|
|
Post by HoneyBadgerHacker on Nov 22, 2023 18:08:43 GMT -5
Got a non-approval for Dragon’s Pass GC…just looking for feedback thanks! There is a good bit of blindness of the tee on quite a few holes. Bunker sculpting and surfacing issues throughout. Good bit of autogen planting that was near playing surface as well. |
|
|
|
Post by mattspy05 on Nov 22, 2023 18:39:25 GMT -5
Got a non-approval for Dragon’s Pass GC…just looking for feedback thanks! There is a good bit of blindness of the tee on quite a few holes. Bunker sculpting and surfacing issues throughout. Good bit of autogen planting that was near playing surface as well. Thank you for the quick feedback |
|
|
|
Post by albinobluesheep on Dec 5, 2023 17:30:50 GMT -5
This is more of a process question, but does every course start as "Approved" and get marked "Tour worthy" if it gets played on a tour, or would it get marked "Tour Worthy" right away if it's of a specific caliber?
Both my recent submissions got accepted, but I was looking for constructive feedback on what is needed to take my process to the next level (and both courses got a bit dunked on by all the Major Competition posts, haha)
|
|
|
|
Post by sroel908 on Dec 5, 2023 17:35:31 GMT -5
This is more of a process question, but does every course start as "Approved" and get marked "Tour worthy" if it gets played on a tour, or would it get marked "Tour Worthy" right away if it's of a specific caliber? A course is reviewed when it's submitted and given 1 of 3 statuses following the review: Not Approved, Approved, or Tour Worthy. At that point, schedulers will look at courses that are rated Tour Worthy and choose from that list which courses get used on tour. Approved courses get added to the total database, along with Tour Worthy ones. Not Approved courses do not get added to the database. |
|
|
|
Post by sroel908 on Dec 5, 2023 17:44:19 GMT -5
Both my recent submissions got accepted, but I was looking for constructive feedback on what is needed to take my process to the next level (and both courses got a bit dunked on by all the Major Competition posts, haha) I can look at your courses here soon and offer feedback. I will say, it seems both the courses were LiDAR tracks from looking at your signature, and those real-life courses tend to not work well for use on most tours, perhaps aside from True Sim. |
|
|
|
Post by albinobluesheep on Dec 5, 2023 17:48:31 GMT -5
I can look at your courses here soon and offer feedback. I will say, it seems both the courses were LiDAR tracks from looking at your signature, and those real-life courses tend to not work well for use on most tours, perhaps aside from True Sim. You are correct, they are both LIDAR. True Sim was definitely what I was curious about, and wanted to know what I need to put into my next course (Gold Mountain: Olympic) to have that be a possibility. Though my Object meter may get the better of me anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by sroel908 on Dec 5, 2023 19:25:17 GMT -5
Ok, albinobluesheep , here ya go: Allenmore GC (LIDAR)First, the course is only 6,500 yards from the tips. That's at the bare minimum for an Approved course, as seen in b101's video in the OP on this thread. That's going to play very short in the game. There's yellow and orange in the 9-box on Hole 1's green when playing Pin 1 at default green speeds. This would be an issue for setting up an event here, as even the default speeds of 144 could not be used. Fairway bunkers are not visible off the tee on Hole 3 due to sculpting. Bunker sculpting itself could be better, as they mostly look bathtub-y and don't have high or low sides. Basically, 3 of the first 4 holes are drivable par-4s from the back tees. This just won't work well on a tour here. Hole 6 is a super short par-5 that I only needed pitching wedge to reach in 2. I stopped playing here because it's pretty clear that the course is just too short and features simple, straight-ahead hole designs that do kind of the same thing over and over. That's not an issue with your work...I think the course looks very clean is is done well. But this course just won't work well in TGCT. GMGC: Cascade (LIDAR)
Bunker on Hole 2 near the green is sculpted a bit deep and is quite large - it's bigger than the green itself. Same deal on Hole 3...bunkers here are massive and very deep. Hole 5 is a very short par-4 at 488 yards, and it's well downhill. Only had 130 yards in on my second. Lots of yellow slopes in the 9-box grid around the hole (Pin 1). Hole 14 has way, way too much fairway for a par-3. Looks really awkward to me, even if this is how it is in real life. Honestly, this one has some of the same issues the other course did, in terms of it being a viable TGCT host course. We can drive the ball so far in the game, it makes these par-4s and par-5s very easy and just driver -> pitch shots for the most part. You have done a pretty good job, it's just the courses themselves that don't translate well being used as event hosts in the game. As far as technical work, I'd focus on bunker sculpting, as there were some that were very deep and bathtub-y. Watch out for pin placements, too...several throughout both courses would be termed "illegal" based on TGCT guidelines, as they have yellow and other non-green colored slopes within the 9 boxes around the cup. Otherwise, I think you have a really good handle on the designer and did well with these courses. |
|
|
|
Post by Q on Dec 5, 2023 19:33:20 GMT -5
