I was told that you shot -5. If that is true than you do. Otherwise its a tie at -2 by Randy B. and myself. Of course all records now are unoffical since the course is not completed.smitty wrote:So what is the course record?
Due to inactivity the KDGA forums have been locked. All past threads are still available. Please join us on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/groups/kansasdiscgolf!
Thomas Park
-
mrsenortyler
- Posts: 2075
- Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 2:11 pm
- Location: Winfield
- Contact:
-
Schoen-hopper
- Posts: 6301
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Thomas Park
Thought I would post my thoughts on Thomas Park after playing at the Food Drive event. The main thought that keeps reoccuring is that you guys did a great job on this design and the hard work really paid off! These wooded holes were so scenic and made me think I was in Colorado. Great mix of shots and lots of character to this course.
I'll give some criticism, but keep in mind that you know the course better than I, having seen it before trees were cleared and having gone through options already in the design process.
One comment was made that you could use the cards to figure out scoring spreads for holes and use that data to evaluate them. Since holes 5 & 6 were not used and 2 extra hole were used in another spot on the course (5.75 & 14.5?), the cards are likely screwed up. Some cards might be good for holes 15 through 4, but if some aren't, then they are all contaminated. Good idea though. The other problem is that if you were going to do this, you would want to consider advanced & pro scores seperate from the rest.
99% of courses should be designed for advanced skill level (950) or below. Most "pros" in this region are actually closer to 950 rated than 1000 rated. An advanced/ pro course (blue) is a good thing to shoot for rather than gold unless you are having a recurring world class NT event that features pros only. So, if this is true and assuming so, all comments on the design would be targeted towards the 950 (925-975 mainly) rated golf played on it.
I thought the tee pads were marked really well with the stakes and the paint. Rain would do a job on them. Loved the large width. Most in good condition still. Is there any thought to dual tees? Quite an additional expense if concrete is planned, but this is the single best way for a course to accomodate different skill levels. Say, for example, the course is a par 59 for 950 rated golf (blue), you could make some shorter 900 (white) or 850 (red) rated tees that could be par 59 for that division. As some of the scores from the event would suggest, playing from the existing tees generates some rediculous scores for some of the lower divisions. Dual pins are a lot of fun, help with erosion control, and this can be where the course gets interesting, but not really good for regulating the difficulty of the course. KC has great courses with tons of pin placements, but one thing they lack is dual tees. The pins are all over the place, so the difficulty of the course at any given time is "who knows?" Main thing there is that the player has no control over the skill level for the course as they do with dual tees. These are the thoughts of most course designers: they are trying to get courses on board with the worldwide skill level tee system.
Another factor that needs to be looked at is how different the course will play in the summer. The pines may not get too much thicker, but the undergrowth level makes a huge difference in how the course will play. I also so a lot of trees to be removed that will make quite a change for the course. Heard other talk of some tweaks, so it sounds like at least part of the course is still in flux. As long as pads aren't poured, the design can be changed to make adjustments if needed.
I'll give some criticism, but keep in mind that you know the course better than I, having seen it before trees were cleared and having gone through options already in the design process.
One comment was made that you could use the cards to figure out scoring spreads for holes and use that data to evaluate them. Since holes 5 & 6 were not used and 2 extra hole were used in another spot on the course (5.75 & 14.5?), the cards are likely screwed up. Some cards might be good for holes 15 through 4, but if some aren't, then they are all contaminated. Good idea though. The other problem is that if you were going to do this, you would want to consider advanced & pro scores seperate from the rest.
99% of courses should be designed for advanced skill level (950) or below. Most "pros" in this region are actually closer to 950 rated than 1000 rated. An advanced/ pro course (blue) is a good thing to shoot for rather than gold unless you are having a recurring world class NT event that features pros only. So, if this is true and assuming so, all comments on the design would be targeted towards the 950 (925-975 mainly) rated golf played on it.
I thought the tee pads were marked really well with the stakes and the paint. Rain would do a job on them. Loved the large width. Most in good condition still. Is there any thought to dual tees? Quite an additional expense if concrete is planned, but this is the single best way for a course to accomodate different skill levels. Say, for example, the course is a par 59 for 950 rated golf (blue), you could make some shorter 900 (white) or 850 (red) rated tees that could be par 59 for that division. As some of the scores from the event would suggest, playing from the existing tees generates some rediculous scores for some of the lower divisions. Dual pins are a lot of fun, help with erosion control, and this can be where the course gets interesting, but not really good for regulating the difficulty of the course. KC has great courses with tons of pin placements, but one thing they lack is dual tees. The pins are all over the place, so the difficulty of the course at any given time is "who knows?" Main thing there is that the player has no control over the skill level for the course as they do with dual tees. These are the thoughts of most course designers: they are trying to get courses on board with the worldwide skill level tee system.
