Ask John Houck about Course Design & Development

[Lazerface]

John, I have been lucky enough to play Harmony Bends in Columbia twice now. It is the greatest course I have every played. THANK YOU

I just checked out some stuff on the Columbia parks website and found these "course specific rules". I can't imagine these are in effect at any tournaments or in local leagues. Seems more like a liability disclaimer or something to keep people from throwing from dangerous lies. More interested in the "casual relief" and "drop zones" than anything. Did you really design the course with these rules in mind? Although I did find 18s landing zone to be a bit random, so I like this "Strawn" zone. Pretty hilarious.

Disc Golf Rules Specific to Harmony Bends
Hole #3:
The area beyond the stone wall is Out-of-Bounds (OB); play from the drop zone with one throw penalty. There is also OB along the right side of the fairway; normal OB rules apply.

Hole #5:
This hole has four elevated landing areas, and each one has a drop zone to provide a good safe run-up. If your shot comes to rest within the drop zone, play it where it lies. If your shot comes to rest outside the drop zone, you must move to the nearest lie on the edge of the drop zone, no penalty.

The top outer edges of the stone wall define the landing area. If your shot comes to rest next to a landing area, you may take up to 1 meter relief, perpendicular to the stone wall, no penalty.

The stone stairs running up the hill are considered part of the landing areas. If your shot comes to rest on the stairs, take the nearest lie on the nearest drop zone, no penalty.

Hole #8
Any shot coming to rest below the log wall within the designated casual area must take relief on the line of play with no penalty, even if the lie is moved more than 5 meters.

Hole #9
The stone wall by the basket is considered casual. Any shot coming to rest completely on the wall must take relief on the line of play, no penalty.

Hole #18
Across the creek is Out-of-Bounds up until about 180' from the basket. Out-of-Bounds/In-Bounds line is marked.

If you land in the marked area just short of the first creek bend (the "STRAWN,"), you may take one meter relief on either side, perpendicular, with no penalty. The STRAWN (Solution To Reduce Arbitrariness When Necessary) is there to help players who, through no fault of their own, get a randomly bad lie behind the big sycamore tree.

Hole #3:
The area beyond the stone wall is Out-of-Bounds (OB); play from the drop zone with one throw penalty. There is also OB along the right side of the fairway; normal OB rules apply.

Hole #5:
This hole has four elevated landing areas, and each one has a drop zone to provide a good safe run-up. If your shot comes to rest within the drop zone, play it where it lies. If your shot comes to rest outside the drop zone, you must move to the nearest lie on the edge of the drop zone, no penalty.

The top outer edges of the stone wall define the landing area. If your shot comes to rest next to a landing area, you may take up to 1 meter relief, perpendicular to the stone wall, no penalty.

The stone stairs running up the hill are considered part of the landing areas. If your shot comes to rest on the stairs, take the nearest lie on the nearest drop zone, no penalty.

Hole #8
Any shot coming to rest below the log wall within the designated casual area must take relief on the line of play with no penalty, even if the lie is moved more than 5 meters.

Hole #9
The stone wall by the basket is considered casual. Any shot coming to rest completely on the wall must take relief on the line of play, no penalty.

Hole #18
Across the creek is Out-of-Bounds up until about 180' from the basket. Out-of-Bounds/In-Bounds line is marked.

If you land in the marked area just short of the first creek bend (the "STRAWN,"), you may take one meter relief on either side, perpendicular, with no penalty. The STRAWN (Solution To Reduce Arbitrariness When Necessary) is there to help players who, through no fault of their own, get a randomly bad lie behind the big sycamore tree

 

[Cgkdisc]

Planning to check this out Monday morning.

 

[sidewinder22]

Nice article on Tweeners!

 

[spinninglens]

ADA Bumpy Pavers for Tees?

ADA Bumpy Pavers for Tee Pads?

https://hw.menardc.com/main/items/media/MWBLK001/ProductLarge/1793043.jpg

Considering trying it some tee pads.

https://www.dgcoursereview.com/course.php?id=9595

Thanks.
Steve

 

[davetherocketguy]

ADA Bumpy Pavers for Tee Pads?

https://hw.menardc.com/main/items/media/MWBLK001/ProductLarge/1793043.jpg

NO

I've never seen those used for a tee pad thankfully and I believe most dg'ers will hate how they feel underfoot. If you really want to try it, I'd do a test on ONE tee pad before going through the time/expense of the entire course.

