#451  
Old 02-18-2013, 09:19 PM
New013's Avatar
New013 New013 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Raleigh, NC
Years Playing: 4.2
Courses Played: 138
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 6,769
Send a message via AIM to New013
Thanks John,

No I'm not that good but I can throw a disc pretty far, though I honestly think that with the 35' drops in elevation a shot to clear the water plays much shorter. At first when I stood in each position it did seem like layups were a bit to short so that's why I considered a par 4 here. Though after I did throw some putters in an attempt to layup it is much trickier than it appears; because you have the elevation drop and it feels short you take a lot off and I don't think I got any layups within 40' of the water.

The green area is on an upward slope and the pin where I have it shown would be about 40ft from the waters edge at it's closest point; the treeline behind it is about 50ft away and 30ft in to the trees is a fence so past that would be OB.

The red does look to have a longer approach but on the actual lines it's just about equal. Though with the red you can layup farther right of the line and get a closer second shot.

The dam is actually on the backside of the pond where I'm looking to put a par four. It's actually not that steep of a slope there as the picture makes it look. It drops about 10ft over 100ft.

Yeah I could back up the blue but I'd have to take out a hole that I like, it's a 285ft shot up the hill that rises 25ft with OB 40ft right and behind the basket. Here's a pic of all three holes as I have them in my head now.



Again, thanks for your input John and everyone else. It is a beautiful part of the property and I want to get it right.
Reply With Quote
  #452  
Old 02-19-2013, 12:37 AM
Royal Hill Royal Hill is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: NW
Posts: 425
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrhouck View Post
Hey, Dave. You bring up an interesting idea. It's one that some of us first heard from Dr. Fred back in the rec.sport.disc days. I know Rodney remembers him.

My big question for you is: how did your test turn out?
John,

I exchange correspondence with Dr Fred currently from time to time. He's not playing much, but still really passionate about the concept behind the directional baskets.

The one public course with the directional baskets in LK Stevens still has an interesting polarizing effect on regional players. Some dedicated lovers, some haters. The course is in good hands with those who have adopted its essence.
The downside of such a departure is that the topic likely overshadows ALL discussions related to the course.

In a way it would be like 2014 Portland worlds using the Hornings courses. The courses might be a great asset, but you and I know that the 2014 worlds would be remembered and overshadowed as the Worlds where we all talked about "those baskets" for two weeks straight.
Reply With Quote
  #453  
Old 02-19-2013, 09:59 AM
johnrhouck johnrhouck is offline
.:Master Course Designer:.
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin TX
Years Playing: 38.4
Posts: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royal Hill View Post
John,

I exchange correspondence with Dr Fred currently from time to time. He's not playing much, but still really passionate about the concept behind the directional baskets.
Glad he's still around. If you remember, please tell him I said hi.

Quote:
The one public course with the directional baskets in LK Stevens still has an interesting polarizing effect on regional players. Some dedicated lovers, some haters. The course is in good hands with those who have adopted its essence.
The downside of such a departure is that the topic likely overshadows ALL discussions related to the course.

In a way it would be like 2014 Portland worlds using the Hornings courses. The courses might be a great asset, but you and I know that the 2014 worlds would be remembered and overshadowed as the Worlds where we all talked about "those baskets" for two weeks straight.
I'm sure that's true. I guess in some way it's telling that no one up that way has replicated the concept. It occurred to me yesterday that our discussion about the directional basket tied in perfectly to two other things we were discussing. First, I always prefer a "natural" option, meaning that I'd rather use slope and trees to encourage people to use one part of the green over another. And second, that kind of green will work a lot better if players are throwing at it from under 250'. Asking them to be that accurate from too far out becomes too demanding.

I still think about the concept, though. While it's almost impossible to sell to players, there's a good insight behind it.
Reply With Quote
  #454  
Old 02-24-2013, 09:51 PM
DanPhillips DanPhillips is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Mountain Ontario
Years Playing: 4.1
Courses Played: 8
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 9
Hello John, I am in the process of designing a course in my back yard. I have 95acres of thick bush with almost no sight lines. The land was logged in the 70's so the trees are not huge and we had an ice storm up here in 98 that destroyed the canopy so in between the larger trees are saplings. I live in a town called Mountain but it is VERY flat. Do you have any recommendations on how to create good holes when they are so hard to visualize on the land? I heat my house with wood so I have no issue with cutting trees down I simply donít know where to start. Any advice would be great. I have read all the articles on your website and enjoyed reading this forum. Thanks for taking the time.
Reply With Quote
  #455  
Old 02-25-2013, 12:35 PM
mendofrolfer's Avatar
mendofrolfer mendofrolfer is offline
Bogey Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Mendo
Years Playing: 7.5
Courses Played: 56
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 90
Hi John,
I could really use your input here. We have a small nine hole course in our hometown, we have been working on improving it, at first it wasn't played by a lot of people so we made up a safari Back nine. But now the course is played much more and people are throwing in on each other even on blind holes. Could you give us some feedback on this, is it ever ok to have a course that does this?
Reply With Quote
  #456  
Old 03-12-2013, 06:49 PM
907miller 907miller is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Years Playing: 17.3
Courses Played: 261
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3
length to gap ratio?

Hi John, would love some input here:

I am designing a course with some heavy flow restrictions, and after multiple iterations of trying different options, we have fund one to be optimal. However, there is one solitary hole that doesn't quite work very well, but seems to be pretty mandatory to connect parts of the course and maintain good flow.

