Suwanee Creek Disc Golf
Has concrete tee pads
Has tee signs
Course flows pretty well except for between holes #12 & #13
Has some benches throughout course
More wooded than open fairways - which will be challenging to the casual player
Many holes have changes in elevations and there are some doglegs
Some holes have multiple basket placements
Almost all of the holes are under shade where this can be really appreciated in the hot and humid summers
Water comes into play on holes #2 and #6 but the stream is shallow and narrow enough where it shouldn't be a factor in losing a disc
Free Parking but can get filled quickly due to other parkgoers - multiple parking areas can allow one to start at hole#1, #4, and #12
Course is mostly mulched
Pretty short course overall - no par variety
Lots of trees where some fairways can be quite unfair and deflect discs into other trees - #17 comes to mind
Have to be careful to not trip on any exposed tree stumps
Blind drives on some holes
Walking path meanders throughout the course and parkgoers can cause some delays
This is a nice short technical course where you'll likely see more parkgoers than players. You won't hardly find any opportunities to throw bombs here. It's a good course to work on your short game and getting an ace. Hole #17 is the worst of them all in my opinion...a good drive here can easily roll down the slope - so something should be used to prevent that from happening.
Technical and Awesome
1 Helpful / 2 Not
Pros: This course is very technical. It requires the player to have several different throws in his/her arsenal. It is very well marked. Tee pads are all concrete with great signage, and nice sign markers directing to the next tee. Considering how wooded these holes are, the amount of clearing that has been done to create fairways is awesome.
Cons: If it is really a con, there's a lot elevation changes with some of it being steep. Hole #2 throws across a bit of a gully, which if you accidentally toss into - discs are retrievable, the decent is steep.
Other Thoughts: I'm a bit surprised at the rating for this course. It is a fantastic journey. As someone who doesn't have a particularly strong arm, I loved this course. It made me explore different throws, and will force me to better my short game. I will absolutely play again.
1 of 3 people found this review helpful.
1 Helpful / 1 Not
Pros: -Well maintained
-Concrete teepads (two per hole)
-Signs for every hole at each teepad
-Challenges your ability to hit lines
-Almost entirely shaded
-Several hole locations for each hole, although in the 3 times I've played the course the holes have not moved.
Cons: -No trashcans
-Parking is a little strange
Other Thoughts: This course is very different from almost all other courses I've played. In general all the holes are short and heavily wooded. Many have sharp turns after about 100 feet or so.
I never pull a driver out of my bag when playing this course, mainly putters and mid-range from time to time. This course will challenge you to hit tough lines. This course is all about finesse, no power shots needed.
1 of 2 people found this review helpful.
2 Helpful / 2 Not
Pros: Great design; very similar to Chastain park in the 1980's. 90% in the trees...Many elevation changes; no extremely long holes; almost completely in the shade; several holes are aces waiting to happen. Not much understory in the forest. Well maintained. Excellent signage and stairs make playing this course a breeze. Can be played quickly if shooting well.
Cons: Way too many opportunities for hitting a hiker, bike rider, walker, picnicker, etc prevent this from being an outstanding course.
Other Thoughts: This is not a course for someone who really likes to rip it. It is a finesse course, one that requires many different types of shots. It is worth a play, just to experience the well designed holes and excellent course layout. I have played DG in Atlanta for 25 years and am very surprised this course is rated so low. The course is in a beautiful mixed hardwood forest with several massive, champion caliber trees. It is not like the pine dominated forests common in many Atlanta courses.
I would suggest parking and starting at 13 and 14 (left when entering park and then all the way to parking lot at end (past the pavilion)
2 of 4 people found this review helpful.
4 Helpful / 2 Not
strong shot shaping course
Pros: I love that this course has lanes to throw, and how much work was done on putting in stairs and markers. It's very easy to find your way the first time you play. The course is very clean and well kept. If you hit your line you will be rewarded. Love the elevation changes and there are chances of the elusive ace.
I like that this course is short but not simple.
Cons: There's not much parking right next to hole 1. There is parking a little further down though. There are people walking you have to keep an eye out for on a few holes. You will not get to grip it and rip it if that is your thing.
