Any legit par 72 disc golf courses?

[Ryan P.]

Whoever mentioned the music city open a few pages back, I'm watching it now, and it certainly seems like 1/2 of the holds are well-designed open holes, and 1/2 of them are easy birdies for the top level distance throwers. It is certainly a par 71 or 72 course for pros, but I think it would only pass the other criteria mentioned in this thread for having good open holes about half the time, if that.

 

[Putt for D'oh]

Yeah, it takes a lot of land for sure to make a good par 5. The woods require less land, so there are certainly a lot more in there.

AND... very hard to make a true par 5 hole interesting for both Pros and AMs. Probably easier to make it for the AMs but then it may become an easy Par 4 for the Pros.

One Par 5 locally is interesting to me thinking about it in regards to this thread. The original basket position is 1049' and the basket is a bit guarded, with low ceiling out to circles edge. But other than that it seems like a huge long waste of space as for anyone that can only throw 300 it feels like 3 wide open shots as far as you can and then try and get under the trees close enough to the basket to putt. BUT if you can throw 450', it should be a long par 4, BUT actually requires placement shots to get around a GIANT willow tree that is certain jail. So much stick and leaf litter under it roller to get out is a crap shoot and the branches hang all the way to the ground. This tree is essentially not in play for the short arms you just throw to the huge area to the left or smaller alley to the right, hell you have two shots to approach it. For the Pros though it is very much in play for the second shot and getting around it clean AND far is the difference between an easy 4 and maybe a 6. My point? When it comes to a par 5 interesting or good can be crazy subjective. As I said for the AMs it is the most boring hole ever, for the Pros? It is deceptively difficult for an easy birdie.

 

[Ryan P.]

AND... very hard to make a true par 5 hole interesting for both Pros and AMs. Probably easier to make it for the AMs but then it may become an easy Par 4 for the Pros.

One Par 5 locally is interesting to me thinking about it in regards to this thread. The original basket position is 1049' and the basket is a bit guarded, with low ceiling out to circles edge. But other than that it seems like a huge long waste of space as for anyone that can only throw 300 it feels like 3 wide open shots as far as you can and then try and get under the trees close enough to the basket to putt. BUT if you can throw 450', it should be a long par 4, BUT actually requires placement shots to get around a GIANT willow tree that is certain jail. So much stick and leaf litter under it roller to get out is a crap shoot and the branches hang all the way to the ground. This tree is essentially not in play for the short arms you just throw to the huge area to the left or smaller alley to the right, hell you have two shots to approach it. For the Pros though it is very much in play for the second shot and getting around it clean AND far is the difference between an easy 4 and maybe a 6. My point? When it comes to a par 5 interesting or good can be crazy subjective. As I said for the AMs it is the most boring hole ever, for the Pros? It is deceptively difficult for an easy birdie.

What's the issue? Ams and Pros should play from different tees. If they are playing from the same tee, of course it's not going to be the right par.

 

[Ryan P.]

Whoever mentioned the music city open a few pages back, I'm watching it now, and it certainly seems like 1/2 of the holds are well-designed open holes, and 1/2 of them are easy birdies for the top level distance throwers. It is certainly a par 71 or 72 course for pros, but I think it would only pass the other criteria mentioned in this thread for having good open holes about half the time, if that.

After finishing the round, I'd venture to say that very few of the multi-shot holes are good.

 

[Steve West]

..Basically like NW gold 12, take a Blue par 5 through the trees and move the Tee back 350' in the trees.

I think NW gold 12 would be more accurately called a par 6.

 

[johnrhouck]

I remember some of my local players coming back from Worlds in Port Arthur (Houck courses) in the mid-90's telling me about these holes where you had to throw more than one shot as if they were unicorns.

That's pretty funny. I recently went back and looked at the original Old Settlers layout in Round Rock from 1990, which we starting using for National Doubles in 1991. It's so big in my memory -- I was shocked to realize it was only a par 63. The course in Victoria, Texas we used for Circular Skies starting in '88 was also par 62 or 63. Similar story: it seemed so huge at the time, and now looks just kind of average to me.