Another factor that needs to be looked at is how different the course will play in the summer. The pines may not get too much thicker, but the undergrowth level makes a huge difference in how the course will play. I also so a lot of trees to be removed that will make quite a change for the course. Heard other talk of some tweaks, so it sounds like at least part of the course is still in flux. As long as pads aren't poured, the design can be changed to make adjustments if needed.
-
Schoen-hopper
- Posts: 6301
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Thomas Park
Hole 1: Par 3.25? That tree in front of the tee is right in the way (good thing). Otherwise this is wide open (okay considering the rest of the course and this is hole 1 is typically a warm up style hole). I like the way the OB road comes more into play the farther down the hole you go. Though this could be somewhat of a safety hazard when the course has a lot of traffic. Shots really shouldn't go OB on this hole (but I saw 3 shots do it, including my own), but with the wind out of the North, things were a little atypical. I think the hole is too long to get more than about 3% birdies, which is not enough, and not quite long enough to get many bogies. I think this is the one hole that has plans for an alt pin, which could be a crazy par 4 that crosses the park road?
Hole 2: Par 4.0? I told Mace that this hole gets the most superlatives. Most difficult. Most inspiring. Most remembered. Most flukey. Most problematic. Beautiful tunnel shot of about 475'? I say flukey because the area to the right of the right side tree line is wide open. I saw Leo take a hyzer route playing down 15's fairway that totally negated the difficulty of the hole. True, it is a small gap, but it will get bigger. I think the tee should be placed where this shot is the most difficult to attempt. There are still some bad shots that will get lucky kicking out to the right into the open, but if a player is trying intentionally to do this, it should backfire a great majority of the time. I said problematic because it looks like the area down by the green will be underwater when you get a good rain. Nice pin location! Really don't know how bad the water is going to be, but seing the mud when it has been so dry makes me think it'll be bad.
Hole 3: Par 3.25? Cool RHBH hyzer shot with some serious jail for a bad throw. A problem I saw with this hole was the length from the turn. I saw lots of really good shots, but they were still outside the circle. 15' shorter and the good shots would be rewarded. I really don't see shots being able to hyzer enough to get to the basket; the ones I saw looked perfect and still came up short. If the pin was just a little shorter, playing shots up high (riskier, but will hyzer more) would be rewarded more than the low skip safe layup. What if a longer pin was added just outside the woods? Or maybe to the left, making a "U turn"?
Hole 4: Par 3.25? Nobody will find this hole without a map or someone who has played. Its out of the woods and 500' South. Tee is just below the dike. Great anhyzer hole. Don't go over the dike left and don't go into the trees right. Just getting par was tough. I could see that with a south wind, the hole would be more managable with a shot at bird. The elevation factor playing around or over that dike makes the hole dramatic.
Hole 2: Par 4.0? I told Mace that this hole gets the most superlatives. Most difficult. Most inspiring. Most remembered. Most flukey. Most problematic. Beautiful tunnel shot of about 475'? I say flukey because the area to the right of the right side tree line is wide open. I saw Leo take a hyzer route playing down 15's fairway that totally negated the difficulty of the hole. True, it is a small gap, but it will get bigger. I think the tee should be placed where this shot is the most difficult to attempt. There are still some bad shots that will get lucky kicking out to the right into the open, but if a player is trying intentionally to do this, it should backfire a great majority of the time. I said problematic because it looks like the area down by the green will be underwater when you get a good rain. Nice pin location! Really don't know how bad the water is going to be, but seing the mud when it has been so dry makes me think it'll be bad.
Hole 3: Par 3.25? Cool RHBH hyzer shot with some serious jail for a bad throw. A problem I saw with this hole was the length from the turn. I saw lots of really good shots, but they were still outside the circle. 15' shorter and the good shots would be rewarded. I really don't see shots being able to hyzer enough to get to the basket; the ones I saw looked perfect and still came up short. If the pin was just a little shorter, playing shots up high (riskier, but will hyzer more) would be rewarded more than the low skip safe layup. What if a longer pin was added just outside the woods? Or maybe to the left, making a "U turn"?
