Who has played the most courses in their home state?

[Steve West]

Here's something I did a few months ago for anyone who wanted to play all the courses in MN in one trip.

 

[srm_520]

First off you are only refering to some of the courses in CA there are quite alot where you would have to go a long ways off of that route that you planed out, there is no way you could do it in 2500 miles not by a long shot. Second your talking the diffrence between driving straight across flat deserts to driving curvy roads through mountains, it will make a big diffrence in the amount of time that it takes to drive it. I will take into account that the I-5 is alot like driving in TX, but the rest of CA is much diffrent. Besides who realy wants to go play a bunch of over rated TX courses, not me. Need proof that they are over rated take a look at this one. http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course.php?id=933 Flat, repetitive, poor teepads and signs, poor design and yet there are still Texans giving it 3.5's and even a 4.


p.s. Flame on!

opcorn:

But the question isn't courses you'd want to play - it's about the total number of courses and state size.

Texas - 269
California - 212

Texas land area - 261,797.12 sq. miles
California land area - 155,959.34 sq. miles

The difference - Texas has 57 more courses and 105837.78 more sq. miles of land.

You can argue for Cali all day long and it comes closes in a few regards, but Texas still wins this argument.

 

[humchris85]

But the question isn't courses you'd want to play - it's about the total number of courses and state size.

Texas - 269
California - 212

Texas land area - 261,797.12 sq. miles
California land area - 155,959.34 sq. miles

The difference - Texas has 57 more courses and 105837.78 more sq. miles of land.

You can argue for Cali all day long and it comes closes in a few regards, but Texas still wins this argument.

But you arn't counting hills in that calculation of land area. Texas is flat so you could just measure length by width. If you took and flatened out CA it would be WAY bigger than TX.

 

[srm_520]

But you arn't counting hills in that calculation of land area. Texas is flat so you could just measure length by width. If you took and flatened out CA it would be WAY bigger than TX.

Are you being serious right now?

If that's the case, then we need to throw Colorado into the mix too, because there are huge number of their 114 courses are mountain courses that keep you on the twisting backroads most of the time. I dare say more than California or Texas in total area if that is your measurement.

And heck at 103,000 square miles - Colorado is closer to California in the difference of land area than California is to Texas.

 

[sidewinder22]

I'd rather watch paint dry than try to hit every course in Texas. The courses are about boring as the drive.

 

[prerube]

I have 100% in Maryland. In a few weeks I will be the only one with 100%.

 

[humchris85]

Are you being serious right now?

If that's the case, then we need to throw Colorado into the mix too, because there are huge number of their 114 courses are mountain courses that keep you on the twisting backroads most of the time. I dare say more than California or Texas in total area if that is your measurement.

And heck at 103,000 square miles - Colorado is closer to California in the difference of land area than California is to Texas.

They are both beter states than TX. But yes I am being serious. I think that both CO and CA would be harder to get every course played than TX.

 

[humchris85]

:thmbup:

I'd rather watch paint dry than try to hit every course in Texas. The courses are about boring as the drive.

:thmbup::thmbup:

 

[scarpfish]

Well, I see this had devolved into the usual my place is better than your place wang measuring thread, with the important criteria being things that have nothing to do with disc golf.

 

[ElementZ]

I think I have most courses in Europe.

 

[humchris85]

Well, I see this had devolved into the usual my place is better than your place wang measuring thread, with the important criteria being things that have nothing to do with disc golf.

I think these things do have to do with disc golf. Great disc golf can't be played on flat ground. You need hills in my opinion to make truly good disc golf.



...But I'm realy just having fun messing with the Texans. They get butt hurt soo easy.

 

[humchris85]

I think I have most courses in Europe.

And you rule for that ElementZ! If I end up making a Europe trip next year, like I was going to try for, I'll make sure to hit you up.

 

[scarpfish]

I think these things do have to do with disc golf. Great disc golf can't be played on flat ground. You need hills in my opinion to make truly good disc golf.

But you're arguing about large land masses that involve entire states, not the more localized topography that would be suitable for a park. Disc golf courses don't encompass the thousands of square miles of land you guys are arguing about. You can easily make a killer course with less than 100 acres, and I don't know of a state in the entire country that doesn't have small pockets of land that could conceivably accommodate that. (Now whether a course exists on such land is another matter).

Even in the supposedly flat middle of the country, there are pockets of elevation. Seriously, go to the hill country of central Texas, and tell everyone how flat the state is.

 

[srm_520]

I think these things do have to do with disc golf. Great disc golf can't be played on flat ground. You need hills in my opinion to make truly good disc golf.



...But I'm realy just having fun messing with the Texans. They get butt hurt soo easy.

I'm actually from Wyoming, I just live in Texas. I just like to call it as I see it.

 

[srm_520]

But you're arguing about large land masses that involve entire states, not the more localized topography that would be suitable for a park. Disc golf courses don't encompass the thousands of square miles of land you guys are arguing about. You can easily make a killer course with less than 100 acres, and I don't know of a state in the entire country that doesn't have small pockets of land that could conceivably accommodate that. (Now whether a course exists on such land is another matter).

Even in the supposedly flat middle of the country, there are pockets of elevation. Seriously, go to the hill country of central Texas, and tell everyone how flat the state is.

Agreed, it's not Colorado mountain golf, but there are some pretty killer courses around the Austin area that have plenty of elevation. I'm unfortuntely in Houston, the A-cup of Texas. It's sad when my four year old thinks the biggest hill is the overpass.

 

[humchris85]

I'm actually from Wyoming, I just live in Texas. I just like to call it as I see it.

I don't know... How long have you been living in TX? You might be a Texan by now...

 

[harr0140]

130 on DGCR in Wisconsin. . . a couple more not listed on the site. My plan was to have finished all courses (excluding private ones I cannot get on without fear of tresspassing) in Wisconsin by the end of 2013. They need to stop adding courses for this to happen though. I would hate to play through an area and then have a new course pop up forcing a trip back. I could say this . . . I hope to play 190 courses which covers all of the public courses in WI.

 

[Countchunkula]

Here's something I did a few months ago for anyone who wanted to play all the courses in MN in one trip.

Looks like fun. Now can you give us driving directions?

 

[NDABRUSH]

But you're arguing about large land masses that involve entire states, not the more localized topography that would be suitable for a park. Disc golf courses don't encompass the thousands of square miles of land you guys are arguing about. You can easily make a killer course with less than 100 acres, and I don't know of a state in the entire country that doesn't have small pockets of land that could conceivably accommodate that. (Now whether a course exists on such land is another matter).

Even in the supposedly flat middle of the country, there are pockets of elevation. Seriously, go to the hill country of central Texas, and tell everyone how flat the state is.

In a state the size of Texas, the terrain will not all be the same.... just too many acres to describe it with a single label. Compared to mountain courses... sure it's pretty flat. Hopefully the designer was allowed or thought to use the best terrain of said property. I think messing with the Texas golfers is fun, just watch out Hum...cuz there's lots of them. BTW I am jealous of all of the courses that they have.

 

[sidewinder22]

Just need to put a sweet course on Mt. McKinley...