Is it frowned upon or considered poor course design to force people to throw an overhead shot off the tee? On many holes that turn left to right you are pretty much forcing a right handed player to throw either a controlled anhyzer or a flick - two shots that a lot of beginning players do not have in their bag. Is forcing an overhead any different?

There's a difference between a design that forces a specific shot versus a design where that particular shot would be a better choice than the alternatives. It also depends on the skill level a particular tee is designed for. I would not want to force an overhead on White and Red level at all but would be fine with making a hole where that was the best choice for Blue or Gold level. I haven't found the place to do it yet but I would love to design a hole where there was a wall of cedar trees maybe 60-80 feet in front of the tee blocking any air shot and trimming them up from the bottom maybe 4-5 feet so that rollers or skip shots were the best choice off the tee.

I haven't found the place to do it yet but I would love to design a hole where there was a wall of cedar trees maybe 60-80 feet in front of the tee blocking any air shot and trimming them up from the bottom maybe 4-5 feet so that rollers or skip shots were the best choice off the tee.



You've never been to Seneca? :D

I actually had some text in my last post regarding that but deleted before posting since I haven't been there since the 90s.

Lake Park in Lewisville, TX has a similar hole (#16). It was designed (by Tom "Old Man" McCutcheon) to force either a very tall RHBH spike hyzer or overhand shot for a putt inside 30' or a well-placed layup shot to the right for a 50-60' putt at best. In the past few years, the main trees between the tee and the basket have grown up even taller, but lost most of their lower foliage. There are still thick vines hanging from the trees that don't appear to be going anywhere soon. The preferred shot is now a skip shot or an accurate low midrange shot for birdie. The vines, the tall trees in the middle, and the two trees protecting the basket still stop a lot of shots. Too long and you're back in the thick stuff. Too short and you don't have a clear putt there, either.

It's still a pretty easy birdie hole for the locals, but the design was to force a technical shot that is at least an MA1-level shot. It has become somewhat easier the past couple of years, much to Mr. McCutcheon's chagrin, but when designed it was about like what the original poster described. Anyway, my point is just that IMO forcing shots like that for birdie is a good idea, so long as you give ams at least a chance at par.

Some of us can't throw overhand due to balky shoulders. A "forced" overhand shot would be cruel. A hole where the best option is an overhand, on the other hand, is cool.

One way to handle places where an overhand would work well, but you don't have the shot, is to throw your shot like a big rainbow backhand roller over the top. It's essentially the opposite of the big knife hyzer. This especially works well for escaping because your disc is flying mostly vertical and exposes less cross section to nail a tree.

It may be "cruel", but no more cruel than if you've an injured lower back and can't throw a RHBH effectively / without pain. Lord knows there are enough holes which "force" you to throw a RHBH (or suffer the consequences of being a shot down to your card if you don't). Obviously, an excellent hole might have a "preferred" line and 1 or more alternate lines also; but to have a hole which "forces" one specific shot I believe is a GOOD thing...providing you "spread the forced shot selection" around so that within your 18 holes you have a "forced roller", a "forced overhand", a "forced tunnel shot"...but only 1 or 2 forced shots of any 1 kind. Or you can think of this as forcing a player to throw a disc multiple ways...mastering a disc in all its capacities and not just "doing a disc one way". Maybe 1 hole should only "accept" a wicked high left to right through a window in the canopy. Maybe another hole only allows a sweeping, low right to left not over 12 feet high. Etc. This in turn forces the player to become multidimensional in his / her shot repertoire. We don't want the PDGA to become the RHBHHDGA (right hand back hand hyzer disc golf association) do we? ...although I might argue that we're there already!
Karl

Trying to design holes that force shots is harder to do than it seems. For one thing, you're usually dealing with foliage and the shot window may not stay the same on a seasonal basis. In addition, as foliage grows, you can't always count on the ability to maintain windows either with your volunteers or Park Dept. And, in a 5 to 10 year period, foliage can break or die.

Harold has tried valiantly for years to make some holes at Winthrop that heavily favor the use of a righty forehand. Hole 17 this year in particular. But Harold's experience is that despite the advantage of using a forehand on that tee shot, the majority still use backhand at their peril. He's amazed at what he calls "backhand savants" that are so good with that shot, they can overcome the need for any other type of throw except in escape situations.

So you can try to design holes to force or strongly favor a particular throw. But the reality is it's very difficult to pull it off unless you actually say that shot is required off the tee. And I suspect that will never happen.

Chuck,

I hear you regarding your "Trying to design holes that force shots is harder to do than it seems" but I still feel it needs to be attempted so that a course can produce - at the end of a competition - the "best disc golfer" and not the "best hyzering RHBH disc golfer" (as a lot of them do now).

