The challenge is for young Harold, Pete, Steve and Chuck to play nicely together. That's the motivation for the original question. I agree that there is no need to add two to a score for traditional disc golf which is mostly for the players. Championship disc golf, which is also about the spectator, may need *some bad shots to count two to increase the emotional engagement for both player and spectator. But in either traditional or Championship disc golf, good throws with good strategy should be in. *
~ Harold
Fascinating reading your design insights for the USDGC, thanks for sharing them with us. Andrew has done the same at Reddit and is a great way to engage with your audience. One comment that struck me from Reddit that chimed with my own disengagement in recent years with the tournament as a viewer was:
"The way I feel about USDGC is that the winner is often the least-unlucky of the highly skilled players."
This coincides with Steve's point 2 stroke vs 1 stroke penalty or the higher possibility of good strokes being punished (unfortunate kicks/uncontrollable bounces/skips off fallen twigs leading to OB roll aways etc.) The level of punishment this year felt like it had tipped to far away from enjoyment for the player/spectator. watching one after another tournament hopeful tincup on hole 17 was painful to watch.
I'm personally curious as to two things and a bonus third.
1. why every hole HAS to have OB/Mandos/something overtly punitive -
Could you not create some balance on the course by having a couple of holes that don't?
Two or three holes where the arms can be unleashed without fear, a chance to wow the crowd, the golf course is there, surely some good holes can be found there where the scoring separation isn't as great but the crowds are allowed to see something spectacular? Players want to throw big, crowds want to see big, whats wrong with one or two holes that say "show us what you've got"
There is a psychological factor to this as well where players will chase these holes and try to score well because of the lack of OB, giving you a great chance to test a different facet of their mental play.
A whole course of these would be boring as hell but 2 or three scattered in amongst the others could surely add something and get rid of the need for the forced mandos on 3 and 4 that neither look aesthetically pleasing or looked a lot of fun to play or spectate (layups to the mando on three or back into the channel on 4 are not what players turn up to play for or what spectators come to watch, when you have more of those than the attacking shot there is an issue)
2. The woods to the North East, all 80 acres of them, is there no way these can be used in some way, instead of trying to recreate the feel of woods golf, make some woods golf?
Bonus 3rd. Please,please, please consider your responsibility as the premier event currently in the world. You are viewed widely by club members putting courses in. They see hole 13 playing across a parking lot. They think "oh we've got a parking lot let's play across it, USDGC do it." (had this conversation with clubs more than once) Hole 13 is undoubtedly a great hole to play and test skills and it is tied up in the history of the course but we need to be moving past that as a sport. We can't be showcasing holes designed to be played across carparks/sidewalks etc and then be surprised when local clubs copy this and people/property gets hit.
Thanks for all your innovation over the years, I'm intrigued to see where it goes from here.