Mike Fortunato

Michigan, USA Righty - forehand

Mike's albums   »   Indy Lake   »   Picture 1 of 3
All things Indy Lake

-   +2 votes   +
Chuck D Course Map
Mike Fortunato uploaded this picture.
Jim Daniels › October 13, 2009 at 11:36am
Par 55? Hmmmm ... I see lots of 4s and 5s by good players on Hole 1. I also see lots of 4s on Hole 5.
Daemon Stahlin › October 13, 2009 at 11:46am
a 3 on #1 is not an eagle. #5 is a bad hole. too short for a 3 to be considered a birdie, too long to deuce. tee needs to be moved 150' in either direction.
Mike Fortunato › October 13, 2009 at 11:57am
Hole 1 is par 4
Jim Daniels › October 13, 2009 at 12:16pm
I believe Hole 1 should be Par 4 and Hole 5, which is approx 600', a Par 4 also. I base this on my observations of scores I have seen and I have watched some good players who throw far get 4s on this hole as often as not. I have also seen doubles teams eating 4s on Hole 5 regularly. Sure, if you can throw 425' accurately, a 3 is pretty easy but I say a birdie should be your bonus for executing that shot. The same logic would apply to a Par 5 in ball golf where the long hitter gets rewarded with the relatively easy birdie 4 for reaching the green in 2. Or a short Par 4 where the big hitters can drive the green and get the easy birdie 3 with an outside chance for an eagle 2. Speaking of eagles, I threw a 60-degree sandwedge shot in from 80 yds last weekend for an eagle, that was pretty cool.
Scott White › October 13, 2009 at 12:56pm
What do you all think about hole 6? Or is a hole that is not reachable in one shot automatically a par 4+?
peter kunoff › October 13, 2009 at 1:01pm
haven't played longs a lot on chuck D......are most doubles teams three-ing #6? if so....I would say it is a par three......
Daemon Stahlin › October 13, 2009 at 1:05pm
i think hole 6 is a great par 4. forgot about that one.
Scott White › October 13, 2009 at 1:46pm
I mean hole 6 on the Chuck D.. It is somewhat of a tweener in calm conditions for someone that can throw 350 ft up hill. Then there is the pond in play as well. We could move that tee back but we would run into a few issues: 1. More upshots would go into the pond. The pond isn't quite as nice to wide in as Independence Lake. 2. The further back you go with the teepad, the wetter that area gets in the spring. So yea it is a tweaner for good players in calm conditions. I really like the 150 ft. shot from the top of the hill though down to the picturesque green so that hole probably won't change. But is it a par 4? I say yes.
Daemon Stahlin › October 13, 2009 at 1:56pm
woops, i am way off. i got 5 and 6 confused.
please disregard everything i said here.
my opinions as a player-
#1- par 4. 3 is not an eagle.
#5- great par 4. takes 2 great shots to make the green.
#6- tee needs to be moved 150' in either direction to make it either a challenging par 4 or long, 2-able par 3. i've seen too many easy 3's, and the green is not reachable.

just my opinions.
Daemon Stahlin › October 13, 2009 at 1:57pm
most every other hole on that course is awesome and very well designed.
Jim Daniels › October 13, 2009 at 2:50pm
Daemon, I agree with you -- most people get a 3 on 6, move it up or back to make it a little more interesting, even + or - 100' would be good. Now we are in agreement on Holes 1 & 5 which brings me back to my original premise: Chuck D is (at least) a Par 56 as it is currently designed. Ps I agree, I love the course, a great addition to the area.
Daemon Stahlin › October 13, 2009 at 3:27pm
agreed
Log in or Sign Up to post comments.