I don't want to continue to pollute Peter's thread anymore (perhaps someone should start a separate one) but the point is why can't ALL courses with the room for it be like Idlewild? Why do we need separate rec courses with some artificial man law that prevents us from putting shorter tees for rec players to enjoy? It makes absolutely no sense. And until something is done about it, we'll continue to have pitch-n-putts that the tournament players loathe, and awesome world class courses that the novice players cry bloody murder about being too hard. It's all so dumb.




At this point in our sport's evolution, I think it's critical to introduce new players to the complete game of disc golf. This includes par 4's and 5's played from a tee designed for the appropriate skill level. New players do not have to have par 4's and 5's explained to them. They seem them on TV every weekend. New players do not fear par 4's and 5's because they've never been indoctrinated to believe that "in disc golf, all holes are par 3." They will not run away from game because "it's too hard" if the tees are designed appropriately. (the first time I played ball golf at age 9, I shot 90 for 9 holes and was hooked. I couldn't wait to play again and again and again.) New players should be brought into the game playing on the best courses and seeing what the best players can do given a real challenge. We're way too young of a sport to intentionally design courses where beginners aren't welcome.

I can understand that financial considerations enter into our design decisions. If the club at Idlewyld is interested in adding another set of tee pads to the course and needs the funds raised, I will pledge to pay for one tee pad if the club decides to install them.

I think that there should be a 4-5 to 1 ratio of beginner/intermediate courses to champion level courses in any DG area. If you don't already have 4-5 courses that have red tees, you should not have a gold level only course.

If you do have 4-5 courses that support intermediate level players, the Championship level course does not need to have beginner tees. It may be a good idea, but if the course is very punishing to players that get off the fairway by even a little bit, it is probably a good thing that beginners are not encouraged to play the course.

Our course here in Amarillo has a few PAR 4's, and it was VERY difficult to convince the early players that we should have them (most wanted the Pitch&Putt style course that we used to see everywhere in the 80's). I was designing ahead of my time ;), and the early players didn't really like it. Most wanted that ACE opportunity on EVERY hole, and it was difficult trying to convince them that the game is heading away from that. Our club dealt with quite a few struggles about course length (and we still do, as we are finding out as we try to get our BLUE TEES permanent). Being one of the longer throwers in the early days, I realized this was more like real GOLF, but the others thought I only wanted to take advantage of my strengths. Now with the more advanced discs on the market, more players are getting the big distance shots. Also, the skill levels of the regular players are advancing quicker than when I started years ago. The discs are more player friendly, and there are MANY, MANY more to choose from. These days, I see a lot of new players out there enjoying our course, playing with one or maybe two discs, and having FUN! Most aren't concerned with "If I can't get the ACE, the hole is too long!" It seems they play the course as it is, and accept that some of the holes are going to be longer than others.

Bigger, longer courses are the future of this game, but I do believe that with a little time and a well thought out plan, any course can install multiple TEE areas that can take care of the needs of different skill levels of players. There may be some extra walking involved for some groups, either to the shorter tees or longer tees, but isn't that (exercise) one of the reasons we play this game?

I disagree that you need 4 or 5 beginner/intermediate level courses before you have a gold level course. It depends more on the # of players you have in your area and what their goals are (and course demand and use or overuse factors). If you already have one of these courses and you have the chance to put in a championship course nearby then you should go for it.

I agree with John that there are a lot of old school players who only want to play pitch and putt. It has taken 7 years of playing our championships on progressively harder/tougher courses here in ND to make some people see the direction our sport is headed. I can't believe how many people early on commented about how I was designing holes to suit my 500' drives - when in fact most of the par 4's I have designed can be reached with two accurate shots of less than 350', and nearly all of them offer some sort of risk by trying to go big (shule or o.b.) Almost all of the area newcomers to the sport that have competed and gotten better though see the value and like par 4 and par 5 disc golf holes, and see how much quicker their games improve by playing harder courses where you aren't just throwing the same shot on nearly every hole and having a 10'-50' putt.

The one thing I will say that is a detriment to par 4 and 5 disc golf is the time involved in a round. Most players will want to complete a round in less than 2 hours (or even 1 hour) so there will always be a place for recreational courses. The last championship course I designed (27 holes) will probably take nearly 5 hours to complete in a tourney round (threesome) which is a little demanding. But it is set up to easily cut off 9 of the more demanding holes and only play 18 which will cut the time down for a casual round.

Darrell, thanks for chiming in, many good points there.


The one thing I will say that is a detriment to par 4 and 5 disc golf is the time involved in a round. Most players will want to complete a round in less than 2 hours (or even 1 hour) so there will always be a place for recreational courses.



