[BoomBoom]

Or if feasible just take the trouble hole to the other side of the plot with some dummy holes around it. Done right no one will know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hey, that is an option. Thinking out loud here. For this to work I would need to do this with 7 as well. Move 12, build 5, 6, 10 and 11 as dummies. Rebuild 7, with 10, 11, 12 and 8 as dummies. Make the current 7 and 12 dummies for the views from 5 and 6.

Anyone flying around might know though, I fly around every course I play, I may not be alone.

It took me 8 hours to build 10 and 11 bunkers, do I want to do that again.

Is a few views worth it? Right now almost every view is perfect, the holes all play exact elevations or will once completed, that's is not the issue. We are talking about a few views from a couple holes to other holes in only a couple spots where they come into view being off a little.

Plus minus list:

Plus

I gain at best 3 accurate views from spots that are mostly likely not going to be noticed by anyone, especially in light of the holes themselves are fine and the views of the other many holes are fine as well.

Minus:

No improvement of playability or reality of the hole.
Days of work.
Many additional holes on the plot.

Cant see an upside to this suggestion.

[BoomBoom]

Or if feasible just take the trouble hole to the other side of the plot with some dummy holes around it. Done right no one will know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is what I was going to suggest....can you somehow leave in a "dummy" hole that you manipulate to get the right views, but move the actual hole to a unused portion of the plot and mask it to look like it resides in the correct place?

I hope I don't have this issue with my rcr, I have 2 ponds and a creek to deal with, but won't know the extend of my potential problems until I start on elevation (I'm laying all 18 out bare bones [tees, greens, bunkers & trees] to start).

Yeah you are likely, use google earth pro now and measure the elevations of the water. All water does not just appear at sea level in RL. With Glen Abbey I had 290 feet of different water elevation to hide. I was lucky there as I had the famous valley holes to hide the huge elevation difference and no expectation of views of other holes from certain other holes. You cant see 11 from 10 etc. So I was able to keep the holes that viewed other holes views and hide the elevation difference with holes that had no views of other holes.

This one is a bit-ch. Every hole has a view of another hole or more, so I cant hide anything.

Augusta had 60 feet of water elevation to hide or more. I'm sure this must happen everywhere there is water.

[Royce]

Or if feasible just take the trouble hole to the other side of the plot with some dummy holes around it. Done right no one will know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is what I was going to suggest....can you somehow leave in a "dummy" hole that you manipulate to get the right views, but move the actual hole to a unused portion of the plot and mask it to look like it resides in the correct place?

I hope I don't have this issue with my rcr, I have 2 ponds and a creek to deal with, but won't know the extend of my potential problems until I start on elevation (I'm laying all 18 out bare bones [tees, greens, bunkers & trees] to start).

Yeah you are likely, use google earth pro now and measure the elevations of the water. All water does not just appear at sea level in RL. With Glen Abbey I had 290 feet of different water elevation to hide. I was lucky there as I had the famous valley holes to hide the huge elevation difference and no expectation of views of other holes from certain other holes. You cant see 11 from 10 etc. So I was able to keep the holes that viewed other holes views and hide the elevation difference with holes that had no views of other holes.

This one is a bit-ch. Every hole has a view of another hole or more, so I cant hide anything.

Augusta had 60 feet of water elevation to hide or more. I'm sure this must happen everywhere there is water.

Yeah just did some elevation measurements on my Oakland Hills project and while one major pond sits at the low point of the plot (or very close to it, enough to not notice on other holes), I do have two other bodies of water (smaller pond & small creek) that sit 15-20 feet above, but I can probably hide that come elevation time.  The thing with Oakland Hills is every hole has a view of adjacent holes, for the most part, so getting the elevation right will be crucial, there's no place to hide drastic changes.

[BoomBoom]

Or if feasible just take the trouble hole to the other side of the plot with some dummy holes around it. Done right no one will know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is what I was going to suggest....can you somehow leave in a "dummy" hole that you manipulate to get the right views, but move the actual hole to a unused portion of the plot and mask it to look like it resides in the correct place?