As for the statement "...the majority still use backhand at their peril...", there obviously wasn't ENOUGH peril (or they wouldn't have tried it). Again, I know it's hard to find a "...totally blocked to the right (from ground to sky...and close to the tee), enough garbage on the ground to stop a roller, and blocked high left situation (to stop a big anhy)" - thus forcing a RHFH, but a course designer should NEVER stop looking for such "variety" situations (to force the player to actually think prior to a shot instead of walking up to a tee, throwing a low RHBH hyzer and grabbing their putter knowing that they have a birdie attempt).

As for the foliage changing, I know it happens (and thus "new" holes open up) but a course - if well designed - should still have these facets of "variations" built into them as much as possible.

Karl

I just disagree with an absolute forcing a throw. In ball golf, players are not forced to use a particular club for any shot. They can even use clubs other than putters on the green as Phil demonstrated a few weeks ago when he chunked a chip and left a smiley in the green surface. I would no more force a type of shot than force a player to use a putter from the tee in sanctioned play. Creating designs where a particular type of shot is much more desireable is a better way because it will encourage players to learn that shot so they don't look bad when faced with executing this shot in front of others.

I just disagree with an absolute forcing a throw. In ball golf, players are not forced to use a particular club for any shot. They can even use clubs other than putters on the green as Phil demonstrated a few weeks ago when he chunked a chip and left a smiley in the green surface. I would no more force a type of shot than force a player to use a putter from the tee in sanctioned play. Creating designs where a particular type of shot is much more desireable is a better way because it will encourage players to learn that shot so they don't look bad when faced with executing this shot in front of others.



I agree that forcing a particular shot is not good course design. Especially forcing an overhead, roller, or skip shot. On the other hand, using an overhead, roller, or skip shot for the player's advantage over an air shot is fine. Anyone with a good roller or overhead, already has an advantage over the field, in general. To give those people another advantage by eliminating other possible routes or throws, especially air shots, is not good design.

There are very easy and simple ways to make excellent par 3s that call for shots other than lefty or righty hyzers. It only takes 3 trees total placed relatively close to the tee.

Dave,

I'm not understanding why you think "...forcing a particular shot is not good course design. Especially forcing an overhead, roller, or skip shot." Why isolate these "other-than-RHBH-air-type" shots! Do you think the same regarding a RHBH...i.e. If a hole "forces" you to throw a RHBH, is that OK? Hypothetically, if a player has an overhand, flick, and roller in their arsenal but doesn't have a backhand most people would say (upon hearing that person grumping about how many holes this course has that require a RHBH) "learn to throw a backhand!" Yet if you "force" a player to throw an overhand, they whine and call it "unfair" (and most agree because they too don't have that shot). Does this make the majority correct? Yes, if the game is RHBHHyzers; no if it is disc golf.

In your statement "Anyone with a good roller or overhead, already has an advantage over the field, in general" is only correct IF you add "...and they already have a RHBH"; if not, I'll attest to the fact that - at best - they're only on even par with the RHBH'ers (because the VAST majority of holes have their biggest path on a RHBH vector).

Karl

Note that Dave did not use the term RHBH but "airshot" which would indicate a some sort of horizontal throw which could be forehand, backhand or chicken wing.

Dave said "forcing a particular shot was not good...", which would include a RHBH shot.

Discette,
I'm aware of what he said. And while I can agree to disagree about the concept of designing a hole which "forces" a shot, I'm focusing in on his use of the words "Especially forcing an overhead, roller, or skip shot..." Why "Especially" any certain type of shot? Is one shot better / more "pure" than any other shot? I don't think so.

Chuck,
You said "..."airshot" which would indicate a some sort of horizontal throw". Says who? A pancake isn't an airshot? A tomahawk isn't an airshot?

Karl

Just so you all understand Karl's stance, he throws almost predominantly baseball throws with an Epic. He's one of the most talented golfers I've ever seen with this kind of throw! His backhand isn't very strong, but with the exceptional skill he throws overhand, he doesn't need it. I'm always impressed that the courses that I think are "overhand-proof," Karl is still able to use his talent to shoot competitive scores and beat the other golfers in his division.

As you can see, his outlook and opinion on course design is naturally going to be biased accordingly because he's not a RHBH thrower. Just wanted you all to understand where he is coming from in these discussions.

A horizontal shot was what Dave was referring to in his context.

You're just not going to get experienced designers to agree that forcing a specific shot is good design. We've already hashed out a similar concept among the 100 members of the Disc Golf Course Designers group when discussing options for hazards. Some have tried hazards where a player was forced to throw a forehand or take a penalty if they landed in it. The concensus is that while we would like to create hazards where using a certain type of throw would be more desireable than another to escape, we would never want to specifically require a player to execute a particular throw if they land in it.

