BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Does what it says on the tin!
seamus
Posts: 525
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:14 pm
Location: North Berwick
Contact:

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by seamus » Wed Mar 19, 2014 8:43 pm

BaggerBlakehill wrote:Hi Seamus. Good to read about the distances however I have a question for either you or maybe Jester regarding the pars; I get what you're saying about hole 5 barely making the par 4 distance but is elevation not taking into account here too? At 420 feet I could see hole 5 being a par 3 but with the massive change in elevation, it has to play much longer surely and therefore be taken into account, no? If you look at it the other way, if you had a 700 foot hole where the tee was on the side of a cliff with the green below, you wouldn't make it a par 5 just because 700 = par 5?
Hi Nick
Sorry to hear about your hand, glad everything is OK.
When measuring Hole 5 I was inaccurate to the point of about 30', 10 paces because I'm 6' tall. I would like to keep it a par 3 because that fits in better with the rest of the course design. Even though there is plentiful information regarding course design with guidelines and charts at some point a subjective decision needs to be made regarding hole length, tee position and par. As far as the elevation change on Hole 5 I don't believe it is drastic enough to warrant any compensation. Hole 10 is a better example of elevation gain that affects a hole. With the combination of a narrow(ish) gap off the tee and a hillside looking you in the face I would assume most players had to adjust their discs to Understable/Stable to get the extra distance. And we kept it a fairly short hole with placement of you drive at 200' paramount. I don't believe that is the case on Hole 5.
As far as tee length is concerned I'd say your very lucky to play at a course like Quarry Park where it is not a concern. There is plenty of room to tee on 4 and 5 adding 3' to the tee will only add about 3' to your drive, what we will work on first is a harder surface to tee from. Tee 13 and 15 could use and will receive a stretch kit. It all part of the course maintenance we'll keep evolving.
I think the water table might have gone up with the amount of discs that went in on Hole 8 & 18, I accidentally threw a Vibram prototype in there in the 1st round, I'd like it back too. We'll go get them soon.
Back to back, chicken shack.

ReBoot Disc Golf
www.rebootdiscgolf.com

seamus
Posts: 525
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:14 pm
Location: North Berwick
Contact:

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by seamus » Wed Mar 19, 2014 9:17 pm

Here is the recap
http://www.rebootdiscgolf.com/the-batll ... recap.html

I probably got it mostly right, please let me know of any adjustments and I will take care of it.
It was a ton of fun, see you on Tour.
Cheers
Seamus
Back to back, chicken shack.

ReBoot Disc Golf
www.rebootdiscgolf.com

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by bruce » Wed Mar 19, 2014 11:58 pm

Belting write up, great pics. That's the way to do it! Gimme a date and I'll be booking flights for next year...


On a side note, gimme a PDGA spreadsheet and I'll get the powerstats updated :)
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

User avatar
rhatton1
Posts: 1692
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by rhatton1 » Thu Mar 20, 2014 9:19 am

Good old Rich Wood putting thoughts in your head - the amount of times he's reminded me of a mando/post/tree shortly before my drive :wink: He's so helpful :D

Thanks for these links Bruce, really good stuff I hadn't come across before. Aiming at Gold at the minute although have a couple of borderline 3's/4's at around the 460' mark but fairly heavy foliage.
www.discgolfuk.com
richard@discgolfuk.com
Home of the Midlands One Day Series
Talk to us about courses!

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by bruce » Thu Mar 20, 2014 10:57 am

Powerstats updated: http://tour.bdga.org.uk/

I'm particularly liking Gary O'Malley's scores this year. 100, 50.5, 1. Average = 50.5, Std Dev = 49.5
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

User avatar
LostMeow
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:34 pm
Location: London

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by LostMeow » Thu Mar 20, 2014 12:18 pm

Thanks, Seamus, for a fantastic weekend. The course is great fun, challenging and like no other we have in the UK! I'd love to have a go at some of those holes without 30-40mph winds!

The food was brilliant - pulled pork sandwiches on Saturday were particularly awesome, but the selection of 'extras' available was also great - pasta salad / potato salad, tasty biscuits, crisps, chocolate bars etc. All eaten on that great decking area.

For future reference, the Belhaven trailer park was a really good place to stay - nice cosy cabins to come back to (despite our boiler not working). Sub £30 per head for two nights' accommodation = bargain.

