New Course Design Do's and Don'ts

[Sadjo]

One of the things...getting back to the original question...I think you should always be open to redesign. The distance discs fly and what players can do with discs change. Always be open to redesigning a hole or an entire course.

 

[DerekTonn]

Just remember the old adage: Too many cooks will spoil the stew.

I'm all for people helping as long as they realize their boundaries. Same as when I get the chance to play a new course and don't care for parts of it, I understand that someone else has done the work to get it in and it's not my place to give design comments. If the designer asks for it, sure, I'm happy to help, and would possibly donate labor to make the changes. But I would never go to the owner for a change without the designer being present for the meeting. Idiots that try to circumvent that process cause more problems than they will ever solve.

I'm not sure I agree with that bolded statement, John. Maybe it's been my own experience, but I almost see it as being the exact opposite problem. Designers playing the roll of "czar" or "God," doing everything their way, while almost taking offense at the notion of others daring to offer constructive criticism or alternative ideas. Also, protecting their "secret" about a new course going in the ground...so they can have a plaque erected in their own honor as its designer. Looking for $$$ or status/recognition more than input and the very-best end result possible. Keeping in mind that the definition of "very-best end result possible" is HIGHLY, HIGHLY subjective.

Too many cooks might spoil the stew, *IF* nobody's minding the pot while the stew is cooking. But if a chef never tries out new recipes, new spices, never talks to their patrons or reads their reviews, then they'll never be as good as they could have been either.

I love Steve West's earlier comment about iterative design! IMHO, that is the key to eventually having a great course. Let a course get broken in for a year or two before spending thousands on signage, tee pads, etc. Play the course with people of all abilities (not just your buddies). Heck, play it with a lefty or two, if you can find one! Play it with a person who's never played it before, then listen VERY carefully to their comments about fun/challenge, safety, finding the next hole, etc. Then tweak/redesign holes based upon live usage and actual feedback rather than "design theory."

Also, the biggest mistake I see on most courses around my area is people simply taking the quickest path to discs flying. Rather than being okay with the idea that it might take a year or two (or heck, 5+ if you're like me with my baby here in my home town) to carve out fairways, plant trees, whatever.

Iterative design though...WHAT STEVE SAID! That, and think of the design project more like a marathon vs. a 100-yard dash. A good course design will practically become like one of your children (emotional ties and the amount of time you invest in it)...so if somebody's thinking it's going to be a week(end) or two of work, a C-/D+ course is probably the very-best folks could hope for.

 

[John Rock]

I understand what you're saying, and in theory that works great. The problem is when you're trying to cook a beef stew for a customer and you get another chef that insists on putting in salami because he thinks that everyone should like what he likes. Instead of delivering a nice steaming pot of beef stew, you're stuck trying to clean up a steaming pile of crap.

Sometimes you need only one cook/designer, but plenty of waiters, hostesses, prep cooks, and clean up people who do the other work to make a great diner.

My area is plagued with those who insist on creating individual holes that have no cohesion with the other holes. Extra-long walks between basket and the next tee, tee pads too close to previous baskets, tee pads in previous fairways, water crossings with no easy way out, and numerous other basic course design flaws. Just because they think their idea is cool, they won't accept the bigger view of the whole course. I've played plenty of courses with several of these flaws and I don't want to install new courses with the same problems. Getting some people to look past their own ego and realize others have put in a LOT of time, effort, and thought to create a WHOLE course is pretty difficult.

 

[denny ritner]

Also, the biggest mistake I see on most courses around my area is people simply taking the quickest path to discs flying. Rather than being okay with the idea that it might take a year or two (or heck, 5+ if you're like me with my baby here in my home town) to carve out fairways, plant trees, whatever.

Agreed. Addressing this thought and the frequent complaint about the challenge of getting volunteer assistance, I'm a believer in the gospel of planting the baskets LAST. I've got a buddy that has been putting in courses at a rapid pace in this area and have listened to his woes time after time about calling for a "work day" and then getting upset because people were daring to play the course on that day. I think I've converted him to the gospel.

As far as iterative design, I'm with ya on not ordering tee signs or pouring cement too quickly. I've found carpet tees to be a great friend. I would argue, however, that too many designers don't put in adequate consideration upfront and end up spinning their wheels later trying to, in the words of my same buddy, "polish a turd". My philosophy is NO TURDS ALLOWED!

