Movement in top 10

[BogeyNoMore]

IN NO WAY CAN I SPEAK FOR BILL.

But I'm just going to take a stab at it. Bill probs tried to keep things as simple and cost effective as possible. I don't think he ever dreamed his backyard course would ever become as popular and iconic as it has.

I don't necessarily think he was trying to "compete" with the best disc golf courses in the world. He was just trying to make the best course he could.

Flip isn't about amenities, or fancy this or that. It's about lines, elevation changes, fun, and vibe. As long as I've been going there, he's always had score cards with a map. I honestly don't think fancy, multicolor tee signs would add a thing. In fact, it would scream "trying too hard" to me. Sometimes it's important to know how to not overdo things.

Just my $0.02.

 

[Jukeshoe]

Unpopular opinion — I actually really enjoy Flip's lack of tee signs. Most pins are visible from the tee, but walking down the fairway for the first time to find a hidden basket and take in Flip's majesty was fun, not frustrating for me. It gives a greater appreciation for the land and hammers home the "Field of Dreams" aspect. In short, your mileage may vary, but a lack of gaudy signage adds to the vibes for me.

I agree. I love the signs, or lack thereof depending on your perspective, as they are.

 

[Countchunkula]

I'm the doofus who dropped Harmony Bends out of the top spot

So I'll chime in. I played it last July. It hadn't rained for at least a few days prior as far as I can remember. The creeks weren't high when we played, but those holes on the back 9 that flood were still retaining pools of water and it was a muddy mess on parts of those. If you can play this course in ideal conditions it's without a doubt, the best course I've played. Therein lies the big problem. It's the best designed course I've ever played, bar none. It's location both makes it, but also is what breaks it.

*I haven't played it, so uninformed take alert*

Shouldn't the effects of rain on a course be a design consideration? If the designer has a choice to design a great hole that will be frequently swampy or a good to very good hole that will be reasonably dry in all but the worst conditions; which is the better choice?

IMO, the answer to the first question is yes and the answer to the second is it depends.

Regarding Harmony Bends, I've heard great things about that golf and bad things about the odds of catching it on a dry day. I don't know the property, so I don't know if it would have been possible to create a course of anything near the current quality without using the frequently flooded areas. I'm expecting the answer is no.

That has to be an even bigger challenge for someone like Houck who isn't local and can only spend so many days on site. I expect he has some way to get an understanding of what areas are susceptible to flooding and which aren't. It would be interesting to hear how he (and other designers) weighs creating epic holes vs creating flood resistant holes.

It's tough to commit to a road trip to a course that has a reputation for frequently being in subpar condition. It's the same thing that has kept me away from Highbridge all these years. Totally different cause there and with the changes that new ownership has made I plan to make it up there later this year. I'd probably need to be already in the general area to make it out to Harmony Bends though. It seems like a total crapshoot what type of conditions the traveling player will find there. While that's a risk with any course, it seems like a much bigger one here.



I also understand that a lot of disc golf courses are on land that was only available because of flooding issues. There are usually better and worse areas in the property though. I think Chuck's redesign of Fairfield in Round Lake, IL did a good job of avoiding some of the worst areas for holding water. The previous design didn't seem to take flooding into consideration. In fairness, Chuck did have a ton more land to work with after they built the bridge over the creek.

 

[Cgkdisc]

I think Chuck's redesign of Fairfield in Round Lake, IL did a good job of avoiding some of the worst areas for holding water. The previous design didn't seem to take flooding into consideration. In fairness, Chuck did have a ton more land to work with after they built the bridge over the creek.

Thanks for your comments. I couple things that may not have been obvious about avoiding flooded areas with the redesign is the 7 white tee was placed on the other side of the bridge so the hole would at least be playable when flooded. Likewise, on 12 white/16 gold, we added the drop zone on the other side of Squaw Creek so it could be playable as a temporary short tee if necessary. Another related item during redesign was resisting our desire to add a hanging basket under the bridge. That would have placed the hole directly in the flood area resulting in the occasional sogginess plaguing HB.

 

[magictenor1]

I find the number of courses with water issues astounding. I believe its at least partially because DG tends to get land not being used for other things and water might be one of the reasons.

 

[ohtobediscing]

Guess I got lucky playing Harmony Bends the first week in Nov ('18)---nice and dry, some leaf cover, and could cross the creek almost anywhere the banks weren't too high.
I do remember seeing a picture of the parking lot with 2 feet of water in it the next spring and thinking, "wow, there's a lot of baskets and fairways completely under water".

 

[mndiscg]

I find the number of courses with water issues astounding. I believe its at least partially because DG tends to get land not being used for other things and water might be one of the reasons.

I've played BRP with a few inches of water on all the open holes. Never left any real damage but I'd rather not play in that much water on one of the world's best courses!

 

[brutalbrutus]

Those holes along the creek at Idlewild flood frequently but the water also drains quickly most of the time. Every once in awhile, one of the retention walls will get knocked over by a particularly bad flash flood. Other than that, the course is usually playable within the day... there's a reason that turf is on those island greens.

The only times I've seen it have problems for any length of time were during winter and we had a big rain occur at the same time the last snow was melting. That pond will ice over and all the rain and melt water goes straight into the drain, or even over the dam straight into the creek... even then, the course is usually playable as soon as the water is inside the banks of the creek. I'm not saying it's fun to play there like that but you can do it, lol.

 

[wolfhaley]

Well since we're on the subject, Rollin Ridge. It's not to the extent of HB, but there are sections of that course that don't drain well and aren't all that different from HB's issues. I just don't think it's ever quite as extreme, but it's an issue nonetheless. Fairfield park and Dellwood seem like they may have some issues too in this regard. Only played those courses once though. But 2 of the top courses in IL.

