I'm just saying...

[BuzzSharpe]

For all of the crapola I've caught for the legitimate par 2 assignations on a couple of the Blue/Gold holes at The Springwood Players' Course, along with other....stuff....I just discovered the currently 2.88 rated, White tee designated Walnut Creek course in Texas. According to its tee signs, which are among the best I've ever seen in pictures or in person, it is a 5179', par 47 layout, with eight, yes, eight par 2's and a 180' uphill par 1! Holes cross walkways (sometimes twice), play right at ball fields and buildings and other holes. I'd be interested to see how The SPC's most bellicose detractors would rate this course. They'd probably just laugh it off as quirky, as one reviewer from NC did, and say that it's all part of the overall fun factor and rate it three to four 'stars', detracting only for the fact that most of the Discatchers are shared by two, differently numbered tees. Of course, they'd probably not have a local disgruntled mid-level grunt of a fellow Parks & Recreation PROFESSSSSIONAL requesting that they trash and bash the course, in hopes of getting it pulled.

 

[saaber]

well, what exactly are you saying? :|

 

[Grungedude42]

What.

 

[DavidSauls]

What Walnut Creek course in Texas?

 

[BraveThrower43]

He's trying to call me out.(as well as some others)

I reviewed his course. Sent him a detailed PM why. He didn't like it. Now he's angry.
The course in question is the Springwood players course in Burlington NC

Sorry if you don't like my wording Buzz. I have a college degree in Parks & recreation/Sports management/History. I work in the parks and recreation field as a Profession. You can put it all together. I've found that having a foot in both worlds gives a better perspective.

I don't think I said the course should be pulled. It does however traverse a VERY populated park. Ball fields, Parking lots, and even residential housing come into play on the course. It is a dangerous combination when you add Disc golf to a populated park like this one as we have seen with the recent incident in California. I think a course could be on the property but the course would not be as long or as intrusive on other activities in the park or neighborhood.

I would not be a fan of ANY course that brought as many safety issues as Springwood so you can stop with your speculating. As far as the par issue, it's just an arbitrary number. I don't like par 2's. It's an OPINION. You could have 18 holes or Par 2's. Doesn't make the course any harder it's just a number.

If you don't want feedback you should never have come here and posted a course. When I said that I was going to play it you said that you were excited for "someone with my accomplishments and experience to play it"(His words not mine) But then suddenly I give my opinion and you say I'm some kid who doesn't know what he's talking about.

My review was not a personal attack on you Buzz. In no way was I talking about you personally or anyone else who was involved and I'm sorry if you have taken it that way. It was an OPINION on a course I played. I did not do it for any reason except to voice my concerns about the course as did many others. So I am not sure why you are attempting to personally attack me.

Instead of blindly believing you have created the perfect course maybe juuusssttt maybe you should listen to a little feedback and look at it objectively. But if you don't want to, that's fine too. Maybe you do have the worlds greatest course and I and most other reviewers are out of our minds. If that is the case you can enjoy it.

 

[BraveThrower43]

What Walnut Creek course in Texas?

I could not find it either.

 

[BirdieMachine]

Par's definition is a score that a first class player would expect to take.

Fine with Par 2's by definition. Any top flight player expects to make a 2 from 200 feet and wide open.

 

[scarpfish]

He might be bamboozling us with imaginary ratings of imaginary courses, but I gotta give him style points for using a $5 word like "bellicose".

 

[BraveThrower43]

By Walnut Creek do you mean Springtown West?

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course.php?id=6111&mode=ci

 

[scarpfish]

By Walnut Creek do you mean Springtown West?

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course.php?id=6111&mode=ci

So it IS real.

This is so you all know what Par 1 looks like. Look, you even get trees.

 

[bhadella]

Oh the outrage that another course can be rated 2.88 and have the same problems (poor design for safety, "pro" pars) than the 2.50 course you designed.

 

[DavidSauls]

By Walnut Creek do you mean Springtown West?

http://www.dgcoursereview.com/course.php?id=6111&mode=ci

It's got to be---but how'd we get "Walnut Creek" out of this? (And how'd you find it?)

Funny, I see all the same "cons" about it being "DANGEROUS" and the odd par-2s. So what if it's rated .38 higher (with only four reviews)? I'm sure someone could dig up some equally-dangerous layouts with even lower ratings that SPC.

 

[DavidSauls]

So it IS real.

This is so you all know what Par 1 looks like. Look, you even get trees.

For my skill level, by almost any definition of "par", a hole would have to be less than 17 feet to be a "par 1". Though on a Gold-level course, that might extend to 35 feet.

 

[BirdieMachine]

A Par 1 would have to be a 30 foot putt.

