I have been trying to come up with ways to incorporate different ideas into disc Golf Course design. I recently read on this board about "Fairway Bunkers". I believe this entails designating an area (with string or paint) where if you come to rest in this area you have certain extra rules you have to follow to make your next shot a little extra hard (similar to the extra rules governing sand traps in Ball Golf). If anyone else is thinking along these same lines, would you please share your thoughts, and or other ideas that you have come up with, or if you have tried some of these procedures, could you share the pros and cons, based on your experiences?

stringing arificial hazards and requiring extra consideration for the next shot is a bit, well, artificial, and it requires players to have a knowlege of the local rule pertaining to a roped area. I would much rather see something that physically forces a player to change their setup or modify their run-up. Maybe instead of stringing an area you plant some shrubs or truck in some rocks. Sure it's more work, but you get a more natural, intuitive hazard.

Today's round brought up the perfect example:

Hole #12 (short position - 314 ft.) is only a medium difficulty hole for the experienced player. It's open off the T-Box with only wild shanks or early release slips punished. Two-thirds of the way down the fairway, trees start to take a toll on errant shots. There are two distinct depressions in the contours of the ground in this area, which could easily be marked with string or paint. They are probably around 500 sq. ft. each, give or take a little. One is on the left side of the fairway, the other is in the center. The experienced players can easily carry the distance past the depressions, but the trees in the area (as well as slips and worm burners) can have them end up in these areas. There is plenty of room on the right side of the fairway for the players who don't throw quite as far, but there is an OB line if they try to go too far that way. A pretty easy 3 hole for several skill levels.

What if I declared the depressions to be a "Hazard Area", and if you land completely inside the line, the special condition was that once you address your lie, you must keep both feet (or two ground contacts) planted until the disc you threw hits something? This would eliminate the jump putt (even though I use jump-putts occasionally) from these areas, which are about 60 to 80 feet away from the basket. It would also force almost everyone to use a different style than they normally do. I know I always lift one foot (and some times both feet) during the follow-through on shots of that distance, and so does almost everyone I've observed.

I don't think I would like to see a whole bunch of these "Hazards" on every hole, but a few strategically placed areas could provide designers a different challenge to use for the new or existing courses. There would not be any extra throw penalty, but I believe people would start working on different techniques to "get out" of these "Hazards".

What would it take to get something like this implemented in our annual PDGA Event?

When I was building my home course on very flat land (no elevation changes at all), I had to get creative on establishing some hazards. I also had tons of trees that had been cut up to create the fairways. What I did was to pile the cut wood into several areas creating bunkers that have to be negotiated once you get close to the green and pin. They are the same as having to navigate around a large bush off to the side of the fairway.

Eventually, these piles will rot and disintegrate. But my hope is that while that is going on, plants will volunteer to grow in these places so that when the cut wood is gone, there will be a vegetative bunker to replace them.

What would it take to get something like this implemented in our annual PDGA Event?

Declare a special condition; depending on what is involved in the special condition, it may require approval of Competition Director (804.01.C). If in doubt, it's best to check with the CD just to be safe.

At some Kansas Disc Golf Association (KDGA) events they've had bunkers that necessitated some type of overhand throw to 'get out'. Not in the PDGA rules, but it was a neat twist!

Actually, if it's not stated in the rules that it's not allowed, Carlton, the Rules Chairman indicates that restricted throw areas are legal without getting permission from the Competition Director, but you may want to ask anyway so you have backup support in the event of controversy.

At A.O. Fisher in Dayton, Ohio hole 6 a 180-200ft easy birdie hole is to put three sand traps in a 33ft radius around the basket which has turned this hole in to a easy putt for two, 33ft save for three, or a long putt for duce.

I like that hole at the USDGC at Winthrop where they made those bamboo or lattice walls. I think something like that makes an otherwise straight up hole a lot more interesting.

http://www.usdgc.com/course/holebyhole/hole7.htm

"Sand traps" can be created with high fences like you see for baseball backstops in little league parks. In a course I developed in our neighborhood multipurpose park, the baseball backstop comes perfectly into play for me, a lefty. If I do not turn over my drive quite enough, I almost always fade right and hit the backstop to land in that "sand trap". I am forced to throw a thumber or tomohawk from 1-2' from the fence and make it land flat on top of a ridge - and there's a big risk of that rolling away.

From the tee pad:
http://home.earthlink.net/~ekbbbb1288/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/3long.jpg

A better view of the backstop "sand trap"
http://home.earthlink.net/~ekbbbb1288/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/6longapproach1.jpg

Good idea. However, how is it that a hole gets designed where the fairway apparently plays across a ballfield? Is it an abandoned field?

At the OctoberFriz, there are several pins which are on islands surrounded by roads. If you land in the road, you are in the bunker. You have to UD your next shot. No, it's not in the PDGA rules, but the Friz isn't PDGA sanctioned. They count discs on top as good, too!

At the Discs Unlimited event, there is one hole where you have to use something other than the traditional backhanded drive. The tee box is right up against the outfield fence. You can tomahawk or use a thumber or a snap roller. Again, this event isn't PDGA sanctioned.

Good idea. However, how is it that a hole gets designed where the fairway apparently plays across a ballfield? Is it an abandoned field?



See the lights in the picture? :D I put that big one up (and 2 others like it) for night golf. That is when most of the 'real' disc golfers play. But there are golfers out there during the day and we have gotten no real complaints yet in the last 3 years. There are never real baseball games on this field. This is in a multi-purpose park in the middle of our development. It is under-used other than by disc golfers.

And it is not a 'real' disc golf course - 3 baskets and 18 tee pads - map with pictures (http://home.earthlink.net/~ekbbbb1288/id3.html) . SSA probably around 43. Night time, 3 disc challenge, .08 blood alcohol SSA is probably around 46-47 :eek:

The concept of using such a fence (permanent or temporary) that is set strategically placed locations is what I was suggesting. It really does make a real sandtrap analogy for disc golf.

This reminds me of the checkerboard fairway.

There was going to be different restrictions from each square.

You have to UD your next shot. No, it's not in the PDGA rules, but the Friz isn't PDGA sanctioned. They count discs on top as good, too!




The UD requirement is not disallowed in the rules, so it is actually OK, but would be controversial nonetheless. Counting DROTs is specifically not allowed in the rules.

This reminds me of the checkerboard fairway.
There was going to be different restrictions from each square.



I'd like to see players have to throw from a square like a knight moves :D

Workin' on your knight moves, Chuck? /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Actually, if it's not stated in the rules that it's not allowed, Carlton, the Rules Chairman indicates that restricted throw areas are legal without getting permission from the Competition Director

Is that simply his personal opinion or the official Rules Commitee position?

Not sure if the Rules Committee has directly addressed it since it was a while ago that Carlton tested the concept at Cedar. However, the Course Designers group which includes some Rules Committee members has recently discussed the option and agree it appears legitimate from a rules standpoint. But most designers would be reluctant to use these options unless the course had so few obstacles that it was the only way to add any challenge.

I agree with Steve that this option is overly artificial. It takes the real work out of course design, of situational physical conditions, that require a certain flight path.

Bunkers in ball golf do not have "Rules" against attempting a certain shot with a certain club, it is the physical constraints that may or may not restrict the use of a certain shot of club.

To do otherwise is un-golf-like IMO.

I have seem artificial bunkers used on a few occasions. The best application of this was a bunker near the green similar to sand trap in ball golf. If you land in the bunker your lie is moved to the edge of the bunker directly opposite the basket. The only penalty for landing in the bunker is that your putt is increased in length. This seemed to work pretty well and was easy to follow.

Any bunker restrictions that involve a mandatory stance or type of throw just don't seem like they belong in this game. That said they still might be a lot of fun for special events but not for serious competition.

As far as forcing players to make a certain type throw, it can be great for a special event. The Moffitt Show is coming up in Houston on Feburary 26th. For this tourney we use a now infamous format known as "Who's Your Buddy" or "Five Card Stroke". At the start each player is issued five cards labeled, Thumber, Pancake, Roller, Forehand, and Opposite Hand Putt. During the round you can play a card on another player in your group and they have to make that throw.

Having a marked area near one side of the basket might be a way to emulate how a ball rolls away from the hole on a sloped golf green. If you land in that area, you mark your lie at a specific drop zone position that's farther away from the basket than anywhere you land in the marked area. No penalty, no forced throws required nor obstacles need to be installed, just marking the area and drop zone.

To make it even trickier, if you have a natural or even artificial obstacle nearby, mark the drop zone behind it. This would also work well out in the fairway where obstacles are sparse. Mark an area that's between a tree and the basket. If you land in this area, there's no penalty but your next shot is from the drop zone marked a few feet behind the tree.

What's cool about these options is there's no required type of throw but the player will likely have to make a different type of throw than they might have if allowed to throw from where they landed in the marked area.

I have seem artificial bunkers used on a few occasions. The best application of this was a bunker near the green similar to sand trap in ball golf. If you land in the bunker your lie is moved to the edge of the bunker directly opposite the basket. The only penalty for landing in the bunker is that your putt is increased in length. This seemed to work pretty well and was easy to follow.