Other Thoughts: This course has improved and a lot of work had been put in to make the elevation manageable(stairs everywhere). Every hole feels like it's own hole. This course does not have it all, but is still very fun.
4 of 6 people found this review helpful.
2 Helpful / 5 Not
Better than two stars
Pros: Decent signage, great tee pads, well laid-out, good variety (balanced between favoring RHBH/LHBH players)
Cons: A little messy (no brooms at tee pads to tidy up),
Other Thoughts: This is my first review. I just couldn't let this course have two stars when East Roswell Park is rated 3.5 (I'm rating this one a 3.0). The course was in decent condition despite poor weather before I played it. The tee boxes are excellent: they're all concrete with grooves to prevent slipping.
PLEASE NOTE: upon entering the park, make a left. After a few seconds, you'll come up to the tee for hole #1. There are only four parking spaces, so if you want to play the holes in order, you may need to drive farther and walk back.
You probably won't need any drivers. This course is extremely short and wooded. Great for practicing up-shots and accurate throws. It's not my cup of tea (I prefer Alexander Park when I can "grip it and rip it") but a great course for a quick, short round.
2 of 7 people found this review helpful.
Good Technical Course
1 Helpful / 4 Not
Pros: - Wooded, technical course. Great for shaping shots and practicing control. Great for utilizing mid-range discs and putters.
- Plenty of hills, but not too strenuous.
- Several parking lots, allowing one to start at different holes. Can start on #1, #4 or #12 for example, which helps spread groups out during busy periods. Starting on #4 is my preferred place.
- Course is in good condition. Baskets in good shape, concrete tees. Course is relatively new.
- Good layout, some sidehill paths, some fairly straight and level.
Cons: - Almost no holes that offer open areas or a chance to bomb it. Except for #1 and #13, there are no straight shots that allow any forgiveness.
- The complaint that some holes have trees, vines and brush within the 10-meter circle/green is a valid issue.
- Some holes (#15-18 come to mind) have sloping paths and footing can be difficult.
- There are a couple of places where it is confusing as to where to go to get to the next tee box, and it's not well marked.
- No practice basket (that I know of).
Other Thoughts: This was the first course I played disc golf upon (in decades, anyway) as I picked up the game. Not a bad course for beginners because of the short holes, though again there are no really open holes (save the 1st hole) to really drive for length.
Edited to add: a lot of reviews are saying how bad the design of the course is. I can't speak to what they want or expect from a course. Maybe they want easy birdie shots on every hole. This course isn't like that: some holes are indeed short and offer birdie and even ace opportunities. Other holes are like real-golf Links courses: one must pick spots and land accurately in them, then make the approach shot and putt and walk away with a good par. I find this course to be very good at challenging me to find the right shots and then make those shots. Be glad that you have this course to play on, play it as it lies, and enjoy your disc golf day.
1 of 5 people found this review helpful.
No Thanks - But it has potential
3 Helpful / 3 Not
Pros: This is neither a pro or a con but I got the idea from the review of "craigd" to give the reader of this a review some perspective of the reviewer. My wife and I played together on this course. We are both senior citizens and have been playing for about 4 years. She is about a 550 rated player and I'm about a 750 rated player. Neither of us had ever been to this course before. We have played about 30 different courses in 8 different states. There are many informative reviews of this course and I will try not to be too repetitive.
Be sure to read the reviews of mullethead326 on 5/15/2014 and craigd on 5/4/2014 for detailed descriptions.
Now for the Pros:
Good use up hilly terrain with downhill, cross hill, and uphill shots.
Cons: Where do I begin? I drove into the park about 50 ft. and there was a fork in the road. The sign that told visitors what was in each direction mentioned nothing about disc golf. We took a guess and ended up in a parking lot that looked like the right place. It turns out the sign we thought was about the disc golf course had nothing to do with disc golf. We did find T-Pad #4 and started there. Thats not all bad, just weird. We still got to play all 18 and returned to the car after hole #3.
