|
|
Post by bauer1993 on Jun 22, 2024 21:26:04 GMT -5
Still struggling to understand this a bit -- course has 1100+ plays in 48 hours (by far my personal record), 150+ fb likes and 50 comments in support, and I promise it'll be featured in every non-TGC society this month (several big xbox ones have it scheduled already). If I've checked every theoretical box, and everyone thinks the course is stunning, what am I missing to get Tour Worthy? What does "above and beyond" mean to the reviewers.. Okay I'm back... I just published Rosedale National Toronto (for the Stadium Design Contest), it got approved within an hour, but no Tour Worthy best I can tell. I wanted to do a second submission to this contest, so I'm just wondering if anyone would be willing to take a look for me to find any gaps I missed. I feel like I can't be too far off honestly. A few possible issues I've flagged: 1) Too many highly visible bare spots under trees. I ran out of meter otherwise i wouldve used more grass, so on the next course I'll try even harder to bury more trees and maybe use a less blunt heavy rough texture. 2) The bridges on 7, 11 & 14 are too close to the forward tee deck and partially block the ravine view. 3) Lighting could be better (I blame the trees) -- the greens are clear but some of the fairways are pretty dark. 4) 1 and 5 could've been long par 4s rather than short par 5s, making it a par 70. If I did a "Tour" version I'd do this I think. 5) Bunkering might be too simplistic. I was going for the highly manicured Augusta look, but I could understand it if the reviewer may have wanted more there. Any ideas? I want to do a Dye inspired, more open meadow look next, so maybe some of this will fix itself, but another set of eyes would be great! Thank you! Course thread: tgctours.proboards.com/thread/35339/rosedale-national-toronto-stadium-challenge?page=1#post-810036More photos: www.facebook.com/share/p/RG3mCq6p9NDcJ1aR/?mibextid=oFDknk |
|
|
|
Post by Australian on Jun 22, 2024 21:37:22 GMT -5
I don't think plays, Facebook likes, Facebook comments or use in societies has anything to do with how they judge the course dude. Geez I hope not. Ha.
|
|
|
|
Post by bauer1993 on Jun 22, 2024 21:42:59 GMT -5
I also hope not lol It's just context I guess to what I'm wondering -- if it's that well received of a course, how isn't it above and beyond. Like my concern is that there is something technically wrong with it, or I'm doing something that turns off the reviewers. I do notice a lot of the Tour worthys look pretty similar.. very open, big greens with big fairway surrounds, fairly easy fairways to hit, lots of grass/bushes but minimal trees, very minimal scenery (because the planting uses all the meter), etc.. idk just trying to get a grasp on the line of thinking I guess I don't think plays, Facebook likes, Facebook comments or use in societies has anything to do with how they judge the course dude. Geez I hope not. Ha. |
|
|
|
Post by mattyfromcanada on Jun 22, 2024 21:44:51 GMT -5
I don't think plays, Facebook likes, Facebook comments or use in societies has anything to do with how they judge the course dude. Geez I hope not. Ha. Facebook is the worst measuring stick for sure, any and all feedback from there is to be ignored for the most part haha! |
|
|
|
Post by bauer1993 on Jun 22, 2024 21:49:42 GMT -5
I like the ego boost though lol I'm really just planning for my next course here.. and I'm not sure if my goal is get a tour worthy, or get another submission into the Stadium Design Contest -- if a reviewer is typically turned off by all the grandstands/crowds, then I'll focus on the tour worthy goal and just keep the one submission. I don't think plays, Facebook likes, Facebook comments or use in societies has anything to do with how they judge the course dude. Geez I hope not. Ha. Facebook is the worst measuring stick for sure, any and all feedback from there is to be ignored for the most part haha! |
|
|
|
Post by mattyfromcanada on Jun 22, 2024 23:00:12 GMT -5
I like the ego boost though lol I'm really just planning for my next course here.. and I'm not sure if my goal is get a tour worthy, or get another submission into the Stadium Design Contest -- if a reviewer is typically turned off by all the grandstands/crowds, then I'll focus on the tour worthy goal and just keep the one submission. Facebook is the worst measuring stick for sure, any and all feedback from there is to be ignored for the most part haha! Crowds/grandstands have nothing to do with it (unless they're in dumb spots and impede play). It's quality of the hole designs first and foremost, sense of place, and if we can see this being used on one of the tours. |
|
|
|
Post by bauer1993 on Jun 22, 2024 23:15:27 GMT -5