Hole 4: Par 3.25? Nobody will find this hole without a map or someone who has played. Its out of the woods and 500' South. Tee is just below the dike. Great anhyzer hole. Don't go over the dike left and don't go into the trees right. Just getting par was tough. I could see that with a south wind, the hole would be more managable with a shot at bird. The elevation factor playing around or over that dike makes the hole dramatic.
Last edited by Schoen-hopper on Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
Schoen-hopper
- Posts: 6301
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Thomas Park
Hole 5? We didn't play 5 or 6, but rather a temp hole playing off the dike into a mostly open short hyzer to basket 6. I think I saw 5's tee below the dike. Looking at the map, is this hole wide open & 600'? What is the construction all about? Will there be any interference problems after this is finished? If you are wanting to put other holes in at other places in the park, are these holes really worth keeping? Didn't really see them so don't know.
Hole 6? Looks like its in the open but with trees in front of th basket you have to go around to the left. Is there another drainage ditch over to the left? Was this an interesting hole? I liked playing it from the other direction with the headwind, but might be boring with a tail wind unless you tweaked it. That's just a thought on the temp hole that played to basket 6.
Hole 7: Par 3.0? This was a snake shot that turned left, then right. Lefty has a better shot at birdie, but also at bogey! We played the hole with all flick shots and ended up in trouble to the right. Smarter shot is a RHBH rhyno shot laid up for a 30' putt from the left. This hole is short, but subtle. Good hole! There is some talk about playing this hole backward when the design is changed. I looked and didn't see a hole going the other way that could anyway match this one. If you want to add 2 more holes after 14, what about putting a long pin on 4, skipping 5 & 6, and making hole 7 number 5? Just a thought. There is a lot more to the story and many other possibilities.
Hole 8: Par 2.5? Short tunnel shot for a putter or slow mid shot. Not too difficult, but good for variety. Some players will struggle with this distance. Hit an early tree and its a tougher hole. I heard some worries about interference with hole 9. With as short as this hole is and how it is laid out, I don't see any shots making it over to 9. There is some possibiltiy of 9's throws coming into 8, but the trees block most of them going the wrong way. Watch a few groups of am players throw them both to get a better idea about interference.
Hole 9: Par 3.0? Gentle right turner with some trees uncomfortably close to the flight path (good thing for short holes) Trees gaurding the basket challenge anything that is left short. Open space just outside the trees not in play, but makes for a scenic hole with the sun shining in.
Hole 10: Par 3.0? Beautiful gently right turning tunnel shot going slightly down hill. To the right is jail and the left is prison. It looks like a lefty hole, but when I flicked a perfect route at it with a driver, it skipped just into the trees. So its actually better for a RHBH. Great hole with equal chances of bird & bog.
Hole 11: Par 3.25? Uphill tunnel shot (straight as an arrow) at around 275'? But tight! Lots of trees coming out will make it less insane. Had fun bogeying this one twice! Saw several birds though.
Hole 12: Par 3.5? Downhill hyzer through the trees. This one you can rip a drive on, but very easy to get trapped on either side. Saw some trees coming out near the basket will make it a little easier. Another great hole, bird is possible, but so is a 5! Good for variety since a few of the other wooded holes are right turners.
Hole 6? Looks like its in the open but with trees in front of th basket you have to go around to the left. Is there another drainage ditch over to the left? Was this an interesting hole? I liked playing it from the other direction with the headwind, but might be boring with a tail wind unless you tweaked it. That's just a thought on the temp hole that played to basket 6.
Hole 7: Par 3.0? This was a snake shot that turned left, then right. Lefty has a better shot at birdie, but also at bogey! We played the hole with all flick shots and ended up in trouble to the right. Smarter shot is a RHBH rhyno shot laid up for a 30' putt from the left. This hole is short, but subtle. Good hole! There is some talk about playing this hole backward when the design is changed. I looked and didn't see a hole going the other way that could anyway match this one. If you want to add 2 more holes after 14, what about putting a long pin on 4, skipping 5 & 6, and making hole 7 number 5? Just a thought. There is a lot more to the story and many other possibilities.