Secondary course modifications should be about making slight adjustments for the subtleties. Basket locations can be moved to help with sight lines. Tee angles can be changed slightly. Distances can be changed slightly. These things can happen, if adequate buffers were initially considered. Secondary course modifications shouldn't be made to address poor course flow, safety issues, seasonal water levels, etc. These issues should be addressed prior to construction. Mapping is an essential design tool. Hand-held GPS units are very cheap these days. A computer-generated map can highlight buffer and flow concerns, as well as inefficient use of areas of the property.

Also, having one or two trusted, experienced folks to walk through the roughed-out design prior to construction can be very helpful. These folks will recognize that their primary role is to serve as a double-check that there aren't any nails or glass in the stew. They aren't there to say you should have used curry instead of tabasco.

There are lots of courses out there that have obviously been designed either directly by committee or by one person using that mentality. They've got the checklists to make sure they have 6 rights, 6 lefts, and 6 straights, the obligatory straight over the water shot, the obligatory straight down the big hill shot, and the obligatory island green. They fail to recognize the opportunity to create a unique, artistic expression of a course as an entity, rather than a recycled greatest hits of design concepts that they've played or read about.

 

[DerekTonn]

Good stuff, Denny!

I'm going to pick on my home course again...just since it's the one I've spent so much time working/tweaking over the past 5+ years.

Our course was initially designed to be nine ho-hum holes that basically waved at clusters of trees as you walked by. Why? Because the out-of-town designer they hired didn't have the time (nor the interest) to help carve out actual holes and fairways inside the trees. I lobbied HARD for three more holes in the trees to give the course at least some initial character (which we got), and then have spent literally five years doing the course "right."

14 holes now (will be 18, if/when we acquire an adjacent CRP parcel and pay the fine to get it out of that program). 24 tees on 14 holes (mostly reds and whites, probably no real blues or golds, since we're very landlocked), vs. 14 tees on 12 holes that we opened with. Nearly 70 feet/hole of added length (while actually improving safety and visibility), as well as over 200 new trees, about 125 yards of gravel, 200 yards of black dirt and about 30 tons of field stone (so far) for landscaping and flood/erosion control. A boring, easy course that shouldn't have been on many people's radars is now becoming one of the jewels in our section of our State. But you can't get to that point parachuting into a community, walking the land, and pouring concrete in a couple weekends and then hitting the road, and/or only organizing a "work day" once or twice per-year.

Back to John's stew analogy, you don't cook a great stew in the microwave out of a can. To do it right, you need fresh ingredients slowly cooking to perfection on the stove. With a "babysitter," to make sure nothing goes wrong. Or you need yourself a good crock pot. But too many designers out there are in such a hurry to get their "plaque" or check that they go "beep-beep-beep" in the microwave and are done.

Give me one designer who spends his/her life making one course that just oozes with quality and charm, over 100 designers who will design 100 courses apiece using formulas and "recipes for the microwave" any, any day.

 

[esdubya]

When making stew, don't forget the wine!! Disc golfers have plenty of that though!

..just wanted to say I have enjoyed reading responses on this thread. Denny - really good stuff, thanks for sharing.

One example of a course where an experienced designer has had endless time to tweak and improve is Terry Calhoun's BRATS in Ann Arbor, MI. For the land he has, this is an AMAZING course that flows well and has a really nice variety of shots. Every time I go there, it just keeps getting better.

 

[Cgkdisc]

How many architects come back on their own or are requested to either tweak or redesign your house? It wouldn't mean they did a poor job within the time framework and payment for that contract. But home owners can screw up or enhance their home's value depending whether they make sensible changes or upgrades before selling it sometime down the road. A veteran designer like Stan lives with his courses for constant upgrades over the years. But a person who specializes in design should not be expected to stay around tweaking every design they ever did except when asked or if they lived nearby or owned the course like esdubya mentioned regarding Terry's BRATS course.

 

[DavidSauls]

I'll bet architects who design their own houses, after living in them for a while think of some tweaks and changes they'd like to make. But it's much tougher and more expensive to change a house than a disc golf course.

I'm half-responsible for one course design, which was definitely a slow-cook job. Personally, I'm very impressed with what some designers have been able to do all-at-once.