If you want forced throws, play Skillshot or the EDGE 20 station challenge. Executing specific throws is integral to the contest.

All,
More important than anything, I'm just trying to make a case for introducing variety-of-shots into a course! There are way too many "a RHBH will (at least moderately well) work every hole" type of courses out there! If I chose to throw all overhands on any course, that's my decision (although that is RARELY ever the case...it's just not the percentage thing to do), and I believe that a course which "lends itself" to all overhands is 1. boring, and 2. not really a good test of disc golf skills. Conversely, a course which "allows" a disc golfer to throw 18 RHBHs also is not really a good test of disc golf skills! A mix of holes where SOME holes are best (by far) to throw a RHBH, and SOME holes are best (by far) to throw a RHFH, and SOME holes are best (by far) to throw an overhand, etc. is the BEST course. Equal chances for all types of shots. No one shot-type should dominate or even have the chance to dominante (any other type of shot). Again, unless you want to be a member of the RHBHHyzerSociety :eek:.
Karl

I think all experienced designers would agree that balance and variety are essential parts of good hole designs. It's dictating absolutes that is all we're contending.

What you don't want to do is make a course where the same shot off of every tee will get you a good score on the course.

There is a course near by where a 320'ish RHBH hyzer is the only drive you need to throw, and you can throw it on every hole on the course and get a pretty good score. You can do a little better if you can adjust the length a little, and sometimes the RHBH hyzer isn't the best shot, but it will work.

I try to design so the player takes a different disc out to drive the next hole. The player may only have three or four drivers or midrange, but at least they don't use the same one off the tee for four holes in a row if possible.

All,
More important than anything, I'm just trying to make a case for introducing variety-of-shots into a course! There are way too many "a RHBH will (at least moderately well) work every hole" type of courses out there! If I chose to throw all overhands on any course, that's my decision (although that is RARELY ever the case...it's just not the percentage thing to do), and I believe that a course which "lends itself" to all overhands is 1. boring, and 2. not really a good test of disc golf skills. Conversely, a course which "allows" a disc golfer to throw 18 RHBHs also is not really a good test of disc golf skills! A mix of holes where SOME holes are best (by far) to throw a RHBH, and SOME holes are best (by far) to throw a RHFH, and SOME holes are best (by far) to throw an overhand, etc. is the BEST course. Equal chances for all types of shots. No one shot-type should dominate or even have the chance to dominante (any other type of shot). Again, unless you want to be a member of the RHBHHyzerSociety :eek:.
Karl



I can't disagree with most of what you just said. My disagreement is with forcing any particular shot. Having a hole where the best choice is an overhead is fine. Having a hole where the only choice is an overhead, (unless it is a relatively short and relatively easy overhead), is not good. It is much like having a hole where the only possible shot is a bh roller. Or, having a hole where the tee shot must clear 450 ft of water to reach the pin. First priority on all holes designed for courses, other than super elite courses, has to be air shots that can be reasonably thrown. Otherwise there are many players who just won't be able to play these holes in a reasonable manner. Routes and distances have to be reasonable. The elite player should be able to overcome the hole design with some exceptional shot, whether it is an overhead, roller, skip shot, or long jump putt. That's okay. But every hole should be playable. A hole that dictates a specialty shot only, is not playable for enough people.

My only disagreement with the above quote is your assertion that a course which "allows" 18 rhbh throws is defacto a poor test of disc golf skills. I might even go so far as to say that a brilliant course might allow any shot you can think of, and still be a great test of course management. It all depends on the design. Just because you can throw a backhand, doesn't mean it is the best choice or will result in a birdie.

How do I find out more about the Course Designers Group?

I agree that forcing overhand would be a 'bad' design. I can only throw 1 overhand shot a round, and it needs to be at the very end of the round, with nothing more than putting left. I injured my elbow in a manner that overhand vs fore/back hand seems to reagitate more often than not. I suffer from 'jelly arm' after that point and can maybe throw 50-60 feet backhand. At least give me a way that I can attempt a 'par' without throwing an overhand.

It seems like Houcks courses are like that also,everytime I play any of his courses I usually use a wide variety of shots and disc;thats a good concept because even if you have a bad round- at least you practiced a wide variety of shots. What is the nearest course to TX that you have designed besides Bear Creek in Grapevine,TX?

I believe Dave Draz did most of the Bear Creek design but I helped him with adjusting for some shot angles and distances. Not sure how close the current layout is to what it was in the mid-90s.