I hope I don't have this issue with my rcr, I have 2 ponds and a creek to deal with, but won't know the extend of my potential problems until I start on elevation (I'm laying all 18 out bare bones [tees, greens, bunkers & trees] to start).

Yeah you are likely, use google earth pro now and measure the elevations of the water. All water does not just appear at sea level in RL. With Glen Abbey I had 290 feet of different water elevation to hide. I was lucky there as I had the famous valley holes to hide the huge elevation difference and no expectation of views of other holes from certain other holes. You cant see 11 from 10 etc. So I was able to keep the holes that viewed other holes views and hide the elevation difference with holes that had no views of other holes.

This one is a bit-ch. Every hole has a view of another hole or more, so I cant hide anything.

Augusta had 60 feet of water elevation to hide or more. I'm sure this must happen everywhere there is water.

Yeah just did some elevation measurements on my Oakland Hills project and while one major pond sits at the low point of the plot (or very close to it, enough to not notice on other holes), I do have two other bodies of water (smaller pond & small creek) that sit 15-20 feet above, but I can probably hide that come elevation time.  The thing with Oakland Hills is every hole has a view of adjacent holes, for the most part, so getting the elevation right will be crucial, there's no place to hide drastic changes.

Yep I just took a peak, you are going to have the same issue. The creek sits quite a bit lower than the 2 ponds, the 2 ponds difference in elevation is small. Its the creek to the first pond is the issue.  The hole with the creek, sorry don't know numbers, is down hill, follow by an up hill hole, followed by the hole with the pond that plays nearly flat.  Looking closer you have the tee with the creek and the tee with the pond that in RL are not level with each other. But in order to go down hill towards the creek, the tee with the creek will need to be elevated and in order to have a level hole with the pond that tee will need to be lower. In RL it's the opposite. The tee with the pond is higher than the tee with the creek. Not a lot mind you, but you have to make the adjustment somewhere. Which will throw off the view from the tee with the creek, the view from the green before the hole with the pond to the tee with the pond. And there is a view from the tee to the hole with the pond.

Until we can put water at any level we have this issue. At least you only have about 15 feet to deal with. Likely by going down hill from the green before the hole with the pond to the tee with the pond, which are level in RL.

[theclv24]

This one is a bit-ch. Every hole has a view of another hole or more, so I cant hide anything.

Augusta had 60 feet of water elevation to hide or more. I'm sure this must happen everywhere there is water.

I won't comment too much on how you should proceed, and you are certainly entitled to your own process, but I would just offer this one insight.

Between fitting every hole on the plot and the water table issue, this is why I would strongly advise anyone starting an RCR to lay out all 18 holes first, and then start at the lowest elevated hole, rather than starting on hole 1 and working on one at a time. There will always be issues with courses that have water at different levels, but at a course like Bethpage that only has one water hazard (unless I'm mistaken), this shouldn't even be an issue.

Your commitment to this one is appreciated, though, and whenever it gets finished it will be a great asset to the The Golf Club. If it takes another month or two, so be it I say.

[BoomBoom]

This one is a bit-ch. Every hole has a view of another hole or more, so I cant hide anything.

Augusta had 60 feet of water elevation to hide or more. I'm sure this must happen everywhere there is water.

I won't comment too much on how you should proceed, and you are certainly entitled to your own process, but I would just offer this one insight.

Between fitting every hole on the plot and the water table issue, this is why I would strongly advise anyone starting an RCR to lay out all 18 holes first, and then start at the lowest elevated hole, rather than starting on hole 1 and working on one at a time. There will always be issues with courses that have water at different levels, but at a course like Bethpage that only has one water hazard (unless I'm mistaken), this shouldn't even be an issue.

Your commitment to this one is appreciated, though, and whenever it gets finished it will be a great asset to the The Golf Club. If it takes another month or two, so be it I say.

I thought this as well and considered starting over, but hole 2 is 25 feet lower than the pond. Hole 2 was started at just above water level as the lowest point on the course. Even starting over, does not fix this problem that I can see. Somewhere I have to have an off elevation.

[ADX321]

This one is a bit-ch. Every hole has a view of another hole or more, so I cant hide anything.