This is where loops of 9 great holes comes in nicely. Whether there's 9, 18, 27, or more holes in one location, I'd much rather play 9 real holes than 18 more of the same old, same old. I think the resistance to playing only 9 holes comes from the same "all par 3's mentality". Ball golfers play just 9 all the time. Virtually all after-work golf leagues are 9 holes. While many of those players would love to play 18 given more daylight, it'd be a tough sell to get them to give up their 9 holes to play 18 holes of putt-putt golf.

As designers, volunteers, and those that care about the future of the sport, we need to see our current player base as the tip of the iceberg of future play. If we make disc golf a sport that's got the best elements of golf, but is more physically active, lots cheaper, much easier on the natural environment, and has a cooler culture then we'll really break through to being mainstream. Frisbee in the park is exactly that.

At Highbridge, more rec players are tackling the long gold tees on our gold course now that they can rent carts. Those who are walking can play the shorter white tees that still come in at 7500+ feet and get it done in 2.5-3 hours.

On our new gold course completely in the woods called The Bear, tournament rounds might take 5 hours, similar to how long it took on Houck's course at the IDGC for the Hall of Fame event. Rather than put shorter tees on this course, I've decided to install alternate pins on most of the par 4 & 5 holes to knock one off the par. So, the course would drop to maybe a Gold par 59 if all short from its planned gold par 67 maxed out. For daily play, they would set the course at maybe par 59-62 and only max it out for events. This would allow rec players to get a crack at a legit gold level challenge but not have the rounds last more than 2-3 hours.

Charlotte may have the best mix of courses in terms of player skill level.

The original course (Latta Park) was as rec and frisbee friendly as you could get - so I hear, never played it.

Reedy Creek was next to be installed, and was probably pretty challenging in its day, but has grown into a great beginner course.

Kilborne was next, and was considered a tournament players course. It has longer par 3 holes and about 3-4 par four holes. A good step up.

Hornets Nest was next, which was a true pro level course, with a wide variety of hole lengths including the first par 5 in Charlotte. Par 58.

Renaissance Original was definitely the most elevation heavy course, and with a par of 58, was also the hardest. Definitely a pro players course.

Renaissance Gold challenged even greater, offering Par 68, with 3 par 5s, and 10 par 4s!

Reedy Stout added a second challenging layout to Reedy, with tougher tee placements and a few longer pins giving new bite to the original course.

Then we step back a bit to install Sugaw Creek, the first par 54 course in Charlotte since the original Reedy. A great little course that will teach a lot of skills, and it does so on only 18 acres of space (actually less).

Then Hornets Nest, not to be outdone, went all nerdy with the Web 2.0 layout. CSS and javascript made for quick load times, and when you got lost in the woods you could use their handy search button..... Just kidding, the Web layout is par 70, and really challenges players with some of the toughest holes in Charlotte. Alternate pins and/or long tees have created a dastardly course with many places to get into the nasties. Including the first island green in Charlotte. Several new holes are being designed as I write this, which will replace a couple of holes (6 and 7) that got lost with the creek reclamation project.

Next on the plate, Idlewild. Which will have 2 layouts... Idle, and Wild!

None of these courses were ever truly beginner courses though, except maybe Sugaw, most were somewhat challenging for the disc technology of their day.

Then Hornets Nest, not to be outdone, went all nerdy with the Web 2.0 layout. CSS and javascript made for quick load times, and when you got lost in the woods you could use their handy search button..... Just kidding, the Web layout is par 70, and really challenges players with some of the toughest holes in Charlotte. Alternate pins and/or long tees have created a dastardly course with many places to get into the nasties. Including the first island green in Charlotte. Several new holes are being designed as I write this, which will replace a couple of holes (6 and 7) that got lost with the creek reclamation project.





Charlotte's Web is the true embodiment of evil on earth. When I realized that the 99.9 I carded only had to be inverted and you had the Mark of the Beast, it sent me into a long downward spiral of despair that took me until Tuesday to pull out of. And Stan looks and sounds like such a nice normal guy. Always greets you in a pleasant way. But so did Pennywise the Clown. ;) /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif :D

#s dont lie ,smaller courses get more play than longer ones.On my courses, it is time and price.You treat the bigger game different ,some are up for the challenge, others run from the numbers alone.No matter what the par is on the course, I keep it the same for all players.My new course in chicago is over 13,000 ft par 72, but with 4,431 ft missing in the am layout ,it plays perfect for both.I am happy to announce ,my new course in the north east ,par 55 timberlinks golf course in PA 1 hr east of pittsburg PA.This course will focus on the family and first timers.It is in a town called ligioner ,across from the largest water park in pa Idlewild .....They also own the golf course, and will help on adtervising in thier handouts at the gate.They get over 10,000 people a day ,in summer!!!!The course will have pro tees ,that will challenge all oncommers ,fly style.There is a limited supply of carts, no bar but you can bring your own cooler, with your choice of beverage :p.This course is cut out of a forest, lots of trees and some elevation.I am trying to have the grand opening on fathers day, june 17 this is a seasonal course, open till november...This is # 18 for fly 18......... ;)All courses have a purpose, the designers are in carge, to make the right decisions for our sport.Vision Purpose

