Rugged golf vs Park golf

[mashnut]

Rugged courses are great until you spend an hour on top of your play time looking for discs that plunge into tall grass, or sometimes fairway grass that hasn't been mowed in awhile, or disappear behind horizon lines or walls of trees, or do double ricochets off trees and land in brush piles, or find those magical crevices or depressions in the ground that you'll only see if you walk over that exact spot.

Then "rugged" becomes tedious.

Yeah but I've spent just as much time on park courses where they thought they were adding challenge by leaving the grass off the fairways unmowed. I'd rather be searching for a disc in a cool scenic place than in tall grass in a city park.

 

[Improbably]

Yeah but I've spent just as much time on park courses where they thought they were adding challenge by leaving the grass off the fairways unmowed. I'd rather be searching for a disc in a cool scenic place than in tall grass in a city park.

Agreed I hate that practice. It's not creating a rough it's purely disc concealment.

 

[Jukeshoe]

Yeah but I've spent just as much time on park courses where they thought they were adding challenge by leaving the grass off the fairways unmowed. I'd rather be searching for a disc in a cool scenic place than in tall grass in a city park.

3rd this emotion.


I'd rather die a horrible lonely death on a rugged course than shoot under par in an hour on a park-style course.

 

[mashnut]

Agreed I hate that practice. It's not creating a rough it's purely disc concealment.

On the other hand, it at least provides a nice habitat for mosquitos, chiggers and ticks...

 

[knettles]

So I guess the moral is... there is a fine line between rugged done right, and rugged done wrong (disc eaters).

Because I've definitely played courses I would consider rugged, but were easy to find errant throws.

 

[koogs]

I like the rugged courses better, here in Michigan we have some great ski hill courses up north and outstanding kinder, gentler course closer to the city.

The most rugged course I've played is in the UP. The Tailings in Iron River.
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course.php?id=3925. I think I lost about 5 lbs and a pint of blood (and 2 discs) playing that one. One of my fave courses but I won't play it alone.

 

[pauldst]

Agree, there's a place for both, and I enjoy both.

If I'm alone and just have an hour and a half or so, definitely the parks (which means most of the time).

But I love finding and playing ones that are different, and are adventures.

I am looking forward to some new ones of both this June and July. I am hoping to get to one in Indiana or Ohio, one in WV, one or two in PA, maybe one in DE, one or two in NY, one or two in Ontario, and one in Michigan. I am even considering getting one of those 3 pound disc targets that I saw advertised and taking it to Africa...

 

[sillybizz]

It's all about Diamond X

 

[Nemmers]

In my locale we have two main courses. One was built in a tamed area of a state park. The other was built in an ACoE rock quarry which had the federal minimum of land reclamation performed on it. It's definitely not land in its natural state but is very rugged and not at all tamed. Both are full 18 hole courses, both offer decent challenge and variety. The primary difference is the "tamed-ness" of the park land, with one exception the park course actually has more thorns.

The park course gets significantly more traffic and many more local golfers claim it as their home course.

I prefer the ruggedness of the quarry course and think overly tamed courses in general are a snooze.

To those who participate in course design or just wish they could; does tamed/park-like land or rugged and/or natural land appeal more?

It's all about preference. Take Geocaching as a for-instance.

People hide stuff all over the world...some of them at disc golf courses. It's a great pastime to amuse yourself with whilst your significant other returns the shoes she doesn't like at the mall for two hours, and it's also a great way to plan an epic camping trip with your friends in a state park.

They grade Geocaches on two criterion: difficulty and terrain. The first is how hard it is to find, the second is how hard it is to get there. The OP appears to want opinions on the latter.

Terrain on a DG course is a huge deal. Playing on a mountain for the one, breathtaking downhill shot you'll probably lose your disc on might not be worth the 17 uphill shots you have to endure to get there. However, I think that DGCR provides all the information you need in order to make an informed decision as to whether or not to play the course.

That said, it's all about what you want in a disc golf course. Personally, I love a challenge. And truth be told, I suck so bad that even a 9-hole course set around a tee-ball field is a challenge for me to make par; however, it's the experience that draws me to the game. I want to play all different kinds of courses: flat, mountainous, wooded, open, short, long.....whatever. Bring it.

Do what you do and play what you want, but if you're reading this you have no excuse for trying to tame a course that didn't fulfill your expectations....as related in the OP, anyway.

Just sayin'.

 

[eegor]

I want to play this course in Borger, TX. I really like challenging courses and it looks like it would do it. Of course, I want to play Diamond X too.

 

[beereakfast]

Rugged courses seem to be somewhat subjective. Those spots look like fun. Might suck to play a whole course like that. I like rugged but there is definitely a point. Funny.

 

[natecappy]

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course.php?id=18&mode=ci

The effect the quarrying had on the land is much more dramatically seen in an aerial image.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=211789673437999745636.0004f6a9221cb998563fc&msa=0&ll=41.103124,-75.708547&spn=0.010009,0.01929

Wow! This is sort of unrelated, but cool. Several years ago I visited the area for a few days. I found the nearest dg course and went out to play a round. Enjoyed my round there even though I was pretty green at the time. Recently, I was updating my courses on here and couldn't for the life of me remember the course I played in that area. Fast forward to the present, in which I wanted to check out this "rugged" course you speak of in this thread. I click the link and think "man, this looks familiar." Pretty unique way to find my mystery course. Plus one on my dgcr course tracker. Thanks for posting.

 

[jmackie]

Getting tired of playing on our park course and would happily play a rugged course for a change of pace! Got some on my wish list that I am planning to play in May

 

[CaptainAnhyzer]

You can have both at Joralemon Park


The front 9 are in the multi use area of the park.......

While the next 12 holes are deep woods and more rugged.

22-27 are back in the park, with a few birdie runs and a big bomber hole.

 

[beereakfast]

Looks like fun. Love the random erratic granite!

 

[optidiscic]

I need to plan a J-Park trip with my club...any PDGA tourneys this year

 

[jongoff09]

If two courses are equally challenging and well designed, I would play the more manicured one more. With a background of playing golf, I love a challenge that is visually stunning.

 

[TheBMeistor]

For casual rounds I prefer manicured park settings. That being said all my favorite courses are more rugged.

Even better are the courses with the park setting on the front 9 and the rugged back nine. Being in the rockies there are quite a few of those within a few hours of me.

We kind of luck out here too, the arid climate really lowers the insect count on most courses. Hornets are about the only thing we run into but I have yet to get stung. Mosquitoes are only around if the course has water, which isnt too common.

 

[Mythy]

My heart says be manly and tackle the wilderness... my ankles say the more rugged the course, the less manicured the tee boxes and the more chance I have to trip and hurt myself

 

[Discette]

Pictures for Mash

Bryan Head

Rim Rock

Sky High

Lake Casitas:

Las Vegas Snow & Skiboard: