Vibram Open 2012!

[NOStheBOSS]

My criteria for a par 4 is this. If it takes me 2 very good shots to give me a putt, it's a par 4. If all I have to do for a 3 is a very good drive and a short upshot, it's not. A 500' uphill shot would usually be a par 3 by my standards

 

[Cgkdisc]

So a 600 ft downhill hole would certainly be a par 3 by your standards (right MTL? )

 

[_MTL_]

So a 600 ft downhill hole would certainly be a par 3 by your standards (right MTL? )

Depends on the hole.

Granite 3 was def a 3. I even 2'd it.

But Granite 9........

 

[_MTL_]

http://qkme.me/3qix7g

(can't get the imagine to post).

 

[Scoot_er]

Depends on the hole.

Granite 3 was def a 3. I even 2'd it.

But Granite 9........

I also 2'd Granite #3 although I don't know if that was during Worlds or Mid-Nationals\

Hole 9 during Worlds was such a let down when the hole used to be a good par (5?)

 

[Cgkdisc]

You found this disappointing?
http://discgolfer.ning.com/photo/1809917:Photo:1284300?context=user

 

[the_lung]

Relax everyone, this all has been worked out with Dodge.

The Maple Hill scorecards indicate that gold par is set at 60 for a 1010-rated player. But because a 61 was a 1022-rated round yesterday, and because hole#17 was playing as a pro par four for almost the entire field, Steve will set par next year at 61 for a 1020-rated player. :thmbup:

 

[Scoot_er]

You found this disappointing?
http://discgolfer.ning.com/photo/1809917:Photo:1284300?context=user

Compared to the original hole....yes I did

A three on the other hole was legit......the changes made it into a par 3.4 (maybe) that only the gifted few could birdie.

 

[Scoot_er]

Also in regards to Maple Hill I would love to see the drop zone on hole 5 cleaned up a bit.....instead of having a tree 5ft behind the front of the box.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Compared to the original hole....yes I did

A three on the other hole was legit......the changes made it into a par 3.4 (maybe) that only the gifted few could birdie.

Yes, but it's a legit blue level par 4 that plays just right for that level 3.7-3.9 as intended. Gold players just get a peek at big events.

 

[Scoot_er]

Yes, but it's a legit blue level par 4 that plays just right for that level 3.7-3.9 as intended. Gold players just get a peek at big events.

So it is better than the par 4/5 it replaced? Also the hole that played into old 9s fairway was not that great if you ask me.......had it been awesome the change would have been fine but it seems like you took out a good placement par 5 so that you could add a so-so par 3.

 

[chris deitzel]

Relax everyone, this all has been worked out with Dodge.

The Maple Hill scorecards indicate that gold par is set at 60 for a 1010-rated player. But because a 61 was a 1022-rated round yesterday, and because hole#17 was playing as a pro par four for almost the entire field, Steve will set par next year at 61 for a 1020-rated player. :thmbup:

I am picturing Chuck's head spinning around with steam coming out saying "1020 rated gold tees? Does not compute does not compute"

 

[Cgkdisc]

There were multiple issues in the redesign of that area. But the net result was a better set of holes overall with less interference and avoiding wet areas that Jokinen couldn't drain any better on the old par 5 due to the city messing with drainage going under the road.

 

[Cgkdisc]

I am picturing Chuck's head spinning around with steam coming out saying "1020 rated gold tees? Does not compute does not compute"

No problem with a Super Gold course on private land with pars set that way. After all, Deer Lakes is admittedly a blue-gold course set for 975 per JGD. All I look for is consistency in designing for a skill level, identifying what level it is and testing to confirm it actually plays that way.

 

[chris deitzel]

All I look for is consistency in designing for a skill level, identifying what level it is and testing to confirm it actually plays that way.

:clap::thmbup:

Agreed. Though sometimes at PDGA events I think that people get upset when they are not allowed to play the gold level course because they are only considered blue level players...And don't tell me they can always move up a division. So while I agree that it is good to design for a certain level player, those courses should not just be limited to that level of player at tournaments.

 

[Cgkdisc]

No problem with players also playing one round on a tougher level at events. Although it really makes less sense to do it at events because the intent for the design is to provide scoring spread. If it's a more open gold level course, then it makes less sense because you'll likely have more push 3s. If it's a moderate to wooded gold course, then scoring spread will be there for all levels. It doesn't matter in most places because blue level is typically the highest skill level on the courses played. The current SSA average for courses played in PDGA events is around 52.

 

[Scoot_er]

No problem with players also playing one round on a tougher level at events. Although it really makes less sense to do it at events because the intent for the design is to provide scoring spread. If it's a more open gold level course, then it makes less sense because you'll likely have more push 3s. If it's a moderate to wooded gold course, then scoring spread will be there for all levels. It doesn't matter in most places because blue level is typically the highest skill level on the courses played. The current SSA average for courses played in PDGA events is around 52.

I'm assuming the avg SSA is steadily creeping upwards?....

Two "Gold" courses in TX...both are very wooded...I like Ingleside Gold but can't stand Lindsey gold (mainly because it could be AWESOME without too much work but is just "meh" IMO)

 

[jcrab66]

so hows that Vibram Open going?

 

[CStout]

I'm assuming the avg SSA is steadily creeping upwards?....

Two "Gold" courses in TX...both are very wooded...I like Ingleside Gold but can't stand Lindsey gold (mainly because it could be AWESOME without too much work but is just "meh" IMO)

Lets do some work Mr. Hall.

 

[badsmurph]

Can we talk about this great event, instead of the same stat nerds talking about ratings, ssa and par? Who cares, lowest score wins and Ricky has been killing courses as of late. Take your krap to another thread or the PDGA website. Talk like this is one reason it's Dead