Many other reviewers mentioned the good signage. I disagree. It was at best fair. Sure there was a nice sign at each T-Box, but nice does not equate to informative. Let's start with the signs often being behind the T-Box so that when you are looking at the sign your back is to the basket. The fact that the T-Pads were rounded at the front did help us figure out which way to throw. The fact that MOST Baskets could not be seen from the T-Box did not help. I like an occasional blind shot, but this course had WAY TOO MANY. It wastes time and holds up other players when you have to walk the fairway to find the Basket and then walk back to the T-Box to throw. Additionally the signs OFTEN showed a slight turn between the T-Box and the Basket when it turned out to be a much more radical turn; a turn that a disc will not do unless you throw a big hyser or anhyser. However, those throws can't be done because of the canopy of trees overhead. OFTEN times the only way to know which way to get to the next T-Box after holing out is to look for a worn path. There may be more than one, so you are guessing. Some of the walks are rather long with no signage to tell you that you are heading in the correct direction. On the good side there was signage painted on the roads when you had to use them to get to the next T-Box. Sometimes the signs guiding the player to the next T-Box was too far from the Basket to be seen or facing in such a direction that it could not be seen from the basket. After holing out at a Basket there should be a sign easily seen from the Basket guiding players to the next T-Box.
The course definitely favors lefties. That did not bother me because I'm a righty with a fairly good forehand flick and it didn't bother my wife who throws both right and left handed.
This course is described as a "Good for beginner to moderate level players". I'm not sure where they came up with that evaluation. Of course, there is no definition of a beginner or moderate level player. So let's imagine a beginner that throws 100 ft. or less. What are their chances of getting a birdie? Almost none. It takes 2 great throws to get within putting range. I say "great throws" because the fairways are OFTEN so narrow that great throws are infrequent. Now lets look at the person who throws about 200 ft. They should be able to get within putting range off the T-box on 16 of the 18 holes. But they can't because their disc doesn't make the turn soon enough and flies straight into the jungle instead of turning toward the basket. Once in the jungle, as many other reviewers have said, there is way too many impediments to getting out. These include trees, vines, branches, etc. A few trees being removed would help but getting rid of vines and branches that are only 4 feet off the ground, or less, would make impossible shots become difficult. It a thrower ends up off the fairway, the next shot should be difficult ... but not impossible.
Narrow openings between the T-Box and the Basket make a hole challenging. When there is a 10 ft. gap 20 ft. in front of the T-Box that is a challenge. When there is a 10 ft. gap 80 ft. in front of the T-Box that takes a prayer for all but the exceptional players. These gaps 80 ft. from the T-Box where way too frequent.
Very few holes had a clearly defined path to the basket that a "beginner to moderate level players" had much more that luck to make.
Other Thoughts: This course is the strangest course I have ever played. It is more like a putt-putt golf course than a place where a beginner can get interested in the game or a moderate level player can hone their skills. It's frustrating to have an awesome drive with birdie written all over it, be 2 degrees off course and turn into a 4 or 5.
I may play this course again just to see if I can figure our what throws might work. If I play this course again I might just use a putter of the T-Box and try to place the shot in the middle of the fairway at the turn point, then use a mid range to lay up at the basket.
As a course designed for "beginner to moderate level players" this course has the potential to get a 4, or better, rating if the fairways were wider and less obstructed, the signs were properly placed and more accurate, and the "rough" was a little less than like being in jail.
3 of 6 people found this review helpful.
Better than Rating Show
3 Helpful / 4 Not
Pros: - Great signage
- Fun, short course
- Great place to work on your short game
- Well manicured park
- Tough lines will advance your game
- Great place to bring beginners
Cons: - Too many trees leave too much to chance.
- Some holes have VERY difficult lines, but make the most of them!
- 15, 16, and 17 are all doglegs to the right, maybe a bit of overkill here? Variety would make this stretch of the back 9 better.
Other Thoughts: I think this course is underrated. Is it my first option when I want to go play? No. Is it the worst course I've played? NO! Some of these reviews are WAY too harsh. Tough lines? Good! Advance your game! I believe that the course is short and challenging. It's tough to make par. Most holes are very tight.