One point about the tournament format (in reference to the cash vs non-cash debate) - I did not realise that a consequence would be that we had to be grouped by division all weekend. This was a shame, for me, as I enjoy a bit of mixing of the groups to meet new people and old friends: partly (mostly) as a result of my poor standard of play, I was in exactly the same group for rounds 2, 3 and 4. (This is no slight on your company, Seamus! Or Woody's for that matter - poor bloke actually had to endure all four rounds' worth of my prattling on.) Maybe this is an unavoidable regulation but it's certainly (for me, anyway) an unfortunate consequence of cash tournaments, if so.
bruce wrote:Beyond the front of each tee pad and either side should be adequate room for follow-thru so a player
doesn't risk twisting an ankle, falling off a ledge or whacking their arm on a tree or sign.
Would love to know how this works with respect to hole #6 (black course) at Quarry Park...
Tom
ND

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by bruce » Thu Mar 20, 2014 12:29 pm

LostMeow wrote:One point about the tournament format (in reference to the cash vs non-cash debate) - I did not realise that a consequence would be that we had to be grouped by division all weekend. [snip] Maybe this is an unavoidable regulation but it's certainly (for me, anyway) an unfortunate consequence of cash tournaments, if so.
It isn't to my knowledge. No reason you can't do the usual mixed -> by score -> by division progression.
bruce wrote:Beyond the front of each tee pad and either side should be adequate room for follow-thru so a player
doesn't risk twisting an ankle, falling off a ledge or whacking their arm on a tree or sign.
Would love to know how this works with respect to hole #6 (black course) at Quarry Park...
It's on the QP continual improvement plan!
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

gommog
Posts: 140
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 1:15 pm
Location: Coventry

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by gommog » Thu Mar 20, 2014 1:28 pm

bruce wrote:Powerstats updated: http://tour.bdga.org.uk/

I'm particularly liking Gary O'Malley's scores this year. 100, 50.5, 1. Average = 50.5, Std Dev = 49.5
I aim to please Bruce (or aim at the trees), i'm expecting some sort of scathing Rich Hatton analysis of my performance at some point :evil:
QP Hyzer Cup Champions 2010/2011
Eurasian and African kan jam champion 2014
Spanish Am Champion 2015

BDGA no.360
PDGA no. 46975

seamus
Posts: 525
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:14 pm
Location: North Berwick
Contact:

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by seamus » Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:53 pm

LostMeow wrote:One point about the tournament format (in reference to the cash vs non-cash debate) - I did not realise that a consequence would be that we had to be grouped by division all weekend.
No offense taken, nice to get a few rounds in with you too. Social events are fun but I think when playing for a purse staying grouped together becomes important to make sure everyone plays within the rules. For example an AM2 player is not going to call an Open player on a foot fault no matter how many times he/she does it, but Open players will.
In 2015 we will most likely have a trophy only category in the Open division, I don't see any issues mixing this part of the Open division with the AM divisions, but Open players going for a share of the purse will be grouped with the same for the entire event.
I'll pass the compliments to the Chef, Thanks.
Back to back, chicken shack.

ReBoot Disc Golf
www.rebootdiscgolf.com

Paul Holden
Posts: 578
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 10:34 pm
Location: York

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by Paul Holden » Thu Mar 20, 2014 5:01 pm

bruce wrote:To answer your questions
Beyond the front of each tee pad and either side should be adequate room for follow-thru so a player
doesn't risk twisting an ankle, falling off a ledge or whacking their arm on a tree or sign. If possible,
provide adequate level ground for a run-up behind each tee pad, especially on longer holes. Avoid
major obstructions that severely block the flight path up to 20 feet in front of tee
This is also interesting in terms of hole 18 at Dunbar with a fence within about 10 ft of the tee I was not able to throw a hyzer sidearm. I think some shorter players also had issues with hyzer backhand which given the headwinds was a manor issue. Any plans to build a tee inside the field?
Paul Holden
BDGA No. 307
PDGA No. 34662

seamus
Posts: 525
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:14 pm
Location: North Berwick
Contact:

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by seamus » Thu Mar 20, 2014 6:21 pm

Paul Holden wrote:This is also interesting in terms of hole 18 at Dunbar with a fence within about 10 ft of the tee
How shortsighted of me to overlook the issue :D
sorry
Someone brought it to my attention on Friday during casual rounds and Yes its an obvious issue that I should have noticed but failed to do so. I'm glad you mentioned it Paul because it is possible to build a tee inside the fence near the water spigot. Since I recently tucked basket 8 in short behind the A frame its opened up enough room to have a tee and I could always move the 18th basket back to keep the 600' length. Cheers
The plan for Hole 18 is move the basket and tee to its original position for the summer, there are too many Rec players with rental discs to play that close to the water.
Back to back, chicken shack.

