Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members

Idlewild Options
finnhawc
Posted: Thursday, November 01, 2007 3:29:21 PM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 1/16/2007
Posts: 906
Location: Wyoming
backs slowly away...my name is not John or Keith...
BIGBOY
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2007 7:12:27 AM
Rank: Veteran

Joined: 7/27/2005
Posts: 288
Come on Keith, where is the love?
Kool Keith
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2007 7:52:11 AM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 6/28/2005
Posts: 338
The shaved hill idea was psuedo-sarcasm Kuhnsie.

Want to make it tougher? Take the basket farther down the creek.

Good shots should not be punished (which is exactly what is happening now). Perfect shots aren't even rewarded.. they are just OK. But a good shot getting punished is stupid - not a bad shot, but just a little less than perfect. OB. Take a stroke. Putt at the bucket from the drop area, hit chains and cut through... OB.

Worst hole at Idlewild = 11.

finnhawc
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2007 8:23:00 AM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 1/16/2007
Posts: 906
Location: Wyoming
A good shot is the thing here-is it better, knowing how risky the green is, to take that drop zone putt or lay up? For you, I'd recommend the later. Me, I'm making that putt or taking my lump that my thick-headedness deserved. Worst hole at Idlewild is 16 by far. Can you say, luck Factor. Every course has flaws; although, IMO #11 has been drastically improved over the old placement.
Kool Keith
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2007 8:34:22 AM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 6/28/2005
Posts: 338
Thanks for the advice Finn.......

For you, I'd recommend ___________ your ___________ with a ____________.

16 is a little goofy, but efforts have been made to open it up. There's always a luck factor when the "fairway" route crosses water 7 times on the way to the green.

I don't understand what exactly about the old placement that was so bad. Could someone explain that to me?

LStephens
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2007 8:52:19 AM

Rank: Veteran

Joined: 6/9/2007
Posts: 217
Location: Noakley
The old placement was tooo easy. Fred saw me as an 808 rated player at the time sinking two's on a semi regular basis and said you shouldn't be taking two's on a signature hole. And by 'regular basis' I mean 1 out of 20.
Rob J
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2007 9:03:34 AM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 3/1/2003
Posts: 461
Location: Indianapolis
Keith,

I believe the concern was that it was too easy to two (eagle); the new placement definitely makes getting a deuce a rare occurence. iow, the goal was to make it a legitimate par 4 for 1000-rated playerz.

The new placement certainly places a premium on touch and finesse. It can be a tough luck hole right now -- but we are still all on a learning curve as far as playing the new pin placement goes. Give yourself time to get better at it. Hole 16 still involves a ton more luck than any other hole. It was improved, but not nearly enough trees were taken out to make a legitimate 'fair'way to get from the tee to near the long green area so you can set yourself up for a birdie (it wouldn't have to be that wide). Hole 16 is throw a good drive and cross your fingers -- it simply involves too much luck. just a couple more trees being removed would solve the problem... You should be able to have a good idea if it is a good shot a few seconds after letting the drive go. On 16 a good shot too often does not lead to a good result.

as for 11, I agree with the one suggestion of making the drop zone be left of the bridge so that the putt seems to involve a larger green. that might cut down on some of the vineyard's harvest...

enlarging the green behind the pin sounds great, trouble is the hillside and roots there make that task extremely arduous even for the hardest course-worker in disc golf Fred Salaz. Who is willing to go out there and make the back wall of the green 4 to 6feet further up the hill (but not too big)? If you go dig the holes for the cores to be placed in and don't make the green crazy large -- Fred might go for it ... any takers?
STEVO
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2007 9:11:33 AM
Rank: Veteran

Joined: 3/10/2003
Posts: 228
Two suggestions:

Wind the back of that tiny green on 11 around the fat tree behind the basket, making it about 8 feet deeper, should make most people happy. It will provide a more "fair" layup zone, and shots that hit the basket or chains will stay in bounds, while shots coming in that miss everything will probably go O.B. Or....

Bring the basket back on the close side of the creek, but move it farther down the creek, as John suggested, maybe 40-50 feet or so.
matthew_blakely
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2007 9:30:47 AM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 2/27/2003
Posts: 488
I am willing to do the work! In My Opinion The left side of the green where the basket is not placed needs to be extended some(5-8 feet) to make it the layup area. I would also say that it needs to be extended by the basket some(3-4 feet).

The thought of the green is great! It is just way too tight in my opinion.