 

[DavidSauls]

Around here, there are some good courses that are very hilly. The courses are there for similar reasons -- the land isn't suitable for much else. But, the steep slopes don't hold water; the only drawback to big rains is that the tame creeks become disc-stealing torrents.

 

[Pevio]

Around here, there are some good courses that are very hilly. The courses are there for similar reasons -- the land isn't suitable for much else. But, the steep slopes don't hold water; the only drawback to big rains is that the tame creeks become disc-stealing torrents.

But at least you know where those disc-stealing torrents are, so you know where to avoid walking and throwing, which is a huge advantage.

 

[DavidSauls]

But at least you know where those disc-stealing torrents are, so you know where to avoid walking and throwing, which is a huge advantage.

Yes. Well, I know where to try to avoid throwing; my discs have other ideas.

Generally speaking, the torrential creeks don't seem to happen as often, or last as long, as standing water on retention-prone courses.

 

[Jukeshoe]

*adds "disc-stealing torrents" to bucket list*

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Yes. Well, I know where to try to avoid throwing; my discs have other ideas.

Generally speaking, the torrential creeks don't seem to happen as often, or last as long, as standing water on retention-prone courses.

Just to complete that thought...

Torrents move. Eventually, they empty into a lake or something. Hence the don't last to far past the heavy rains or melting down.

Standing water.... well... It just sits there, making life miserable for everyone except ducks skeeters.

 

[aphilso1]

Not to derail the current discussion, but I played Caliber last week and have been mulling over how to rate it. It is a fantastic course, but personally I would place it in my top 5-10% of courses played (rather than top 1-5%) which means probably a 4.5*. Given how tightly bunched the ratings are at the top, and given the small sample size of ratings for Caliber, it appears a single 4.5* rating would actually drop it a spot in the DGCR ratings. And that has made me mull things over much more than I normally would for a course rating. Anyways, more in depth thoughts to follow in the actual course review.

 

[wellsbranch250]

Not to derail the current discussion, but I played Caliber last week and have been mulling over how to rate it. It is a fantastic course, but personally I would place it in my top 5-10% of courses played (rather than top 1-5%) which means probably a 4.5*. Given how tightly bunched the ratings are at the top, and given the small sample size of ratings for Caliber, it appears a single 4.5* rating would actually drop it a spot in the DGCR ratings. And that has made me mull things over much more than I normally would for a course rating. Anyways, more in depth thoughts to follow in the actual course review.

Which do you personally think is better. Caliber or Wilderness?

 

[aphilso1]

Which do you personally think is better. Caliber or Wilderness?

Wilderness. But I played it in 2019, before they apparently had to thin out some of the trees.

 

[Monocacy]

Not to derail the current discussion, but I played Caliber last week and have been mulling over how to rate it. It is a fantastic course, but personally I would place it in my top 5-10% of courses played (rather than top 1-5%) which means probably a 4.5*. Given how tightly bunched the ratings are at the top, and given the small sample size of ratings for Caliber, it appears a single 4.5* rating would actually drop it a spot in the DGCR ratings. And that has made me mull things over much more than I normally would for a course rating. Anyways, more in depth thoughts to follow in the actual course review.

Did you play Caliber from both sets of tees? I only played short tees, but buddies played short and long tees and found the experiences quite different.

Also, did you like Water Works more than Caliber?

Personal opinion: mull it over, write your review, and give your rating. As long as the review supports the rating, you have added useful information to the site. Will you get some thumbs down? Quite possibly. You will have to decide whether that matters to you.

Ratings for top courses are often separated by 0.01 out of 5.0. From a statistical perspective, an 0.2% difference on an opinion-based survey does not mean much. For me, any course with 15 or 20 ratings that averages above 4.50 is probably going to be an exceptional disc golf experience, unless the course requires 400' water carries, has degraded significantly over time, or is underwater.

 

[wellsbranch250]

Wilderness. But I played it in 2019, before they apparently had to thin out some of the trees.

I also threw it in 2019. apparently only 3 months after you had. still in my top 10 out of nearly 500 courses, so 98 percentile on my personal ledger. although, I'm not sure how much of an impact the thinning has had.

 

[aphilso1]

Did you play Caliber from both sets of tees? I only played short tees, but buddies played short and long tees and found the experiences quite different.

Also, did you like Water Works more than Caliber?

Personal opinion: mull it over, write your review, and give your rating. As long as the review supports the rating, you have added useful information to the site. Will you get some thumbs down? Quite possibly. You will have to decide whether that matters to you.

Ratings for top courses are often separated by 0.01 out of 5.0. From a statistical perspective, an 0.2% difference on an opinion-based survey does not mean much. For me, any course with 15 or 20 ratings that averages above 4.50 is probably going to be an exceptional disc golf experience, unless the course requires 400' water carries, has degraded significantly over time, or is underwater.

I played Caliber from the Long Am pads, or at least that's what my BIL who is a local called them. He said that is what is used for League rounds. Most holes appeared to have a significantly shorter Am tee pad also, and all holes had a Pro pad that was generally 30ish feet longer than the tee pad we used. I can't see playing the course 30' longer on every hole as improving the experience at my arm strength, and playing the shortest pads appeared to be for newbies and true noodle arms. I played the appropriate tee pads for my arm/ability.

I personally liked Water Works better than Caliber, but I could see that being a minority opinion. I know guys that are woods golf purists, and can't fathom a park style course being 5*. But Water Works is an absolutely perfect course relative to its style.

I'm not worried about downvotes. A bigger influence on the decision is not wanting to lower the course rating if unwarranted. Particularly because the course designer/owner is an awesome dude, and truly has created a gem. Just maybe not as much of a gem as other elite courses.