3 of 7 people found this review helpful.
Yikes Yikes Yikes
13 Helpful / 4 Not
Other Thoughts: I have now played Suwanee Creek Park several times, and would like to express both support and concern for the park and course. I am always excited to see new courses going in, particularly with the full support of public entities, because it means better access to playing and exposure to the community. However, the design of Suwanee Creek is strange, and I foresee some significant user conflicts with pedestrians on the busy network of paths throughout the park. Those paths are an equally legitimate form of recreation; their existence precedes (and volume of usership may mean that they preclude) that of the disc golf course.
There are absolutely some interesting shots on this course, and some challenging and legitimate holes. There are also some terrible holes. I observed a recurrent theme throughout the course (holes 2, 5, 7, 10, 11, 16, 17, 18) where the intended fairway is either impossible to reach the basket, or much longer after the turn than before. I do not believe that a hole with few birdies (and requiring luck or a long putt to achieve same) necessarily constitutes a challenging hole; nor does lack of a landing zone suitable for its intended user group. In throwing these holes, I have often been frustrated by hole shapes-despite my efforts to manipulate my discs, some holes at this course truly are unreachable without an absurd amount of luck, but for most users, even beginners, they are not long enough to truly be multi-shot holes. There are also some unnecessarily small gaps that make several holes play unfairly--hole 10 is a huge culprit in this regard. Beginners, as well as advanced players, want to feel like they can have success in the game; holes that are poorly designed and don't have a repeatable and viable way of playing them (without being skill-level dependent) make the experience far less enjoyable for all users. In addition, being able to see the basket from the tee without walking for nearly half the hole is an underrated part of a positive experience--some blind holes are fine, 9 is far too many. Holes 2, 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 16, 17, and 18 (long) are particular offenders of this suggestion.
Numerous holes are too close to other parts of the park, and bad shots or even good shots with unfortunate kicks will find their way onto paths, picnic areas, and paved areas. In the time I have spent in the park, I've seen on the order of 50-100 pedestrians per hour making use of the walking paths; that's already fairly busy; if it gets busier on weekends or other high-traffic disc golf times, then someone will be inconvenienced. I, too, want to believe the best of disc golfers, but I know that some are impatient, erratic, and occasionally you just don't see somebody until it's too late. I am not aware of the specific liability or legal ramifications to designers, constructors, or park owners for the possible accidents that may occur, but I do know that I make throwing mistakes as well as anyone, and that being hit by a disc hurts. Even in large parks, with disc golf set apart from other activities, there are bound to be some errant shots that find their way to strange places, but this park is something else. With a precedent already set for lawsuits as a result of disc golf accidents, it is in our best interest to collectively minimize this possiblity. Most of us reading (or writing) this review probably have some control over where our discs are going, we also have seen or played with players who can throw one high-speed driver in a general direction at a high velocity. The shots we need to prepare and design for aren't always the perfect ones, they're the ones 3 standard deviations beyond terrible.
This next point is more incriminating of the mind of a disc golfer than anything. I walk up to a hole, and I want to find the easiest way to get to the basket. Always. I'm not alone in this; most golfers want to find a way to "cheat" the design of a hole. So even though I want to believe that I can get to the basket, a frequent occurrence is a disc skipping, kicking, or flying through an area I might not have intended. For example, I played with a golfer who threw a "hyzer line" on hole 17, that avoids the intended (absurd) fairway by throwing onto the path and attempting to skip down to the basket. The path above the teepad is largely a blind shot, but it's preferable enough that I could understand his logic in attempting to reach the basket that way. I think this is an instance where mandos won't really solve the problem, because the "fairway" is just plain dumb and golfers will try it anyway. On hole 13, I have often tried to skip a Firebird around the right side, and come within a foot of the path by punching through a thin wall of brush (likely to be trampled eventually). That's a pretty reasonable shot, one I could see many players trying--if that's what happens on a pretty straightforward hole, where else will we see golfers "cheating" the course and introducing unforeseen problems?