A Fly 18 with trees and elevation? That sounds awesome, Reese. Can't wait. :cool:

Numbers certainly can be made to lie. Ever listen to politicians? However, I do agree that shorter/easier courses get more play. BUT, our longer tougher courses get an incredible amount of play by beginners. Actually, if we did not have a ton of college students playing Reedy Creek our distribution of players is not really related to the difficulty of the course, but actually more related to the geography of the city. That is my experience of golfers and courses here in Charlotte. The next course that I am working on will have 27 holes. There will be a 9 hole beginner course with a set of longer tees. Then there will be an 18 hole course with two sets of tees. The only question is will this course go in before Sam Nicholson's Idlewild (Charlotte Version) course? That course will feature long tees (par 70) and short tees (par 58). BOOM, Big boom. Big badda boom. Just fly away!!!!!

Stan, if you ever get a chance to play one of my courses ,please call me ,and I will comp you, and who ever you are with ,a round with cart, for the day , to enjoy,the experience...I serve a tasty pie.I am working on atlanta.

At Highbridge, more rec players are tackling the long gold tees on our gold course now that they can rent carts. Those who are walking can play the shorter white tees that still come in at 7500+ feet and get it done in 2.5-3 hours.

On our new gold course completely in the woods called The Bear, tournament rounds might take 5 hours, similar to how long it took on Houck's course at the IDGC for the Hall of Fame event. Rather than put shorter tees on this course, I've decided to install alternate pins on most of the par 4 & 5 holes to knock one off the par. So, the course would drop to maybe a Gold par 59 if all short from its planned gold par 67 maxed out. For daily play, they would set the course at maybe par 59-62 and only max it out for events. This would allow rec players to get a crack at a legit gold level challenge but not have the rounds last more than 2-3 hours.


God I hated that. I was annoyed every time I played a hole that was in a short position on the courses up there, haha. I kid I kid (okay I'm serious, but that was the light-hearted part of my post).

I definitely agree completely with the notion that it takes a little while for many to adjust to changes that make the courses harder. Here in Toledo we moved the teepad for the short 15 and the pin itself on 16 and I heard nothing but complaints for at least a month about how two of the easiest ace runs were GONE. Newbies couldn't get their first ace nearly as easy anymore! Oh nos!

However, over the past couple of weeks I've heard more and more newish players (especially those that have been out for a few weeks only, brand spankin new) that hole 16 is the best hole on the course (and it is now, by a long shot) and that hole 15 is a nice hole (still nothing great, but no longer a jump putt down a hill). Those that hated the change have had it grow on them, those that never experienced the old ace runs love it.

Now as for the need for championship level courses, or less in relation to more deuce-or-dies, I disagree. I believe that there is more need for a solid ratio of red-blue-gold than anything. Around here we've got two valid red level courses (Ottawa Shorts, Vienna Shorts), a tweener red-blue (Ottawa Longs), and a valid blue course (Vienna Longs). And it plays well. I sincerely desire a gold level course to even things out, add a course at each level, but few agree with me. Many cite that it would never get played. I disagree and constantly point out the love for Toboggan when it is in, and the love for trips to tougher courses that all our locals enjoy... but nobody in charge of course design (read: one man, really) will listen. Frustrating.

I can't wait until I've been around, until I'm in my 30s and people will listen to me and I can push a county parks committee to put in a course and design it. God how I'd love to implement the things I've seen done at Highbridge, Idlewyld, etc. and make something spectacular in the area.

Until then, we're stuck with, at toughest, a bunch of easy blue level courses.


-Woj.
[excuse the seemingly pointless rambling, the Pistons just lost and I'm in a bad mood]

Here's an interesting article on top ball golf pros cashing in on designing courses: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/golf/2007-05-31-course-design-cover_N.htm

Two quotes relevant to this discussion:
"It's very easy to make a very tough course," says Garcia, 27. "The challenge is to make a course that is challenging for (elite players) and at the same time the amateurs can play and say, 'You know, I want to come back and play here.' I'm brand-new at this, but I love it."

The new architects didn't enter the industry solo. Each is associated with experts who understand how to design, construct and put together courses. Els, for instance, worked with Nicklaus' design team before branching out on his own. Woods hired Beau Welling, who worked with Fazio, to help with the Dubailand project. Welling now has his own company.