Hole 8: Par 2.5? Short tunnel shot for a putter or slow mid shot. Not too difficult, but good for variety. Some players will struggle with this distance. Hit an early tree and its a tougher hole. I heard some worries about interference with hole 9. With as short as this hole is and how it is laid out, I don't see any shots making it over to 9. There is some possibiltiy of 9's throws coming into 8, but the trees block most of them going the wrong way. Watch a few groups of am players throw them both to get a better idea about interference.
Hole 9: Par 3.0? Gentle right turner with some trees uncomfortably close to the flight path (good thing for short holes) Trees gaurding the basket challenge anything that is left short. Open space just outside the trees not in play, but makes for a scenic hole with the sun shining in.
Hole 10: Par 3.0? Beautiful gently right turning tunnel shot going slightly down hill. To the right is jail and the left is prison. It looks like a lefty hole, but when I flicked a perfect route at it with a driver, it skipped just into the trees. So its actually better for a RHBH. Great hole with equal chances of bird & bog.
Hole 11: Par 3.25? Uphill tunnel shot (straight as an arrow) at around 275'? But tight! Lots of trees coming out will make it less insane. Had fun bogeying this one twice! Saw several birds though.
Hole 12: Par 3.5? Downhill hyzer through the trees. This one you can rip a drive on, but very easy to get trapped on either side. Saw some trees coming out near the basket will make it a little easier. Another great hole, bird is possible, but so is a 5! Good for variety since a few of the other wooded holes are right turners.
Last edited by Schoen-hopper on Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Schoen-hopper
- Posts: 6301
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Thomas Park
Hole 13: Par 3.25? Jailbreaker? Scenic looking hole coming out of the trees across the ditch. Hole might be 460'? It looks like you should throw a turnover shot, but that's the worst thing you can do. You should play a shot at the right side and have it hyzer back to the fairway for an up and in. As cool as this hole looks, it feels like it is the wrong distance. Birdie on this hole might only be about 2%. Granted, if you have a cannon you could get it. Its one of those holes where you feel stupid if you don't get the 3. Shorter wouldn't be that great, but is there anything you could do to make it harder? Longer or pin in the trees or tee farther back in the trees making them tighten the shot just a bit? I imagine the south wind makes this hole play differently, but probably not any easier.
Hole 14: Par 3.0? Signature hole, in my opinion. #2 is amazing, but I like #14. You can flick it, throw a mid, try a low turnover, high dive-bombing turnover, roller. Fairway is generous. You should make a 3 if you are playing conservative. If you go big, your chances of taking 4 go up.
Hole 15: Par 3.25? Tee in the horshoe pit. If the pit can't move, the tee could go up without hurting the hole. Street OB left and trees right are good features. Just seems like it's just a smidge too long. How many birdies do you see here?
Hole 16: Par 2.75? About a 300' straight shot, but the fairway is generous compared to some. When you don't birdie this hole, you tell yourself you should play more of these style holes. Enough trees to get in trouble though. When the one behind the basket comes out, it'll be a better hole.
Hole 17: Par 3.5? Tight fairway that takes a dogleg around 240' with another 100' to the pin. Shots going left, right (early), or long are punished. The fairway would be too tight if you were throwing all the way down it straight (an idea for an alt location), but since you are only throwing to the landing area (if you are smart), you should be able to make 2 control shots and take the 3. This hole has ideas of it's own though. That thorn bushes will need trimmed out before summer comes.
Hole 18: Par 3.25? Tree in the middle with dual routes similar to hole 1. Nice tight green at the end. Just a little too long to have a legit shot at a 2 here. Espescially if going into the south wind. Not a bad hole though.
Hole 14: Par 3.0? Signature hole, in my opinion. #2 is amazing, but I like #14. You can flick it, throw a mid, try a low turnover, high dive-bombing turnover, roller. Fairway is generous. You should make a 3 if you are playing conservative. If you go big, your chances of taking 4 go up.
Hole 15: Par 3.25? Tee in the horshoe pit. If the pit can't move, the tee could go up without hurting the hole. Street OB left and trees right are good features. Just seems like it's just a smidge too long. How many birdies do you see here?
Hole 16: Par 2.75? About a 300' straight shot, but the fairway is generous compared to some. When you don't birdie this hole, you tell yourself you should play more of these style holes. Enough trees to get in trouble though. When the one behind the basket comes out, it'll be a better hole.
