The courses we play - "Resortification"

[Pubknight]

Mar 2, 2015 1:55:42 GMT -5 Crazycanuck1985 said:

I'll try not to "gush" as much on my reviews Pubknight . With those Par 3 videos, we are only commenting on things we like about each course so it seems like we are "gushing".

To clarify, I wasn't criticizing you at all.
Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion.
And you can like a course I don't and vice versa.
That doesn't make either of us wrong.
It's just makes our opinions different.

That one just happened to jump out at me, as my group universally hated it.
And note I haven't named the course, or the designer, as it's really irrelevant and not about that.

It just fed into the discussion of, let's call it the Metacritic effect... where critics can praise an offering, but when the general populace gets its hands on it, the marks go in the toilet.
I keep reading 'hard, challenging courses get low marks'. (not just in this thread... it seems to come up in any design oriented thread)
But that's not really the case.
Bad courses get low marks, or bad holes on otherwise good courses can cause low marks.

I realize I might be coming across as overly negative on the designers.
But I'm not.
I'm actually pretty easy to satisfy when it comes to courses.
But one or two dumb decisions can really taint the experience.

To bring it back to the main topic of the thread: The courses can get a lot tougher.
And they need to, as the players are that good.

Probably the best way I could put it is this:
- A course has the setup that it uses for 51 weeks of the year that the general public plays
- The week the tour comes into town, the course plays much differently, the rough is thicker, the greens are faster, the fairways and greens are firmer. Basically it is playing at its toughest.

Because, just like in real life, if the tour pros play a regular track like the rest of the public plays, they eat it alive.
Bubba Watson played a public course in Markham Ontario called Bushwood.
He shot a 61 (with all aids off )

And that's basically the situation we have every week.
We are taking the tours to public golf courses, and letting the best players have at them.
And the scores are comparable to Bubba's 61.

A 'tour stop' course might get extremely low marks out in the 'open'.
Since it's available for anyone to play, and they might find it overly difficult.
And they should.
It's not meant for them.

In that respect, I don't have a problem with TGC Tours 'commissioning' courses to be made for play.
Since asking someone to spend a whack of time designing a course that may never get played if it isn't used on a tour seems unfair.
Alternatively, picking courses from the existing universe, but asking designers to make it 'tour week ready' is another fully viable way to go.

[Crazycanuck1985]

Nevada, hit me up with a PM anytime and we can discuss privately. Also the "can you mow this?" idea was passed along to me by a couple other designers when I was just starting out. It sounds silly but it seems to give my courses a more realistic look. It doesn't need to be perfectly flat...in fact perfectly flat is a bit boring.. but the "wavy" look that some courses exhibit looks very cartoonish.

Pubnight- we are working on the April and May schedule as we speak and some of the courses chosen have received the "tour ready" treatment.

[mcbogga]

 

And that's basically the situation we have every week.

We are taking the tours to public golf courses, and letting the best players have at them.

And the scores are comparable to Bubba's 61.



A 'tour stop' course might get extremely low marks out in the 'open'.

Since it's available for anyone to play, and they might find it overly difficult.

And they should.

It's not meant for them.



In that respect, I don't have a problem with TGC Tours 'commissioning' courses to be made for play.

Since asking someone to spend a whack of time designing a course that may never get played if it isn't used on a tour seems unfair.

Alternatively, picking courses from the existing universe, but asking designers to make it 'tour week ready' is another fully viable way to go.

This is good - first part is well put. But I think that this is actually what TGCT wants to do and have tried (Powderfinger last days)? Not easy when there is a limited pool of "Tour style" courses with the quality they (and we) want out there. Making tour versions of existing courses if the designer is up for it is a great way to expand the library of tour courses.

Canuck was dead on - an interesting, enjoyable , difficult course is a rare beast and a huge challenge to make. Difficult is easy to make, but "good difficult" should have its own place in the TGCT ranking world. Maybe time to add something to that effect in the rankings? Like a badge or similar. The number of 5* courses have reached a number where a next level would make sense. 

Another great point from Canuck is that it is a shame that this great course library and rating system goes largely unused. Needs to be used more and we are all guilty on this one. Does not take that long to put a score in on courses. What can be questioned is the 5* special rules and how some courses gets 5* pretty much upon release. Don't know where to attribute the saying but there is one to the effect of "You will not necessarily like a good course the first time you play it". Opposite should hold true as well.

[joegolferg]

After Canuck mentioned the user reviews I realized this is definitely something I will participate in from this day forward. I am even going as far as doing a user review/rating on my favorite courses of the past, I feel selfish not doing this.

[Deleted]

I love blind shots and had some at Oak National and Deliverance.

The problem is they typically get criticized and result in low ratings which results in less plays etc.

I'm 75% done with a course that is gonna be made the way I want it to be made and if people like it great if not ok

I play a course daily irl with blind shots and tough shots... I want that here. It's going to have narrow fairways too... another thing that will get hit on points.

Oh well hit it straighter

[nevadaballin]

Mar 2, 2015 10:13:06 GMT -5 Crazycanuck1985 said:

Nevada, hit me up with a PM anytime and we can discuss privately. Also the "can you mow this?" idea was passed along to me by a couple other designers when I was just starting out. It sounds silly but it seems to give my courses a more realistic look. It doesn't need to be perfectly flat...in fact perfectly flat is a bit boring.. but the "wavy" look that some courses exhibit looks very cartoonish.

Pubnight- we are working on the April and May schedule as we speak and some of the courses chosen have received the "tour ready" treatment.

Will do, thanks 

[nevadaballin]

Mar 2, 2015 13:51:48 GMT -5 joegolferg said:

After Canuck mentioned the user reviews I realized this is definitely something I will participate in from this day forward. I am even going as far as doing a user review/rating on my favorite courses of the past, I feel selfish not doing this.

