Ask John Houck about Course Design & Development

[chrishysell]

Well, hello, Chris Hysell. Nice to hear from you.

I've been good, but it seems I'm unable to find the words to accurately express how much I miss you. Please accept my apology.

I've tried to follow your career, but when I Google the Russian Wrestling Federation I can't find you. Maybe they changed the name to RWE?

Anyway, I miss our old Fantasy Football rivalry and getting to shake your hand on the course. Maybe USDGC this year?

Talk to you soon,
John

I gave up the gig as a russian wrestler. I grew hair when I found out the Mr Clean job had been filled. I will see you somewhere soon. No USDGC for me this year in my plans. Maybe next year.

 

[grodney]

Thanks John.

I guess this is the hole we're talking about (see below). Sounds like it was playing about 285.

I don't know what to think about this, not having seen the hole. But my first thought is that if a 285 foot hole is so tight (or so finicky) that roller is your best option, then it's not a good hole, and saying "you should roll it" doesn't excuse it. Of course you work with what you've got, I know. And I probably have an anti-roller bias.

Chuck's explanation of how it played vs the photos: "The long pin played is to the left along the brush line and about 25 feet longer. The greenery near the tee was trimmed back plus brush along the ground about halfway there on the left."

 

[johnrhouck]

Oh. I see what you mean.

When I looked at your question, I immediately thought about holes where a roller could get you extra distance. Par 4's and 5's, basically.

Let me think on this one; I think I know now where you're going.

Thanks,
John

 

[grodney]

Ha, don't think too hard -- I don't think I'm going anywhere, I think I'm already there!

It goes like this:
Rodney steps up to a one-shot hole. It looks stupidly tight or littered with random trees. Rodney says "This hole is stupid.". Somebody else says: "It's not stupid, it's a roller hole.". Rodney says "That's stupid.".

There's not a lot of depth here, I don't think. Just wondering your thoughts. So thanks in advance for any and all analysis.

 

[Porkchop]

It goes like this:
Rodney steps up to a one-shot hole. It looks stupidly tight or littered with random trees. Rodney says "This hole is stupid.". Somebody else says: "It's not stupid, it's a roller hole.". Rodney says "That's stupid.".

I concur ...... man I wish I was a fly on the wall when You, Clue and Kenton get together opcorn:

 

[Sadjo]

John - when figuring the par of a hole, do you consider distance plus obstacles or do you consider what top players should shoot on a hole versus the average weekend hacker?

 

[Gregor]

Sorry if this is a little off topic, but are you going to be involved in putting 14-18 back in at the Ridge Bible Church in Austin? If so will it be the same? Any other plans for improvement to that awesome raw course? Thanks,

Greg

 

[Rightbench2004]

Hi John, I haven't read this whole forum yet, so this may already be answered but :

Im interested in putting in a course in my hometown *Simi Valley CA* and i've found a rarely used park that i think would be great for a course.

Im wondering about the best ways to approach the city with my ideas??

Here's some of my thoughts:
It would benefit the community and promote disc golf by being visible and available to the public
It would be beneficial for the park because it would promote usage
It would be beneficial for the DG community as the closest courses are 40 miles one way and 40 miles the other way (with a smaller 9 hole course about 20 miles away) ((i know lots of guys that are stuck in this middle area and don't play very often because of the commute))
It would be great to give a boyscout an opportunity to do a great eagle scout project. (my fiancee's father is good friends with the local scoutmaster)
The land is condusive to an 18 hole course


anyways... im just not sure who to contact specifically and how i should present everything (whether that's preplanned, as an idea, on paper, onsite etc... )

any info would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks
Matt

 

[johnrhouck]

Hello Everyone!

Just wanted to log on and let you know that John has been traveling the last 2 months and crazy busy designing 2 courses in Selah Ranch in Texas and one in Hillcrest Farm on Prince Edward Island, Canada.

He wants you all to know that he will log on in the next week or so to catch up on the questions. Thanks for your patience.

Dee for John H.

 

[Sadjo]

World Class or Championship Caliber Course

John,

I enjoyed talking with you at the USDGC.

