Originally Posted by Parks
Jeremy, I agree with you for the most part on hole design/theory, but I think you're wrong on 7/8 and 11.
First, the current hole is routeless. 15 foot gaps at over 200 feet, where being off your line by 2 feet could send you off a tree into the river. If you look from behind 8's where the teepad would be, you can see a very clearly defined 30 footish gap to aim a righty hyzer safe shot for those with less than 450' of power (99.9% of us) or a lefty/sidearm distance route which can result in birdy for those with 400+ feet of power (1% of us, or more for tourney players). A righty with enough power to throw the hyzer to the log can grab more consistent deuces on this hole than the current hole because the route is a LOT less random.
There would also be a very risky RHBH turnover route that could produce 2's, but its tight and random. But those wanting to take the risk could reap the reward.
I agree that the current hole is not very good and that luck does determine alot of the scoring swings. I never proclaimed that the current hole as great. I think its adequate. There is a safe shot that I hit fairly consistently and you can go for it shot. The hole has gotten better since that tree snapped.
The RBH on the newly proposed teepad is a 440 hyzer BOMB. The Top players cannot consistently throw that shot through that last gap. Then hit the 40-50 foot putt. Don't know how much time you've spent playing with the top players but nobody would like that hole and there wouldn't be a good scoring variation.
If we can move the pin deeper than there could be something workable but I'm not sure. Need to look closer next time I'm out which won't be until next Tuesday at the earliest.
[quote=Parks;96869]Nope. Look at the area like 30 feet behind 8's pin. If 8's pin is moved, this is a very safe place to be, in addition to having vision.
Originally Posted by Yoduh
The hole as it stands has quite a bit of luck. involved to get a 2 but it is gettable.[/quote
This also sounds really boring, with a silly safe shot and random kicks off trees that will kick and create 4s/5s. Having a high score differentiation based mostly on luck is not desirable at all.
2's would not be eliminated for top players, and those are the only players that would not consider this a par 4. If you wanted to make this a true par 4, then moving the pin back and down some (not far enough for high water to infringe on the green) then you could. I believe we have a bit of room to move back there, even though its state land.
I highly doubt this would result in more 3's, because the line of your first drive is more important. You want to avoid the hill on the right a lot more, so you can't turn over (or fade out as a lefty) nearly as much as the current hole without being punished.
I think it would reduce the 5's, but that is because you would have a lot less random kicks into the woods or river due to the better defined line. Scoring would be based more on skill than luck.
It wouldn't be perfect but it is better than the current hole and would be a lot better than yet another boring birdie hole at DR, which is what a hole with the tee at the base of the hill would be.
As for hole 11, your claims of a safety difference between the teepad on the road and the one to the right are greatly exaggerated. Neither one is very safe, nor is either one terribly unsafe. The difference is probably negligible.
Do you play golf at Downriver on the weekend?Anybody that can toss a disc 100 feet can hit somebody on hole 1 from 11 and not even know that they are over there.
From hole 16 30-40% of golfers can get to the tee. Most of those players know to yell Fore and you can see them throwing from the Old pad of 11. Those are facts, not exaggerations. Negligence was what was gonna cause an injury by course designers who do not carefully analyze what the most common mistakes a newbie golfer makes.
P.S. Heads up walking up hole 16's fairway.. Newbie RBH's will be bombing about 1/3 up the fairway