Ask John Houck about Course Design & Development

[johnrhouck]

In your most recent article in Disc Golfer, you mentioned places where a throw off the fairway leaves no room for a recovery shot, but forces the player to pitch out to the fairway. I've seen criticisms of the pitch out in other forums as well.

Admittedly, the pitch-out throw isn't usually much of a golf throw. Unless you throw as badly as I do and sometimes just reaching the fairway is a challenge. But it seems to me that these areas play much like O.B.---a serious hazard that you seriously want to avoid because of the extra stroke it will cost you. Other than the fact that it's harder to fly over, how much different is a fairway lined with dense rough that will require a pitchout from a fairway lined with O.B.?

That's a very important question, David.

As you mention, the flyover aspect can be critical. Imagine for example, that the USDGC course had tall trees everywhere instead of yellow rope -- it would play very differently. And you're right about the psychology of wanting to avoid a certain area.

We actually started to discuss this topic a little earlier in this thread. If you go back to October, mubhcaeb78 asked about his course, where going into the thick stuff can require multiple shots just to get back to the fairway. In that case, throwing into the rough can actually be worse than going OB -- an overly severe price to pay, in my opinion.

Probably the biggest difference between pitching out and OB, other than having to execute the pitch itself, is where your next lie is. Imagine, for example, that your drive heads into the woods short of a dogleg. In an OB situation, you might take a lie in the fairway and have to pitch up to the dogleg. Now you're lying three.

If there's no OB, you might be able to pitch "forward" a little and get around the corner. Now you're closer to the pin and lying 2. In that case, being in the woods costs substantially less than OB would have.

What I'm lobbying for in my article, for those you haven't read it, is a type of fairway that's not as black and white as "in the woods" or OB. Instead, there are a range of rewards and punishments, and players who just miss the fairway, instead of being completely screwed, have a chance to make a real recovery shot, not just a pitch out.

The fairway feature I describe in the article is called a PITTSBORO, which stands for Place Improving The Throwing Strategy By Offering Recovery Opportunities. Such features are not generally easy to create, but they can really enhance the playing experience, and I'm hoping that the state of the art in course design will now head that way.

 

[DavidSauls]

Thanks. It was a good article. Generally speaking, the chance to make recovery shots, or screw them up, is more fun. I like them, in the same way I like par-4s & par-5s, because unlike tee shots and putts, each time you face one you're trying to figure out a unique shot you haven't thrown before.

My feeling is that the pitch-out rough is maligned a bit too much. When it borders a reasonable-width fairway, or especially when it runs along one side of the fairway, I'm okay with it.

I guess the worst is woods of just the right density that you may have a recovery shot, or may have to pitch out to the fairway, depending on the random luck of where the disc stopped.

 

[sloppydisc]

It works!

That's a very important question, David.

As you mention, the flyover aspect can be critical. Imagine for example, that the USDGC course had tall trees everywhere instead of yellow rope -- it would play very differently. And you're right about the psychology of wanting to avoid a certain area.

We actually started to discuss this topic a little earlier in this thread. If you go back to October, mubhcaeb78 asked about his course, where going into the thick stuff can require multiple shots just to get back to the fairway. In that case, throwing into the rough can actually be worse than going OB -- an overly severe price to pay, in my opinion.

Probably the biggest difference between pitching out and OB, other than having to execute the pitch itself, is where your next lie is. Imagine, for example, that your drive heads into the woods short of a dogleg. In an OB situation, you might take a lie in the fairway and have to pitch up to the dogleg. Now you're lying three.

If there's no OB, you might be able to pitch "forward" a little and get around the corner. Now you're closer to the pin and lying 2. In that case, being in the woods costs substantially less than OB would have.

What I'm lobbying for in my article, for those you haven't read it, is a type of fairway that's not as black and white as "in the woods" or OB. Instead, there are a range of rewards and punishments, and players who just miss the fairway, instead of being completely screwed, have a chance to make a real recovery shot, not just a pitch out.

The fairway feature I describe in the article is called a PITTSBORO, which stands for Place Improving The Throwing Strategy By Offering Recovery Opportunities. Such features are not generally easy to create, but they can really enhance the playing experience, and I'm hoping that the state of the art in course design will now head that way.

When I played the new and unfinished #1 at Rock Ridge my buddy ended up in one of the 'sandtraps' on the right. He was able to hit a tight line, and make a nice approach to the basket. If he was buried in the woods, he would never had made that shot. My only concern is the durability of that sand trap or others that aren't created with large trees. Some disc golfers may not tree saplings or medium sized trees nicely. We'll see.