 

[DavidSauls]

Oh, well, it's Monday morning, and I needed a good chuckle. Thanks.

 

[Three Putt]

He's trying to call me out.(as well as some others)

I reviewed his course. Sent him a detailed PM why. He didn't like it. Now he's angry.
The course in question is the Springwood players course in Burlington NC

Sorry if you don't like my wording Buzz. I have a college degree in Parks & recreation/Sports management/History. I work in the parks and recreation field as a Profession. You can put it all together. I've found that having a foot in both worlds gives a better perspective.

I don't think I said the course should be pulled. It does however traverse a VERY populated park. Ball fields, Parking lots, and even residential housing come into play on the course. It is a dangerous combination when you add Disc golf to a populated park like this one as we have seen with the recent incident in California. I think a course could be on the property but the course would not be as long or as intrusive on other activities in the park or neighborhood.

I would not be a fan of ANY course that brought as many safety issues as Springwood so you can stop with your speculating. As far as the par issue, it's just an arbitrary number. I don't like par 2's. It's an OPINION. You could have 18 holes or Par 2's. Doesn't make the course any harder it's just a number.

If you don't want feedback you should never have come here and posted a course. When I said that I was going to play it you said that you were excited for "someone with my accomplishments and experience to play it"(His words not mine) But then suddenly I give my opinion and you say I'm some kid who doesn't know what he's talking about.

My review was not a personal attack on you Buzz. In no way was I talking about you personally or anyone else who was involved and I'm sorry if you have taken it that way. It was an OPINION on a course I played. I did not do it for any reason except to voice my concerns about the course as did many others. So I am not sure why you are attempting to personally attack me.

Instead of blindly believing you have created the perfect course maybe juuusssttt maybe you should listen to a little feedback and look at it objectively. But if you don't want to, that's fine too. Maybe you do have the worlds greatest course and I and most other reviewers are out of our minds. If that is the case you can enjoy it.

Thinking about disc golf courses from the perspective of the overall park is something that really is overlooked. Most of the people running parks and recreation departments don't understand the sport, and most disc golfers don't understand overall park design. Both groups have migrated to a common ground of disc golf being OK in multi-use areas, which has lead to a lot of dangerous disc golf holes. It's something that is getting worse, not better.

Parks are important places for a community. Something disc golfers need to understand is that parks have been important places for communities for a lot longer than disc golf has existed. Providing a space for disc golf is one, very small part of the puzzle that park managers need to consider.

What I see in a lot of places is not disc golfers working with park managers to develop courses that work with the overall park. I see either evidence that disc golfers don't understand what that looks like, or that they are trying to pull the wool over a park managers eyes to try and cram what they feel will be a "World Class" course into a park that only has space for a 9 hole pitch & putt. That needs to stop before more lawsuits threaten the very existence of our courses.

I have no issue with par 2's. Just a number. :|

 

[BirdieMachine]

Par is a way to evaluate how well you did on the hole or course in comparison to a top flight player. That is my main issue when certain courses have ton's of real easy "Par 3, 4's and 5's." A newer player could go to course "XYZ" and shoot 12 under Par. If a newer player shoots 12 under what a Top Flight player is expected to shoot it makes the course and the sport look "Like a game" or "Not a serious sport".

 

[scarpfish]

Par is a way to evaluate how well you did on the hole or course in comparison to a top flight player. That is my main issue when certain courses have ton's of real easy "Par 3, 4's and 5's." A newer player could go to course "XYZ" and shoot 12 under Par. If a newer player shoots 12 under what a Top Flight player is expected to shoot it makes the course and the sport look "Like a game" or "Not a serious sport".

The problem is that a lot of Parks Departments precisely want to emphasize the whole "Like a game" or "Not a serious sport" feelgoodery aspect so they can sell disc golf to the masses. A lot of clubs go along with it so they can have another place to play.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Par is a way to evaluate how well you did on the hole or course in comparison to a top flight player. That is my main issue when certain courses have ton's of real easy "Par 3, 4's and 5's." A newer player could go to course "XYZ" and shoot 12 under Par. If a newer player shoots 12 under what a Top Flight player is expected to shoot it makes the course and the sport look "Like a game" or "Not a serious sport".

Par should be based on the skill level a course is designed for. If a course is designed for red (rec) level, then red level players should occasionally be shooting under "their" par and experienced players even more often.

 

[goosefraba1]

"Just sayin'" might be on the top of the list of phrases that annoy me. It is already implied that you are saying something. You do not have to say that you are saying... we already know that.

What was the question again? Basically, one poorly designed course is rated more highly than another poorly designed course?