I would be more than willing to go over there and do some if not all the work to expand the green. I would need a few more cores though.
bobherb
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2007 11:50:04 AM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 8/10/2004
Posts: 449

Who would have guessed that moving a basket 30 feet would cause such intense debate - I think everyone has some good points here. It is great to interact this way. So far, everyone has remained relatively respectful to fellow, opinionated disc flingers.

I have conveyed to Fred that anything which makes the course tougher, I am for it.

#11 is placed in an intensely technical position which, as Keith has pointed out, can be very penal if not executed almost perfectly.

What is the definition of (or how thick is) the fine line between "challenging" and "overly technical"? #11 may be pushing the envelope. Perhaps moving the basket a mere 2 feet closer to the water could make all the difference. I respect Fred and trust him to make sound course design adjustments. The ones he has made so far are pretty good ones.:smile    I am confident that all of you cyber flingers feel the same way. We all certainly enjoy playing Idlewild, don't we? It has been getting better every year.

This is not the first controversy Fred/Idlewild has encountered. There was controversy before the first blade of grass was even trod upon and it will likely continue because such a great course is worthy of debate and opinions. Amen?

I have never seen Fred ignore a hard worker's opinion...  :homeimp  

Long #2, #6, long #10, and long #16 (among others) are all examples of hard workers' design suggestions which became reality.

Metadata for the ages!!!

 

BIGBOY
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2007 12:19:31 PM
Rank: Veteran

Joined: 7/27/2005
Posts: 288
:dunce :machinegun
Rob J
Posted: Friday, November 02, 2007 12:41:39 PM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 3/1/2003
Posts: 461
Location: Indianapolis
Quote:
matthew_blakely - 11/2/2007 12:30 PM

I am willing to do the work! In My Opinion The left side of the green where the basket is not placed needs to be extended some(5-8 feet) to make it the layup area. I would also say that it needs to be extended by the basket some(3-4 feet).

The thought of the green is great! It is just way too tight in my opinion.

I would be more than willing to go over there and do some if not all the work to expand the green. I would need a few more cores though.


Matt i like that idea and would help too. Maybe Fred will go for it given that you're willing to put your time and work into helping create the change. the main problem is the difficulty moving the green back wall a little higher up the hill because of the terrain there. Maybe we can meet out there and see how hard it would be to dig holes for the cores to get concreted into...
(i think maybe Fred will go for widening it a little... but we'll have to wait till he returns from California after this weekend...)
Craig
Posted: Monday, November 05, 2007 7:05:48 AM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 10/3/2005
Posts: 240
Could see the left side of the green bigger for an easier layup, for pars most the time anyways. But leaving the right side alone for the greedy putters to get penalized. Just IMO but most ball golf courses have 1 or 2 par 4's that can be reached by the best of the best. With this new green if you don't make it off the tee, there is hardly any chance of getting your par. IMO the green definelty adds a stroke to the hole if you play it good or bad. Now the best (of my) drives gives you a sketchy upshot. But I have'nt really played it enough to have a solid gameplan on that hole yet.
Fred Salaz
Posted: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 3:18:42 PM
Rank: Expert

Joined: 2/27/2003
Posts: 1,224
The impression that I'm getting is that only a couple of people "hate it" and the rest can live with it the way it is. I like that it adds another stroke average to the score and the beauty of the hole is nice also. I'm checking to see if it is the smallest green in the country and if it is that would add another unique quality to Idlewild.
discndat
Posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 7:18:34 AM

Rank: Expert

Joined: 3/1/2003
Posts: 1,512
Well, if it's not the smallest Fred, just say if it's not in, it's OB - that would give you the smallest green in the country and still have the aesthetics of the beauty of the hole. Maybe even the world! crazy
bschick
Posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 8:45:44 AM
Rank: Regular

Joined: 9/5/2005
Posts: 22
I have yet to play the new placement, but I really loved the old placement. I thought that was one of the most beautiful holes out there and one that really gave me a ton of problems just getting off the tee! I played in several lead groups in tournaments there and have seen that hole 2'd maybe five times. I saw the hole 4,5,6'd way more times. To get a 2 on the old placement, it made a great player throw an excellent drive and then have the 30-50 footer with water directly behind the hole. Maybe you guys in Cincy (820 rated golfers) just pimp that hole weekly? :cool I saw many putts going for that 2 and plop in the water. As I said before, in a group of four, there was usually a couple 3's, a 4 and a 5. I am not one for super small greens, but I have yet to see it. Maybe someone can take a picture and post it on here.
Kool Keith
Posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 9:43:07 AM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 6/28/2005
Posts: 338
Do most disc golf holes really have a green? It's not a green in the common definition - it's OB OB OB OB. The closest thing that relates to a Idlewild 11's basket placement is the hole placement on 17 at Sawgrass. And at least there you have to make a wide open shot - not 2 or 3 of them to get into position where you can attempt to find the safe area near the hole.