 

[Stan McDaniel]

The way I play ball golf often requires a pitch out. Sometimes I am left with shot making opportunities but the pitch out is usually the only sane option. So, I have always had this comparison in my mind while designing. I do admit that I had never thought about the recovery route concept till I walked Pittsboro with John and listened to his philosophy and saw what he was trying to achieve. I wholeheartedly endorse John's idea of recovery routes. Even with recovery routes there will still be pitchouts. The thrower will still have to keep the shot pretty close to the fairway to have a chance to use the recovery routes. The recovery route is kind of like being in the furst cut of rough where you still have a chance to strike the ball and also havea reasonable path to the green. If your throw goes a bit too far to use the recovery route you will likely be faced with some form of a pitchout. (sometimes called a thumber)

The only downside that I see is the amount of extra work required to create these. Most of the wooded courses we have built here in Charlotte take at least 1500 manhours of volunteer labor. I may be wrong, but I would imagine that building the recovery routes takes nearly 30% to 50% extra work on a hole for clearing and dragging. This would take the manhours required to build a wooded course from 1500 to somewhere from 1900 to 2300 manhours. That is just a guess.

 

[johnrhouck]

When I played the new and unfinished #1 at Rock Ridge my buddy ended up in one of the 'sandtraps' on the right. He was able to hit a tight line, and make a nice approach to the basket.

Now that is excellent news. At least we know it will have worked once. Thanks, Mark.

 

[johnrhouck]

The way I play ball golf often requires a pitch out. Sometimes I am left with shot making opportunities but the pitch out is usually the only sane option. So, I have always had this comparison in my mind while designing.

Now that's interesting. Since the way I play golf usually involves dropping a new ball in the fairway, I don't get those same opportunities.

I do admit that I had never thought about the recovery route concept till I walked Pittsboro with John and listened to his philosophy and saw what he was trying to achieve. I wholeheartedly endorse John's idea of recovery routes.

Thanks, Stan.

Even with recovery routes there will still be pitchouts. The thrower will still have to keep the shot pretty close to the fairway to have a chance to use the recovery routes.

Of course you're right. We can't save everyone. And we don't want to.

The recovery route is kind of like being in the furst cut of rough where you still have a chance to strike the ball and also havea reasonable path to the green. If your throw goes a bit too far to use the recovery route you will likely be faced with some form of a pitchout. (sometimes called a thumber)

Exactly.

The only downside that I see is the amount of extra work required to create these. Most of the wooded courses we have built here in Charlotte take at least 1500 manhours of volunteer labor. I may be wrong, but I would imagine that building the recovery routes takes nearly 30% to 50% extra work on a hole for clearing and dragging. This would take the manhours required to build a wooded course from 1500 to somewhere from 1900 to 2300 manhours. That is just a guess.

You're absolutely right about these features requiring extra work. In this case, I want to again recognize the amazing volunteers we've had giving love to this course. And it starts with the three main guys: Jeff Baldwin, Noah Becker, and Mr. Sloppy himself.

But I think your math may be off a bit. Hole #1, which is the one in the article, is about 600' long and about 20' wide, to use rough numbers. The landing area is about 100' long and probably averages about 35' wide. So that's (600 x 20) plus (100 x 15 extra) = 12,000 +1,500, or 13,500 square feet worth of clearing. The PITTSBOROS on either side of the landing area add about 100' x 10' each. So that's 2,000 extra square feet of clearing, or about an extra 15% worth of work. The third PITTSBORO on that hole involves selective clearing of a percentage of that area, so maybe that adds another 5%. So that's maybe an extra 20% on that hole, and we don't have them on every hole. Overall, I'd guess it's an extra 10-15% total over the entire course. We'll see if the players (and the volunteers) think it was worth it.

To be honest with you, I didn't expect these guys to tackle that last area until after everything else was done, but apparently they just couldn't stop themselves. As I said, they're amazing.

My estimates could be off, also. Maybe Mr. Sloppy can confirm or correct.

 

[Mando]

Played WR Jackson again this week, which is a great example of recovery route design. I can't imagine a course of that length being enjoyable without them. As far as installing these, I think they should be a second installation phase of any moderate to long wooded course, but not necessarily on every hole.
For example, shortest hole at Sugaree is 189 feet, but if you get in the rhodos below the hole, you can easily score a 5. It's the only hole that recovery routes have not been added and believe me, the course plays alot differently since they were installed.

 

[Stan McDaniel]

You may well be right. I am just relying on my unreliable memory. When working in the woods I tend to underestimate the amount of clearing on wooded holes. It always ends up being more labor intensive than it looks. It still seems that 10-15% would be on the low side, but, I guess my point was that significant extra work would be involved,,,,and worth it for the final product.

 

[Stan McDaniel]

Played WR Jackson again this week, which is a great example of recovery route design. I can't imagine a course of that length being enjoyable without them. As far as installing these, I think they should be a second installation phase of any moderate to long wooded course, but not necessarily on every hole.
For example, shortest hole at Sugaree is 189 feet, but if you get in the rhodos below the hole, you can easily score a 5. It's the only hole that recovery routes have not been added and believe me, the course plays alot differently since they were installed.