Augusta had 60 feet of water elevation to hide or more. I'm sure this must happen everywhere there is water.

I won't comment too much on how you should proceed, and you are certainly entitled to your own process, but I would just offer this one insight.

Between fitting every hole on the plot and the water table issue, this is why I would strongly advise anyone starting an RCR to lay out all 18 holes first, and then start at the lowest elevated hole, rather than starting on hole 1 and working on one at a time. There will always be issues with courses that have water at different levels, but at a course like Bethpage that only has one water hazard (unless I'm mistaken), this shouldn't even be an issue.

Your commitment to this one is appreciated, though, and whenever it gets finished it will be a great asset to the The Golf Club. If it takes another month or two, so be it I say.

yep #8 is the only water on the course

there really isnt even any to drink either lol

[WindyCityWizard]

start at the lowest elevated hole, rather than starting on hole 1 and working on one at a time.

That's my own personal rule. Begin working with either:
A: the things that absolutely can't change
B: the water holes b/c they're at the lowest elevation
Then work your way out from there.

My first course had a huge ravine/crevice. Couldn't move it. The first thing I did was dig the crevice and then built the holes involving it.
Courses with water? Do the water holes 1st, then go from there.

[BoomBoom]

start at the lowest elevated hole, rather than starting on hole 1 and working on one at a time.

That's my own personal rule. Begin working with either:
A: the things that absolutely can't change
B: the water holes b/c they're at the lowest elevation
Then work your way out from there.

My first course had a huge ravine/crevice. Couldn't move it. The first thing I did was dig the crevice and then built the holes involving it.
Courses with water? Do the water holes 1st, then go from there.

B. The water holes have to be at the lowest point, but what if they are at near the highest point of the golf course in RL, then what? What do you do with the holes climbing towards the water hole, or lowering away from it?

Maybe I'm not being clear I did, I started with 1 fairway as the lowest point, went backwards, then forward as the holes all climb from there. Even if I built 8 first, then 2 would of needed to be under water by nearly 20 feet. Does not matter how many ponds 1 or 20, there's nowhere to hide the elevations. Something has to give somewhere. Although I am all about making a difficult course, under water is a bit extreme. If the pond in reality was the lowest point then great it all works, but the pond is actually near a high point, I cant place a pond at a high point as we know and still have water.

I get it everyone is an expert, I'm stupid, but I certainly don't know how I could possibly get this to work even if I start over it fixes nothing, I still have a problem with 1 fairway and 2 tee being 20 feet below the pond at water level. I'm open to suggestions that fixes the problem without creating new ones.

I have no idea how Augusta got around the 60 feet of water difference, but it must of been gotten around it somehow, because there is no way you can build ponds at 60 feet of elevation difference and not have something off somewhere.

I'm not going to be held to a different standard, there is no way any course with water did not have to juggle some view or elevation somewhere to make it work. Just point me to the course that did not have to juggle something and I will study the crap out of it, but I would imagine I will find where that course did in fact juggle something, so what would that get me.

I have been looking at this all day now, I have come up with no solution other than what I have already come up with.

Best bet is to remove the water from the pond, raise the entire area and then the problem is fixed and all elevations can revert back to or be corrected to perfect with the only issue being no water in 1 pond. I can make it deep, I can make it OB, I can fill it with junk. Same net result. I Was hoping to avoid that, but every other solution is going to be fraught with suggestions that this is not a true RCR.

[BoomBoom]

Ok so I have essentially started this over, armed with Google earth pro, WGT, I had done 11 holes, they were brought back flat again and Up to this point today up to the 5th green completely re-sculpted. Hole 8 now sits flat elevated almost to the highest point on the golf course. Each and every spot on this course will be absolutely true to the RL Elevations. If green 12 sits 5 feet above green 5, even though it's hidden by trees, green 12 will surely sit 5 feet above in my RCR as well.

I fully intend on making this the most accurate RCR to date ever at TGC. There will be only 2 differences from real, the trees, and the fact the pond will be replaced with a well planted hole in the ground marked as OB. The 9th tee will absolutely sit at the correct height, the correct place behind the 8th green. Everything about this will be as real as possible right down to the finest of details.