It is a small chunk of land with river on one side and walking path on the other. It starts wide but tapers down to almost nothing (it worked much better in reverse because of that). This leaves us with little room to work with to avoid high speed errant shots (for pedestrian protection). After scouring this land and pulling my hair out for a while, I found a pretty unconventional hole. It is about 120' with a tee pad 10' or so from a 2.5' or so tree gap, and the basket on a small knoll.

Pros:
- Offers a highly controlled shot that every player should be able to execute
- Slows disc speed to protect pedestrians
- Uses very little land
- Provides a very unique hole seen close to nowhere in my experience (250+ courses in 41 states)
- Provides decent risk/reward (any player can lay up a putt 15' for an easy 3, but most will risk the 2)
Cons:
- many players will hate this hole
- could be conceived "gimmicky"
- the "risk" isnt very high. you could hit the trees and salvage a 3 sometime. double mandoing the trees or adding a small OB island around the trees could change this.
- many players will throw overhand shots through the gap. this could be remedied by screwing some small down trees/branches across the gap at say 8' high and up or something...

So basically I'd be very interested to hear your opinion on a hole like this.

Also, I'm wondering if you have any formula for "distance to gap":"gap width" ratio. i.e. if your double mando is 20 feet off the pad, and your double mando is 6 feet wide, the ratio would be 3.33. The higher, the harder... What is the maximum to not be considered lucky? Is it even a linear correlation?

Thanks for the help!!
Reply With Quote
  #457  
Old 03-12-2013, 07:16 PM
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is online now
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 25.5
Courses Played: 586
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,708
Maybe Steve West will see this. He has some data on spray values for shorter distances like this. In my view, at least 2/3 of the throws that players of the skill level the distance from the gap and gap width is designed for should be able to make it through the gap, not necessarily land near the basket, but simply make it through. If only half the throws can make it through, then you basically have a coin flip shot that's mostly luck and the tee should be closer to the gap. It sounds like a situation where you could test different distances to the gap before making the tee final?
Reply With Quote
  #458  
Old 03-12-2013, 07:29 PM
jeverett's Avatar
jeverett jeverett is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Eugene, OR
Years Playing: 5.3
Courses Played: 22
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 973
Quote:
Originally Posted by 907miller View Post
Also, I'm wondering if you have any formula for "distance to gap":"gap width" ratio. i.e. if your double mando is 20 feet off the pad, and your double mando is 6 feet wide, the ratio would be 3.33. The higher, the harder... What is the maximum to not be considered lucky? Is it even a linear correlation?

Thanks for the help!!
Personally, I like using angular accuracy as a way of assessing distance to gap, rather than ratio. e.g. if your double mando is 20 feet off of the pad, and 6 feet wide, and the ideal flight line is right down the middle, you effectively have 3ft. of width (in either direction) at 20ft. to work with, otherwise represented as:

angle = arctan (3ft. / 20ft.) or a required angular accuracy of 8.53076561 degrees.

In my experience, requiring even gold level players to throw with an angular accuracy of under 10 degrees is going to induce a fair amount of randomness in the hole. Amateur players, for example, can occasionally be off the 'ideal' flight line by as much as 30 degrees.

Last edited by jeverett; 03-12-2013 at 07:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #459  
Old 03-13-2013, 10:20 AM
johnrhouck johnrhouck is offline
.:Master Course Designer:.
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin TX
Years Playing: 38.4
Posts: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanPhillips View Post
Hello John, I am in the process of designing a course in my back yard. I have 95acres of thick bush with almost no sight lines. The land was logged in the 70's so the trees are not huge and we had an ice storm up here in 98 that destroyed the canopy so in between the larger trees are saplings. I live in a town called Mountain but it is VERY flat. Do you have any recommendations on how to create good holes when they are so hard to visualize on the land? I heat my house with wood so I have no issue with cutting trees down I simply donít know where to start. Any advice would be great. I have read all the articles on your website and enjoyed reading this forum. Thanks for taking the time.
Hi, Dan --

Sorry to keep you waiting. The technique I use the most is to string up fluorescent tape. I use a lot of pink and orange. When I'm working in the woods, I frequently can't see 50' in front of me, so there's usually tape everywhere. In addition to wrapping individual trees, I'll mark some areas horizontal, some with a forward slash, some with a backslash -- at one spot in Pittsboro I even used a zigzag pattern (see photo).

Sometimes you need to hang tape from a tall branch in order to be able to see it from a distance. Two quick tips: 1. Don't tie it tight -- it's easier to see when it's moving in the wind. 2. Hanging a piece tape off your first tape gives you a better chance of seeing it.

Hope that helps.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Pittsboro Woods Tape Photo.jpg (161.3 KB, 25 views)
Reply With Quote
 

  #460  
Old 03-13-2013, 10:27 AM
johnrhouck johnrhouck is offline
.:Master Course Designer:.
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin TX
Years Playing: 38.4
Posts: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by mendofrolfer View Post
Hi John,
I could really use your input here. We have a small nine hole course in our hometown, we have been working on improving it, at first it wasn't played by a lot of people so we made up a safari Back nine. But now the course is played much more and people are throwing in on each other even on blind holes. Could you give us some feedback on this, is it ever ok to have a course that does this?
Mendo, I think the easy answer is that no matter how you got there, it is never OK to have a course that does this:

Quote:
...people are throwing in on each other even on blind holes.
Not knowing anything about the course, I can't suggest a redesign remedy, but it sounds like you really need to do something.

Thanks for the question, and I hope you find a solution before someone gets hurt.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:11 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.