 

[PoorPutter]

I'm not familiar with John's Flat Creek course near Austin, but this line in a review of it almost made me cry:
"
As far as water in play, the upper pond was mostly a dried out mudhole the day I played and the creek was essentially dry as well. However the lower pond (Hole 18) was full.
"

 

[Billipo]

Pyma 17 getting additional pin

John,

Have a question. On an existing course (Pymatuning SP Regarding Hole #17 Par 3), there is a slight hyzer shot for each of the three tees red (180 ft), white (310ft) , blue (340 ft). If you go for the pin and do not righty slight hyzer you risk being blocked by a stand of trees virtually unpassable. Too the left there is water. I have a picture attached.

I have been allowed to add a pin with a water carry which I will be utilizing for the blue only. I still want to retain a par 3. The added distance is 185 ft pin to pin.


My question is ... where to place the blue tee?

Current location is 340 to pin and 370 to water edge.
At white tee is 310 to pin and 340 to waters edge.
At Red tee could possible carry water 180 + 150 (330 total)


Input appreciated.

 

[Billipo]

John,

More on previous post. pyma #17.

After looking at my post I had left out a photo showing the green. Right now there is a placement element to the hole requiring a shot between the tree on the left and the brush on the right to get close for a par on the drive since the pin is tucked back. With the second pin, there is the ability to be short of the original pin for the layup across the water, but still a mando near the dock.

My goal is to make the drive the strategic shot. The approach shot across the water is easier when approaching from the left of the new basket. The straight line is requires more accuracy from the right it is blocked.

I am thinking that a lesser distance off the tee to the layup point than the current blue will make a more difficult drive since overdriving becomes a possibility. Kinda my original question. What is that appropriate drive distance to make water in play and thick brush to right of original pin?

 

[Gene Varano]

I would not use these. A standard paver in that same size offers enough tactile feel for traction, but is in bas relief, those ADA Bumps will be tough on consistency. If you want, you may be able to get an ADA Mat made of thermoplastic you can bolt down with drive pins or epoxy, and try them on an existing concrete pad....

If you are doing pavers for permeability, use standard.

Gene Varano

 

[johnrhouck]

Right now there is a placement element to the hole requiring a shot between the tree on the left and the brush on the right to get close for a par on the drive since the pin is tucked back.

Thanks for this question, Billipo. It's an interesting situation. Before I throw out any ideas, let me see if I'm understanding. Did you mean to say that you currently need a placement drive to get close for BIRDIE?

 

[Billipo]

*birdie...….My bad.

John,

I appreciate your input. Any other questions. Please ask. Ironically I was reading an article you wrote regarding creating awkward shots. You reference a ball golf designer with the same name as mine. No relation.

Bill

 

[johnrhouck]

OK, that sounds great.

Here are the first three things I would want to understand:

1. From the Blue tee, what percentage of drives currently land inside the 10m circle?

2. If someone misses the circle, how hard is it going to be to make the shot across the water to the new pin – are a lot of people going to have to throw a little layup to the water's edge first?

3. Suppose a Blue-level player makes a good 340' drive, lands near where the current basket is, and now has 185' to go to the new pin. How often will he/she land an approach shot inside the circle? Is there much trouble there – will offline shots get "rejected" and fall back into the water?

That's all information that I think needs to be taken into account before making a decision on where your new Blue tee will be.

 

[Billipo]

1.) Assuming player is playing from appropriate tee for skill, I would say 60% reach the circle. Players are currently disappointed if they do not birdie the hole.

My assumption is that with using a longer pin the landing zone for a desirable carry shot is much larger than 10m circle. Players can land significantly shorter of current pin and still have a reasonable approach shot.

2.) It is not unreasonably hard to reach a desirable landing zone off the drive.

I don't anticipate a need for a short layup except if a player falls to the right of the brush protecting the short pin. My thought is that without the need to "park" the short pin to reach a safe landing zone, falling on right of the brush is less likely.

In current configuration, I am not aware of the players throwing drives into water. I do know it can still get into players psyche altering shot direction.

I get your point. The water carry is nothing from edge but if you land way short of the edge then the carry could be undesirable.

3.) The obstacles are not on waters edge so rejection back into water is unlikely. My desire is not having rejections into water. An approach from the left of basket is clear, straight on has some obstacles, from right will result in no look for a putt.

I feel carrying the water is more an obstacle with a weak approach or on a windy day. I am thinking the pin being at stated location will result in more putts (3rd shot) back towards water.

Additional comments: The course has been in the ground for many years. Players will like the "water" shot for cool factor. Right now the hole is frequently a birdie. It is a good hole. I want the result to be a better hole. I know the scores will increase, but will they always be 3s versus current 2/3 mix. I want to create a hole with a desired 3 (avoid bogey) versus predictable 3 with a cool factor.

