How much OB is too much?

Karl Molitoris · Post by **Karl Molitoris** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:21 pm

Played the Bowling Green AMs this past weekend (happened to run into Kelley C. a couple of times there) and - as all people do - played 72 holes in regulation (if you didn't make the finals). 60 out of 72 of these holes had OB on them. And I'm not talking about a fence 100' behind the hole either! The majority of them had OB all the way down at least 1 side (sometimes OB down 1 side, river / road down the other) that would end up circling around to the other side of the green (meaning anything left, long, or right of the green was OB).

This seems to be the way the sport is going (per the USDGC set-up and a lot of tournaments I've either seen pics of or attended in Europe)...much to my chagrin.

What do you all say about "added OB"?
I can see the 'OB is used to make things safer' thing, but when safety isn't in the equation, why use additional fabricated OB just to get the scores out of the 40's?

Karl

Chuck Kennedy · Post by **Chuck Kennedy** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:34 pm

That's because some designers haven't learned how to use the buncr concept so the "penalties" for a less than accurate throw are more like going off line in the woods or a ball golf sandtrap than a true out of bounds shot that justifies the penalty. Some of the OB designs out there are not risk/reward but penalty/reward.

Matt DeAngelis · Post by **Matt DeAngelis** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 8:40 pm

Please explain the buncr concept. I know I have heard of this before...

johnny betts · Post by **johnny betts** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:00 pm

The buncr does not cost you a stroke. I believe hole 10 at the USDGC was a good example of this. If you missed the landing zone on the drive you would re-tee and be throwing 2. This is nice when you are dealing with tough placement drives. Hole 17 at USDGC was also changed from OB to buncr. Thank god for that!

Chuck Kennedy · Post by **Chuck Kennedy** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:16 pm

There are three types of buncrs. The USDGC introduced the most extreme version which is to rethrow from your previous lie without penalty if you land in the buncr.

The fairway buncr is used on longer holes say 450+ where there's not much foliage to challenge the landing area. So you mark an area where if you land in it, you go to a drop zone without penalty which might be 15-20 feet behind a tree. However, just like a sand trap, you have a more challenging throw to the pin than you would have had in the open area where the buncr was located.

The greenside buncr works similar to a slope on a green where your ball can't land close to the hole without rolling away. What you do is create a buncr maybe 10 feet from the pin on one side that's kind of kidney bean shaped say 30-40 long and 20-30 ft wide. If a player lands in the buncr, there's no penalty but the player has to move the lie back to the edge of the buncr on the line of play like casual relief.

Chris Martin · Post by **Chris Martin** » Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:09 pm

If the course is set up/designed well enough utilizing natural obstacles, OB should be intrinsic and not manufactured. Maybe that doesn't jive in Kentucky, but in the north east we're loaded with hills, boulders, streams, ponds, etc.

IMHO

James Lane · Post by **James Lane** » Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:41 am

I like the manufactured ob, especially in more open holes. It makes you think more about your shot when there's previously not much to the hole.

However, the buncr rules seem very cool

Karl Molitoris · Post by **Karl Molitoris** » Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:34 pm

Chuck,

I know YOU like the 'bunker concept' but your advocation of it is 1) slightly thread jacking (as it is a potential remedy for OB but not directly addressing the question) and 2) self-fulfilling (as it is one of your 'babies').

All,

But getting back to the point, do y'all think OB - which is 1) not a safety thing and 2) not a property boundary - is necessary? Or should the ground the course is on dictate the hardness alone?

Karl

Ps: Would someone cut-and-paste the below into a poll (I'm feable and don't know how to get the poll to allow 2 selections (i.e. "choose 2")). Thanks.

Course OB Preferences (choose 2)

1. None
2. Only if it is a road / property boundary / building / etc.
3. Very limited
4. A ‘healthy amount’ (to prevent a birdie-fest)
5. OB to the max!

Jeff Wiechowski · Post by **Jeff Wiechowski** » Tue Apr 07, 2009 12:49 pm

Karl wrote: Ps: Would someone cut-and-paste the below into a poll (I'm feable and don't know how to get the poll to allow 2 selections (i.e. "choose 2")). Thanks.

I dont think you can make a poll allow for more than one choice......

Allen Smith · Post by **Allen Smith** » Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:11 pm

A lot of OB is fine.

It is up to the discretion of the course designer.

What I'd like to see more of is actual ball golf style course design, with certain disc golf twists of course.

Instead of a bean shaped rope, dig a small pond.

It'll be great

John Biscoe · Post by **John Biscoe** » Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:17 pm

as a td i think it's all about what you are trying to accomplish with your event- it can make a bad course better or can be just plain silly. it can also take away a lot of opportunities for players whose strength is their recovery game. i've heard the ob at winthrop described as "bring it back in, throw another hyzer".

in areas not blessed with the plethora of natural obstacles we have in the mid-atlantic and northeast having a lot of artificial ob makes sense. if i ran events on a desert course i would use it heavily.

i haven't played the courses in bg in years but when i was there i would have said white park would have benefitted from some judicious ob, keriakes and hobson not. don't know if those were the ones you played over the weekend or not.

at my home course (hawk hollow) there is ob on virtually every hole of one sort or another- it all involves either streams, fences, or one swamp however so none of it is what i would call winthrop style artificial.

Allen Smith · Post by **Allen Smith** » Tue Apr 07, 2009 1:22 pm

Biscoe,

You use that creek like a master artist, painting brush strokes of beautiful agony throughout the course.

