually don't affect play and scoring all that much. i think at least 1/3 of the holes should have significant changes to merit a new page.

that said, i understand (and now that i do, i appreciate more) that these things have a big effect on reviews and the scorebook feature of the site and it seems Tim likes to operate in favor of keeping the scorebook more accurate.

but that said again, if that's the case why can't we select tee options per hole instead of once for just the entire layout in the scorebook?



i also think a lot of the less understood features of the course pages and especially the hole info page could be used more effectively. you can list up to 4 tees and up to 3 basket locations per hole. if the person rotating baskets on the course is DGCR savvy the scorecard can be really accurate all the time on most courses (most courses aren't Morley where there are a dozen pin placements per hole).

 

[timg]

In this particular case, the club asked to retire the old page and make a new one. The front 9 has like 7 new holes, something like that, and a new flow. Usually I just ask how many holes are different when someone contacts me. If they just redid like 2 holes, it's not that big of a deal but if it's 50% or more new, I'll consider retiring the old layout.

I do have a redesign option available for courses that don't have a lot of rounds recorded as well. I have some ideas regarding preserving stats for courses that do have a lot of rounds and see a change like this which could avoid the retiring thing entirely but it's a ton of work and I've been procrastinating on it just because it's going to be a bear to get it done.

As far as a course not changing much and being RIP'd, I just go by what the person I'm emailing with tells me. I have no way of knowing otherwise. I do try to ask questions so I get a better understanding, compare maps, etc. but more often than not a map isn't ready so I just have to go by what my contact says.

 

[DiscGolfCraig]

As Tim said, it's heavily reliant on locals. Case in point, Stumpy Creek in Mooresville, NC (just north of Charlotte) was never retired when it went from 9 to 18 holes. No one knew, or thought to, initiate it at the time. As a result, there are some low ratings from the 9 hole layout that bring down its overall rating.

 

[takman]

And secondly, I'd love to hear about the specifics at Castle Hayne. How many holes are different?

Thanks!

Regarding Castle Hayne, see the attached map. Due to the new road and recent decisions we lost original Holes 1 and 5. Original Hole 4 was cut in half but is still playable. There are 3 new holes across the ditch that are now Holes 5,6,7. Ten playable holes on the front 9. Back nine has not changed.

 

[timg]

I never noticed Castle Grayskull on that map, I like it

 

[BrotherDave]

Regarding Castle Hayne, see the attached map. Due to the new road and recent decisions we lost original Holes 1 and 5. Original Hole 4 was cut in half but is still playable. There are 3 new holes across the ditch that are now Holes 5,6,7. Ten playable holes on the front 9. Back nine has not changed.

Hole 1 is permanently gone? Bummer. I had a feeling since the sign board got moved to hole 2 and the tee taken out.

Hole 1 (old hole 3) plays basically the same. The green looks different b/c the road opened up the background so it messes with your depth perception a little bit. Exposed the green to wind more too.

Hole 2 (old hole 4) is just a straight to fade righty hole now, putter or mid at most. Then a slightly awkward walk to hole 3 which used to be hole 6.

Hole 4 (OG 7) is basically the same but the road punched an opening behind the green. They put in a bridge for the road so if you shoot for the long pin and go too far left and long you can land in the creek.

Hole 5 (new) is a tricky uphill par 3, kind of a flex line. Bogey town real quick if you carom off the fairway.

Hole 6 (new) is a good, true par 4 dogleg left. You gotta get some good D off the tee to reach the landing zone where you can get a good angle to hook around the final bend. Again, the rough is hard to scramble out of.

Hole 7 (new) is a longish par 3. It's slightly downhill but it's just tight and long enough to make going for it a bit high risk/high reward. If you can frozen rope a hard FH you'll lick your chops. The green is a little quick.

The new holes are really good but I'll miss the OG layout. Hole 5 and its bunker tee, the immensely rewarding if you hit it flex fairway of hole 4, the ace-able hole 1 with its inevitable line of frat boys holding a 6er of Shock Top. Sigh.

 

[wolfmandragon]

This was on my bucket lists of travel courses. Is it still bucket list worthy?