Okay that is helpful -- like I said in the original post, I thought maybe I had some par 5s that could be long par 4s, I could see that being considered a hole design issue. I know this thread is about getting things approved (I'm 5 for 5 on that front) .. I presume there's not much here in terms of Tour Worthy standards? I've learned a bit about certain preferences.. ie design for 5 different green speeds, no yellow in 9 squares, etc. I don't play much, I mostly design and run my societies on xbox, so it's a bit tricky for me to be able to visualize what the Tour might have an interest in I guess. I like the ego boost though lol I'm really just planning for my next course here.. and I'm not sure if my goal is get a tour worthy, or get another submission into the Stadium Design Contest -- if a reviewer is typically turned off by all the grandstands/crowds, then I'll focus on the tour worthy goal and just keep the one submission. Crowds/grandstands have nothing to do with it (unless they're in dumb spots and impede play). It's quality of the hole designs first and foremost, sense of place, and if we can see this being used on one of the tours. |
|
|
|
Post by b101 on Jun 22, 2024 23:38:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bauer1993 on Jun 22, 2024 23:48:22 GMT -5
Well how did I miss that lol.. thanks! Big fan btw -- been watching your channel on the ipad while I do dishes for like a year now, learned a lot, and Ive used a ton of your courses for my societies. Looking forward to learning more ! |
|
|
|
Post by b101 on Jun 23, 2024 3:23:01 GMT -5
Well how did I miss that lol.. thanks! Big fan btw -- been watching your channel on the ipad while I do dishes for like a year now, learned a lot, and Ive used a ton of your courses for my societies. Looking forward to learning more ! I think it's in Tips and Tricks, but could be clearer. Glad to hear it and hope it helps! The other link that would be useful: tgctours.proboards.com/thread/33512/improve-guide |
|
|
|
Post by doctorcurbschool on Jun 25, 2024 4:03:52 GMT -5
Good day all, I've taken the valuable feedback from sandgroper and patlouvar and made a beta version, now called Sugar Lake Country Club (Formerly Sugar Creek Country Club). Sugar Lake Country Club - Par 72 Black - 7,298y / Blue - 6,746y / White - 6,243y / Red - 5,680y Medium (6.5) Green Speeds Based on the feedback, the biggest change was the sculpting on and near the tee boxes to allow for clear views of every tee shot. Every landing area should now be visible from the player's perspective. I extended the fairways on #5 and #10 to allow for a larger bailout area. Trees on multiple of the fairways have been pushed back to make for less overhang. On every hole except #2 and #18 any ball in the fairway will have clear line of sight to the green. For #2 and #18, the only blocked shots from the fairway are any drives hit to the short left part of the fairways. Anything 270+ yards or anything short on the right half of the fairways still have a clear line. The encroaching trees on #2 and #18 have still been pushed back a bit, so even from the blocked area a draw around those trees is more reasonable. The par-5 16th hole was probably the biggest issue on the course, it has been completely redesigned. It's still a split fairway, however no more trees in between both sides. Instead, the tees have been pushed back, the left fairway route has been widened, and the water right of the fairway has been pushed closer to the landing area. This makes it a true risk/reward tee shot. The left side is the safe side and makes it a 260+ yard approach to the green, where the right side leaves less than 250 yards in most cases. Give it a play and let me know if you think it's ready to be submitted again. I personally think it's the best course I've ever made, certainly the most detailed. It plays tough but fair, just requires you to plan your shots instead of swinging 110% at everything. It's a true "private country club" setting with a lot of flowers/shrubbery surrounding the tees and common areas. Every view should feel intentional. Any and all feedback is welcome. Thanks yall. |
|
|
|
Post by HoneyBadgerHacker on Jun 25, 2024 6:33:45 GMT -5
Good day all, I've taken the valuable feedback from sandgroper and patlouvar and made a beta version, now called Sugar Lake Country Club (Formerly Sugar Creek Country Club). Sugar Lake Country Club - Par 72 Black - 7,298y / Blue - 6,746y / White - 6,243y / Red - 5,680y Medium (6.5) Green Speeds Based on the feedback, the biggest change was the sculpting on and near the tee boxes to allow for clear views of every tee shot. Every landing area should now be visible from the player's perspective. I extended the fairways on #5 and #10 to allow for a larger bailout area. Trees on multiple of the fairways have been pushed back to make for less overhang. On every hole except #2 and #18 any ball in the fairway will have clear line of sight to the green. For #2 and #18, the only blocked shots from the fairway are any drives hit to the short left part of the fairways. Anything 270+ yards or anything short on the right half of the fairways still have a clear line. The encroaching trees on #2 and #18 have still been pushed back a bit, so even from the blocked area a draw around those trees is more reasonable. The par-5 16th hole was probably the biggest issue on the course, it has been completely redesigned. It's still a split fairway, however no more trees in between both sides. Instead, the tees have been pushed back, the left fairway route has been widened, and the water right of the fairway has been pushed closer to the landing area. This makes it a true risk/reward tee shot. The