How do you feel about "Island Holes"?

[dandaman]

I have played Moseley and I played it back when the DZ was on that path just across the road at the top of the picture you gave. The rules, just like you wrote above, I see as "confusing." I have to interpret what you mean. You state that "....successful tee shots are shots that land in the circle OR that come to rest touching any portion of a border rock...." Here's what that sounds like to me. If my tee shot lands inside the circle (island) then that shot is good (successful) whether it stays in the island or not. If I happen to skip or roll out, then I can take my penalty stroke and mark where I last went in. You may not mean that, but that's what your written rule said ... a tee shot landing (to me that means where it first hits) inside the island is successful. I also struggle with a rock being the OB border and your written requirement that the disc be actually touching a rock when it comes to rest. What if it finds a roll that ends up wholly on the ground, not touching any rock but clearly it's spot is under one of those rocks deemed as "safe" (if you look straight down). Unless every border rock in completely in the ground that might happen, and it seems unfair if that shot is ruled OB.

Perhaps I should say "If the disc comes to rest on the island or any border rock". I can see how I wrote it could be confusing. But it really shouldn't be. You are thinking to much about the interpretation of the word "landing". If I'm reading your interpretation correctly then we could argue that discs that initially land on OB, but then skip onto the island should be ruled unsuccessful. Because after all the disc initially landed OB first didn't it? Doesn't that seem a bit unfair and not at all how an island should operate?

As for the rocks I don't see how there can be ambiguity. Are you touching a rock? It's a yes or no question. In your example you would be OB. If you think that your example is unfair, then my response is that you should have thrown a better shot.

 

[dandaman]

The JP Moseley hole needs a closer drop zone in the 80 ft neighborhood so players can absolutely get to the green on their 5th throw after missing from 187 feet. There are many island holes where the original tee is at 187 feet to start with. Also, I suggest that if the pin is not in the middle that it be shifted to the front of the island not back. That way you have the opportunity to fly by the pin chain high and still land inbounds but maybe have a 40 ft comeback putt with perhaps less than 20 ft behind the pin in that direction. When the pin is in back, it's not worth the risk to run the pin.

Are you suggesting two drop zones in this case? I could see how it would work, but I'm not really that big of a fan of that short of a drop zone. At 80 ft we're getting real close to it not being a golf shot. We might as well let players be on the front of the green attempting a forty foot putt to save double bogey then going to a second drop zone where more than likely they will end up with a triple bogey.

I'm concerned that with the pin moved short (270 ft.) the risk for going for the ace is drastically minimized. Shouldn't the greatest of rewards on this hole have the greater of risks attached to it? I absolutely understand the risk from the comeback putt from the ace run, and I really like it, but to me the risk is perhaps misplaced or minimized a bit too much. You've made me think about it and I appreciate it. I kind of like it the more I think about it, and I feel a new pin placement coming, but I still think it minimizes the risk a bit in the inncorrect direction from the tee. Also this kind of pin placement would drastically change the approach shot from the drop zone. I'm debating if that would be for the better or not.

 

[Cgkdisc]

The point with the 80 ft drop zone is to make sure there's a position where everyone can get to the green no matter what even if there are 50 mph winds that day. We're not worried about it being a golf shot as such since it's really just an easy penalty throw.

The fact our target is raised compared with a hole in the ground means the player who is throwing high enough to hole out must throw with more energy that will result in landing farther than the target if he misses versus lagging up under the pin. So in theory, you would want the landing area to still be inbounds for a player who threw with just enough energy to hole out but missed. Otherwise, the essence of our game to hole out is taken away if it's too risky or the reward is not good enough to try that shot if you actually have the skill to do it. Think about this. In ball golf, a player who hits an iron with just enough energy to reach the hole and misses, will 99.9% of the time will land near enough to the pin on either side to be safe.

That's the logic for shifting the pin to the front of islands so players have the option to throw with just enough energy to be high enough to hole out and probably safe if they most likely miss. Then on their comeback putt, they can throw with enough loft to hole out and still probably be safe if they miss even with the OB only 15-20 feet behind the pin from that direction.