Yes this is an interesting idea. You could really play with the shape on the ground so that players would be more likely to hyzer, anhyzer, or fly straight at the target. I like the idea of moving straight back away from the target rather than drop zones, since this would give degrees of penalty rather than just one set penalty. Variety is good.


Any bunker restrictions that involve a mandatory stance or type of throw just don't seem like they belong in this game. That said they still might be a lot of fun for special events but not for serious competition.



I agree with this. Excellent for a game of �PIG� around the back yard but too corny for a more serious event.

Its only my humble opinion, but I don't think artificial hazards are good for the game. What drew me to it was its simplicity... throw the disc in the basket... no need to worry about special clubs or balls. Just throw the disc and have fun. No fancy rules... why suddenly make it different?

I believe I understand the challenge facing course designers in coming up with some equivalent course hazards to our sister sport.

I just don't think that we have exhausted the physical possibilities yet and that it is too soon to start dropping "Monopoly - Utilities Taxes" style penalties for just landing here or there. I'm fine with OB, because that is simple and straight forward. I even understand what Harold is doing at Rock Hill with the string, but eventually I hope that we get some courses that present hazards simply and straight forwardly with no need for strange and zainy (IMO) rules to add challenge where none exist.

Back yard rules are great in the back yard, but just don't feel right out at a Professional Disc Golf Event.

Does anyone know when sand traps were introduced to Ball Golf? I'm sure that all of the golfers weren't in favor. Now these traps seem to help define some of the greatest courses in the world. Fairway bunkers are there to punish those throws that don't land in the fairway (usually the par 4's & 5's). The longer throwers have to either lay-up in front of the traps, or risk having a not-so-great next shot if they don't throw a well-executed drive. On courses that are extremely wooded, I can see where the longer throwers don't have much advantage. But on the more open courses, there needs to be a way for designers to make players think more.

Bunkers in ball golf do not have "Rules" against attempting a certain shot with a certain club, it is the physical constraints that may or may not restrict the use of a certain shot of club.



You can't "ground" your club in a sand trap. That's a rule.



I feel that artificial OB, traps, and (to an extent) mandos are a reflection of poor course design. I know that we are generally limited in the scope of a course because were using public lands, and have to take what we can get, but still these elements detract from the natural feel of the sport.

Does anyone know when sand traps were introduced to Ball Golf? I'm sure that all of the golfers weren't in favor.

Sand traps have been a part of golf from the very beginning, because the earliest golf courses were built on links, i.e., the strips of land in seaside areas between the beach and the inland arable areas that feature sandy soil, dunes and undulating topography, and where the land is not conducive to cultivated vegetation or trees. So sand traps were simply natural features of links. (The pot bunkers at the Old and New courses at St. Andrews, for example, including the Road Bunker on #17, aka the Sands of Nakajima, are all part of the natural landscape.)

I agree with Steve that this option is overly artificial. It takes the real work out of course design, of situational physical conditions, that require a certain flight path.

Bunkers in ball golf do not have "Rules" against attempting a certain shot with a certain club, it is the physical constraints that may or may not restrict the use of a certain shot of club.

To do otherwise is un-golf-like IMO.



As someone pointed out Nick, there are rules that govern a shot out of a sandtrap in ball golf.

If we had unlimited land usage and large course budgets, it would be much better to use 'real' hazards and obstacles, BUT many of our courses don't have that luxury. I posted a little while ago about Fairway Bunkers and Approach Traps.

Fairway Bunker - defined area where run-up before throw is prohibited. Primarily used to add strategy to open tee shot landing areas on Par 4's and Par 5's.

Approach Trap - defined area where the same stance rules apply as do within 10M of the basket. Primarily used to add strategy to open approach shot landing areas on Par 4's and Par 5's or tee shot landing areas on Par 3's.

I was watching my new USDGC DVD (2003) and came up with the above ideas. Everyone seems to agree that the USDGC is disc golf's premier event and Winthrop Gold is LOADED with random OB rope, bamboo fences, a Clown's Mouth drive, and fake islands that your drive must land in. I think at this point, it is safe to say that our top players don't mind this type of challenge being added to a course. I don't see why adding some red rope to define 'hazards' and losing some of the standard yellow rope that define OB's would be any worse ... IMHO, it would be much better.

BTW - I like the idea of landing in a defined area and having to move back away from the target ... easy to govern and understand.

The problem I see with this idea is that a lot of courses are in used parks. The USDGC is played where they can easily set all that up and they don't have a guy walking his dog and crapping in the middle of the fairway. Look at all the posts discussing vandalism and you can see why ropes may be a bad idea. Plus ropes and running wild children don't mix too well. If you had a park designated JUST for DG this may be a possible choice, but I think in a public park that would be really hard to institute and maintain.

One of these techniques is already used but you may not have noticed. At least around the Twin Cities, if your shot lands on an asphalt park path that has heavier pedestrian traffic, players are expected to move their lie back off the path on the line of play with no penalty. Essentially, the path operates as a casual relief area.

I have always played that paved land is OB. There is a concrete relief creak on the fairway of one of the holes at my home course and it is considered OB.

You may play it that way but it's not consistent everywhere. Most TDs/players don't call landing on the forward cement tee pad OB for example. In many places, hard surface paths are not OB for daily play and are only sometimes OB for events.

I actually like the idea of the OB. It sort of answers the question posed on this thread. How you do make new obstacles? You put in a cement creak without the water. Call it a walking path and suddenly you can get funding for it too. Be creative with it and you can get it on a few holes with minimal danger.

I forgot about this:

http://cincinnatidiscgolf.com/

Click on "courses", then "Miami Whitewater". Take a look at some of those pictures (particularly 4-9). That's an early attempt at disc golf traps. Not very effective, but interesting anyway.

Did they make some of those mounds? If the natural topography provides natural obstacles/hazards/traps ... great! I've played a small 9 hole course in Eugene, OR that features small hills/mounds to add challenge. I was told they actually brought in equipment to create the mounds. That's great if you can afford that type of course modification, but most courses have no budget to work with at all (not to mention permission if it is in a park). This discussion is further proof to me that the future of DG is on private courses where the owner can invest $$ and doesn't have to answer to the park rangers (see The Grange in Virginia).

I like the idea of just changing the landscape to add difficulty and challenges to a course. I think our game should be determined by the lay of the land and not by artificial ropes and lines. I think it is a great idea if you have the money and means to add hills and dales to a course. Also, just planting new trees is a good idea and also good for the environment. (Yes a shameless tree loving plug) I would love to see this game become main stream and have really nice expensive courses, but I think a lot of us will always enjoy the public parks that have the courses that are just tucked in between play grounds and walking paths.

/\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ /\ I'm with ya.

None of that is natural. They're man made, and an interesting idea, but they don't do what (I asume) they were meant to accomplish. All those holes are reachable with a short hyzer. I believe the distances are measured down the center, and they're all doglegs. Every once in a while you may have to putt from one.

The course was designed without the help of disc golfers. In fact it's a re-design. I'm told the original course was much better.

Yeah the mounds don't really do much for stopping many shots. Now if they were 50 foot high and then had 50 foot vallies, it would be interesting. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif I think the best way to make a DG course more difficult is simply to plant trees and with elevation changes but simple mounds are just fun things for the discs to fly over on route to the basket.

at our one course here, we have 3 huge piles of dirt and woodchips gaurding the pin. it makes still makes an easy douce, but if u shank, and go behind a pile its a hella shot to get it to the pin

Bringing this post to the top, someone started another thread about it. It is an interesting topic though.

As for mounds, it does not take much to mess with the mind of a disc golfer off the teebox. A depressed teebox, or a teebox behind a mound that is only 3-4ft tall can greatly affect the release angle at which the golfer lets go of the disc and drastically changes the difficulty of the hole.


And I have a question.

How far is too far to make an artificial OB for a Pro only event?

I will be running a tournament in the spring and am trying to eliminate any easy duece opportunity. Dueces will be possible, just at very high risk reward levels.

one idea i have been kicking around for a "fairway bunker" is to put logs, maybe 12- 24" around on the ground in a ladder pattern near the desired landing zone. if you landed in the logs, you would pretty much be forced to throw from a stand still, thus losing much power(the same effect of a sand trap in ball golf) and creating an extra throw. this would make the player navigate the landing zone a little more cautiously and would requre a save type shot if you did land in the hazard. plus, no extra rules or requirements would be needed, if the hazard area is still a fair distance from the basket it would require two more throws from all but the biggest arms, and you couldn't physically perform a run up over 24" logs placed 24-30" apart.

Logs would work or another idea in the previous thread was an area with scattered big boulders to prevent big runups similar to the log idea. One thing we're looking at for Highbridge is to scoop out bunkers by pushing grass/dirt forward with the bulldozer in key spots. The pot bunker might be 40x40 with a 5' or so dirt mound (eventually grass covered) in front of it so the shot would have to go over the top.

It's important to position the trap so it's not where the desired landing area should be but where an errant shot should be penalized in some fashion. Otherwise, it just becomes a flukey deal like having OB 10' behind a basket.