I've 2'd the old placement a couple of times, and I'll probably eventually 2 this one once or twice, but it's not the norm, and no sane person would try to do so during any round that counted.

What defines a "green" in disc golf? I think I'm okay from a 20 ft circle around the basket. I think that stick and schick are both money from about 40 feet. And I'd give a 50/50 chance or better to Dave Cox from 50 feet. We all have different ideas of what makes a putt, and what makes something that you should layup on.

Hitting chains from 20 feet, having your disc travel 4 feet behind the basket, and being forced to take an OB stroke is not something that I'd expect to happen on a World Class disc golf course.
NEngle
Posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 9:55:32 AM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 11/18/2003
Posts: 944
Location: Fairfield, OH

Here's a pic, Brad.  They've put cores now where the mulch line is.  Anything not between the cores is OB, and anything that's OB comes back to a drop zone on the other side of the creek regardless of weather it hit the green or not.

bschick
Posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 10:17:44 AM
Rank: Regular

Joined: 9/5/2005
Posts: 22
LMAO.....well from the pic it looks a bit crazy, but that is just my opinion. I just don't understand why if a few people makes a great shot, then it must be too easy. Hell if that were the case, you could do that to every hole to make people lay up. Scores are going to get worse, but does that make it a better hole? This is just my opinion and the work that goes on at Idlewild is mind blowing! I think I would prefer either the green get a bit bigger, or if you do go OB, you don't get penalized again by having to go back to the drop zone? When I think of a nice green, I think of hole 13 or 15. Those are fair greens that you still have to throw a good shot to get on.
frizgolf
Posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 10:49:48 AM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 5/17/2003
Posts: 221
Quote:
NEngle - 11/7/2007 11:55 AM
Anything not between the cores is OB, and anything that's OB comes back to a drop zone on the other side of the creek regardless of weather it hit the green or not.

It comes back to the other side, even if it hits the 'green' first?
Man, that's gonna open it up to all kinds of interpretations of PDGA rules.
2Timer
Posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:28:56 AM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 3/30/2006
Posts: 372
Location: Ameila, Oh
Now you can see the point I have made from the beginning. Why change it for the sake of changing it when it was such a great hole before?
finnhawc
Posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 3:17:38 PM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 1/16/2007
Posts: 906
Location: Wyoming
frizgolf the rules allow for drop zones on O.B. shots regardless of whether the disc hit in-bounds first; this is nothing new. The putt from the drop zone is fairly easy so the penalty is a nervey 27 footer(and a stroke).
Discgolfkid
Posted: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 7:59:22 PM
Rank: Veteran

Joined: 6/9/2006
Posts: 139
Location: Fairfield
I was just thinking the other day how much Idlewild inspired me to become a better disc golfer, as I read about Fred's induction to the Hall Of Fame in DGWN. When I first went I was amazed at how well designed the course was, and I think we should all take a step back and think.

I haven't played the new placement, but I suggest we try it for at least a year before we decide if something should be done. After all, nothing ventured, nothing gained, right?
finnhawc
Posted: Thursday, November 08, 2007 6:59:35 AM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 1/16/2007
Posts: 906
Location: Wyoming
That is a good idea DGKid to see what happens on #11 for a year with tournament play and such.
Fred Salaz
Posted: Thursday, November 08, 2007 7:53:43 PM
Rank: Expert

Joined: 2/27/2003
Posts: 1,224
Brad, just to let you know. The green that you see in the picture is what we started with. Everyone I played with said it was too easy because all they had to do was throw into the hill above the green and the disc would be inbounds(as long as they didn't throw too high) for an easy birdie. . So, I decided to put cores around the green and make it a little tougher to get a birdie(3) and "BAM" now it's too difficult. I didn't like the idea of throwing over the green and landing OB and getting a drop in par so I added the putt from across the creek to make it challenging. That's all. You've got two options: 1. Make the putt. 2. Lay up if you don't think you can make the putt. These guys are complaining because they go OB when they miss the putt. THAT is option #3.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

YAFPro Theme Created by Jaben Cargman (Tiny Gecko)
Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.7 running under DotNetNuke.
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.