I know that, in some parts of the country, par fours and fives are still as rare as four-leaf clovers, if not unicorns, but there are obviously higher-par courses going in all the time.

On the other hand, my quick and unscientific DGCR research just showed that fewer than half the 18-hole courses established in 2018 had par higher than 57. That's not real encouraging, though let's not forget that there will always be a place for par 54 courses in the DG world. We're getting there -- just wish we could get there a little quicker.

 

[johnrhouck]

what's a good par three design that you haven't seen yet?

I'm not sure that I have a specific idea in mind that I hope to be able to implement someday. If you step back far enough, just about every hole is a variation of some existing hole, anyway. Still, somehow, I keep seeing opportunities to say, "This area would make for a great par three, and it's different enough that it feels unique." Let's hope that never ends.

also, do you think there are course features that we haven't seen yet that could become commonplace in the future if greater resources were available?

Now THOSE I do have in mind. We did some things I've always wanted to do at Harmony Bends, and I'm hoping that's just the beginning.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

By "legit Par 72," I assume you mean for 18 holes.
I'm sure there are tons of 24 hole, par 72 courses.

 

[johnrhouck]

The fact that we can make more interesting par threes (I guess you mean more interesting than ball golf) isn't an argument for more pars 3s. We can make more interesting par 4s and 5s as well. The same logic should apply to them.

That's a fair point, Ryan, and is generally true about individual holes. I guess what I'm really saying is about the overall course. A good 8-6-4 disc golf course can be a lot more interesting than an 8-6-4 ball golf course could ever be.

(By 8-8-2, I mean 8 par threes, 6 par fours, and 4 par fives).

 

[johnrhouck]

The difficulty with designing even decent open par 5's in disc golf is the huge disparity in throwing distances of players. If they are long enough for the long throwers to be challenged to birdie they become a boring slog for the rest. If they are short enough to be interesting for the bulk of the field the long throwers eat them up like candy and eagles are commonplace. In my experience I can come up with good par 4 holes at the drop of a hat on virtually any property. Good par 5's on the other hand require better land and exponentially more brain power on my part.

Amen to all that, and very well said.

 

[Casey 1988]

The difficulty with designing even decent open par 5's in disc golf is the huge disparity in throwing distances of players. If they are long enough for the long throwers to be challenged to birdie they become a boring slog for the rest. If they are short enough to be interesting for the bulk of the field the long throwers eat them up like candy and eagles are commonplace. In my experience I can come up with good par 4 holes at the drop of a hat on virtually any property. Good par 5's on the other hand require better land and exponentially more brain power on my part.

I agree. This is why one hole at Oahe Downstream state park on the Powerhouse Ally Course changed from par 5 to par 4 due to tech change from 9 and slow 10 speed to 11-12+, then people able to study in Magazines and online the proper throwing techniques for distance forehand/backhand, to throw the lines well for the disc. Even on the long tee at almost 600 feet it is a par 4 due to being a wide open hole to the left, right is 15-20 feet right of tee pad a long section of brush/trees and other plants you can kiss disc goodbye unless one can get disc from the other side and even that is hard. So most people will make it out far to 270-300 feet minimum unless they are a hyzer honker every shot type player.

 

[Ryan P.]

That's a fair point, Ryan, and is generally true about individual holes. I guess what I'm really saying is about the overall course. A good 8-6-4 disc golf course can be a lot more interesting than an 8-6-4 ball golf course could ever be.

(By 8-8-2, I mean 8 par threes, 6 par fours, and 4 par fives).

Gotcha. And I agree. We are better and offer more variety than ball golf. All I'm arguing for is not limiting us to better par 3s and 4s, and I think you guys understand that. While we may not be making a ton of great par 5s yet, we'll get there.

Please note that I've seen a ton of good par 5s from your courses John. Sadly, never in person, but one day. I simply mean the vast majority of courses don't offer them. If you only had the time to give advice on every course ever designed ...