(A nod to the need for top pros who aspire to be designers to study and work with experienced designers)

Here's an interesting article on top ball golf pros cashing in on designing courses: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/golf/2007-05-31-course-design-cover_N.htm

Two quotes relevant to this discussion:
"It's very easy to make a very tough course," says Garcia, 27. "The challenge is to make a course that is challenging for (elite players) and at the same time the amateurs can play and say, 'You know, I want to come back and play here.'



Except that in disc golf, it would be the following:

"It's very easy to make a very easy disc golf course. The challenge is to make a disc golf course that is challenging for (elite players) and at the same time the novices can play and say, 'You know, I want to come back and play here.'

My experience is different.

As long as a course is well marked and the easy to follow, the difficulty level does not deter newer golfers.

It does cut down on mob golf a little, but novices still hit the tough courses that are east to follow.

I think is more about the experience than it is about the score. A great course will get played even if the novices are shooting in the 80s.

this deserves repeating:

I think is more about the experience than it is about the score. A great course will get played even if the novices are shooting in the 80s.

When I first started playing, the only thing that kept me from going back to a course was if it was a) too boring, or b) I spent too much time looking for my discs. I still don't like playing a course where there is a good chance that I will lose a disc.

When I first started playing, the only thing that kept me from going back to a course was if it was a) too boring, or b) I spent too much time looking for my discs. I still don't like playing a course where there is a good chance that I will lose a disc.



When I first started playing, the things that kept me from going back to a course was: <ul type="square"> it was designed poorly, with many safety hazards it was poorly marked and impossible to negotiate my way around the course was not well maintained and I spent too much time looking for my discs. it didn't have appropriate tees for different skill levels. Many courses had only one set of tees, and being a beginner who could only throw 250 feet, I hated long courses.[/list]

Now that I've been playing disc golf for 12 years, have played over 150 courses across the U.S. and Canada, have a player rating of 953 and top out at 375 feet on flat ground, the things that keep me from going back to a course are: <ul type="square"> it is designed poorly, with many safety hazards it is poorly marked and impossible to negotiate my way around the course is not well maintained and I spend too much time looking for my discs. it doesn't have appropriate tees for different skill levels. Many courses have only one set of tees, and I am sick of pitch-n-putt courses. I need a course with several pro par fours and an SSA preferably above 50. [/list]

But what if it's an excellently-designed course and the novices are shooting 100's?

Sounds like any public ball golf course out there.

But what if it's an excellently-designed course and the novices are shooting 100's?


then they're probably playing from the wrong tees. we need to continue to educate designers, players, and potential players alike on what our standardized color system means. more and more new courses are being designed with these guidelines in mind. some existing courses are being modified so that each set of tees corresponds to a specific skill level.

we need to get more and more courses on board with labelling tee signs and/or pads with the appropriate color and having clear descriptions of the intended skill level on the course information board. some players will still want to play from the gold tees that maybe shouldn't, just like skiiers break their legs every year on the black diamond slopes.

But what if it's an excellently-designed course and the novices are shooting 100's?



By definition, an excellently-designed course will have appropriate tees for different skill levels. For example, the new course at Moraine State Park near Pittsburgh plays to a pro par of 66 and an SSA of about 67.0 (http://www.pdga.com/tournament/course_ratings_by_course.php?RatingCourseID=3004) from the longest set of tees, the Gold tees. However, there is a shorter set of Blue tees for golfers rated 950 and an even shorter set of White tees for golfers rated 900 and below. The white tees allow Intermediate and Recreational players the opportunity to shoot a round of golf that still maintains the pars for each hole (par 3, par 4, par 5) without giving that "Battan Death March" feeling of playing a course that is too long and no fun. Intermediate, Recreational, Am Women golfers, etc. typically shoot anywhere from the high 60s to the high 70s, with a few scores in the low 80s. That's still well below 100.

As part of a club that just finally got a course in Golden Gate Park after 10 years of struggle I'm having hard time relating to this discussion. Multiple tees just are not an option here. We have tried, within the constraints of the land we were given, to design a course that is challenging to experienced players as well as newcomers. Our experience so far has been that both are pretty satisfied but we'll never be ranked as a "great" course because we are in a crowded urban area and simply do not have the land (but we have a hell of a lot of trees that make things challenging).

I also disagree with those who say that new players will not play hard courses. Just go to Delaveaga any day of the week and see the duffers having a great time shooting god knows what over par (I learned to play at Seneca Creek and Patapsco and didn't care what I shot -- it was fun!).

If you have the land by all means "go big" -- but in some places that simply will not be possible.

I think most people realize that many courses simply don't have the land for a world class championship course. That is well understood.

I think the issue here is that many course designers who do have the land available choose to install beginner courses because a regular course or a championship course would be "too hard" for novices. When in many cases all it would take is a set of red level or green level tees which are 250-350 feet away from the polehole on most holes.