|
Post by linkslover on Mar 23, 2020 11:19:13 GMT -5
A good course will have a mixture of both.
A great course will get the balance between the two right (along with many other things).
|
|
|
Post by PicnicGuy / BobalooNOLA on Apr 25, 2020 17:34:52 GMT -5
I'll chime in with the "both" crowd. Sometimes a nice, open tee shot with the driver is fine to offer up.
I only feel like a few holes a round should require a full fairway wood in neutral conditions.
Shorter the likely approach shot, the smaller I tend to make the green - without being ridiculous - and that can make for some reachable Par 5s having a nice risk/reward.
The main problem with holes like that, I rarely get a chance to replay & change my decisions, what with a few dozen new courses appearing daily to tempt me !
designing as Bobaloo42 w/10 courses including: Lake Parr GC (also has a tourney version) , Dormie City ; 7 Bridges at Babalu Shores ; Meadows Course by Bob ; Desert City Tourney Few have even a hundred plays, LOL. I'm a lousy self-promoter
|
|
|
Post by progolfsynopsis on May 12, 2020 11:23:54 GMT -5
For me there are a lot of factors that go into it. Personally, I want golfers to be able to take out the driver at least 12 times a round (provided there are 14 par-4's and par-5's). I am also against laying up off the tee on par-5's.
If I make a generous landing area off the tee, it may be due to the following:
1. It may be the #1 or #10 hole. I tend to feel that the opening hole should feature a tee shot that allows for a fairly comfortable driver swing.
2. I may have just designed a few holes that featured difficult tee shots and/or required laying up off the tee. I'm trying to keep some sense of an ebb and flow to the course.
3. I may have a hole designed in mind where the approach and/or putting may be very difficult and I don't want to make the entire hole difficult, so the focus on the hole is now more on the approach/putting.
Pete Dye detested driveable par-4's and I can see why. They rarely work out like they should and slow up the pace of play. Whether it's the game or something else, I feel like my biggest strength in designing is creating driveable par-4's. So I try to add a driveable par-4 in at least one of my holes just because I feel like that's where my designing strengths are. And usually my driveable par-4's feature 3 options.
PGS
|
|
|
Post by hallzballz6908 on May 14, 2020 23:13:01 GMT -5
In my opinion, strategy/variety > bombing it all day. I don’t care much for courses that either force you to hit driver perfect on every hole to score or don’t even make you think twice before attempting a fast tempo swing to get max distance. A hole or two here and there of these two varieties are ok but a bunch of them gets boring fast. Narrow, long holes feel too much like work and wide open holes require zero brain activity. In this game at least, we all hit the ball 300 yards and never top, skull, duff, shank, or sky anything. Hitting a perfect drive in this game is nowhere near as difficult or rewarding as it is in real life. The only truly rewarding aspect of this game, in my opinion, is how you decide to approach a hole and the reward/penalty for how well you executed your plan.
|
|
cutchemist42
Weekend Golfer
Posts: 103
TGCT Name: hamster1984
Tour: Challenge Circuit
|
Post by cutchemist42 on Jun 5, 2020 10:32:33 GMT -5
Yeah the driver in this game is way too easy to be accurate compared to real life. It's why the race courses play so easy, because the driver is not modelled correctly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2020 20:15:27 GMT -5
Great discussion and I'm in agreement with what everyone has said.
100% agree that hole after hole of driver shots that max distance is the biggest factor is boring. On top of that don't insult me with a hole or two where the driver is impossible.
If at all possible leave all the clubs in your players' hands, but provide different options of how to play each hole. Also, don't make the strategy predictable. Making a long shot risky but giving a good angle vs a shorter club with a safer landing area and worse angle is getting old(bottle template). Think - a chess match instead. The golfer should be thinking a few shots ahead to know what strategy to use now. Subtle things like the slope of landing areas and mounding can have as much as an impact on hold strategy as length or obvious hazards.
|
|
|
Post by SkinniePost on Jun 20, 2020 21:01:47 GMT -5
Great discussion and I'm in agreement with what everyone has said. 100% agree that hole after hole of driver shots that max distance is the biggest factor is boring. On top of that don't insult me with a hole or two where the driver is impossible. If at all possible leave all the clubs in your players' hands, but provide different options of how to play each hole. Also, don't make the strategy predictable. Making a long shot risky but giving a good angle vs a shorter club with a safer landing area and worse angle is getting old(bottle template). Think - a chess match instead. The golfer should be thinking a few shots ahead to know what strategy to use now. Subtle things like the slope of landing areas and mounding can have as much as an impact on hold strategy as length or obvious hazards. I have been trying to design options using a triangle diagram where you only get two sides at best. The sides are foot lie/view - distance to hole - angle into green or next shot. You could still throw in a hole or two that get all three, and some lower options that get only one side... But most holes the two best options still leave you giving one side up based on your choice. Curious if that makes any sense?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 21, 2020 9:33:07 GMT -5
I have been trying to design options using a triangle diagram where you only get two sides at best. The sides are foot lie/view - distance to hole - angle into green or next shot. You could still throw in a hole or two that get all three, and some lower options that get only one side... But most holes the two best options still leave you giving one side up based on your choice. Curious if that makes any sense? Interesting idea. I like the idea of checklists and tools to help make sure everything is considered. I've often wondered about the following approach - yes maybe too structured for some but you've got me thinking: Let's take a Par 4 that's 425 yards. Let's subtract the length by the longest club in the bag that's not the Driver - so a 2 wood. For argument sake. The 2-wood flies 250 yards. So that leaves whatever club you have that hit 175 yards up to whatever your Driver can reach as options off the tee to still hit the green in two shots. (keep in mind that most folks lean towards driver as the go to solution and rarely consider an iron (but they do in the pros!)) So take all the clubs in that range and figure out where they would land on the fairway. Then consider each of those shots into the green - so lie/slope hazards, elevation, angles, green angle/depth/slope. Then make sure you have an option for each club - some clubs may have tough challenges and other may be easier paths to the green. Then consider not only club length but position - so think of more of an arc off the tee to the fairway - now depending on where you are on the arc there are difference challenges again. You can imagine that you quickly develop dozens of ways to play a routine par 4. As the architect you get to decide which of these dozens of options set up for an easy path to the green and which ones are the wrong way. I think this level of planning doesn't need to be so regimented and numerically based. Instead just test play each hole over and over again with multiple clubs to multiple spots that are in play. I really feel that I spend as much time playing a hole in test as I do designing it. I often shape a slope somewhere, then I hit to it over and over again to see how the ball roles and if the desired outcome is what I'd want for a player playing a hole that way. Then I go back, tweak the slope, and do it all over again. It's exhausting but gives you full control of a well thought out design and can get away from designs that are focused on Grip and Rip or it's punishment.
|
|