I need to do this as well. I started doing it at that other site with all the courses listed but then that place seemed to die off for some reason.

[Deleted]

I like the rough look because the course I play most days looks like that






And my favorite part



On any given day about 50 to 75 rounds max so I can go step on the tee just about anytime I want and nobody even knows it's there

So I'm trying to make holes that look tough from the tee like in the first pic on my latest course...



which gets you to




But also do some "decision holes" where the prevailing wind is going to make left or right the better option




and for sake of balance every tough hole needs something counter it



I will post this in the under construction folder but thought this was germane to this topic.  So what do you all think of that opening blind uphill tee shot?

P.S. that name is just a placeholder lol

[Crazycanuck1985]

I personally love that blind tee shot, ADX. I think I may confuse people when I mention avoiding blind shots as much as possible. I think a shot like that it fine,it's intimidating and tough, but there is something in the distance to aim at. What I don't like is creating blind approach shots using large humps and bumps in the fairway. If you have spend the time making some difficult and nice looking bunkers, show them off! Intimidate the golfer!

I'm guilty of letting the occasional blind approach sneak through in my own designs...#9 on The Double Black Course at Christina Pines drives me nuts every time I play it because I raised the fairway too high and can't really see the green. I think this happening occasionally is OK, but on every shot, especially short irons and not being able to see the green..I'm not a big fan of.

[mcbogga]

But - the blind approach is a staple in classic golf course design - and even modern championship designs with links ambitions use it frequently. Especially creating mounds to block the view of the green from certain angles and create exitement to an otherwise flat tee shot. In TGC this only works if assists are off really, but as a design concept it is completely valid. Not everyone will like it - but opinions are opinions and it is hard to dispute the strategic value of the feature or difficulty coming into the green a blind approach can bring. Particulary when the designer does not provide any visual aids to help aiming. One of the scariest shots in golf is playing over a mound into a shallow green knowing there are hazards front and back.

[Pubknight]

Mar 2, 2015 10:13:06 GMT -5 Crazycanuck1985 said:

Pubnight- we are working on the April and May schedule as we speak and some of the courses chosen have received the "tour ready" treatment.

That sounds awesome CC!
Looking forward to it.

[doublebogey]

Feb 23, 2015 12:24:59 GMT -5 bruce said:

Now as far as greens go, at least in real life, they are generally flat. Now by that I mean there not actually flat, but they don't have huge up and down breaks. Its all about subtleties. But then thats real greens, where you can see small breaks. Now on sim greens everything needs to be ramped up, so its easier to see for one and you can't really "see" breaks at all anyway.
 
 

This is absolutely false.  At least as championship courses go.  Public courses are generally flat because they are made for the high handicapper.  Championship courses have very sloping greens.  I used to be a member of Medinah CC for years, and although it doesn't look it on TV, the greens have a lot of slope.  There are times I've had putts with 20ft breaks.  The greens shouldn't be subtle or uniform at all.  It's quite common to have double breaking putts.

Don't be afraid to have fairways slanted towards bunkers or water.  Try and create approach shots that need to be drawn or faded to get close to the hole.  Make sucker pins, force guys to hook or slice drives off the tee to keep in the fairway.  Place hazards very close to landing zones.  Make golfers have to think about how aggressive they can be.  Look at courses like St Andrews, deep pot bunkers all over the fairways with slopes running right into them.

If you're designing a course for the PGA or Euro tours, your goal should be the top players shooting in the 65 range.  I'm certainly not the best, but I can shoot low.  If anyone making a championship course would like someone to test their course, I'm very happy to help.

[Deleted]

Hey mcbogga,

My latest effort "Majestic Royale Golf Club" tries to address the issues discussed in the O.P. I'ts built to feel like a major venue and keeps far away from the resort feel. I just wish I had some stadium seating style bleachers and galleries to plop down. Give it a try and let me know what you think.

Thanks,

-Mike 

[mcbogga]

Tried the Royale. Has some good concepts - but to me it felt a bit unfinished and rushed. Some holes (200 feet+ drop and then back up the hill par 4s, last hole) were firmly in fantasy land as well which personally I am not a big fan off.

Would say that as a source for Ideas similar to my prototype links it has value - but needs quite a lot of refining to become a tour worthy course in my opinion.

I do applaude your effort and intentions though!

[Deleted]

Mar 19, 2015 19:51:31 GMT -5 mcbogga said:

Tried the Royale. Has some good concepts - but to me it felt a bit unfinished and rushed. Some holes (200 feet+ drop and then back up the hill par 4s, last hole) were firmly in fantasy land as well which personally I am not a big fan off.

Would say that as a source for Ideas similar to my prototype links it has value - but needs quite a lot of refining to become a tour worthy course in my opinion.

I do applaude your effort and intentions though!

-Thanks for trying the Royale. I'm beginning to realize in my zeal to show off the basic concepts of the course design that I should have waited for later editions for the official release but it's really the official release for the U.S. Open Competition which I really had no intention of really winning. I would love to win it but still believe the Majestic Royale will eventually be worthy of garnering the U.S. Open venue. I released it to kind of prove a point about staring out with the basics of design. The course especially if you move the tees around becomes much more accessible but I always knew there would be changes. Mainly I hope some of the concepts overtly demonstrated in the early design will provide inspiration for some real big venue feeling courses for the tour.  Most especially I appreciate the honest feedback about #6 and #7. I was already going to lower/alter both 6 and 7 and do a little work on the terraces. I also need to move the snake bunker to the bottom of the landing area leaving the entry into the green clear.-

Thanks again mcbogga,

-Mike