 

[optidiscic]

I like the basket in or near the center if the island thus a good drive is rewarded with a possible 2 and 4 is imptobable vs the bad drive to DZ yields a probable 4 and miracle 3 at best.... to punish a shot that made it safe with a risky putt at the oob seems cruel and unusual......unless theres an artificial shore or island hopping option but that seems to be on the cusp of insane artificialty lol

 

[Cgkdisc]

The point regarding shifting the pin forward is when you have a small island say just a 10 meter radius circle so the player doesn't fly out the back going for the pin. And, OB 15-20 feet behind a pin has a slight risk in case of a rollaway but not for a loft putt from 30-40 ft. If the green is bigger than 10m radius then having the pin closer to the center can make sense.

 

[araytx]

I use drop zones on 2 holes on my course

1 is an island without water and the rule is wherever the disc comes to rest thus a shot can skip from inbounds and go to the DZ

the other is a peninsula over a creek wherever the disc comes to rest determines your lie even if u hit the basket and plink oob you go to the DZ

...
I think DG needs more of them actually

See right there. It's not clear what is meant on #1 by "...the rule is wherever the disc comes to rest thus a shot can skip FROM inbounds and go to the DZ..."

 

[optidiscic]

we have a hole 188 ft 8 inches with a perfect 10m circle....the reward for landing in the circle is typically a 2.....the hole has been aced and most ace runs would have stayed inbounds as they are typically putter hyzer shots.....anyone winging a driver at the pin from 188'8" away deserves oob imo

I do get your logic however and its interesting but maybe for bigger islands and longer shots

 

[optidiscic]

See right there. It's not clear what is meant on #1 by "...the rule is wherever the disc comes to rest thus a shot can skip FROM inbounds and go to the DZ..."

its not difficult at all....where your disc comes to rest is either oob or inbounds thus you finish oob you go to dz

why is this so hard to comprehend?

 

[araytx]

its not difficult at all....where your disc comes to rest is either oob or inbounds thus you finish oob you go to dz

why is this so hard to comprehend?

Because you said skipping inbounds goes to DZ !!:wall:

 

[optidiscic]

I will add that a shot that skips oob isnt a good shot getting your disc to finish inbounds is a good shot.....especially for the short island holes we are discussing....I often get the complaint I made a good shot that hit the green then skipped oob....to which I counter I guess it wasnt a very good shot then

 

[optidiscic]

Because you said skipping inbounds goes to DZ !!:wall:

skipping from inbounds to out of bounds

 

[araytx]

skipping from inbounds to out of bounds

Yeah! Thanks for being specific. So skipping from OB and coming to rest inbounds is good. You'll see from my first post here (#69), that executing that very shot and being ruled OB is what started my distaste for "island" holes.

 

[Cgkdisc]

From a design standpoint, having a physical boundary like a curb, logs, fences or walls separating IB and OB is a way to reduce fluky skips and rolls that go either direction.

 

[optidiscic]

Yeah! Thanks for being specific. So skipping from OB and coming to rest inbounds is good. You'll see from my first post here (#69), that executing that very shot and being ruled OB is what started my distaste for "island" holes.

imo it should be where your disc comes to rest not how it got there

 

[mashnut]

Yeah! Thanks for being specific. So skipping from OB and coming to rest inbounds is good. You'll see from my first post here (#69), that executing that very shot and being ruled OB is what started my distaste for "island" holes.

Sure, but that's a specific situation with a really stupid rule I haven't seen used anywhere. Your issue was with poorly designed and poorly communicated rules exceptions, not with well designed island holes.

 

[optidiscic]

From a design standpoint, having a physical boundary like a curb, logs, fences or walls separating IB and OB is a way to reduce fluky skips and rolls that go either direction.

except for hay bales at hornets lol

 

[1978]

Hornets Nest - Silly to have hay bales at the back of the green, lol. Never heard anyone suggest that for #17 USDGC. 2 tries and you have a drop zone a 20' putt for a 5. Most you ever see is a 6. Just land in the green, it is the harder layout.

 

[Cgkdisc]

It's because the island is so small that hay bales are needed behind the green. The hay bales in essence increase the size of the green so it's closer to being fair. Hole 17 at Winthrop has a decent sized landing area and doesn't need a backstop.

 

[optidiscic]

chuck whats your best take on ratio of island size to distance off the tee

I recall Steve West having dome fot diagrams of spray zones this info is very interesting to me and Id like to ponder island sizes vs distance for 100 on up to 300+ ft holes

 

[optidiscic]

done dot diagrams