It's important to position the trap so it's not where the desired landing area should be but where an errant shot should be penalized in some fashion. Otherwise, it just becomes a flukey deal like having OB 10' behind a basket.


yeah, i was envisioning an area aht's about 45 ft in length, and runs the along the left side of the fairway, penalizing a shot that hyzers out too far, or on the opposite side for shots that turn over too far...either way, it would have to be done so that it wasn't a flukey thing, you're right

First off I'm not a real big fan of fences or artificial objects near a green. I do think the use of sand traps is a very good idea. If u place a trap on a side of the hole that is flat and force different shots on you approach it can make the hole very different. If the other side slopes down..well u just made the hole that much more difficult. To pentalize a player simply make them take the throw from the back of the hazard..it may not seem like much, but instead of a 25 to 35 foot putt..now they may have a 45 to 65 foot putt..big difference..I also think sand is a good idea because than if you land or skip into the bunker u are there no way out just like a ball would in sand..this could greatly help 200 to 300 ft holes that need some help in the score spread department and really could make you think about how u place your shot or up shot..another great idea but could pose problems is natural bunkers near a green..bushes or tall grass..I hate it when they are with in 20 of the hole but around 30 to 40 is great, it rewards those who can place an upshot close and to the left of a basket for example as apposed to the player who just trys to land near it any way possible..the idea o boulders or logs is interesting, but little challanging..if you have a 550 foot hole and you have and area around 350 to the left where u think most drives will end up place a nice row of bushes about 5 feet tall along that area..than see where people start placing the drives it spices things up more than a few oak trees or pine trees can ever do..

Jay

It may not grow in all climates and conditions but a sumac grove is a very nice place to avoid. It's very difficult to get out of. They grow consistently to a height of 12-15ft and no more. It grows fast like a weed though spread can be easily controlled just by mowing.

Not the poison variety, though please.

It may not grow in all climates and conditions but a sumac grove is a very nice place to avoid. It's very difficult to get out of. They grow consistently to a height of 12-15ft and no more. It grows fast like a weed though spread can be easily controlled just by mowing.

Not the poison variety, though please.



Those suckas grow to maximum height in only one year too! I think they only live about 7 to 10 years though and they all seem to die at once. They were significant elements on 2 or 3 holes at Killens Pond in Delaware.

One idea I really like is to put actual "Sand Traps" on holes more than say 500 feet around the preferred landing areas for the drives. If you land in them you would have really mooshy footing for your next shot. Keeping the sand fluffy is a big challenge though, and it ain't cheap (unless you have a local natural supply). Perhaps Gravel Traps, though I suppose some folks consider them excellent tee pads... :p :D

I know that most disc golfers don't like "artificial" hazards like roads or fences or walls or string . . . . I like them all. Seems silly NOT to use them.

Just keeping my .02 up to date. No need to tell me that it seems gimmicky or contrived, because I will still disagree. I don't need anyone to build a lake to throw my disc in if they prefer to just spray paint the grass. I have enough imagination to paint it blue in my mind. I'll even dry off after I swim out and get my disc to take it to the drop zone.

More obstacles and challenges please.

Mandos -- those are usually badly designed and just an argument waiting to happen.

I agree, though it would be nice if they'd paint the grass to look like a nice koy pond!


I know that most disc golfers don't like "artificial" hazards like roads or fences or walls or string . . . . I like them all. Seems silly NOT to use them.

Just keeping my .02 up to date. No need to tell me that it seems gimmicky or contrived, because I will still disagree. I don't need anyone to build a lake to throw my disc in if they prefer to just spray paint the grass. I have enough imagination to paint it blue in my mind. I'll even dry off after I swim out and get my disc to take it to the drop zone.

More obstacles and challenges please.

Mandos -- those are usually badly designed and just an argument waiting to happen.

How about wrecked or junk cars ?

I was thinking of having a row of telephone poles set up !!!! :eek:

Here's a new bunker at Highbridge. No relief or penalty when landing in the rock pile, just difficult footing.

http://publish.hometown.aol.com/ck34/images/highbridge%20bunker.jpg

There's a lot of rock piles like that occurring naturally on courses in Pennsylvania. How far from the polehole is the above? The farther from the polehole, the more the tricky footing becomes a factor, because you often need a run-up or secure footing to deliver a longer shot. Sort of like in ball golf - there's a big difference between being in a greenside bunker and a fairway bunker. If I was putting to a basket 35-60 feet away, I don't think those rocks and the footing would be a very big issue for me.

And if that rock-pile is 250-300 feet away disc golfers will sprain/break their ankles on a regular basis on the hole.

It's a big granite pile near Highbridge and I pasted the basket in the photo just for fun. There's no way this hazard would be safe for play. It's a real ankle breaker. However, the concept of a boulder field as a hazard makes sense. But I would want single boulders scattered around with some space between each one for walking, but close enough that usually you don't have much run-up.

BTW, this granite is from the vein used to create President Kennedy's Memorial at Arlington. It's also what we're using to create the special granite trophies for Mid-Nats winners.

Chuck, disc golfers will do a full runup and hurt themselves, or else relocate to a flat spot without penalty. After all, it's disc golf and they are entitled to their preferred throw no matter where they landed.

I don't recall large rocks being in the list of casual obstacles. :cool:

Mandos -- those are usually badly designed and just an argument waiting to happen.



Most people feel that Mandos are where bad course design prevailed and installed to rectify the problem. However, this assumption is not entirely true. Sure, there are countless courses around the U.S. and abroad that have this issue, but when used correctly, the addition of a mando can create a very nice and difficult shot.

Take this hole on my local course.
http://home.comcast.net/~cs_lastboyscout/Hole_12_Mando.jpg
The trees are located about 13 and 15 feet from the tee pad. The basket layouts are all reachable through this mando, but the around the tree to the right hyzer shot is far easier. The biggest problem this mando injects into the shot is that you now have to power a straight and very accurate shot 300 feet to the short pin, 400 feet to the middle pin, and 485 feet to the long pin. Most players hit the gap, but end up in the woods to the left, or hitting the trees to the right by throwing an anhyzer from trying to power the shot. Occasionally a worm burner is thrown into the hillside. Rarely does the player make it over the sidewalk, around the bend of trees and near the next teepad.
http://home.comcast.net/~cs_lastboyscout/Hole_12_Mando_Satellite.jpg
This hole is a hard 2 in the short position, a hard 3 in the middle position, and an easy 4 in the long position. And Yes, the middle position is located under a tree. Sometimes it helps your approach shot, but most the time is really screws your putt up. You better learn how to putt on your knees, or laying down on your chest depending on the angle of approach to the basket.
----------------------------------
Also, and I forget the course name, somewhere in KY, there is a hole with a single tree mando. The reason for this: The tree was there and no other trees where around. The tee pad sits in the middle of this hole, with the single tree about 80 feet straight forward. If the mando arrow is pointing to the right of the tree, then the basket is visible very hard left of the mando tree. If the mando arrow is pointing left of the tree, then the basket is very hard right of the mando tree. In all of these cases, there is a road that some what curves around the fairway, enstablishing an O.B. that really toughens up the shot and causes you to essentially make this easy 3 hole turn into a safe layup around the mando tree causing for the hard pushed 3 for par.

Sometimes a mando is an easy way to offer options on a hole where nothing else is possible, short of spending several hundreds if not thousands of dollars. Remember, nice trees cost about $300.00, and this is for something that is only 15 to 20 feet high with a width of about 5 feet when the tree has leaves. Add to this the fact that most states are inacting a native tree act to any public (read city or state owned) land, and your choices for trees gets whittled down to usually oaks or maples as the cheapest options.

It's hard to tell from the picture but it looks like the designer wanted to create the scenario to support your argument for a double mando versus originally positioning the tee and pins so it was challenging enough without needing the mando. It doesn't look like a double mando is required here, just a single mando going to the left of the right tree. Looks like missing the left tree on the left would likely be a penalty already?

It's hard to tell from the picture but it looks like the designer wanted to create the scenario to support your argument for a double mando versus originally positioning the tee and pins so it was challenging enough without needing the mando. It doesn't look like a double mando is required here, just a single mando going to the left of the right tree. Looks like missing the left tree on the left would likely be a penalty already?



All too often people assume the golfer is right handed. Well, we have a fair amount of lefties, or atleast right handed sidearm throwers. It is a little hairy if you are not accurate, but a well placed shot to the left of the mandos makes for a easy birdie in the shot position and a great layup for throwing at the mid and long positions. Hence, why the double mando is in play.

I like mandos, O.B.s and other natural object placements within reason. I see them as learning tools. They are great ways to teach and enforce a certain shot, and also teach you to be creative. A sidearm flick roller (RHFH) or a backhand roller (LHBH) is a seldom used, but very effective shot on this hole. I know it, so do a few others, but we like to let the golfer think for his or herself. Sure the course could have been made harder by moving the teepad into the woods, but isnt that essentially what a mando is? Just a open course version of a wooded hole or a dogleg even? The only difference is that you dont have the possibility of hitting every tree on the fairway on a botched shot. If every mando was viewed as a wooded course, people would simply not complain. However, since the end goal (or basket) is visible, or alternate yet easier options are viewable, people tend to complain.

Just like hole 7 (i think) at the USDGC with the bamboo fence. Sure, thick bushes and some trees that top out at 10 to 15 feet would be better and more realistic and offer a better course feel and asthetics, but it does the same job.

