Major Design Contest: Judging Guidelines PLEASE READ
Feb 1, 2020 12:20:58 GMT -5
mayday_golf83, b101, and 1 more like this
Post by PithyDoctorG on Feb 1, 2020 12:20:58 GMT -5
I am posting here the judging guidelines for the Major Design Contest. These are the same as the TGCT Design Contest guidelines, with a few contest-specific criteria added. The major-specific guidelines are denoted in red.
Contestants: Note that, when you publish your course, you should provide round-by-round conditions for a 4 round tournament. These are the conditions the judges will be using.
Judges are expected to evaluate courses in the following areas. Each area should be graded as Excellent (outstanding), Very Good (well above average), Good (above average), Fair (average or slightly below average), or Poor (well below average). It should be noted that “average” refers to the average course in the contest, not in the broader community. The different areas do not have specific weights attached to them--each judge is free to score the courses holistically. Judges won't necessarily be providing explicit answers to the questions below; they are simply meant to guide their thinking.
Playability & Shot Values (the most important category)
Were there stretches where you felt like you played on auto pilot without being mentally engaged?
Did the course offer you opportunity to play different shots and styles or did it dictate the proper play throughout?
Did the design of the greens and their surrounds lend interest to short game play and putting?
Did the placement and appearance of the hazards enhance the interest of the holes?
Technical Execution
Were there areas of unnatural sculpting that “took you out of your round?”
Were textures placed in a thoughtful manner with regard to landscape and design or do they seem forced at times?
Do textures and elevations work together to enhance immersion?
Are things simply sloppy and done without care?
Did you have to search for problems or did they present themselves in the normal course of play and exploration?
Were there any technical surprises that made you say "How did they do that?"
Aesthetics & Environment
Do the course and its surrounds feel cohesive and unified in their presentation?
Is the vision of the designer clearly expressed in the style, planting and atmosphere of the course?
Are the surroundings and atmosphere forced or repetitive in a way that distracts?
Is there "stuff" for the sake of "stuff"?
Are crowds and tournament objects (if applicable) placed well?
Does the overall environment give the sense that there’s a significant championship going on?
Routing, Flow, Cohesion,Variety of Holes
Does the routing make sense? Does the course flow well? Do all the holes feel like they belong on the same course? On the other hand, does the designer reuse the same feature too many times on the course?
Were there any holes that pulled you out of the flow? Which ones?
Does the variety seem to arise naturally in the course or does it feel forced?
Challenge and Course Set-Up (contest specific)
Does the designer create challenging scenarios in creative and interesting ways?
Does the designer rely too much on a single design element to provide challenge?
Have course conditions (i.e. green speed, terrain firmness, wind/weather conditions) been selected in such a way to bring out unique aspects of the course throughout 72 holes?
Does each pinset/round set up provide variety within the round with respect to difficulty?
How well will the course challenge the very best players without “going over the line?”
Overall things to consider
Is this a course you would point out to someone in a private message as one they must play?
Even if the course is wonderful there will be opportunities that were missed on some holes.
Were there opportunities for a better hole you noticed that made you a little sad?
Is the designer’s creativity expressed in a way that adds to the playing experience or is it forced or shoehorned into the course?
What questions would you ask the designer if you were to play through the course with them?
How memorable was your round? Do you want to play the course again right now on another pinset?
When you reflect on your round do you remember the general feel of the round or only specific holes?
Are the holes and shots you remember based on the view/aesthetic or on the hole's layout/playability?
If you played the course again RIGHT NOW do you have specific holes/shots that you want to try to play/execute differently?
If you would play the course the same way...why would you replay it?
BOTTOM LINE QUESTION: Is this course worthy of hosting the Olympics? Why or why not?
Contestants: Note that, when you publish your course, you should provide round-by-round conditions for a 4 round tournament. These are the conditions the judges will be using.
Judges are expected to evaluate courses in the following areas. Each area should be graded as Excellent (outstanding), Very Good (well above average), Good (above average), Fair (average or slightly below average), or Poor (well below average). It should be noted that “average” refers to the average course in the contest, not in the broader community. The different areas do not have specific weights attached to them--each judge is free to score the courses holistically. Judges won't necessarily be providing explicit answers to the questions below; they are simply meant to guide their thinking.
Playability & Shot Values (the most important category)
Were there stretches where you felt like you played on auto pilot without being mentally engaged?
Did the course offer you opportunity to play different shots and styles or did it dictate the proper play throughout?
Did the design of the greens and their surrounds lend interest to short game play and putting?
Did the placement and appearance of the hazards enhance the interest of the holes?
Technical Execution
Were there areas of unnatural sculpting that “took you out of your round?”
Were textures placed in a thoughtful manner with regard to landscape and design or do they seem forced at times?
Do textures and elevations work together to enhance immersion?
Are things simply sloppy and done without care?
Did you have to search for problems or did they present themselves in the normal course of play and exploration?
Were there any technical surprises that made you say "How did they do that?"
Aesthetics & Environment
Do the course and its surrounds feel cohesive and unified in their presentation?
Is the vision of the designer clearly expressed in the style, planting and atmosphere of the course?
Are the surroundings and atmosphere forced or repetitive in a way that distracts?
Is there "stuff" for the sake of "stuff"?
Are crowds and tournament objects (if applicable) placed well?
Does the overall environment give the sense that there’s a significant championship going on?
Routing, Flow, Cohesion,Variety of Holes
Does the routing make sense? Does the course flow well? Do all the holes feel like they belong on the same course? On the other hand, does the designer reuse the same feature too many times on the course?
Were there any holes that pulled you out of the flow? Which ones?
Does the variety seem to arise naturally in the course or does it feel forced?
Challenge and Course Set-Up (contest specific)
Does the designer create challenging scenarios in creative and interesting ways?
Does the designer rely too much on a single design element to provide challenge?
Have course conditions (i.e. green speed, terrain firmness, wind/weather conditions) been selected in such a way to bring out unique aspects of the course throughout 72 holes?
Does each pinset/round set up provide variety within the round with respect to difficulty?
How well will the course challenge the very best players without “going over the line?”
Overall things to consider
Is this a course you would point out to someone in a private message as one they must play?
Even if the course is wonderful there will be opportunities that were missed on some holes.
Were there opportunities for a better hole you noticed that made you a little sad?
Is the designer’s creativity expressed in a way that adds to the playing experience or is it forced or shoehorned into the course?
What questions would you ask the designer if you were to play through the course with them?
How memorable was your round? Do you want to play the course again right now on another pinset?
When you reflect on your round do you remember the general feel of the round or only specific holes?
Are the holes and shots you remember based on the view/aesthetic or on the hole's layout/playability?
If you played the course again RIGHT NOW do you have specific holes/shots that you want to try to play/execute differently?
If you would play the course the same way...why would you replay it?
BOTTOM LINE QUESTION: Is this course worthy of hosting the Olympics? Why or why not?