ReBoot Disc Golf
www.rebootdiscgolf.com

Sky
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 6:43 pm

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by Sky » Fri Mar 21, 2014 7:46 am

Shame there isn't two baskets for it. Even though I managed to loose one disc to the water I'm still really fond of 18. Its just so rewarding when u give yourself a look at a birdie on that hole :-D
Graham
BDGA # 1116
PDGA # 62324

User avatar
Jester
Posts: 1782
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:10 am

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by Jester » Sun Mar 23, 2014 4:54 pm

Thanks again to Seamus for running a great event. All the hard work that’s gone into the courses so far is clearly evident, I can’t wait to come back and play there again. Playing each hole 4 times during the tournament meant by the time it was over some thoughts had occurred on the course as it stands and how it might develop further in future. To be clear the following thoughts are ideas only, not demands! I hope sharing them provides some food for thought.

Hole 1. For those who possess a huge arm it is reachable and can be 2-ed, for the mortals however this is always going to be a 3 at best. As there is no OB danger to shorter arms, it’s a case of chuck it as far up the hill as possible, then chuck it as close to the basket as pos to try and get the 3. Perhaps either shortening the hole (by moving the tee forwards) or moving the tee and basket to the right by the OB line could give players more to consider? Such a position would give anyone attacking the green a risk/reward scenario.

2. Great hole that has been improved since Nationals by being lengthened and I think it could yet benefit from the basket going back another 20-30m back and a little left to be nearer the water. In such a position players on the tee would have to consider where to place their drive much more than they do now to be able to attack the green. A 3 then would be really well-earned.

3. Great hole, and a damn tricky 2 for the mortals again. If a new basket position of hole 2 was too close to this tee, perhaps this tee could move forward over the fence to where there is a large flat area? It would be a shame to lose the elevated tee however.

4. Great hole, could just benefit from having a longer tee as the big tree at the back of it gets in the way a little.

5. Great hole. I wonder if instead of shortening it to make it a par 3, it could be lengthened into a ‘proper’ par 4? If doing so I would suggest leaving in place the leaning tree on the left of the front fairway - it narrows the space and bring the trees on the right into play for the drive. However I would like to see if one or two of the stand of 5 trees that are in the middle of the second part of the fairway could be removed. This would open up the landing area for good drives and perhaps encourage players to take on the tee shot knowing there is space to land around the corner. The other way to play it would be to place a midrange at the corner of the dog leg, but if the basket moves back that leave a longer second. Either way I think that sounds like a great 2-shot hole rather than another 1-shot par 3!

6. Short and sweet, but deceptive. Feels like it should be 2-ed every time but I think I went 3, 2, 3, 4 over the weekend. It’s a keeper!

7. I initially missed the hole this replaced, but by the end of the weekend I loved it. Really tough to keep something on line all the way to the basket. IMHO having the fence behind OB is unnecessary. It doesn’t add anything and if someone somehow managed to throw over it having them have to play out would be tougher than getting a one-shot penalty.

8. Much-improved from Nationals by being shortened. If the tee had to move moved forward to make space for a longer hole 2, the basket could move further left to preserve the distance which I think feels just about right. This would also mean more players going nearer the water on the drive or perhaps even considering a forehand route over the wet stuff.

9. I agree this needs to change. The length is too far for a par 3 and not enough for a par 4. With lots of great par 3 already on the course, I’d be keen to see if a 2-shot par 4 could be created. For example, is there somewhere along the existing line of woods on the right of the gully where a narrow fairway could be cut in? This would have to go back away from the gully about 50m so there is a considerable second shot to take on. Players would have to position a tee shot accurately to have the chance of attacking the basket on the second shot, much like they have to do already on the excellent hole 12. But for those who want to attack the gap to leave a shorter second that is also on. This is where an OB area in the gully comes into play to catch those out who aren’t accurate enough. Actually on this point I would really appreciate any areas as variable as the gully OB being marked out with rope like the stream is at QP.

