0 Helpful / 3 Not
Other Thoughts: Not much to say here that hasn't already been said. Too much unrealized potential here.
This course is not worth playing for me. Even if it were the closest course I'd probably drive further to play a better course such as Richmond Hill or Black Mountain.
0 of 3 people found this review helpful.
9 Helpful / 0 Not
Pros: Great park with some very good basket placements. The course layout unfortunately kills what could, and should, be a very good 9-holer.
- Great piece of land for a 9-hole course. Holes are all mostly open, with minimal trees coming into play on a few holes.
- Crookston has some great, challenging pin placements, with trees or wetlands playing good obstacles. Out of 9 holes, 6 or 7 have very challenging putting areas.
- Plenty of open space to unleash some big drives. Course definitely favors big arms. Average hole length is 441, with none less than 300 feet, meaning average throwers aren't going to see many birdie 2 putts. You can still get plenty of 3s with smart throwing.
- Great course to empty your bag throwing drives. Plenty of room, open and flat space make it ideal to work on adding distance.
- Course is in the far back of a great city park. It plays mostly around a walking trail, and also near a wetland. By wetland, they mean small pond, but whatever. Anything to be eco-friendly.
- It's a very clean and well maintained park. My wife even commended how clean the bathrooms are. Course has lots of amenities - ball fields, walking trails, picnic shelters, nice creek running along side the park.
Cons: This is one of the most disappointing courses I've ever played. It should be so much better than it is, and I blame that on 2 major flaws. Unfortunately for the course, these 2 issues come in to play on just about every single hole.
- The first is the length. It's not that the course is too long for me, but that it's too long for it's layout. You hear in football when a punter outkicks his coverage, negating a longer-than-normal punt. And that's essentially Crookston's problem. Sometimes less (distance) is more. I'll focus on holes #5 & 7 as my chief examples.
- Both holes have good distance (482 & 420 respectively), with legitimately challenging basket placements - #5 behind some trees, #7 nestled in an opening, surrounded by trees. These would both be difficult baskets to get close to from long range. So, why does the course make these holes too long that nobody is going to be going for them with a driver? If these holes were in the 300 foot range, these holes become reachable for most players, and suddenly become huge risk/reward holes. You might get close to the basket, and have a birdie putt, but you might also hit, or get stuck behind a tree, making it a difficult 2nd shot. By making these holes too long, the 300 foot thrower is now going for these tough baskets from a shorter, easier range (100 - 150 feet). It's much easier to get your disc close from shorter range, meaning the advantage goes from the course to the player.
- The other major flaw with the course is that it runs along the walking path, at times presenting unsafe, dangerous shots. For example, the "official" wide, walking trail runs behind the baskets for #2 - 4 (as you can see on the course map), but there's the walking trail that people actually use, which is in front of these 2 baskets, and also comes into play on #5, 7 & 8. On #4 you're throwing a blind shot over the walking trail, to a dogleg right basket, meaning your shot will cross back over the trail. On #2, you're also throwing down a fairway with the parking lot/road on the left, and benches, horseshoe pits, walking trail on the right/the most direct route. I played the course on a Thursday afternoon, and even with that, had to wait on 3 different holes for the few people on the walking trail. Again, if holes were shortened/moved, some of this would be eliminated.
- The mando on #8 is terrible, possibly the worst I've seen. As you can see in one of the pics, you're throwing through a narrow "fairway", mando pole on left, thick overgrowth on right. I could be ok with that because it prevents you from throwing back at #7 tee. My issue is the second mando pole you're supposed to throw around. After my tee shot, my second shot was maybe 150 feet, straight to the basket. But, I had to throw out of the way, around an unnecessary second mando. Mandos are only good if they're needed, not these artificial, "let's make it tougher" ones.
- The tee for #9 was way too close to the tall brush around the wetlands. You have to throw at angle on the tee, or off the tee to go around the brush.
- Not a beginner-friendly course at all. Most local park, 9-holers try to reach out to first-timers and/or families. I'd hope there aren't many, or any, people who play this as their first course, and get turned off to the game.
Other Thoughts: Overall, I don't know if I was more frustrated with the problems or with the fact there are simple solutions to all of them. Making each hole about 100 feet too long, and/or "challenging" (possibly unsafe) gave me the sense of someone wanting to have the longest course in the area. Having the best possible course would have been a much better option. Judging by the other reviews, I'm not alone in my disappointment with the course.
- #7 could have been another great hole without the mandos. Move the tee further down the path, past the first mando pole. Imagine the fun of pulling out a driver, knowing if your shot goes long, it's in the pond/thick brush.
- Fair or unfair, I played this course seeing the potential every hole had. I compared each hole to what it could have been.
- If you want to see a good example of making an open course fair and challenging drive 30 minutes to Brevard, and play that 18-holer.
- This course could have been one of the top 2 or 3 nine-holers I've played, instead, it's one of the top 2 or 3 most disappointing courses I've played. I feel bad for the locals who have this rated 2.5 or higher. This isn't anywhere close to an average course.
- I wish there was a 1.25 rating. 1.5 is way too high for this course, so it's getting a 1.0. It's sad that with so much possibility, this is the best they could do. On the bright side, at least this course has more room for improvement than most courses.
9 of 9 people found this review helpful.
Join Disc Golf Course Review
for free to add your review. Have an account already? Sign In
to add a review.