I believe that on every single hole, I could be within the circle and not have a putt at at least one spot. Whatever the design notes were for contracted clearing of the holes, they evidently did not include creating actual greens. This is one of the most frustrating things I find on a course; I wish to be rewarded for a shot that puts me close to the basket with a minimally obstructed putt--I do not mind mature trees, but vines, privet, new growth, and scrubby brush really doesn't serve much of an ecological niche, nor does it provide for an enjoyable experience to a disc golfer. In addition, many holes on the course were not adequately cleared in the throwing lanes. Branches, vines, and trees are still very much in play on holes 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 15, 16, 17, and 18. I also think that a good design concept is to create an off-fairway density gradient that reduces the penalty for being just a few feet off the fairway; Suwanee Creek pretty much has fairway and ridiculous shule, but no early rough. All of these remaining obstacles combine to make a strongly invalid course. I hope that this is can be chalked up to the course not being a finished product, rather than its eventual state. Real greens benefit all disc golfers.
I was very pleased to see the addition of 6x6 steps; these are well-made and so long as they're anchored to a packed undersoil will be excellent erosion control on the most popular paths. I hope that the currently scraped paths on holes 2, 4->5, 5->6, and 6 will be either graveled or mulched to avoid compaction. The teepads, baskets, and signage are professional and more than adequate. The signs are well-made and sufficiently detailed, but the diagrams are often dramatically understated, and the posts are frequently oriented at insensible angles.
I am a little curious who has been involved throughout the conception, design, and construction of this course. My present understanding is that the designer and contractors responsible for clearing had some input from disc golfers, but evidently have not taken their ideas seriously. The shapes of these holes, size and placement of gaps, remaining obstacles in fairways, and proximity to other park features suggest to me that the involved parties are unaware of the mechanics of disc golf and what constitutes a quality hole. I hope that, for those of us who already play disc golf and want to see more courses in the area, this serves as a notice to the importance of having designers and constructors who are well-attuned to the needs and minds of disc golfers, and already have some experience with course design and maintenance.
Hole 1: This is a fine hole. I would like to see more clearing near the basket, but it's a fine, skill-level appropriate, and minimally intrusive hole. Some disc golfers I met today said they had been asked to move their bags from the walking path, which is where social dynamics suggest they're most likely to leave their bags--inviting a user conflict with the round hardly begun.
Hole 2: This is a pretty dumb hole. Its shape, as I indicated above, is longer after the turn than before. It wouldn't be terrible with more clearing on the left side after the turn, and a little more right and short of the basket. There are about four strands of barbed wire 100 feet short of the basket on the left side. I could easily see a hard, straight shot or a tree kick putting a disc into the street, which is a significant safety concern. The checkdam in the drainage hopefully won't be an ankle-breaker or result in more distributed flow around the area. Teepad for 3 is waaaaay too close to the basket.
Hole 3: This is also a good hole. Clearing low shule within 25-30 feet of the basket would improve it greatly.
Hole 4: The birdhouse needs to go. I'm a little worried about the proximity of the amphitheater, but I haven't seen anyone using it yet. This is absolutely a hole where an off-fairway density gradient would be a dramatic improvement.
Hole 5: This is a very similar hole shape to 2. I haven't seen the wetlands really in play, and the green area is a good one. Still, the sharpness and length of this turn results in Not-A-Golf-Shot for many, many players. There is potential for conflict with the path, which is only about 20-25 feet past the basket.
Hole 6: A very solid hole from both teepads. Personally, think the short pad is a little unnecessary because the "water hazard" isn't much to speak of, even for a recreational player. I saw multiple shots get kicked to finish onto the walking path to the left. There is minimal clearing in this green right now, so a 15-footer might be impossible. 7's teepad is way too close, particularly since it's on the line that both drives reaching the pin, and upshots from the fairway are likely to come in on.
Hole 7: I don't have strong enough words for how bad this hole is. How on earth did this get approved? Did no one, in any of the walkthroughs, think to question the inevitable safety concerns associated with throwing directly at a walking path, for which oncoming users are blind from the teepad? I'd put even money on this being the hole that shuts down the course. I'm not even going to comment on the gap, the shule, the green, nothing, because this hole should not exist in its current form.