I will post the pic of the hole as soon as I find it.
Here it is:
http://home.comcast.net/~cs_lastboyscout/usdgc_hole_7.jpg

I personally don't think there is anything wrong with a mandy used to add difficulty to a hole. The double-many 20 feet away is a great mental test, too. From the looks of the picture, there really is no reason to miss that double mandy, but just stepping up to the pad with it there will mess with your mind.

it does. I see and hear about alot of people barely missing the trees, but usually its the stories of nicking the tree and getting a very crappy kick out through the mando, or smacking the trees that gets passed along. Very good risk and reward layout. Go for the glory and you might shank a bad shot off hitting the woods to the left or trees to the right (in some cases on or over the road which is O.B.) or take the easy pitch up towards the middle and pray for an accurate approach shot.


As we finish up improving this course this summer, look for both PDGA and Souther Nationals tournaments to be played here by next summer if not sooner. This course is Sanders Ferry DGC (http://www.pdga.com/course/courses_by_city.php?id=763) in Hendersonville, TN just outside of Nashville. We are looking to bring back disc golf to the Nashville Area and have talks with some key people currently in progress. The tournament, name still being debated, but will include the following courses: Sharps Springs DGC (http://www.pdga.com/course/courses_by_city.php?id=1648) in Smyrna, TN - Seven Oaks DGC (http://www.pdga.com/course/courses_by_city.php?id=772) and Ceadar Hill DGC (http://www.pdga.com/course/courses_by_city.php?id=771) in Nashville, TN.

This will offer several different flavors of Disc Golf with Cedar Hill being a long and tough wooded course offering a few open shots to give your a breather - Sharps Springs being tight and technical, but very fun to play witha water shot, and a mud pit hazard valley shot - Seven Oaks is a very clean wooded course that rewards consistant skill, and punishes lack of focus - Sanders Ferry is a fairly open big arm course with several water shots.

Sharps Springs is commonly played as the PDGA Skeeter Heater. Seven Oaks and Cedar Hill are played as the PDGA Nashville Vapor Trail.

Sanders Ferry is the best open course in the nashville area, and has so much potential that our club cannot figure out what to do. We plan on improving the existing set up first before going all out with pro tee pads. Here are the ideas that we are currently looking at, and will possible implement:

Elevated Basket like at USDGC, use of an O.B. sandtrap modeled after Hole #3 at Ephram White Park (Bowling Green Ams), tighter placement of baskets near O.B. but with a O.B. relief to one side, installation of trees to act as natural objects, but to also create wind tunnels and slots (good windy course), placement that creates an "island" type shot, and landscaping to increase asthetics and increase low-lying natural objects (bushes). And maybe a sign that reads "Disc Eating Tree." I have always wanted one of those.

Keep these ideas and critiques coming. Im talking all this info and using it to turn this course into a gold rated course.

Check out the controversy going on this weekend at the ball golf Memorial. Apparently, Nicklaus took out every other tine in the sand trap rakes so they make much deeper and wider grooves when it's raked. Almost all pros are complaining. It was a PGA test to see whether they will do it other places on tour to make the bunker shots a little tougher.

Check out the controversy going on this weekend at the ball golf Memorial. Apparently, Nicklaus took out every other tine in the sand trap rakes so they make much deeper and wider grooves when it's raked. Almost all pros are complaining. It was a PGA test to see whether they will do it other places on tour to make the bunker shots a little tougher.



I caught a few minutes of coverage yesterday between kid duties, including a bit of an interview with Mr. Jack.

He said it was a PGA decision (not his) to alter the rake pattern, and only determined in the days prior to the event. I thought the pattern looked rough, but didn't hear the part about removing e/o one. Cool idea. Now if they could throw some big stones in and hide them in the sand, they'd be more like the bunkers most of us hacks have to play on.

At least in the fairway traps, they have the rake running along the fairway, vs. across it, and that apparently makes for nasty exits for those who enter. I think that was equally a factor, along with removal of the fingers.

Wish I had time to watch more. I like to watch the pros the most when they have to think/execute and are challenged to do something beyond deuce or die.

Joe

Even though this mando is way better than most and no one's mentioned that the bushy stuff growing along the trees are probably the best part of the mando. It takes some of the usual arguments away -- but not all. When playing with friends/honest guys it's not much of an issue -- although it can be. When playing with guys that are all hyped up in a tournament it can also cause a problem -- "it passed on the inside . . . no it didn't . . ." etc. I like mandos for play with guys that I know -- but it's just another rule that can be a real hassle. Even on a couple courses with more cover around the mando there's still that miracle shot that crosses on the wrong side but doesn't touch anything -- it's just a hassle. Unless there's a spotter there making the call, then it's fine. Without a spotter I'd just say forget the mando.

Seems to me that most golfers are over-looking one aspect of our game. It is in a natural park setting. Adding elements that are not natural will take away the appeal of the game. WE do have options in increasing the difficulty of our game. One that I think is overlooked, Bamboo. Yes, it is a weed. But it grows fast, and is easily maintained ( when course locals are present ) and is asthetically pleasing. The beauty of bamboo.......... The phrase " dude you just got some bamboo love " would never be heard. You will not fit a disc through this stuff. Perfect hazard! It is easy to find, transplant and maintain. Bamboo mando's anybody??? A strategic bamboo patch 5 feet right of a tee-pad, 20 ft out on a hyzer line will drive people nuts, and make them better golfers!
Just a thought!

That ball golf sand trap rake issue is funny. I personally always flip the rake over when I smooth out the sand trap. Guess thats just my OCD wanting to make the sand look pretty.
==========================================

It is easy to find, transplant and maintain. Bamboo mando's anybody???



Unfortunately, more and more states, like Tennessee, are inacting the Invasive Species act, which means that on public land (city, state, federal) only tree, shrub, and flower species natural to Tennessee, or your particular state, can be planted.

Short story made long, no go for bamboo unless you own the property for the Disc Golf Course. However, it would be possible to build a bamboo fence or even a slatted fence and plant some english ivy around its base.

...in a tournament it can also cause a problem -- "it passed on the inside . . . no it didn't . . ." etc.



I have never had an issue like this arise. Besides, all members on a card should be watching and spotting at all times. The mando we have are so close to the tee anyway, its too easy to tell if you hit the mando window or not. I could maybe see an issue on a mando 50+ feet away.

All the guys who taught me to play started by hitting me with rules and rule violations from day one. I was also taught to watch other players on my card at all times because you never know if someone is doing something. Case in point, a guy now named "Foot Fault". He steps completely on top of his mini when he uses one, or all the way on top of a disc if he does not flip it. He also likes to make falling putts inside of 10 meters. Got an object in you way, well "Foot Fault" steps to the side of his disc or mini. He averages about 4 extra penalty strokes in a tournament.

Watch for it -- it will come up. Playing in a group of 4 laid back types and the guy that threw the disc stumbled a little as he fell and missed the mando and wasn't watching since he was catching himself. I told him he missed it and another guy in the groupe told him he missed it. When he got to his disc he told the 4th guy that there's no way he missed the mando based upon where his disc landed. The 4th guy told him he missed the mando. The guy who threw it was still skeptical whether or not he made the mando. I've played a couple double mandos like yours and the other issue that's come up is when you carom off the inside of the closer one and then go so fast past the second one it's tough to tell if you hit or not if you miss the deflection. I realize that everyone's supposed to be watching -- it's just that they don't. Then one guy's stuck making the call -- usually me, and then I'm the bad guy. If there was heavier cover on the non-good sides of the mandos that would of course be better. I like the idea of mandos -- they just lead to so many discussions that I don't want to have. The other thing that's fascinating is I've been in groups where the guy clearly misses the mando and everyone except me reacts like he made it . .. ??? Uh, you missed the mando right? No -- I think he made it, Yeah -- that's the ticket, he just made it. ??

I love the looks of the course -- where is it?

I like the looks of the basket with or without the mando. Without the mando, do people try to go up the middle anyway? It looks pretty invitiing even if there isn't a mando since I know there's no way I'm getting there by going around . . . ??

That ball golf sand trap rake issue is funny. I personally always flip the rake over when I smooth out the sand trap. Guess thats just my OCD wanting to make the sand look pretty.
==========================================

It is easy to find, transplant and maintain. Bamboo mando's anybody???



Unfortunately, more and more states, like Tennessee, are inacting the Invasive Species act, which means that on public land (city, state, federal) only tree, shrub, and flower species natural to Tennessee, or your particular state, can be planted.

Short story made long, no go for bamboo unless you own the property for the Disc Golf Course. However, it would be possible to build a bamboo fence or even a slatted fence and plant some english ivy around its base.



When you are in a sand trap what kind of restrictions are on your next shot? Have you ever been required to move your ball to another location?