left side is the safe side and makes it a 260+ yard approach to the green, where the right side leaves less than 250 yards in most cases. Give it a play and let me know if you think it's ready to be submitted again. I personally think it's the best course I've ever made, certainly the most detailed. It plays tough but fair, just requires you to plan your shots instead of swinging 110% at everything. It's a true "private country club" setting with a lot of flowers/shrubbery surrounding the tees and common areas. Every view should feel intentional. Any and all feedback is welcome. Thanks yall. Think it’s always good to do a beta version before publishing however if you plan to do that and then resubmit the course that was not approved with the new changes it will not be reviewed. Please don’t waste your time on changes to the one not approved but please do so on any that have not been submitted.changing the name to something else doesn’t make it a new course for the reviewers to basically re review the one you updated. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorcurbschool on Jun 25, 2024 9:36:07 GMT -5
Good day all, I've taken the valuable feedback from sandgroper and patlouvar and made a beta version, now called Sugar Lake Country Club (Formerly Sugar Creek Country Club). Sugar Lake Country Club - Par 72 Black - 7,298y / Blue - 6,746y / White - 6,243y / Red - 5,680y Medium (6.5) Green Speeds Based on the feedback, the biggest change was the sculpting on and near the tee boxes to allow for clear views of every tee shot. Every landing area should now be visible from the player's perspective. I extended the fairways on #5 and #10 to allow for a larger bailout area. Trees on multiple of the fairways have been pushed back to make for less overhang. On every hole except #2 and #18 any ball in the fairway will have clear line of sight to the green. For #2 and #18, the only blocked shots from the fairway are any drives hit to the short left part of the fairways. Anything 270+ yards or anything short on the right half of the fairways still have a clear line. The encroaching trees on #2 and #18 have still been pushed back a bit, so even from the blocked area a draw around those trees is more reasonable. The par-5 16th hole was probably the biggest issue on the course, it has been completely redesigned. It's still a split fairway, however no more trees in between both sides. Instead, the tees have been pushed back, the left fairway route has been widened, and the water right of the fairway has been pushed closer to the landing area. This makes it a true risk/reward tee shot. The left side is the safe side and makes it a 260+ yard approach to the green, where the right side leaves less than 250 yards in most cases. Give it a play and let me know if you think it's ready to be submitted again. I personally think it's the best course I've ever made, certainly the most detailed. It plays tough but fair, just requires you to plan your shots instead of swinging 110% at everything. It's a true "private country club" setting with a lot of flowers/shrubbery surrounding the tees and common areas. Every view should feel intentional. Any and all feedback is welcome. Thanks yall. Think it’s always good to do a beta version before publishing however if you plan to do that and then resubmit the course that was not approved with the new changes it will not be reviewed. Please don’t waste your time on changes to the one not approved but please do so on any that have not been submitted.changing the name to something else doesn’t make it a new course for the reviewers to basically re review the one you updated. Apologies, wasn’t trying to make it seem like a “brand new” course per say, just wanted a different name to easily tell it apart in-game. Still new to the submission process, my apologies. |
|
|
|
Post by Alec675922 on Jul 3, 2024 1:40:05 GMT -5
Not sure if this is the right place, i submited a course last night under the name of Honeywell Castel (Green). There is an error in the spelling. It should be Honywell Castle (Green). Should I resubmit or will the reviwer make the changes to fix this.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by steshan on Jul 7, 2024 17:14:40 GMT -5
I think my recent submission was not actually played or looked at prior to being decided upon. I see the photos posted to my course from the reviewer, but these are not photos from my course. My course is Cedars Pointe Golf Club, but the photos posted to the course by a reviewer are not from my course. I don't know if the refused email was based on my course or the one that they have in the photos. Based on other courses I have that are approved I do not see why Cedars Pointe Golf Club would have been denied for any reason. I am not sure where to post the issue or who to reach out to regarding the possible error.
|
|
Okay I'm back... I just published Rosedale National Toronto (for the Stadium Design Contest), it got approved within an hour, but no Tour Worthy best I can tell. I wanted to do a second submission to this contest, so I'm just wondering if anyone would be willing to take a look for me to find any gaps I missed. I feel like I can't be too far off honestly. 
