Pros:
- Equipment: The teepads are large and offer plenty of space for a good run-up with great traction. Alternate astro-turf pads work well and look nice as well. New baskets catch well, and the just installed tee-signs are beautiful and helpful with all the information you could want on them. Practice basket with "HORSE" type markers in the ground is nice as well, and gives you a place to warm up when the course is crowded and you are waiting to tee off on 1.
- Landscaping: Course is already beautiful, and will only improve as more work and cleanup is done in the coming months. Wood chips on all fairways look great and provide a nice and somewhat unique playing surface. A decent amount of underbrush has been thinned out to aid in the already easy navigation and prevent inescapable tree-jail from the rough, though some locations still need a bit of work. Most fairways are well shaped.
- Good, technical golf: with the exception of one passable, and one possibly ill-designed hole, (2 and 7) I have enjoyed playing each hole on this course. Tight but generally "fair fairways" require well shaped lines, moderate elevation present throughout the course keeps things interesting, and the pond on the last hole is a nice feature to finish the course. Holes, 3 and especially 5 in particular stand out.
- Multiple tees and pins: Multiple tees on every hole but 2, with 4 (!) on hole 4, and 3 on hole 9. Many of these tees provide drastically different and not necessarily easier lines. Playing through this course twice from the various tees almost gives the feeling of playing a complete 18 hole course. Multiple pin position on several holes which should be changes somewhat regularly should keep things interesting for local players playing frequently as well.
Cons:
- As others have said still a little rough around the edges in places, but nothing that really distracts from the golf.
- Doesn't bother me, but some may not appreciate the long walk from 2 to 3, and there isn't really a clear route from hole 9s basket back to the parking lot by hole 1 if there are games being played on the soccer fields.
- Hole 7 seems like a transition hole that the designers attempted to make more interesting with the tight set of trees not far off the pad. Unfortunately, the result is simply a frustrating hole, with 2 or 3 incredibly tight gaps (mere inches of clearance if properly navigated) that must be hit. The slender trees are already scared from being pelted by discs, and may not last all that long anyway. There isn't really anything that can be done to make this a "good" but removing one tree could make it better.
- It's too bad a soccer field backs the basket on hole 9, because a tee pad on the top of the hill would be great, I've had fun throwing from there anyway, but can see how it could present a danger if someone unloads and goes long with a high speed disc.
Other Thoughts:
I've really enjoyed playing this course so far, and look forward to getting more familiar with it. I loved the old course, and am delighted the redeisgn has improved what was previously here. I'm sure it will help my accuracy and technical game, as the middle 4-5 holes provide the tight, wooded golf not present on most of the other major courses in the area I play frequently (Madison Meadow and Katherine Legge.)
I struggled on what to give this course. Giving a 4 or above on a 9 hole course, even one with a great number and quality of alternate tees and pins such as this Central Park, is hard to justify. For me it came down to a 3 or 3.5. Not having played a huge number of 9 hole courses (I concede I haven't played a staggering number of courses of any size at his point) I don't have the knowledge base to say this course is among the elite 9 hole courses. However, until I am proven otherwise, I can't see many 9 holes improving on what has been done here.
Perhaps I will re-evaluate later, but right now I feel giving this course 3.5 discs, basically the equivalent of 4.5 for an 18 hole course, is justified.