10. Cracking new hole, similar to hole 3 in style, but shorter so different enough.

11. Should be a really simple birdie chance but I still managed to 4 it once during the weekend. Great to have something short and sweet like this to balance out the longer par 4s.

12. Another hole that’s greatly improved since Nationals. A great 2-shot par 4 that rewards accurate tee shot placement with a chance to get up and down, but that is still such a tough task it’s no cakewalk. For anyone who reckons this is a big-arm only hole, I watched Ivan throw a perfect roller all the way to the gap.

13. While the terrain here is different to hole 1, I think 13’s challenge is quite similar: a big heave across an open field with no OB danger. If you can make the distance you’ve got a bid for the 2, if you can’t it should be a 3 every time but with the wind up and the basket on the stump 4s and 5s are easily picked up as well. With that being the case, perhaps that means 13 has a good enough spread of shots to leave as is, but my feeling is this is down to the wind more than the hole design and as such there may be some scope for design improvements, I’m just not sure what those would necessarily be.

14. Another great 2-shot par 4 that demands accurate tee shot placement to give any real chance of the 3.

15. One of my favourites on the course, perhaps because after so many straight par 3s this has got a bit of shape to it! Beautiful elevated tee position and fair but punishing fairway if you come off line.

16. Tough leftie-tunnel shot can be 2ed as easily as it can be 6ed. Brilliant.

17. A great challenging hole with a near impossible line to the basket. Perhaps feels like one or two key trunks could come out so as to demine a true fairway? As with hole 7, I don’t think the OB line behind the basket is necessary. Better to get the player to have to go and play a shot back into the green if they are so aggressive to punch through the treeline and out into the field beyond.

18. Great evolution on the National’s design, I loved this new longer version. I think some folk have already commented on moving the tee forward 10 yards bringing over the fence? I would consider actually moving the tee about 30y forward from current position and moving over the right side OB line. Moving the tee forwards would bring the lake into range of a lot of players, meaning they have to make a decision as to where to place their tee shot rather than just go for power and distance. If the tee did come forwards a significant distance, the basket could go back by the same amount to maintain the par 4 nature of the design.
Jester
BDGA #128
PDGA #8817
------------------------------------------------------
Croydon DGC: Hyzer Cup Champions 08/09, 13/14

seamus
Posts: 525
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:14 pm
Location: North Berwick
Contact:

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by seamus » Sun Mar 23, 2014 11:03 pm

Thanks for the insight Jester, we are thinking alike on many points and I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the next version of our course.
I'd like to think we have a course that challenges the better players in the area to shoot for a 54, which I think is attainable and close to a 1000 rated round minus the conditions we played in last week. I have to agree a few of the holes are ahead of their time, while they might be Blue Course par 4's, we have excellent examples of Gold course Par3's, Hole 5,9 &14 fall into this category. We'll keep tinkering, C'mon back soon.
Cheers
Back to back, chicken shack.

ReBoot Disc Golf
www.rebootdiscgolf.com

User avatar
Jester
Posts: 1782
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2005 10:10 am

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by Jester » Mon Mar 24, 2014 9:35 am

seamus wrote:Thanks for the insight Jester, we are thinking alike on many points and I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the next version of our course.
I'd like to think we have a course that challenges the better players in the area to shoot for a 54, which I think is attainable and close to a 1000 rated round minus the conditions we played in last week. I have to agree a few of the holes are ahead of their time, while they might be Blue Course par 4's, we have excellent examples of Gold course Par3's, Hole 5,9 &14 fall into this category. We'll keep tinkering, C'mon back soon.
Cheers
My pleasure, fella, hope it all made sense and wasn't too rambling. Dunbar is already one of the best courses in the UK, I'm really looking forward to playing there again soon.
Jester
BDGA #128
PDGA #8817
------------------------------------------------------
Croydon DGC: Hyzer Cup Champions 08/09, 13/14

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA #3- The Battle at Bluebell Woods

Post by bruce » Tue Mar 25, 2014 8:44 am

LostMeow wrote:
bruce wrote:Beyond the front of each tee pad and either side should be adequate room for follow-thru so a player
doesn't risk twisting an ankle, falling off a ledge or whacking their arm on a tree or sign.
Would love to know how this works with respect to hole #6 (black course) at Quarry Park...
Related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vA_vJjKIe88 :lol: :twisted:
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

Post Reply