The course is located just outside of Nashville, Tennessee. It was one part of the Tennessee State Championships, and also was used in the Worlds one year when it was held in Nashville. The course is located in Sanders Ferry Park - Hendersonville, TN. Just check the PDGA course directory. We plan on having a website in the near future, but first things first, got to get the course to bragging status first. The Nashville area has no open courses, so we really want to go all out with this one. We even have the city mowing the grass weekly on monday mornings before our Random Doubles Tournament that night. It is the nicest course in the area by far. Just got to get that gold rating ;)

As far as your question about having to move my golf ball John, I have seen a sign in Florida. Apparently some gators had eggs in the sandtrap, and we were advised to leave the ball and move to a drop zone about 50 feet away. Still, in Disc Golf, a sandtrap that is O.B. near the basket on a nice easy birdie hole really hits you psychologically. Add to that a nice head wind and a 200 foot shot over water and you have some fun fun fun ready to be had!

Typically speaking, and not including OB areas, how many times during a round are you Required to move your ball and play it from a different spot? Are there any distinct requirements for your next shot when you are in a sand trap? I'm asking because I've never played a round of ball golf, much less even read their rules. I have paid attention to the players and courses I've watched on TV. I'm not sure I've ever seen a player move their ball out of a sand trap during a competitive round (and I don't mean a hypothetical situation of the ball plugged in the lip of the trap). Traps are meant to be avoided, or play a special shot if you land in one.

No. The ball is not moved unless an issue such as a relief or O.B. is presented. However, unless pot bunkers with a 7+foot high earthen wall was built, then the sand trap has no effect on the disc golfer. Maybe sandtraps as fairway bunkers with bushes that are kept at about a height of 4 feet would work. This gives just enough hope of an out, and punishes the next bad shot. That and trying to x-step on sand is not easy (hence Fly18 pads).

Thanks for the response about the rules, except you didn't fill me in on the restrictions for playing out of the sand. You're right about regular sand traps not presenting much challenge to disc golfers. With taller walls, or bushes between the bunker and the pin, bunkers would add to the course designer's tools. But trying to create these bunkers and stay within the budget that us designers have to work with is difficult. I believe restrictions on footing would be a much better, and easier way than moving to a drop zone. Of course, near the basket there won't be much of a hinderance by just limiting footwork. Maybe this is where extra bushes (or rock/bamboo/wood fences) could be utilized.

Water areas are hazards and not OB in ball golf. However, most of the time the player takes a penalty and a drop outside the hazard since it's hard to play the shot from the hazard unless it's on the edge of the water or it's only 2 inches deep where the ball is.

I think for public parks, casual relief hazards could just be uncut grass areas instead of sand traps that are just painted for more clear boundaries for sanctioned events.

Maybe im just misunderstanding you john. If you are referring to sand traps for disc golf, then the fact would be that the sand traps are O.B. meaning that the disc golfer would have to putt from the grass area before the sand. If the sand traps are placed so that they lie at the edge of 10 meters, then jump putting would be allowed. However, I forsee placing these at around 25 feet out, thus causing a 30 foot putt which does not allow for jumping. Risk Reward. Do you have the ability to hit the green, or do you lay up?

Well, I'm not suggesting "sand" traps for disc golf. I've played a lot of times from a sandy lie, and it's not too terrible. The similarity I'm after is to make an area that if you land in, your next shot is different than a normal shot, thus increasing the difficulty of the particular hole.

I'll try to illustrate:
Ball Golf - A player steps up to the tee on a Par 4 hole and sees several fairway bunkers out in the fairway and a few bunkers around the green. Nothing too unusual, so he fires off a shot that is supposed to miss the fairway bunkers. The shot happens to land in the bunker (in the sand). When the player gets to his lie and sees that he is in the sand, what does he do? He grabs the appropriate club, takes his stance, and hits the ball without taking a practice swing that touches the sand (which is, as far as I can tell, the only restriction when playing out of the sand). There is no penalty stroke, he is not required to move his ball, he only has to deal with the difference in surfaces and no grounding of the club. If he works hard at practicing these shots, the player won't worry about being in a bunker (he'll likely try to avoid them, but he won't panic when the situation arises).

Disc Golf - A player steps up to the tee on a Par 4 hole and sees several trees in the fairway and one or two fairway bunkers (let's use the boulder field as a bunker). The player throws his shot and goes around the trees, but lands in the bunker. This particular bunker is 200 feet from the basket, but with all of the boulders, the player can't get good footing for a run-up so he has to "Stand and Deliver". A 200 foot shot with no moving of the feet is not easy unless it is practiced. The bunkers aren't intended for penalty strokes, they are there to make a player execute their shots correctly, or deal with poor footing if they miss.

I'm sure there are ways to increase the difficulty of the game of Disc Golf. Not every course will need bunkers. Many courses that are heavily wooded don't need any more hazards. Course that are more open can benefit from added hazards.

From my previous posts I'm sure y'all recognize I've got a strong bias towards incorporating everything that's great about ball golf into our sport. Having said that, I do not think that our rules need to be identical. I do think that casual relief hazards can be well utilized to have flat greens play as if there are drop-off's. They can also be used strategically on par 4 & 5 fairways to force players to think more on the teebox, read the wind, decide what the upside and downsides of the gamble are , and roll the dice accordingly.

I think Chuck's suggestion of having the (CRA's, buncrs, funnels, name ytb hazards) casual relief areas defined by higher grass for casual play works. It's visible and cheap to maintain. The hazards just need to be explained on the course information board and preferably on all the tee signs as well. For tournaments, paint or string lines would be required.

This is not to say that having an area, such as a boulder field, that naturally restricts run-up is not a good feature to include in designs. Just like ball golf has water, sand, waste areas, tall rough, short rough, wood chips, wicked slopes on greens etc. disc golf should have a greater variety of hazards.

I think that these ideas are great as ideas, but to really present the challenge, it needs to be a lie with natural objects, not a posted sign. IMHO, O.B. areas are the only postings I feel that disc golf needs. Disc golf is suppose to be eco-friendly, and I feel that adding additional trees or shrubs adds to this. Just like tiger woods and a local duffer stepping up to play one hole together, they will both view the hole differently and take a different shot or approach. This same principle should work for disc golf as well. I know of 3 people off the top of my head who cannot throw sidearm, thumber, or tomahawk shots because of bum shoulders. Back hand presents no problem for them. If they hit these "special shot" areas, and cannot physically perform the shot, they are being penalized unfairly. Granted, if an obstacle is in the way, then it is there choice for the shot. While a thumber might be the shot, that person might opt for a grenade since it is a shot they can perform. Challenge the player to play within him or herself.

...Just like tiger woods and a local duffer stepping up to play one hole together, they will both view the hole differently and take a different shot or approach. This same principle should work for disc golf as well...I know of 3 people off the top of my head who cannot throw sidearm, thumber, or tomahawk shots because of bum shoulders. Back hand presents no problem for them...While a thumber might be the shot, that person might opt for a grenade since it is a shot they can perform. Challenge the player to play within him or herself.



I couldn't agree more. I think the shot choice should be up to the individual golfer, not for the course designer, to decide. Having a tall obstruction (fence/shrubs/bamboo, etc.) can make a person throw something besides the standard backhand without the use of a special 'ruling' or course stipulation. Not that those things can't and/or don't work, but I just feel that it should be up to me as a player to decide the best way to traverse the course. I also like the idea of the boulder fields to limit stance/footwork options. I would think you wouldn't want anything too crazy that people will be breaking ankles every round, but enough that they really think about their footing.

Just to be clear, no one in the 100-member DGCD course designers group seems to support having any type of hazard with a forced throw type being required. Carlton Howard tried it in the 80s and it has been discussed recently among the group. But it's been rejected in lieu of other types of hazards that don't necessarily force a certain type of shot but make other throws more appropriate than a backhand.

BTW, the player was never forced to throw the specific shot. They were allowed to take an OB penalty instead and throw whatever they wanted from where they entered the trap.

I wouldn't call the hazards "boulder fields" but "areas with scattered boulders" where there's room to walk among them on the ground/grass/dirt. The idea would be to hamper the run-up but not break an ankle unless you were foolish (Darwinian disc golf).

Just to be clear, no one in the 100-member DGCD course designers group seems to support having any type of hazard with a forced throw type being required. Carlton Howard tried it in the 80s and it has been discussed recently among the group. But it's been rejected in lieu of other types of hazards that don't necessarily force a certain type of shot but make other throws more appropriate than a backhand.


I agree. There is nothing in the rules that can force a player to play a certain type of shot. There is, however, open latitude for a TD to utilize drop zones for a designated area with or without penalty.

I'd still be in favor of formalizing and naming such casual relief hazards and creating a "hazards" section under "Rules of Play". I still like the buncr name, but really like calling them "funnels" since everything that lands in them funnels to the drop zone.

I still like the buncr name, but really like calling them "funnels" since everything that lands in them funnels to the drop zone.



That's not the case though. The buncr, by a pin in particular, doesn't (necessarily) have a drop zone but it could. The 'cr' at the end of the word is short for casual relief. We installed our first buncr near a pin at Highbridge last weekend. The first group had a player land in it. He took casual relief back from the pin on the LOP out of the sand to the edge and proceeded to still make his 30 ft putt instead of 15 footer.

