Disc Golf Design MythBusters

[Billipo]

Starting a thread to discuss a particular situation or certain reasons why commonly stated design "Rules" may not always make sense. Sure they are probably great guidelines, but maybe not perfect absolutes.

Please start posts with the broken rule of design and then make your case.

Dispelling those "thou shalt not of disc golf design" - Disc Golf Design MythBusters!

 

[Billipo]

No Par 2 Holes

Always avoid Par 2 holes.

I disagree. I think in general they are a bad design option, but I like to incorporate at least one hole that a player approaches the tee with confidence that they can ace the hole.

A hole listed as a par 3 but a majority of players card a birdie.

Also a benefit when hosting tournaments when players are deciding to participate in the ace fund.

Place the hole near typical event headquarters and it makes a great CTP hole.

One design I have such a hole has three tees. Red 220, White 280, Blue 320. Open downhill hole. A few more feet in length the hole would card a majority of 3s. Hole 10 right outside pavillion on second nine loop.

 

[seedlings]

It would be fun to see a mando 'over this tree'.

 

[DavidSauls]

No crossing fairways.

Seems like a no-brainer, and usually is.

But one of our favorite courses had a pair, so when my brother and I built a private course, we included a set. Traffic is so light that I doubt there's ever been a conflict outside of tournaments; the layout is such that there's almost no danger of it happening in a tournament, just an occasional wait on the tee for the mutual area to clear. The holes are so good that it would be a shame not to have them, just because of this design rule.

I played a public course once, with crossing fairways -- but they crossed over a body of water. We tried that, too, briefly, but eventually came up with a better idea for one of those holes.

 

[Billipo]

No crossing fairways.

Another example is a course I played where two holes were 90 degrees from each other. One hole following the contour of the base of a significant elevation change. The other played from the edge at the top of the hill. Playing overtop the first hole easily clearing the first hole.

 

[txmxer]

I'd still say crossing fairways is less a myth and more a rule you can break but it has to be a really good reason.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

I think crossing fairways really depends on whether the course is public private.

While it's less than optimal, it's not that big a problem if the property owner limits access, and players know the deal. But on a public access course, it's trouble waiting to happen, and usually a bad idea.


And agree with txmex that you should have a really good reason... along with limited access, for it to possibly be acceptable.

 

[jakebake91]

Slight thread drift, but on topic of crossing fairways....

Is it more dangerous to cross fairways, or for a fairway to cross a decently well used public use area (i.e beach or picnic area)?

I feel like both should be avoided at all costs, but at least with fairways crossing each other, disc golfers know to watch out for each other.

 

[biscoe]

I feel like both should be avoided at all costs, but at least with fairways crossing each other, disc golfers know to watch out for each other.

This is correct. In addition liability for someone getting injured is far different between a participant and a bystander (in Virginia at least).

 

[DavidSauls]

I'd still say crossing fairways is less a myth and more a rule you can break but it has to be a really good reason.

The O.P. had me slightly puzzled -- mentions "myths", but then describes rules usually make sense, but are not absolutes.

I went with the latter, since I'd imagine myths to be things that aren't usually true.

 

[Rastnav]

I'm guessing it would be an even shorter conversation if it was limited strictly to myths, but IDK much about DG course design. It doesn't seem like there are very many hard and fast principles, let alone ones that are just wrong.

Question, is "no NAGS" a myth? Something that can be broken? It seems like Albert Oakland generated a bunch of what might be considered NAGS for both fields. It obviously wasn't the best pro DG experience, but it also seems to me that it simply highlights that NAGS for thee aren't necessarily NAGS for me, and you still have to execute them.

Or maybe I'm just confused on what really constitutes a NAGS.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Is it more dangerous to cross fairways, or for a fairway to cross a decently well used public use area (i.e beach or picnic area)?

I feel like both should be avoided at all costs, but at least with fairways crossing each other, disc golfers know to watch out for each other.

Course designers should avoid having reasonably playable lines anywhere where non-DG traffic can come into play. Designing a hole where courts, ball fields, trails/paths, roads, are a grip lock or newb hyzer away is completely irresponsible.

As Jake said, at least players gave the awareness of where they are and what's going on around them.

People playing basketball, or walking, biking, etc, in an area specifically intended for that use, have every right to not be part of our game. You really can't blame them for not realizing how far you can throw, where your disc might be expected to fly, or even what the heck we're doing in the first place.

 

[chevis]

Question, is "no NAGS" a myth? Something that can be broken? It seems like Albert Oakland generated a bunch of what might be considered NAGS for both fields. It obviously wasn't the best pro DG experience, but it also seems to me that it simply highlights that NAGS for thee aren't necessarily NAGS for me, and you still have to execute them.

Or maybe I'm just confused on what really constitutes a NAGS.

^this.
Not A Golf Shot is a myth imo. different players have different skills, so what may be nags for you isn't nags for all. just because the design is for a certain skill level, all skill levels will attempt to play it.

 

[autocrosscrx]

What is NAGS?

 

[oldmandiscer]

Always avoid Par 2 holes.

I disagree. I think in general they are a bad design option, but I like to incorporate at least one hole that a player approaches the tee with confidence that they can ace the hole.

A hole listed as a par 3 but a majority of players card a birdie.

Also a benefit when hosting tournaments when players are deciding to participate in the ace fund.

Place the hole near typical event headquarters and it makes a great CTP hole.

One design I have such a hole has three tees. Red 220, White 280, Blue 320. Open downhill hole. A few more feet in length the hole would card a majority of 3s. Hole 10 right outside pavillion on second nine loop.

Heck why not. Make everything Par 2 since we got giant baskets and putting is irrelevant.

I think that is the best idea yet. Course Par 36. Shooting "Par" would be an actual good score.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Anyone else hear that fly buzzing around in here?
*reaches for swatter*

What is NAGS?

Not A Golf Shot... certain circumstances of what is essentially a forced layup. Not sure if John Houck coined the term, but he wrote an article about it for PDGA's quarterly mag several years ago.

Not from Houck, but it's discussed here:
https://www.vorticasport.com/amp/2019/01/09/common-problems-in-disc-golf-ranging

 

[Billipo]

Always avoid high usage park areas

I know of quite a few courses where the randomness of disc golf play in previous high used non golf park activity areas has pleased the parks.

Vandals and participants in other illegal or discouraged activities seem to avoid sites absorbed by disc golf courses.

 

[Innova63]

Anyone else hear that fly buzzing around in here?
*reaches for swatter*

Note to self
Need to buy a new swatter...
Old one was broken early last month...

Before experiment began.

 

[coupe]

Slight thread drift, but on topic of crossing fairways....
I feel like both should be avoided at all costs, but at least with fairways crossing each other, disc golfers know to watch out for each other.

Experienced disc golfers, maybe. I've seen plenty of players who've been playing long enough to know better tee off when the group in front of them was 150-200' down the fairway, not to mention mob golfers wandering around yukking it up and not paying attention to others on the course.

 

[Countchunkula]

^this.
Not A Golf Shot is a myth imo. different players have different skills, so what may be nags for you isn't nags for all. just because the design is for a certain skill level, all skill levels will attempt to play it.

I both agree and disagree. I think nags is an important concept for designers to be aware of, in order to create good holes for the intended skill level. I'm also one of those lower skilled players who loves gold courses; even though playing a given hole to the best of my ability with often yield a nags.