I am leaning for rewarding drive placement with controlled power versus rewarding pure power. Would rather retain water fear on drive than on the approach.

I thought the redesign created an interesting challenge. I can gain valuable input and I thought others may be interested in your perspective. Hence the post.

Thanks.

 

[DoWork]

John, thanks for all the effort you've put into this thread over the years, it has been a heck of a read.

I have a question about par on a hole on our course in particular that gets a lot of talk. It is a 600' big downhill on a ski slope, heavily wooded on either side but probably 200' across and wide open up the gut. The basket is in a birdcage island of pretty tight birch (visible in the pic as the clump of trees to the left of the middle of the trail) and also behind a very large rock. The hole is a Par 4.

The main issue is the wind and the large elevation change. When the wind is non existent the hole is a pretty predictable birdie to good players. When the wind is up 5s & 6s are not uncommon, even for competent plastic chuckers.

The hole was designed around the natural beauty of the valley view and of course for the love of watching a putter go 600' but in your opinion is it a bad thing to have scores be so effected by non controllable elements like wind conditions?

Pics below for reference- and everyone seems to love the hole, but everyone is up and down about the par rating. Should it be a soul crusher of a 3 or is it more fair as a 4? My honest opinion is that it is better as a 4 for everyone but for higher tier events it may seem like a gimme bird. I suppose it suffers a bit from tweeneritis.

https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=66719&stc=1&d=1543296743

https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=66720&stc=1&d=1543296745

 

[DoWork]

John, thanks for all the effort you've put into this thread over the years, it has been a heck of a read.

I have a question about par on a hole on our course in particular that gets a lot of talk. It is a 600' big downhill on a ski slope, heavily wooded on either side but probably 200' across and wide open up the gut. The basket is in a birdcage island of pretty tight birch (visible in the pic as the clump of trees to the left of the middle of the trail) and also behind a very large rock. The hole is a Par 4.

The main issue is the wind and the large elevation change. When the wind is non existent the hole is a pretty predictable birdie to good players. When the wind is up 5s & 6s are not uncommon, even for competent plastic chuckers.

The hole was designed around the natural beauty of the valley view and of course for the love of watching a putter go 600' but in your opinion is it a bad thing to have scores be so effected by non controllable elements like wind conditions?

Pics below for reference- and everyone seems to love the hole, but everyone is up and down about the par rating. Should it be a soul crusher of a 3 or is it more fair as a 4? My honest opinion is that it is better as a 4 for everyone but for higher tier events it may seem like a gimme bird. I suppose it suffers a bit from tweeneritis.

https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=66719&stc=1&d=1543296743

https://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=66720&stc=1&d=1543296745

Just to clarify, the birdcage looks impossibly tight in the pic, but that is only the downhill portion. The sides are thinned far more to provide lanes, and the thick downhill side is to highly discourage overthrowing and going past the green as there is another fairway about 200' beyond it. We like to avoid putting artificial OB on the course and so we use that impossible wall of suffering in it's stead, and it works well for that.

 

[johnrhouck]

Thanks, Do. Looks like a beautiful hole.

First question: Is there a particular skill level that you'd say this tee (or the entire course) is designed for?

Second question: On a perfect, windless day, how many deuces would you expect from those players?

Third: How many deuces would you expect from 1000-rated players?

Thanks,
John

 

[johnrhouck]

OK, Bill. Let's see what we have have here. I'm not sure I understand absolutely everything, but going by what you've said:

Players will like the "water" shot for cool factor.

I think you're absolutely right about that.

My assumption is that with using a longer pin the landing zone for a desirable carry shot is much larger than 10m circle. Players can land significantly shorter of current pin and still have a reasonable approach shot.

That also sounds spot on.

It is not unreasonably hard to reach a desirable landing zone off the drive.

Agreed. If they can reach the current circle, and if the new landing area is bigger than the circle, you should be fine.

I am thinking that a lesser distance off the tee to the layup point than the current blue will make a more difficult drive since overdriving becomes a possibility.

A possibility, yes. But getting to the current pin will leave you with 185' to the new pin. It sounds like there aren't a whole lot of obstacles, so that should be an easy enough approach most days. I'm not sure it's worth trying to get an extra 30' to the water's edge, so that you could have a 155' approach. I would think most Blue-level players wouldn't feel the need to get very close to the water. On the other hand, humans don't always act rationally, and I'm sure you'd see discs getting wet.

If the difference were more like 270' vs 240' or 290' vs. 260', my guess is players would want to be more aggressive.