Funnel makes it sound like the two tier minigolf holes where you go in the pipe on top and the ball spits out to the lower tier CLOSER to the hole not further away like our drop zone concept. If anything, ours work more like a 'chute' as in the game Chutes and Ladders where you go back if you land on a chute. If we called these hazards 'chutes' then players could just say "Aw, shoot!" when they land in one to avoid (ahem) shouting a potential courtesy violation... :o

Landing in a hazard with a drop zone is also like a 'scratch' in pool when the cue ball is automatically returned to the end of the table. There's enough scratching going on already, in the GM groups at least, so I'm not sure we want to go there with a name like 'scratch' for a hazard, even though it might sometimes involve sand, or heaven forbid, poison ivy... :)

I guess the best parallel name with golf would be Collection Area. That is what they call the area in front of a false front where all balls in that area "collect", usually within a couple feet of a drain.

Around the basket it wouldn't make a difference in most cases whether the lie was taken straight back on the line of play or to a pre-determined drop zone. For fairway casual hazards, however, the drop zone could be placed back into the trees on the side of the fairway with a difficult, but possible shot to the next landing area. This aspect wouldn't necessarily be the result if the relief simply went back on the line of play. For uniformity it would be good to have all such hazards be defined and played in the same manner.

I think the Rules Committee would rather we just concoct these hazards within existing rules. However, the Special Conditions rule, which is what we're using for drop zone hazards, seems to always require approval. So, we need to at least get that clause modified in a future rules update to embrace these new type of hazards.

yeah, i don't think it matters where it's listed, but do feel that it'd be a good thing to for the growth of the game that there are consistent rules and markings from course to course so as to not have td's read a grocery list of special conditions before every tournament. also, so that players are introduced to the game and all the rules at the beginning and don't enter a tournament to find out that it's a completely new game.

While I do like the BunCR idea, this nearly imposes the same penalty, but with more risk of missing the putt as opposed to the trap or bunker just being O.B.
Shown below is a picture of the hole in which we are looking at adding the sandtrap O.B.. This layout is slightly unusual in the fact that the sandtrap is behind the pin rather than in front. Currently, due to wind off of the lake and a cross wind coming off of the field to the right of the pin, making a very accurate landing under the pin takes skill and a little luck. Most people over drive the pin and land in these ruts created by people who would off road in this area.
It is the feeling of myself and others that this layout causes the person to layup, and usually by 30+ feet, creating a hole that once was an easy 2 to have psychological influence on your shot making the birdie attempt even harder. The sandtrap is about 15 feet behind the basket with around 75 feet in front of the basket.

http://home.comcast.net/~cs_lastboyscout/Hole_15_Sand_Trap_Satellite.jpg

You won't get any support from me for any OB behind a pin within 25-30 feet. That's unfair when players in our sport are required to throw such that a disc is still about 3 feet off the ground by the time it gets to the basket. Thus, unlike BG, we need a falloff distance behind the basket for misses that have the right amount of energy. OB could be as close as 15 feet in front of a basket following the same logic since good throws must be at least 3 feet or so above ground as they pass or hit the basket, easily clearing a closer trap on the front side.

In BG, they can use the proper amount of enegy to reach the hole on an approach or putt and usually don't get penalized for missing slightly left or right with the correct amount of energy. Granted, missing left or right might be penalized with a rollaway, but usually not a penalty stroke. Our new buncr concept emulates that rollaway scenario.

My recommendation would be to make the sandtrap shown a buncr with LOP relief away from the pin if a player lands in it. It's positioned and is shaped exactly like how our newly defined buncrs should be designed near a pin.

That makes sense. The whole idea was to offer a risk/reward scenario for those that want to try and ace the shot (Its only 255 feet). Easy hole to land short on, even harder if you try to park it for the easy birdie. Unlike BG, the sandtrap was around 10 feet from the front of the basket with the O.B. road about 20 feet behind it.

Moving the sandtrap to the front of the hole is possible (granted this idea is a concept and not in place yet). I would however like more BunCR info. Is there a posting, or an email you could shoot me?

I'm not saying the trap should be moved. I like your position behind the pin, just not the 1-throw penalty. I think it's reasonable to have buncr traps on any side of the pin as long as it's easy for players to see or know (via sign) where it's located.

There are no official specs on buncrs yet. The first one we know of was just installed last week. My proposal would be that the trap be designed so the edge closest to the pin be around 10-15 feet away and the far edge be 25-35 feet away. The trap might look and work best as roughly kidney bean shaped arcing around the pin ranging from about 1/4 of the circumference up to possibly even 1/2 way around the pin (or sometimes two 1/4 arc traps?). The lie for any disc landing completely in the trap would be moved back to the edge of the trap on the line of play from the pin. No penalty.

I agree that having a bunCR 10-15 ft. past a basket is fine and that OB shouldn't be that close, but for a different reason than Chuck does.

I do feel that it's "fair" to have a bunCR, OB, or a steep drop-off 10 feet past a basket, as long as the player is aware of the hazard. I think that disc height and speed control is an essential part of disc golf. One of the first things I learned as a beginner was to throw my drives/approaches just short and right of the basket to let them skip/slide right next to the pole.

The reason I don't like OB that close behind a bucket is that the next shot is a virtual gimmee. That gives a player the opportunity to run as hard as they want at the basket, blow by, but still have a gimmee par. A comparable shot in ball golf would usually result in a tough up-and-down for par, or worse.

I agree that keeping bunCR's at least 10-15 ft. from baskets is a good rule of thumb. That distance would allow for approaches to be layed-up and putts inside of 60 ft. or so given a lobbed chance to go in. I don't think, however, that there should be any set standard for depth, or shape of bunCR's. I think that size, shape, and placement of bunCR's may end up being a recognized part of designers' signatures.

As to the LOP vs. drop zone theory of bunCR's: I think that LOP bunCR's do not fall under the Special Condition Drop Zone rule as written. I believe that it falls under 804.01 D, which requires permission from the PDGA Competition Director. It's clear that the logic flows from the Casual Relief rule, and the TD's option to allow for relief beyond 5meters, but that rule is created for optional relief and not to penalize.

I do believe that the Special Conditions Drop Zone rule as written does allow TD's to implement bunCR's with drop zones without seeking permission from the Competition Director. This does not necessarily mean that the drop zone bunCR is inherently better than the LOP bunCR, but I will argue that it is.

I think that the formalization and incorporation of the bunCR concept into our rules and courses will be a nice step forward towards greater risk/reward scenarios "around the green". I do think that, if the rules committee elects to write a specific definition for bunCR's they'll have to pick one or the other.

As I said, I think that either way it'll benefit the game. I'm partial to the DZ version because it grants the designer greater leeway in creating unique shots behind trees, bushes, etc.

Also, the DZ version would eliminate any controversy over the definition of LOP with fairway bunCR's. i.e. the bunCR is on the short side of a dogleg, does the LOP point towards the actual basket location or to the middle of the fairway?

I do feel that it's "fair" to have a bunCR, OB, or a steep drop-off 10 feet past a basket, as long as the player is aware of the hazard.



Buncr, yes. Steep drop off, maybe (depends on landing area and how steep). OB, no. Put OB less than 25 feet behind the pin at your own peril for getting marked down on the PDGA Course Evaluation.

The Special Conditions rule 804.01 seems to be interpreted in two ways. One, you must get any approval for Special Conditions setups. Two, you only need approval if you do something that's not used in any other current rules like forcing a throw or giving a 3-shot penalty. As I read it, doing the buncrs the way that's been discussed completely falls within the options allowed in 804.01. The LOP buncrs by the pin are handled like casual relief areas except that players are required to take the LOP relief, which they aren't in regular casual relief areas like poison ivy patches.

BTW, I agree the LOP buncrs primarily make sense by the pin, not in the fairway. Using a drop zone makes more sense for fairway buncrs and possibly some near the pin. I could see using a drop zone by the pin in the case the buncr was a small circular pit/depression less than 10 feet wide. Or, when the shape of the buncr has a lot of inside curves such that determining LOP gets hairy.

We'll be trying several of these types at Highbridge this summer. We already have the following:
1. One hole on the whole course where all of the trees have the 2m rule in effect.
2. One hole with a hemlock tree right next to pin where any disc stuck in the tree is marked at a drop zone 30 feet from the basket with no penalty.
3. A sand buncr 10 feet from the pin where you must take LOP relief to the edge of the trap but no penalty.
4. Another sand buncr with LOP relief that's positioned perfectly between the A & B pin placements which are about 55 feet apart. The buncr is about 10-15 feet away from either pin so we get to use the buncr properly in either pin position.
5. Two sand traps that are OB because it was easier to create them with sand than fill them and retain water in those areas for ponds.

Future hazards being considered:
A. Fairway hazard with scattered boulders that will not have a penalty but just hamper run-ups.
B. Dig out a fairway trap that's a shallow pit with the dirt creating a high front lip that will require a player to go up and over the front lip to escape.
C. A marked fairway buncr on at least a par 4 hole where the player must move without penalty to a drop zone which is positoned so the next shot will have to be curved around a tree 10-15 feet away.

i think we agree that in one form or another there's room for some clarificationin the next edition of the rules.

i like your ideas for new hazards and applaud you for implementing different ideas and analyzing their impact on score spreads. i'm concerned that having too many hazard options available for designers will make the game confusing, particularly to new players. just circles back to the need for formalization in the rules.

i'm concerned that having too many hazard options available for designers will make the game confusing, particularly to new players.