I hear a lot of people saying in my area of SC the we need a World Class or Championship Caliber Course. It seems that most of these players are thinking primarily in length.

From your perspective of being one of the most well known course designers in the country, what makes a Championship Caliber or World Class Course?

 

[johnrhouck]

John,

I enjoyed talking with you at the USDGC.

I hear a lot of people saying in my area of SC the we need a World Class or Championship Caliber Course. It seems that most of these players are thinking primarily in length.

From your perspective of being one of the most well known course designers in the country, what makes a Championship Caliber or World Class Course?

It was good talking to you, too, Adam. Sorry we didn't have more time.

If you talk about a World Class course, I think you first have to make sure you have four key qualities that make any course superior: balance, variety, strategy, and character. And of course it needs to be safe.

To be truly World Class today, length is an important ingredient. But I'm talking about length in terms of real par fours and par fives, not making every hole 450'. I think you'd have a hard time making the argument that a par 54 course, no matter how great the holes are, would qualify as a Championship or World Class course.

Is there an easy yardstick? Not at this point. But I would say that you'd probably want par to be at least 60. But the most important thing is that the course rate high in the areas of balance, variety, strategy, and character.

Thanks,
John

 

[Sadjo]

John - there's a thread somewhere on the forum where someone said any great course has at least 6-7 'aceable' holes. When designing a course, do you consider having a certain amount of short holes that players would consider aceable?

 

[Cgkdisc]

I posted that comment but it wasn't necessarily 6-7 aceable holes but 6-7 deuceable holes with at least some of them aceable. Harold and John developed that idea while designing some longer courses with several other designers embracing that concept even on our toughest courses. Houck's current Jackson course at the IDGC has 6 deuceables: 7, 9, 11-13 & 16. Harold's Winthrop Gold has 7: 1, 3, 6, 7, 14, 16 & 17.

 

[johnrhouck]

Right now I do consider six deuce-able holes to be a minimum. In traditional golf, most courses have four par threes. But, for several reasons, I don't think we want to be there.

Covering the exact reasons would take a while, but for now let's just note that reachable (deuce-able, ace-able) holes is where we came from, and I think those holes will always be a very important part of our game.

 

[bayouace]

Right now I do consider six deuce-able holes to be a minimum. In traditional golf, most courses have four par threes. But, for several reasons, I don't think we want to be there.

Covering the exact reasons would take a while, but for now let's just note that reachable (deuce-able, ace-able) holes is where we came from, and I think those holes will always be a very important part of our game.

This gives everyone some potential for a happy round. Houck courses always seem to have a balance of "Uh Oh" and "Oh boy!" holes.

 

[jtencer]

What about birdie-able par 4s and 5s? I'm thinking specifically about hole 1 at Circle C which is a par 4 but isn't very hard to get in 3 if you've got a decent arm. Where does that sort of hole factor it?

I suppose what I'm asking is how you draw that line. Do you tend to err on the side of making the par too high so that the average golfer can shoot closer to "par?"

 

[Cgkdisc]

Ideally, you want more holes on a course of any par where there are more birdies than bogeys on average for the skill level the holes are designed for.

 

[grodney]

reachable (deuce-able, ace-able)

That's funny. After Chuck's post where he said deuce-able but not necessarily ace-able, I thought: Is there a difference? Reachable is a better word anyway, and to me it means both ace-able and deuce-able.

I mean, I'm having a hard time thinking of a hole that is deuce-able but not ace-able, let alone a *good* hole.

 

[optidiscic]

I think every hole should be able to be EAGLED but is typically not. What I mean is all par 3s should be able to be aced, 4s should be able to be 2d, and 5s should be able to be 3d. I don't mean its likely but it should be possible to Eagle every hole.
I'm not advocating overly simple design I just get annoyed by par 3s that have no line to the basket., Par 4s that even with a perfect drive you have no look at basket, and Par 5s where 2 perfect drives leave you again with no look. I don't care if the Eagle happens once a year it just has to possible.

 

[HCD Studios]

John,
I designed a course for kids last year and I am going to do 2 more this year. Do you have any advise for designing courses for kids. They will be middle school courses. Thanks.