It doesn't really look like you have much room to move the tee back or to move the pin back, so based on what I know, I think you're probably best where you are at 340' to the current pin.

Now, as for what you would call this new hole, here are a few bonus thoughts. You said:

I still want to retain a par 3. … Right now the hole is frequently a birdie. It is a good hole. I want the result to be a better hole. I know the scores will increase, but will they always be 3s versus current 2/3 mix. I want to create a hole with a desired 3 (avoid bogey) versus predictable 3 with a cool factor.

I see it a little differently. To me this new hole is absolutely a Par Four. It takes two good shots to get to the basket. (In the upcoming issue of the PDGA magazine, I write about par and introduce the idea of the "full shot" – I'm advocating that all holes consist of one, two, or three full shots, so no 'tweeners.) I also believe that every hole should be birdie-able (if a hole is giving up so any deuces that people want to call it a Par Two, then it's not a full shot and should be made harder.) In your case, an accurate 340' drive plus an accurate 185' approach shot and a made putt deserves a birdie. (Or 320' and 205' or whatever.)

As for an estimate of how the scoring might work out, let's use your number that 60% of drives currently make the circle (that's a bit higher than we would expect for a 340' hole with obstacles near the green, but we all know that Ohio disc golfers are well above the national average...). Let's say that now 70% are going to make the landing area on the new hole and will have between 155' and 245' to go. And let's guess that 50% of those players will get up and down.

That will give you something like:

Good drive, good approach, good putt, take a 3: 35% (.7 times .5)
Good drive, OK approach, miss putt, take a 4: maybe 20%
Good drive, bad approach, take a 5: maybe 15%
Bad drive, save a 3: maybe 5%
Bad drive, save a 4: maybe 15%
Bad drive, take a 5 or worse: maybe 10%

That leaves you with:

40% take a three (birdie)
35% take a four (par)
25% take a five (bogey)

I'm probably being a little generous, but again, Ohio golfers. (Yes, I know that 950 golfers everywhere have the same skill level. Just a bit of levity, people.)

If those numbers did turn out to be about right, I'd call it a fairly easy Par Four, but a Par Four nevertheless, for Blue-level players.

Hope that helps. Unless I'm missing something, I think you have a winner there, Bill.

I imagine there are those who will see it differently, and I look forward to reading their comments.

 

[Billipo]

John,

Thanks for the thorough response. Great info. I thought the redesign created an interesting challenge.

I agree with the logic presented regarding a par 4. Just afraid other local course designers will think my new par 67 design would be taken as a case of one up man ship. .....kinda a spinal tap "this par 66 goes to 67".

Again thanks for taking time to review the hole redesign.

Billipo

 

[DoWork]

Thanks, Do. Looks like a beautiful hole.

First question: Is there a particular skill level that you'd say this tee (or the entire course) is designed for?

Second question: On a perfect, windless day, how many deuces would you expect from those players?

Third: How many deuces would you expect from 1000-rated players?

Thanks,
John

Wow, sorry I missed your response!

The entire course is designed to accommodate a pretty wide range of players, but is biased towards more skilled players. We hope to eventually host A & B tier events once we can get a few more tees set and a little more clean-as-designed maintenance performed. As you can see the sides are very thick, and we expect to do a major cutback & selective thinning this summer. The back 9 has been open since July 2018. We have a pretty competitive league and I've never seen a deuce on this hole- several eagle putts that were missed but never a deuce.

On a perfect, windless day I would hope to see at least one or two, but as I said I've yet to see or hear of one. I've gotten pretty good at driving consistently near the birdcage but having a clean line look to the basket is another story and I've never converted either. It's a big elevation change and it definitely makes it a tricky hole.

In a 1000-rated crowd I would expect realistically 1/4 of the field to bird it, but that's on the same assumptions as above, and can't say for sure. Having played a round with Simon I'd think he'd torch it but you never know.

I should probably say I don't consider it to be a really hard hole, but the factors involved in throwing on it greatly magnifies the consequence of small errors. I am also of the opinion that par 4 is a fair rating for the hole and I look to the complete absence of deuces as evidence to that but I get enough questions about it to want to ask.

 

[RootsDiscGolf]

John,

What do you think about Dual Fairways?

What do you think about a hole that has a turn that you need to layup? The layup is 250-300 out.

What do you think about a water hole that is about 350ft, reaches the pond about 230ft and about 70ft to cross the pond to the basket?

What is the right tee pad size?

I am working on my course and these are all ideas that I have right now. Thank you for all your help with all these responses.