It does lead to more professionalism in course design so that some experience and training is needed and not everyone will assume they can do it well. Harold lead the way by creating more challenges for a temp setup but with less aesthetic design elements he had to use at Winthrop. These ideas are another step into new challenges that have a more natural and perhaps less punitive effect than throw and distance.

On a tangent I'm trying to remember, Chuck, what were your thoughts on Dave Mc's proposal that basket manufacturers require a course design be approved by a certified designer before baskets could be shipped?

Do you see any benefit in the short to medium run of designers becoming "certified" through 2-3 day regional seminars?

Also, what attributes of the LOP bunCR concept do you find better than a DZ bunCR?

There's not enough money in the course design profession to justify the expense and potential licensing of course designers like architects or engineers. Steady Ed and Jim Challas (former Commissioner) strongly recommended against calling our group the Disc Golf Course Architects when we formed in 1994 due to potential legal implications.

Certification couldn't really be done in 2-3 days. And there's no curriculum written. Preparing one could take a fair amount of time and money.

Not that this shouldn't be done at some point but I think it will be a longer term evolution that justifies it. We'll be looking into doing design training and seminars at Highbridge with the same content being available for the same seminars at the IDGC. But with the Worlds next year, I wouldn't expect it for a while. I know Houck has threatened to write a design book but I think he's too busy, too.

I think I answered Dave's idea on the thread where he brought it up. I don't see the PDGA requiring designs to be approved before baskets are shipped. It would be up to manufacturers if they want to follow that policy.

The LOP buncr by the pin seems less contrived than the drop zone, given a choice. It feels more like a ball golf green with a hole on a ridge where the player putts up the ridge, doesn't hit it hard enough and it rolls back down to roughly the same position, not a collection area.

Little quick clarification please... LOP? Line Of Play?

The more and more that I read and come to understand on these bunCRs, the more I like. Im not real partial to drop zones, but I do understand that in the right situation, it would be a benefit.

The idea of using the sandtrap as a bunCR is something that I discussed today with several members who do my course's maintenance and they liked the idea of the bunCR over the O.B. Keep in mind that the O.B. was still brought up by several of them, but this idea really fits better with our goal of having a designer gold rated course on public land. We also have an area of the course that would be a prime canidate for the DZ bunCR.
http://home.comcast.net/~cs_lastboyscout/Hole_11_DZ__bunCR.JPG
The area in red is a drainage ditch that is about 12 feet deep. It has been filled with logs and large branches that have fallen due to storms to provide an uneven footing. The area in blue is where I would suggest putting the DZ. This area would be marked by using landscaping ties boxing in a natural tee pad. The basket is located directly in line with the tree in front of the DZ about 100 feet away. Is this a pretty could usage of a DZ bunCR?

I would love to be a pilot course for the bunCR concept.

Your picture shows a situation that in the past might have been marked as causal relief and or special conditions area anyway. So it looks like it would be fine for the new buncr concept as you've sketched. Some designers are more punitive and might have just called your marked area OB and added a penalty to it so it's more matter of preference.

I remember that hole from Am-Worlds, what a fun week!

I'd agree that the area could be OB or could be a bunCR. I like the bunCR idea better there, but would like to see the drop zone moved a little farther to the right to the point that it's a pretty difficult up and down to save par.

Remind me, is the sidewalk OB or the street?

street. The whole course improvement and disc golf club for this course (host city) is really just a jumping point for bringing disc golf back to the Nashville area. This town is so disc golf stagnate that its not funny. One incident occured that caused the PDGA to really stay away from this town, and a fairly large group of DGers are trying to clean the slate and start anew. By next year, expect to see the Nashville area as one of the top rated areas for disc golf courses and hopefully A-Tier tourneys. Its kinda like dominoes. We have all the pieces, they just need to be set up right so that they all fall into place.

One incident occured that caused the PDGA to really stay away from this town....


I don't know the situation there, but I've dealt with "the PDGA" a lot. In my experience, "the PDGA" doesn't "stay away" from anywhere. It's the local DG organizers that stay away from the the PDGA.

In any event, it's good to hear you are invloved with a group that is trying to bring PDGA tourneys (back?) to the area.

I love the course variety in Nashville, with Cedar Hill being one of my favorites anywhere.
(Too bad Stonehenge went away :()
Keep on keepin' on!

I have been talking with a few people in the area, and word has gotten to Thomas Laird, the TN Coordinator. The disc golf scene is about to blow up big in the Nashville Area and TN in general. Be on the look out, I am planning to get my Course Evaluator Certification, which means all of these courses will more than likely become improved both asthetically and course design.

Here's a photo of one of two new Buncr (http://publish.hometown.aol.com/ck34/images/buncr%20example.jpg) hazards that were tested at the Mid-Nationals. Seemed to work well and players enjoyed "defeating" the buncr when they made their putts from the edge after having to move back out of the sand to the edge of the buncr. One advantage of the buncr in this case is the sand will slow/stop any disc that bangs the basket and might have rolled away even farther.

howd that work? did they take a penalty stroke? or just move back?

Just move back on the LOP. No penalty other than a longer putt, just like a ball rolling away on a slope near a BG hole.

whats the point of it? in the pic, it looks like its only function is to make a very accurate shot at the pin result in a much worse lie. i dont get it, at least from this pic.

Buncr's around the basket create an effect as if there were a drop-off from the edge of a hill in a situation where there isn't the desired topography. Just put on your mental 3-D glasses and you're good to go.

What is the point of bunkers around the green in BG? At times they place the pin only feet from the edge of the green that is guarded by a bunker. Do you fundamentally disagree with that too?

Instead of merely "very accurate", now you want to be very accurate and make sure you don't land short and left of the pin. And, if you land to the left of the basket and miss your putt, you are in the buncr. Adds a lot to the mind games, IMO. I love that part of buncrs

As has been mentioned elsewhere, I am still trying to digest the departure from the "play it where you land" nature of golf. But, I like the idea of making the putting green area more challenging on a wide open area that is devoid of terrain like the hole pictured.

It's not a reachable hole by blue level so it makes for an interesting 100-150 ft upshot to avoid the trap. The slight penalty of having to make a longer putt is enough to affect where upshots are directed and psychologically impact the players. In addition, playing too safe above the basket then produces the dreaded downhill "death putt" which is nerve wracking itself besides having the big sand pit looming behind the basket. I'm not sure a hazard needs to do more than these things to be worthwhile and effective.

asking what the point is doesnt mean i disagree. it just means that from the picture the point is not obvious. chuck's explanation makes sense, and now i see what he is doing with this particular "bunker"

i do wish it was possible to accomplish these kinds of design objectives with foliage rather than contrived spaces, though, but thats just me.

For public parks, an unmowed area the shape of this buncr could be used to achieve the same thing. Paint or string could be used to formally mark the boundary for events.

asking what the point is doesnt mean i disagree. it just means that from the picture the point is not obvious. chuck's explanation makes sense, and now i see what he is doing with this particular "bunker"




Thanks for clarifying. Sorry for missing your intent.


i do wish it was possible to accomplish these kinds of design objectives with foliage rather than contrived spaces, though, but thats just me.



An idea that I think that is worthy is putting a 4' or so high section of chainlink fence 15' or so feet from the basket. This would force an altered stance if your disc was close to it basket side, force you to putt from the other side of the fence if you were leaning up against it basket side, and would force you to alter your putt (players with turbo putts would be rewarded) if you were on the opposite side form the basket.

Playing with length of the fence and the orientation of it relative to the normal direction of approach could yield lots of different effects.

You could dress the fence out nicely with your regional vine of choice to make it more aesthetically pleasing and natural looking.

Sort of like the bamboo on Winthrop 7. Mulch piles at Chili (Rochester) worked similarly on some holes there.

thats an excellant idea. bushes, shrubs, ornamental grasses, lots of different plants could serve the same purpose. some wood lattice would work, as would the chain link fence. i cant wait for more designed to have opportunities to use real foliage for disc golf obstacles. a lot has to happen just right for this, but wow, its nice when it does.

IMO, durability and maintainability of obstacles is key (discs hitting it as well as frustrated golfers hitting and kicking). I am not fully convinced all vines could take a beating and survive in my proposal.

A wood lattice would work if it was heavy enough. Some shrubs could work, but the expense of big enough shrubs is a lot of risk to try it and hope they survive long term. I do not believe we have any ornamental grasses that would grow high enough and be robust enough in the SE. Do you have any pictures of grasses in TX that would work?

I got the fence idea partly from playing in FL where the palmetto bushes (shrubs) provide the same effect. The nice thing about palmettos is that if a golfer decides to fight one in frustration, he will usually loose and go away bloodied.

http://www.swallowtailgardenseeds.com/assets/pampasgrass.jpg
pampas grass is native here in texas (and also NM) and gets real big in a couple years. if you need to make a 2-8 foot barrier, this works great. if the pic doesnt show, do a yahoo image search for pampas grass

I agree with Sandal; I'd rather see these hazards accomplished naturally. I don't want to see chain link or bamboo fences on disc golf courses - it's not very aesthetically pleasing and makes disc golf look more like mini (putt-putt) golf.

Even though we used short blue flags and string to indicate the buncr, in the long run we want to use that black rubber garden edging or bricks to mark the edge. Better for cleanly mowing near it also.