 

[Sadjo]

I spent last Saturday afternoon marking the initial design of a new 9-hole course in Seneca, SC. I sold this course and have been given the final say on the design. Design is not my strong point and I freely admit that. There's one other player that is working with me on design and he has worked with me on every design project I've worked on over the past couple of years.

He sent me a text yesterday telling me of the changes he made to the layout. I went out there today to start clearing brush and small trees. I saw where he moved tee boxes and some pin locations...I don't see what he apparently does but I am trusting his vision knowing that when were ready to install in a couple of weeks that I will see how these changes will make the course better than what we first designed.

Now if someone else came in made some chamges, i'd probably be upset because they weren't involved from the get go and may not understand the flow we have in mind.

 

[DerekTonn]

What I'm trying to do in Southern Minnesota is get *MORE* cooks in "my" kitchen. People see what I've done with my home course, and people saw what I did with another new course about 30 minutes down the road, and my phone has been ringing quite a bit in the past year.

However, I am not a "professional" course designer, by any stretch of the imagination. I'm just a guy who has played ~40 courses around our area who has been playing over the past 35 years, who just signed up for DGCD about a month ago. I work too hard, don't charge nearly enough for DG-related projects, and have a wealth of gardening/landscaping experience too, which helps. But a "pro" course designer? Nope.

My hope in 2012 is to have a few course (re)design tourneys/parties on a few courses. Bring 9-18 temps out to a virgin piece of land (in a community/county requesting help), or 6-9 portables out on to an existing course, then get players of all abilities out playing the temps for a day. Morning round is the layout I'm envisioning. Lunch would then be provided (by the City/County)...where we talk about what folks liked and didn't like about the holes or flow. We then go out, move tees and baskets to new locations (based upon player feedback), and play the afternoon round. Same prizes/payouts as your usual tourneys! Only with the added wrinkle of having a hand in designing a new course in a community that wants/needs it.

Of course, John's "caveat empour" message about too many cooks in the kitchen definitely applies here. But to counter-act that, there would be one person in-charge of where the buck stops related to design. AKA the loudest voice doesn't necessarily win! And if guys can't live with that? Then they wouldn't be asked to participate in the next design tourney/party.

 

[denny ritner]

When making stew, don't forget the wine!! Disc golfers have plenty of that though!

..just wanted to say I have enjoyed reading responses on this thread. Denny - really good stuff, thanks for sharing.

One example of a course where an experienced designer has had endless time to tweak and improve is Terry Calhoun's BRATS in Ann Arbor, MI. For the land he has, this is an AMAZING course that flows well and has a really nice variety of shots. Every time I go there, it just keeps getting better.

Thanks for the kind words.

I'm looking forward to the time that I get to play BRATS as well as about half a dozen other new courses in that area, plus a trip to Grizzly Peak Brewing Company for the chicken cous-cous salad and a root beer! Coming up on nine years since I left.

 

[Sadjo]

I had a long talk tonight with a course designer that's done 45 courses over the past 15 years. He also said the worst thing you can do is telling anyone what you're working on. Now once the course is sold you can get some others involved...you just need to be aware the amount of things that can go wrong.

 

[DerekTonn]

Maybe this is part of the difference in where some of us are coming from...but the first thought I had after reading your (Sadjo's) latest response was this:

Why on Earth would a course designer be designing anything unless/until the course had officially been approved and sold on a specifically identified piece of land?

I'm not talking about "Hey...Minneapolis could use a course at ______ Park. Let's go walk the land, then pitch a design to the Parks Board!" I'm talking about projects where the City/County/??? is already on-board, the concept of a course has been formally approved (financially, zoning or land use(s), etc.), and the project is real.

That's when I'd want to bring in MORE people, not less. People to help me walk the land. People to concur with my ideas, offer their own ideas, or to tell me I'm a dumb### for thinking I could try and shoe-horn a hole in a particular location. People to play the proposed layout with me on temps, *BEFORE* holes are dug and concrete is poured! Etc.