Hole 17: Par 3.5? Tight fairway that takes a dogleg around 240' with another 100' to the pin. Shots going left, right (early), or long are punished. The fairway would be too tight if you were throwing all the way down it straight (an idea for an alt location), but since you are only throwing to the landing area (if you are smart), you should be able to make 2 control shots and take the 3. This hole has ideas of it's own though. That thorn bushes will need trimmed out before summer comes.
Hole 18: Par 3.25? Tree in the middle with dual routes similar to hole 1. Nice tight green at the end. Just a little too long to have a legit shot at a 2 here. Espescially if going into the south wind. Not a bad hole though.
-
Schoen-hopper
- Posts: 6301
- Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 12:58 pm
Re: Thomas Park
So what is the par or scratch scoring average for this course? The hole pars were just guesses, but those add up to around 58. The best score of the round at the food drive was 54, and I'm guessing the real course plays a stroke tougher. I would guess the SSA to be around 54, making blue par around 59.
The one thing that I mentioned that might be a problem is that so many holes play around par 3.25. Par 3.5's can be a lot of fun. But those holes where par is the common score and also the best score, all you can do is lose. Struggling to tread water has a negative psychologicol effect on the player. A hole that gives birdie and bogey possibilites is better at "sorting" scores according to skill. While I think there are a few holes that are just a bit too long (1, 3, 13, 15, 18), perhaps some could be longer? Though the par might be 5 strokes above 54, there is only 1 hole that sticks out as a true par 4 (hole 2). I haven't played 5 yet though; is it a 3.5 or 4? I think some par 4's could be made by increasing the distance after the dog leg on some of the turning holes (like 3, 10, 13, 17).
Heard some talk about course changes. It sounded like... play 7 backwards after hole 4. Then play 5 & 6. Then play a hole that combines current 8 & 9. Then play 2 holes in the woods in between 14 & 15. Then make 17 longer and cut 18 out.
I might have to see more to have an educated perspective on this, but not too many of those changes sound favorable yet. Maybe just lacking the vision of what's to happen here. It sounds like this hinges around trying to make those 2 holes in between 14 & 15. Those holes looked like they would have lots of small trees "in" the fairway rather than surrounding, since these are not existing paths. So that would be good variety. The flow wouldn't be any better or worse. Took a brief look, but didn't really visualize the "fairways" for these holes. It would take a lot of cutting yet.
Where should holes be added on the course? This place may be the best option. What about a hole playing from 3 to 4 to eliminate the long walk? Are you allowed to play close to the drainage ditch going south? That could be a treacherous one with the basket on top at the end. 4's tee would have to go up on the dike. Would that be better or worse? I liked teing from on top on the temp hole. Is there another possibility like this? The one other location that is not being used are the 2 huge sapling grids. How would a hole going through this be like? If this is usuable, there could be a creative hole or 2 through here.
What holes are the weakest? 1? 5 & 6? 8? If you do find more locations for holes, a 21 hole config. might be an option?
Too many variables to say exactly what the best plan is. I'm just hoping to throw some ideas at you guys and see if anything comes of it. With the thought of dual tees or dual pins or both, there is a lot to consider. The course is a gem. Very inspiring to the game in our region. When is the next tourney?!
The one thing that I mentioned that might be a problem is that so many holes play around par 3.25. Par 3.5's can be a lot of fun. But those holes where par is the common score and also the best score, all you can do is lose. Struggling to tread water has a negative psychologicol effect on the player. A hole that gives birdie and bogey possibilites is better at "sorting" scores according to skill. While I think there are a few holes that are just a bit too long (1, 3, 13, 15, 18), perhaps some could be longer? Though the par might be 5 strokes above 54, there is only 1 hole that sticks out as a true par 4 (hole 2). I haven't played 5 yet though; is it a 3.5 or 4? I think some par 4's could be made by increasing the distance after the dog leg on some of the turning holes (like 3, 10, 13, 17).
Heard some talk about course changes. It sounded like... play 7 backwards after hole 4. Then play 5 & 6. Then play a hole that combines current 8 & 9. Then play 2 holes in the woods in between 14 & 15. Then make 17 longer and cut 18 out.
I might have to see more to have an educated perspective on this, but not too many of those changes sound favorable yet. Maybe just lacking the vision of what's to happen here. It sounds like this hinges around trying to make those 2 holes in between 14 & 15. Those holes looked like they would have lots of small trees "in" the fairway rather than surrounding, since these are not existing paths. So that would be good variety. The flow wouldn't be any better or worse. Took a brief look, but didn't really visualize the "fairways" for these holes. It would take a lot of cutting yet.