Ok, albinobluesheep , here ya go: Allenmore GC (LIDAR)First, the course is only 6,500 yards from the tips. That's at the bare minimum for an Approved course, as seen in b101's video in the OP on this thread. That's going to play very short in the game. There's yellow and orange in the 9-box on Hole 1's green when playing Pin 1 at default green speeds. This would be an issue for setting up an event here, as even the default speeds of 144 could not be used. Fairway bunkers are not visible off the tee on Hole 3 due to sculpting. Bunker sculpting itself could be better, as they mostly look bathtub-y and don't have high or low sides. Basically, 3 of the first 4 holes are drivable par-4s from the back tees. This just won't work well on a tour here. Hole 6 is a super short par-5 that I only needed pitching wedge to reach in 2. I stopped playing here because it's pretty clear that the course is just too short and features straight forward hole designs that do kind of the same thing over and over. That's not an issue with your work...I think the course looks very clean is is done well. But this course just won't work well in TGCT. GMGC: Cascade (LIDAR)
Bunker on Hole 2 near the green is sculpted a bit deep and is quite large - it's bigger than the green itself. Same deal on Hole 3...bunkers here are massive and very deep. Hole 5 is a very short par-4 at 488 yards, and it's well downhill. Only had 130 yards in on my second. Lots of yellow slopes in the 9-box grid around the hole (Pin 1). Honestly, this one has some of the same issues the other course did, in terms of it being a viable TGCT host course. We can drive the ball so far in the game, it makes these par-4s and par-5s very easy and just driver -> pitch shots for the most part. You have done a pretty good job, it's just the courses themselves that don't translate well being used as event hosts in the game. As far as technical work, I'd focus on bunker sculpting, as there were some that were very deep and bathtub-y. Watch out for pin placements, too...several throughout both courses would be termed "illegal" based on TGCT guidelines, as they have yellow and other non-green colored slopes within the 9 boxes around the cup. Otherwise, I think you have a really good handle on the designer and did well with these courses. To elaborate more on this, Sroel is correct in that courses can be considered "approved" purely off of if they can be used on tour effectively in this game. I'm currently working on a liDar project myself and know for a fact it is simply too short to be worth putting in the database (as the database's purpose is entirely for schedulability, not as a list of the best courses). |
|
|
|
Post by albinobluesheep on Dec 5, 2023 20:11:11 GMT -5
sroel908 (and Q ) Thank you both so much for taking the time for the feed back! All of that helps a lot of trying to contextualize what I should be shooting for going forward, and in any fresh designs. Olympic is a bit longer/"harder" than Cascade (someone has posted a basic LIDAR version of it, with not enough trees...), but - The bunkers are going to be a challenge to not make bathtubs (limitation of the game's bunkers, I think),
- The greens very well may be impossible to pin "legally for TGCT guidelines" without slowing them to a crawl, if the Cascade side is on the edge/beyond the edge, as the greens are very very sloped IRL, and I wont want to spend the time softening them unless explicitly requested.
I've got a few other LiDAR courses in my personal queue, but I'll probably skip submitting them to the database based on the above feedback (unless requested). Thanks again!
|
|
|
|
Post by bubbadave on Dec 7, 2023 12:11:29 GMT -5
To elaborate more on this, Sroel is correct in that courses can be considered "approved" purely off of if they can be used on tour effectively in this game. I'm currently working on a liDar project myself and know for a fact it is simply too short to be worth putting in the database (as the database's purpose is entirely for schedulability, not as a list of the best courses). Wait, what? I always thought there were tiers to approved courses. Tour Worthy and all the others. I have one published, but wasn't listed as tour worthy, but it is still in the database. Confused. |
|
|
|
Post by sroel908 on Dec 7, 2023 12:20:20 GMT -5
To elaborate more on this, Sroel is correct in that courses can be considered "approved" purely off of if they can be used on tour effectively in this game. I'm currently working on a liDar project myself and know for a fact it is simply too short to be worth putting in the database (as the database's purpose is entirely for schedulability, not as a list of the best courses). Wait, what? I always thought there were tiers to approved courses. Tour Worthy and all the others. I have one published, but wasn't listed as tour worthy, but it is still in the database. Confused. There are 3 "tiers" or statuses given to courses upon review: 1) Not Approved 2) Approved 3) Tour Worthy Any course that's "Approved" or "Tour Worthy" gets added to the database. Schedulers will then use courses that are given "Tour Worthy" status in TGCT events. |
|
|
|
Post by sandgroper on Dec 7, 2023 17:26:29 GMT -5
I like the rename of the OP thread title...
|
|
|
|
Post by Q on Dec 8, 2023 0:42:31 GMT -5
I like the rename of the OP thread title... One of these days someone will watch it. |
|
|
|
Post by jbert220 on Dec 16, 2023 20:27:11 GMT -5
G'day fellas. Three weeks back I submitted a course called Inverloch Pier to the database. Ever since, its status has been 'claimed'. What does this mean? Sorry for the dumb question. Just put a tonne of time into that course and have been waiting on tenterhooks.
|
|
|
|
Post by axelvonfersen on Dec 17, 2023 3:56:31 GMT -5
G'day fellas. Three weeks back I submitted a course called Inverloch Pier to the database. Ever since, its status has been 'claimed'. What does this mean? Sorry for the dumb question. Just put a tonne of time into that course and have been waiting on tenterhooks.
It probably slipped through the cracks, eh b101.
Claimed means it's in line to be reviewed, but I'm sure Ben just forgot about this one.
|
|