Closest course to TX I had a major impact on the design is probably the IDGC Steady Ed course but that's almost as far away as Minnesota courses. I was just an advisor or consultant on the AZ courses used for Worlds in Flagstaff. You'll have to come to Worlds and see Highbridge to use all the shots in your bag and some you might never have tried. :)

(That's what I heard from several players at the Pro Worlds Warm-Ups this past weekend)

My home course of Cranbury Park in Norwalk, CT, home of the ZZ, has a hole that I'm sure Chuck would love. The tee is setup to the left of a tree line that goes out straight 10' and then turns hard left. A wall of cedars is in the middle of the fairway about 100' out from the tee. A small tree and shrub are present on the right-hand side about 50' out. The far right-hand side has a tree line that runs parallel to the fairway, and then cuts up the right side. On the far lefthand side there is a rather large mound covered in shrubs and thick growth. Lastly, the topography is flat from the tee to the tree line, and then slopes down about 5'-8' towards the pin, which is located 20' in front of some thick weeds.

These obstacles set the stage for one of the most unique holes that I've played. Your first option (and a good one in winter when the ground is frozen) is to throw an air shot beneath the cedar trees where there is less than 10' of clearance. In winter I've hit a good gap. skipped off the ice, and found my disc within 15' of the basket for a birde.

The more common, and slightly more advanced shot, is to throw a roller (rhbh) off the tee. The shot needs to hit a gap between the short tree/bush, the last cedar in the wall, and the far right tree line. The disc needs to land at an acute angle like a cut roller, which hits the cedar-tree line gap. As the disc hits the crest of the hill, it needs to start turning back to avoid the shrub mound, and yet not turn so much that it runs into the trees on the right, nor stay so straight that you're in the weeds 25' behind the pin. I throw a beat DX roc for this shot, and though I hit the first gap and land it 7 or 8 times out of 10, I'm never quite sure what the disc is going to do on the downslope.

There's a lefty option to go BIIIIIIGGGGG around the cedars, and spike hyzer into the pin.

There's a Schwebby option of thumbing over the top, which I've seen several players attempt, and just a few be able to make.

Lastly, there's the ridiculously huge rhbh spike hyzer that goes over and around the tree line on the far right side. This shot requires a ton of speed and height, that I've only heard of Brinster even attempting it.

IMO, the above is a definition of a great hole. Five distinct options off of the tee, all with various risks and rewards.

There's a Schwebby option of thumbing over the top, which I've seen several players attempt, and just a few be able to make. the thumber was more realistic before this summer when the branch off the tee began saggin and blocked the perfect route. Now, i have to crouch and throw a full power thumber in order to get it. But yes, it is always a putt.

Lastly, there's the ridiculously huge rhbh spike hyzer that goes over and around the tree line on the far right side. This shot requires a ton of speed and height, that I've only heard of Brinster even attempting it.
Up until the last year and 1/2 this was possible, but never the best approach...Bobby and I used to do it, but the glide on the hyzer usually put you too far left and if you hit the tree tops it was a 4 or 5...The hole has been a favorite for most advanced players, because of the many reasonable options and one TTrue shot(the roller)...may i add that lefties throw a 2 finger roler and have better success than righties...Only problem; we dont know if we are gonna lose the hole.

There's a Schwebby option of thumbing over the top, which I've seen several players attempt, and just a few be able to make. the thumber was more realistic before this summer when the branch off the tee began saggin and blocked the perfect route. Now, i have to crouch and throw a full power thumber in order to get it. But yes, it is always a putt.



crouching thumber hidden golfer

I've always wanted to design a Figure 8 hole. We just haven't had the equipment or good location here. I want to make a 500-600' long figure-8. Straight distance from basket to tee, with the center intersection at 250-300'. The idea would be to have an easy 300' or less tomahawk over some smaller trees from the tee to the central landing zone, and another tomahawk to the basket. Or, players could take a very long, sharp curve, and tight route along either of the sides of the 8. A hole not impossible, but one to defintely reward the tomahawk throwers with a somewhat easy 3, while outside routes may produce anywhere 4-6 depending on how tight they'd be.

That's the design intent of hole 7 on The Bear course at Highbridge. The overhead was out due to tree height but the 250 left or right curve to a landing area and another 250 left or right curve to the pin. It worked out that way but it ended up a little more open than I originally intended it to look.

Isn't there a hole like this on the Houck course at the IDGC?

Houck's hole 8 par 5 has interweaving fairways. But his concept is to have two long shots on one route and three shorter shots on the other. Superberry and I are talking about two equal routes with two shots to the pin.

Chuck, Bear #7 has three routes though (if I remember right)? I'd like to eliminate the inner route, keep trees low to allow for an overhead throw, and really make the side routes difficult so that the overhead drive is definitely rewarded.

A brush field/swamp, or young poppel forest would be great for this.

Hole 2 is the one with three routes. Hole 7 is the flat figure 8 or inifinty symbol, if you will, but no realisitic overhead option