I'm raising the bar here folks.

From here on in whenever I see water on an RCR, I will know, it's not a true RCR.

[ADX321]

exciting stuff - Cannot wait and if you need a tester with real life knowledge let me know

[ks-man]

Another benefit with your approach is hopefully a future water texture will allow you to go back and very simply fill it in without needing to make any other changes. 

[WindyCityWizard]

B. The water holes have to be at the lowest point, but what if they are at near the highest point of the golf course in RL, then what? What do you do with the holes climbing towards the water hole, or lowering away from it?

You are absolutely right. This is a major problem if trying to make a 100% accurate RCR.

My personal opinion is: if a player plays your course, and they choose to focus on the fact that the elevation in certain spots on the course aren't spot on, as opposed to focusing on the designer nailed the course in pretty much every other aspect, all I can say is "seriously? that's what your gripe is?" A designer spent dozens/hundreds of hours on this course, having it nearly perfect, and the elevation on a certain hole is off, and that's your big issue?

Our game has certain limitations. Anyone who has spent 1 hour in the GNCD should be able to recognize that. Everyone under the sun knows the issue with the water table, and if they can't get past that, screw them, IMO, as long as you do a great job on the rest of the course, on the matters that are in your control.

Another example, Countryside has no coniferous trees, can't remember if Harvest does or not. To anyone who has made an RCR in Countryside & possibly Harvest,  does that course you re-created really have no coniferous trees? If they do have coniferous, you didn't completely do it right. Case in point, FriendBomber RCRed Sawgrass, and it looks incredible. It has no pine trees. Who in their right mind can criticize the job he did b/c of the trees?  Who can say a nearly perfect Countryside course is no good for not having Coniferous trees?
My point to all this is, we know what the GNCD allows us/doesn't allow us to do. If anyone is going to be a stickler on tree types or elevations in spots, their opinion isn't worth anything anyways.

[Royce]

Ok so I have essentially started this over, armed with Google earth pro, WGT, I had done 11 holes, they were brought back flat again and Up to this point today up to the 5th green completely re-sculpted. Hole 8 now sits flat elevated almost to the highest point on the golf course. Each and every spot on this course will be absolutely true to the RL Elevations. If green 12 sits 5 feet above green 5, even though it's hidden by trees, green 12 will surely sit 5 feet above in my RCR as well.

I fully intend on making this the most accurate RCR to date ever at TGC. There will be only 2 differences from real, the trees, and the fact the pond will be replaced with a well planted hole in the ground marked as OB. The 9th tee will absolutely sit at the correct height, the correct place behind the 8th green. Everything about this will be as real as possible right down to the finest of details.

I'm raising the bar here folks.

From here on in whenever I see water on an RCR, I will know, it's not a true RCR.

Exciting!  I love reading details like this.

Curious how you are able to dial in elevations and know exactly if a particular green is 5 feet above another, just trial & error with the flatten/raise brush and info from the distance tool?

[McBogga]

Ok so I have essentially started this over, armed with Google earth pro, WGT, I had done 11 holes, they were brought back flat again and Up to this point today up to the 5th green completely re-sculpted. Hole 8 now sits flat elevated almost to the highest point on the golf course. Each and every spot on this course will be absolutely true to the RL Elevations. If green 12 sits 5 feet above green 5, even though it's hidden by trees, green 12 will surely sit 5 feet above in my RCR as well.

I fully intend on making this the most accurate RCR to date ever at TGC. There will be only 2 differences from real, the trees, and the fact the pond will be replaced with a well planted hole in the ground marked as OB. The 9th tee will absolutely sit at the correct height, the correct place behind the 8th green. Everything about this will be as real as possible right down to the finest of details.

I'm raising the bar here folks.

From here on in whenever I see water on an RCR, I will know, it's not a true RCR.

Pretty tall order with courses like Magnolia, Sawgrass, Congressional, and lets not forget Turnberry, out there. If you you need to work a lot more on the greens compared to Riviera.

Good luck and I really hope you pull it off as an authentic Bethpage would be epic.