I remember WRJ as a different type of woods. It consists mainly of large pine trees (mostly). There are lots of recovery routes between the large trees whereas in most wooded areas there are tons of smaller trees filling the gaps between the large trees.

 

[Mando]

I remember WRJ as a different type of woods. It consists mainly of large pine trees (mostly). There are lots of recovery routes between the large trees whereas in most wooded areas there are tons of smaller trees filling the gaps between the large trees.

Yea, you are right. If it was previously managed for pine production, the understory would have been thinned out in a selective harvest and/or periodically prescribed burned. In any case, I really like the current spacing of the trees.

 

[johnrhouck]

I remember WRJ as a different type of woods. It consists mainly of large pine trees (mostly). There are lots of recovery routes between the large trees whereas in most wooded areas there are tons of smaller trees filling the gaps between the large trees.

You're absolutely right again, Stan. Very different type of woods. But we did "augment" some of those natural gaps by taking a few extra trees to create the kind of feature we're talking about now. That was my first major attempt to create those routes.

In fact, I think we were in Augusta when I drew my first concept for a disc golf "sandtrap in the woods" on a napkin. I was going to throw it out, but I think Chuck wanted to save it, if I remember right. I doubt he still has it today.

 

[johnrhouck]

When working in the woods I tend to underestimate the amount of clearing on wooded holes. It always ends up being more labor intensive than it looks.

I hear that. As far as I've been able to tell, pretty much EVERYTHING takes longer than I expect it to.

And other people's kids are always 5-10 years older than I think they are.

And things that I think happened 5-10 years ago actually happened 15-20 years ago.

Where does it all go?

 

[Stan McDaniel]

There are courses here that I would love to do some recovery routes on some of the holes. I just got cortisone in my right shoulder and my left foot yesterday. My left elbow is swollen from throwing left handed. I won't be the person to impliment these enhancements. Charlotte will have to rely on some youthful maniac who has yet to appear. But, if I ever get a chance to design again, RR will be in my playbook.

 

[BraveThrower43]

There are courses here that I would love to do some recovery routes on some of the holes. I just got cortisone in my right shoulder and my left foot yesterday. My left elbow is swollen from throwing left handed. I won't be the person to impliment these enhancements. Charlotte will have to rely on some youthful maniac who has yet to appear. But, if I ever get a chance to design again, RR will be in my playbook.

pour some Icehouse on it and get back to work.

 

[Cgkdisc]

I probably have the napkin sandtrap sketch around here somewhere. I remember it being a hook-shaped pocket of trees along the left fairway. If you landed in it, you had to punch thru small gaps (2') between small trees like coming out of jail, sort of a more liberal spacing of the bamboo on hole 7 at Winthrop.

 

[DavidSauls]

Wow. I left the room and it became an All-Star-Course-Designers forum. Reminds me of stories I've heard about parties I've left.

 

[sloppydisc]

Mando needs to put some sand trap recovery routes in those rhodo's! I have been in his rhodo jails many times. :wall:

 

[_MTL_]

There are courses here that I would love to do some recovery routes on some of the holes.

I would love to hear you expand on this and even reference a hole or two you think it would be good idea to do it on.

On the surface, I don't like this idea b/c of the luck factor of throwing a poor shot but having the good luck to be able to have an escape option from there.

To me, I don't think that you should ever have an easy shot from a place you aren't intending to throw to.

 

[sloppydisc]

The recovery shot isn't necessarily easy. It can be a tight, risky shot that can result in further pain if not executed properly. But it gives a skilled player a chance to make a great recovery shot. Think of the great save from a ball golf bunker where the player chips out and lands right near the cup. What is more entertaining? The great chip out and success, or a player tossing his/her disc 10' out of the woods back onto the fairway? Are we looking for fun and entertainment, or all punishment, all the time?

I could not have executed the shot my buddy made. He is an accurate FH player, and that helped him. With my poor FH, and mediocre skills at BH the recovery shot would probably have had a very slim chance at success for me. But it opens up a little more thought and strategy where you can fit one in.

I think #2 at Leigh Farm could use one, but that's a whole additional discussion!

 

[Cgkdisc]

"Sand trap" recovery areas should be located just next to the fairway so if you land in it, you had a slightly worse than great shot but not a real shank. Ideally, you wouldn't want a recovery area located way off line so you have a scenario where you're hosed if somewhat offline but get a big break if you're really off line. That's one of the criticisms Scott Stokely made about the Swope course in KC. On several holes, if you're slightly off line, you kick off a big tree. If you're more off line, you might rip down a parallel fairway and even come back into the one you are playing. The idea when possible is to increase the penalty the more off line a player throws similar to the first cut rough then higher rough as you're more off line on a ball golf fairway.