I agree with your assessment on look and feel of mini-golf.

Clematis vines on a chainlink fence would totally obsure it and make it look very natural. That stuff grows quickly and really thick. You could use the green plastic coated chainlink to obscure it even better in winter when the leaves die off.

I tried to find a good picture, but could not find a good really one, but I have it on the side of my house and that stuff could work! I am sure there are plenty of others that would work fine too, but I am not much of a gardener.

clematis would be a great choice. it is thick, and lots of varieties have wonderful blossoms. i kinda like the chain link fence idea, especially if you are using a thick plant to hide it. it shold work well in an area where a standalone plant wont work

Chainlink fence would be a better choice than lattice, since it would last longer. Some wild climbing rose varities would work well. Bamboo thats growing is hard to keep under control in a lot of areas. It really likes to spread.

agreed on both. lattice will look nicer as the plants fill in, but it will wear out and a lot of times the only way to replace it is to tear out everything and start completely over.

bamboo grows like crazy. it is absolutely the wrong way to go unless you have a maintenance budget. that being saidm, though, there is nothing like a well maintained bamboo forest. when the stalks are kepts about a shoulder width or less apart, you can have a forest that feels thick but that can easily be walked. talk about a natural "trap" for disc golf - bamboo is awesome.

(The bamboo on Winthrop 7 is a fence, not live :))

well that makes a difference on the maintenance huh :cool:

Not only that, but I think it's there only for the USDGC.

I agree with Sandal; I'd rather see these hazards accomplished naturally. I don't want to see chain link or bamboo fences on disc golf courses - it's not very aesthetically pleasing and makes disc golf look more like mini (putt-putt) golf.



Thank you Jeff. For a while, I thought I was the only one that prefers natural obstacles and thinks fences on greens are ugly.

I flat out refuse to ever design a hole and then go back and put fencing on it to make it more difficult. That is not the direction in which we need to travel. Trees and shrubs are not that expensive. I realize they may not always be a feaseable solution, but they should be the prefered one. I just don't understand the eagerness to throw fencing on a golf green to increase difficulty.

Chuck's "buncr" is a good idea as it accomplishes the goal without rendering the putting green ugly. Since it doesn't involve landscaping, it is also low maintenance. Alternatively, it could also be done with low growing shrubs.

Trees and shrubs are not that expensive. I realize they may not always be a feaseable solution, but they should be the prefered one. I just don't understand the eagerness to throw fencing on a golf green to increase difficulty.




We're going to work on developing more hedges as obstacles at Highbridge (I mean doesn't it sound like a place that would have hedges?) but it takes some time. It's harder to do on a public course due to likely damage and the Park Dept not maintaining them.

It's harder to do on a public course due to likely damage and the Park Dept not maintaining them.



I agree completely. Getting the Parks Dept. acclimated to the concept of maintaining a disc golf course is a chore unto itself.

it IS harder on public park property because of thoswe reasons. if you are using all natural (which i also obviously prefer) you need to look at the course much more holistically. at ke'ohana we are going to finish off many holes in keeping with the overall Hawaiian/Polynesian them of the overall property. We are also planning to use some of the 1,000 dogwoods that will be planted throughout... maybe line the edge between the underbrush-free edge of #3 with dogwoods. that way we'll have totally clear fiarway lined by woods, but the first 12-15 feet of the woods will be cleared to make it park-like. then a row of dogwoods, then the thick underbrush. should be spectacular when the dogwoods blossom.

I agree completely. Getting the Parks Dept. acclimated to the concept of maintaining a disc golf course is a chore unto itself.



We need to keep raising the bar when pitching courses to Parks initially. The mentality of pitch the course on the cheap just to get something in and we'll go back later and add the amenities shouldn't be the prevalent model. Telling parks people upfront that the course should be free to play and requires almost no maintainence, I believe, is a dinosaur that won't keep us moving forward.

I know I'm in the minority, but I believe that whenever possible new disc golf installations should be pitched as $2-$5 pay per plays with a proshop that the parks can also make money from. They should also be pitched on the idea of Parks and Rec disc golf classes and/or summer camps that can be taught by area pros as another revenue source that builds the player base of the future. That way we can finance signs, benches, trash cans, multiple tees and sleaves, better maintainence, etc.

If we stick to our guns of "free" disc golf we impose a glass ceiling on ourselves. I do not believe that the fly-18 model will ever be dominant, but it definitely has shown that a segment of our player base is willing to pay $10-$15 to play disc golf. In order to attract sponsors from outside the sport to our pro events and ultimately have disc golf on live television, we have to demonstrate that our player base is willing to spend some money. In many people's minds, something that's free isn't worth doing, i.e. the unused fitness trails where you stop and do pushups, crunches, dips, etc.

. . . but i digress . . .

A slight digress, but still related.

The course I have just about finished in Williamsburg will be pay to play. The County Parks & Rec folks are committed to establishing a quality facility and it will cost you $3 per round and $25 for an annual pass. They are paying for top-shelf signs, designed by my wife, as well as a score card that looks like a ball-golf scorecard instead of a glorified Excell spreadsheet. Even with that committment to quality, they got sidetracked for 6 weeks after I installed the concrete pads because of preparations for July 4 celebrations and failed to mow the grass for that 6 weeks. I just got the word Sunday that it had been mowed over the weekend.

The related point here is that I have pushed for a top quality, well-maintained course and the County has agreed that's what they want. I feel that this has been a major step forward in creating a mindset where the course is viewed as something that needs to be kept nice since people are paying money to play it. But they are new golf course owners and there is a bit of a learning curve getting them acclimated to the maintenance needs of the course.

If we can get more parks & rec. departments into this mindset, then we can have maintained, natural "buncrs" instead of having to resort to chain link or bamboo fences that makes the sport look silly.

Wow, that sounds awesome, Mike. I can't wait to get down and check out New Quarter Park and that nearly 7000' layout.

It's a course with good contrasts. There's not much elevation on the open holes but some gullies and slopes with walls of trees to throw around make them interesting. Most of the wooded holes have much more slope to them adding the double whammy of elevation and obstacles.

And being in a "gorgeous historic park" with "Civil War era forts within view" it sounds like a very scenic course.

"Civil War era forts within view"



That's tourist speak. The reality is that there are overgrown mounds in the woods near a few holes that you wouldn't know were anything more than natural unless someone pointed out that these linear mounds were part of the earthen walls for a fort. Not that that isn't cool but it's not like you're visiting Gettysburg when you play the course :)

"Civil War era forts within view"



That's tourist speak. The reality is that there are overgrown mounds in the woods near a few holes that you wouldn't know were anything more than natural unless someone pointed out that these linear mounds were part of the earthen walls for a fort. Not that that isn't cool but it's not like you're visiting Gettysburg when you play the course :)



Dang.

I was expecting something more like the following:

http://www.swcivilwar.com/PhotosForts/PulaskiAerialTN.jpg
http://www.swcivilwar.com/PhotosForts/FtDelawareAerialTN.jpg
http://www.absoluterealtime.com/photos/Oct1999Maine/TOF00029.JPG

Considering Williamsburg is just down the road, you can find things like that nearby, just not on the course.

Actually, the reality is that if you take a look at the earthworks, you can plainly see that they are not natural. The front side has a huge ditch from which dirt was dug and piled on one side to create the earthen wall. They are a bit sneaky due to the overgrowth and people have missed them because they don't know what they're looking for.

It's nothing like Gettysburg, neither in importance or scope. Only two forts built by the Rebs that never saw gunfire.

Incidentally, there are also rifle pits scattered all over the property that most will think are sinkholes, but their history is documented. Rebs dug them to protect the forts. One of them acts as a bunker on Hole #5 and is adjacent to the intended landing area on this par 4 hole. If you land in the bunker/rifle pit off the tee, you will have a hard time getting your next throw to the putting green.

Chuck walked the course with me before I put the pins in and provided some very good comments.

None of the historically sensitive areas come into play. The bunker on #5 is mostly filled with leaves from the past 140 years which protects it from damage.

"Civil War era forts within view"



That's tourist speak. The reality is that there are overgrown mounds in the woods near a few holes that you wouldn't know were anything more than natural unless someone pointed out that these linear mounds were part of the earthen walls for a fort. Not that that isn't cool but it's not like you're visiting Gettysburg when you play the course :)



Dang.

I was expecting something more like the following:

http://www.swcivilwar.com/PhotosForts/PulaskiAerialTN.jpg
http://www.swcivilwar.com/PhotosForts/FtDelawareAerialTN.jpg
http://www.absoluterealtime.com/photos/Oct1999Maine/TOF00029.JPG



Uh, no Jeff. The ones at NQ were built in the field, on the fly, probably within a week or so time frame, from dirt and sticks. :)

Considering Williamsburg is just down the road, you can find things like that nearby, just not on the course.



Fort Monroe is about 25 minutes away in Hampton. It's a masonry fort with a moat around it, but no disc golf course. :D There is however a private course in Suffolk that has a moat around the first green.

There is however a private course in Suffolk that has a moat around the first green.



Has Ace Run Ranch recovered from the hurricane and re-opened?

I haven't played there in about 5 or 6 years because I live so far away from there, so I don't really know.