Hole 8: For a beginner course, one of the better holes. Short, straightforward, flat. No problems here.
Hole 9: A beefier complement to hole 8, and one of the better lines on the course. However, I feel that the 6-7 foot gap 160 feet off the pad, leading to the left basket position, is unfair and capricious. That gap is unnecessarily demanding; at that distance and width it's skill that gets you to the gap and luck that gets you through it--making it a dumb gap for my level, and a dumb gap for a first or second shot for most, if not all, players. This hole also needs to be cleaned out around the green. DGers are already creating a desire path from the walking trail, directly to the back of the teepad, which makes the sign's orientation and location inconvenient. That's something an experienced designer would/should have picked up on quickly.
Hole 10: This is a dumb gap. Discs do not fly this way. This is also a dumb gap for people trying to lay up, because the lane to the basket isn't very forgiving, and the "landing zone" is tiny. Basically, it doesn't suit any user groups.
Hole 11: Sort of an East Roswell #8 light. This is a fine hole for beginners, but not great for many others. Eventually, someone's vehicle, parked in a reasonable location in a parking lot, is going to get hit, or someone will throw over the fence into the retention pond.
Hole 12: This used to be a nice place to have a picnic, now it's a great place to get brained while you're trying to grill. Less than 30 feet from the grill to the short basket position. The walking path is also very much in play on this hole. I'll set the over/under on number of first-time users who actually play this hole at 20%.
Hole 13: A pretty good hole, and one of the more conspicuous to the walking path--it's good in the sense that it will be a good introduction, like #1, to non-disc golfers. I see some creative shots (skips, over-the-top, etc) interfering with the existing walking path.
Hole 14: Straightforward, solid hole. Going about 40 long could put you on the walking path.
Hole 15: We've got another good hole here. Off-fairway density gradient (most especially on the high side, as trimming the low side would increase the frequency of discs kicking/trickling down to the walking path below) would be a great inclusion. Hole 16's teepad is more or less on the line to the basket from the tee and fairway, and inside the circle.
Hole 16: This is a terrible and impossible hole. I can only imagine that the designer wanted to balance the course with an absurd right turn to balance the absurd left turns from before. There are plenty of branches, vines, and trees that need to go before this hole could even begin to be legitimate. It's only about 45 feet from the basket to 17's tee... not terrible, but not great either.
Hole 17: This is also a terrible and impossible hole. The fairway has numerous branches interfering with the flight lines. Any conventional shot using the fairway will not reach the hole, or even be within birdie range. The most successful shot I have seen, as I alluded to above, has been by throwing a skip shot off the path to the right. A better hole could have been achieved with a teepad downhill of where 16's basket is (assuming, of course, that 16 remained in its foolish state), and throwing uphill using the second half of the existing fairway on 17. There are also a ridiculous number of intrusive branches directly in what I must assume is the intended flight path for this hole. 18's long pad is pretty close to 17's basket.
Hole 18: Putting a basket 20 feet (+/- 5) from a pavilion is not a good idea in any possible way. I see that and say " great, a backstop, let's really rip on it". Any rational park user sees that and says "this picnic table is a good place to be". From the long/left pad, this is an awful hole. There is not a true route to the right basket without getting absurdly lucky, and the straight shot out of the existing gap results in being behind the pavilion. Numerous limbs remain in the throwing lanes. From the short tee, this isn't a bad hole, with the exception of where the basket is located.
In summary, I applaud the city of Suwanee and those who have worked to get the course installed. I am worried that because of the small area of the park, and the close proximity of the course to other park features (including paths, pavilions, picnic areas, parking lots, and roads), there will be significant safety concerns that I fear may prove detrimental to future public support of this course in particular, and disc golf in general. I hope that as this course develops and changes, we will see maintenance of the throwing lines and greens to improve the playability of the course, but in its current and early iteration, I foresee issues arising. Please feel free to provide additional insight, tell me how and why I'm wrong, and anything else you care to do. I'm pretty invested in the growth of this sport, and I'm more concerned than excited about what Suwanee Creek can offer.
13 of 17 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.