We've seen horror stories here in Minnesota over the past few years about very talented DGers (play/design) who have invested dozens/hundreds of hours into proposed projects...only to get to the point of digging holes and pouring concrete, and learn the land owner doesn't have the zoning and/or DG isn't going to be a permitted use on the property. A gigantic waste of everyone's time. And a gigantic mistake that cannot be repeated. You get your "TPS Reports" filled out and you prostrate yourself before Most-High (City Councils, County/Park Boards, whomever) to get all of your I-s dotted and T-s crossed BEFORE you spend much/any time on actual design.

Selling a DG course going in the ground, and selling a design are two entirely separate things. I suppose they can/are combined in many instances. However, it seems like a waste of time (to me) to invest a ton of energy trying to develop and sell a design, if one doesn't even have the approvals and the idea of a course sold to the powers that be. Once those approvals and "sale" have been completed? I assume the person who spear-headed the selling is the person the City/County/Parks Board looks to spear-head design...and even if some yahoo came in to try and cut you off at the knees and design it "their" way, the City/County/Parks Board is still going back to the person(s) who made the sale. Right?

 

[DSmith]

For the OP
Don't layout/design a course during a drought. Get out there and do the leg work when the course is at it's wettest.

Visualize the worst possible outcome of a shot.
Try and realize that the majority of users arn't going to be seasoned players that respect mandos, obs, etc. Just because you shortened a hole to avoid a walking path doesn't mean the players are going to throw slower discs.

Get a really good feel of the property's usage. I know this is part of leg work but it's especially important when your working with multi-use properties.

Oh and I agree about keeping project specifics to yourself till the time of ground breaking. I've run into this so many times the last several projects that I've decided to not go public until the project is going into the ground. While it's a huge plus to get people pumped up about a new course going in, it's not worth the aggravation of having people disappointed at you because a few yahoos decided to monkey wrench the project either intentionally or unintentionally.
I'm still a rookie at this with only a handful of courses under my belt that I either designed, co-designed, or had to adjust for Parks and Rec. (I'd join the DGCDG but I'm broke).

On the baskets before pads design philosophy. While the idea works in theory that you can install baskets then wait a year to install pads/signage (aka lock the course down) so you can tweak the course, there's a big issue I've run into, on my projects, following this doctrine.
Pouring tees on a course that's in use. The issue is/was people messing with the wet cement. It's like an idiot magnet.
Pull the baskets before pouring? they'll still show up wanting to play and mess with the pads, probably out of spite that you pulled the baskets.
Set up watch? You'd need volunteers.
It's almost ideal I think to pour all of the concrete in one go as in pads and pins if you can. I think that its hard to get past the fear that you should have put the pad in x other than y. Put then again that's what is the difference between great designers and good designers.

 

[bwiese]

Dont put all your baskets together before you have all the collars cemented into the ground. You need at least 1 pole to use to make sure the pin location is plumb.

On a side note does any one know if pvc is the same diameter as a collar? I would take the basket apart, but afraid I will strip threads and wreck it.

 

[DSmith]

Dont put all your baskets together before you have all the collars cemented into the ground. You need at least 1 pole to use to make sure the pin location is plumb.

On a side note does any one know if pvc is the same diameter as a collar? I would take the basket apart, but afraid I will strip threads and wreck it.

We've made sleeve plugs out of pvc pipe (it's pretty close to matching the inside diameter), so I'm guessing you can make ones to level your pins.

 

[bwiese]

If the gap isnt too big I guess I could use a shim to make sure it is flush with the sleeve

 

[bwiese]

Do's: A 1 1/2 pvc pipe fits perfectly into a sleeve and can be used for many purposes:

1. make sure baskets are plumb when installing
2. sleeve plug (Keep extra/unused sleeves free from debris, and easy to find)


I guess many means 2 purposes.

Don'ts:

Tell people you are having a workday. Tell them you are playing the new course and when they show up say you have to do some stuff first then play the course when you have worked for an hour or two.

 

[optidiscic]

something I would advise is to have numerous plans and to remain flexible...sometimes an issue arises out of left field and you need to adjust.....sometimes you gotta sacrifice a hole to allow the course to survive

 

[Lewis]

Do's: A 1 1/2 pvc pipe fits perfectly into a sleeve)

I've heard the inside diameter varies by brand. The difference is whether the brand quotes its pole's diameter based on the inside or the outside diameter (pipe or tube), and my club knows from experience that Innova poles and DGA poles are different. Ultimately it may not matter much, as long as you don't mix and match baskets and poles between brands.