Where should holes be added on the course? This place may be the best option. What about a hole playing from 3 to 4 to eliminate the long walk? Are you allowed to play close to the drainage ditch going south? That could be a treacherous one with the basket on top at the end. 4's tee would have to go up on the dike. Would that be better or worse? I liked teing from on top on the temp hole. Is there another possibility like this? The one other location that is not being used are the 2 huge sapling grids. How would a hole going through this be like? If this is usuable, there could be a creative hole or 2 through here.
What holes are the weakest? 1? 5 & 6? 8? If you do find more locations for holes, a 21 hole config. might be an option?
Too many variables to say exactly what the best plan is. I'm just hoping to throw some ideas at you guys and see if anything comes of it. With the thought of dual tees or dual pins or both, there is a lot to consider. The course is a gem. Very inspiring to the game in our region. When is the next tourney?!
Re: Thomas Park
Mike, we are as close to the nursery that we are allowed to be and pretty much the same with the drainage ditch, core of engineers have control over it. We have the tee signs frames just need to get them up and four will be easier to find.Schoen-hopper wrote: Where should holes be added on the course? This place may be the best option. What about a hole playing from 3 to 4 to eliminate the long walk? Are you allowed to play close to the drainage ditch going south? That could be a treacherous one with the basket on top at the end. 4's tee would have to go up on the dike. Would that be better or worse? I liked teing from on top on the temp hole. Is there another possibility like this? The one other location that is not being used are the 2 huge sapling grids. How would a hole going through this be like? If this is usuable, there could be a creative hole or 2 through here.
As far as hole 3 being to long I do not agree. After playing it more u will find that there are two routes that will give birdies, a low skipper and the high hyzer (this needs a little more clean up to make this route better. Alot of good comments will have to take a better look through them
-
mrsenortyler
- Posts: 2075
- Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 2:11 pm
- Location: Winfield
- Contact:
-
mrsenortyler
- Posts: 2075
- Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 2:11 pm
- Location: Winfield
- Contact:
Re:
I could add it to the directory, I just don't know the information about the course. Hole lengths, target type, tee type, and whether or not there are restrooms, that sort of thing.mrsenortyler wrote:Hey, somebody should add this course on the PDGA course directory. Or nobody will know it's there!
-
disc golf superhero
- Posts: 760
- Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 12:12 pm
- Location: Salina
- Contact:
Re: Re:
I spent some time trying to add the course today. PDGA has made it all but impossible to add a new course. OMG!mrsenortyler wrote:I could add it to the directory, I just don't know the information about the course. Hole lengths, target type, tee type, and whether or not there are restrooms, that sort of thing.mrsenortyler wrote:Hey, somebody should add this course on the PDGA course directory. Or nobody will know it's there!
OK here's what my uneducated mind is having trouble with.
Course Length in Feet must be an integer value. (WTF? I googled it and gave up)
City Latitude is invalid. A valid latitude must be numeric (with an optional decimal) and between -90 and 90. (I thought I got this right.)
City Longitude is invalid. A valid longitude must be numeric (with an optional decimal) and between -180 and 180. (I thought I got this right.)
1st Tee Latitude is invalid. A valid latitude must be numeric (with an optional decimal) and between -90 and 90.
1st Tee Longitude is invalid. A valid longitude must be numeric (with an optional decimal) and between -180 and 180.
I give.
Re: Thomas Park
I think that you can leave some of those blank and get it on the directory.
Go here http://www.pdga.com/course-edit?action=insert&id=0
And just do the stuff that you know. You don't have to fill in all the blanks.
Go here http://www.pdga.com/course-edit?action=insert&id=0
And just do the stuff that you know. You don't have to fill in all the blanks.
-
disc golf superhero
- Posts: 760
- Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 12:12 pm
- Location: Salina
- Contact:
Re: Thomas Park
I tried leaving what I didn't know blank. It didn't work. I first tried entering my estimated footage. Maybe I should of left that blank? I don't know but I spent a lot of time googling wtf does this mean and kicked the dog. I sent them an e-mail and got a response from a Cliff Towne. He asked me to send him the information and he'd get it entered. I don't see it on there and haven't heard back from him. I'll e-mail him again tonight after league. Or work on it again tonight. I did let him know my dissatisfaction with the difficulty.