Karl Molitoris · Post by **Karl Molitoris** » Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:04 pm

John,

I played Keriakes (where I had my good round...and the only 1 which had the 2-meter rule in effect); didn't play Hobson. K course had probably the least OB (maybe 10 - 12 holes). Chalybeate had it on every hole. Moore had it on maybe 15 or so. Griffin on every one except maybe 1 or 2.

My contention is that even a desert course shouldn't be "tricked up". Nature either provided (or didn't) obstacles (wind, trees, cacti, water, hills, etc.) and we either can (or can't) make a whup-butt course. But to try to emulate a watery-type course by placing 'fake water' not only looks silly it takes away the "naturalness" of our sport.

If the land can't support a fantastic layout, then all we have (to work with) is either a birdie-fest or a wicked long (possibly windy) course.

Karl

Karl Molitoris · Post by **Karl Molitoris** » Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:06 pm

Jeff,

Then I guess we can only make a poll that says "choose 1".... Please?

Karl

John Biscoe · Post by **John Biscoe** » Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:18 pm

Karl wrote:John,

I played Keriakes (where I had my good round...and the only 1 which had the 2-meter rule in effect); didn't play Hobson. K course had probably the least OB (maybe 10 - 12 holes). Chalybeate had it on every hole. Moore had it on maybe 15 or so. Griffin on every one except maybe 1 or 2.

My contention is that even a desert course shouldn't be "tricked up". Nature either provided (or didn't) obstacles (wind, trees, cacti, water, hills, etc.) and we either can (or can't) make a whup-butt course. But to try to emulate a watery-type course by placing 'fake water' not only looks silly it takes away the "naturalness" of our sport.

If the land can't support a fantastic layout, then all we have (to work with) is either a birdie-fest or a wicked long (possibly windy) course.

Karl

no ob, no matter how contrived and silly, is sillier than the 2 meter rule. it is arbitrary in multiple ways.

i disagree that dg courses on sorry pieces of land cannot be improved by adding ob- i do agree that it has the potential to look silly but hey, we are grown men playing with child's toys after all- the silly factor is already there in the eyes of non-players.

if the land cannot support a fantastic layout then we do what we can to improve it, be that planting trees, digging ponds, or stringing off fake ob. (note that the first 2 are my vast preference- i am happy to be here in spotsy where our courses are plenty good on their own without the string)

Morgan Wright · Post by **Morgan Wright** » Sat Dec 25, 2010 1:36 pm

Why do you spell it buncr?

Chuck Kennedy · Post by **Chuck Kennedy** » Sat Dec 25, 2010 10:35 pm

Because it's essentially a special form of Casual Relief area. BunCR...

Eric Desmarais · Post by **Eric Desmarais** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 1:01 pm

Does EVERYBODY get that Karl does not like O.B. !?!?!?!?!?????? I do........ Build your own coarse how you like. Get workin or get silent. These "I don't like O.B." threads come up every so often from him. When playing we can all excersize our free will if you don't like a coarse don't play it..... :roll:

Kevin Gardner · Post by **Kevin Gardner** » Tue Dec 28, 2010 8:58 pm

Don't throw it O.B.

Matt Aubin · Post by **Matt Aubin** » Wed Dec 29, 2010 1:43 pm

punk4buddha wrote:Does EVERYBODY get that Karl does not like O.B. !?!?!?!?!?????? I do........ Build your own coarse how you like. Get workin or get silent. These "I don't like O.B." threads come up every so often from him. When playing we can all excersize our free will if you don't like a coarse don't play it.....

*coUrse*

it's the same thread someone bumped from last year... the one and only thread he made about OB. try reading before you slam someone.

Titan Bariloni · Post by **Titan Bariloni** » Thu Dec 30, 2010 1:14 pm

I can see water,safety,road,property line....

in a perfect world a course should not be designed around a safety issue or road...and should leave a buffer between property lines for many reason anyway..we all know this is not reality..(that post about growing the sport relating to course design was brilliant must read in gen discussion somewhere)

other then that I agree with Karl..creating OB to up scores or demand some stupid control shot is silly...we have enough control shots in DG...! Also we all want the BIG D that kinda sets that back..and I don't care what people say..spectators wanna see the big crush and long putts...so lots of OB on green also creates lay up after lay up...kinda BORINNNNNNNG..!

To grow the sport we need a crowd of people not playing in said Event...look at Ball Golf until the addition of the "stadium course" the sport struggled to compete with other major markets..so people wanna go watch lame OB shots and lay ups...sounds fun

Karl once broke this down to me in person...

player A throws 600 feet
player B throws 600 feet but 2 inches left of player A and is OB

who is the better player..?

so we want our sport to basically come down to "luck" when determining champs..?

I understand other sports may come down to a lil luck as well..Golf is a game of perfection not luck

James Lane · Post by **James Lane** » Sat Jan 01, 2011 8:19 am

Titan Bariloni wrote:player A throws 600 feet
player B throws 600 feet but 2 inches left of player A and is OB

who is the better player..?

Player A. Controlling your disc is part of the game. If you land and skip OB on a shot, there's a reason for that. If you fly it OB, there's a reason for that too.
The player should be in control, and if you cant control your disc, you're not as good a player.

In a heavily wooded environment I think OB should be very restricted. (Im looking at you Panthorn 16 and Pyramids 15) These I dont like.

Golf is not a game of perfection it is a game of consistency IMO.

NEFA DISCussion

How much OB is too much?

How much OB is too much?

Re: How much OB is too much?

Re: How much OB is too much?

Re: How much OB is too much?

Re: How much OB is too much?

Re: How much OB is too much?

Re: How much OB is too much?

Re: How much OB is too much?