E-mail
Password
Lost password »
Register »
      

LATEST FORUM POST

Argentina  INESfun

22 Feb 2020 at 13:37

There are about 300 recesses on one golf ball, and thanks to them, the ball flies three times farther than a smooth one. ... Balls of the same size...

Go to latest post »


LATEST COMMENT  More »

United States of America  Smitty

07 Jun 2023 at 04:45

Jason and team make this place beautiful and the tournament is fun and well run.

Go to latest comment »




LATEST BLOG POSTS

Hungary  Magician | 4291 views | 0 comments

31 Dec 2023 at 17:32

End of 2023


United States of America  PatPenguin | 9546 views | 0 comments

17 Nov 2023 at 13:07

A 2023 Masterful Experience


United States of America  PatPenguin | 7509 views | 0 comments

22 May 2023 at 13:19

We’re All Loony Here....


All blogs »



POLL

From which country will the World Adventure Golf Tour Final (April 27-28, 2024) come from?


- Czech Republic

- Sweden

- Germany

- United States

- New Zealand

- Austria

- Wales

- Finland

- Slovakia


To vote, you need to log in.


You have to vote to see the results.


Total 0 votes, since 27 Mar 2024.

Recent polls »

Sweden Carl-Johan Ryner's blog« See all C-J's blogs

Lane selection part 2 - eternite
04 Aug 2009 at 09:47 | Posted in: General | Views: 2843 | Comments: 5
With the shortest segment over I will now turn to eternite. I the WMF-rulebook there are 25 different lanes (more to come after the meeting in Odense probably) and some of them can be easily discarded from cup-consideration. But first I must once again question the decision to use the 9 lanes with the highest average. Why should a really difficult lane be used? Why shouldn’t a difficult lane be used? If we have to select 9 lanes based on the average then why not choose the 9 most average lanes statistically? Why not use lane 6-14 based on the average? Then you won’t have the 5 easiest lanes and not the 4 most difficult lanes either. This could of course also be used on felt.
But I still believe that lanes should be chosen based on how good they are, regardless of the average. Let’s go!
I will start by removing all more or less pointless lanes. Jump with net, labyrinth, double wedges, middle hill, volcano, V-obstacle, V-obstacle with sloped circle.
Now I will place all lanes in different categories to make sure that we get 9 lanes with pretty even distribution.
Group 1 (3 lanes) will be made up by lanes where you normally would use a spin shot; Loop, double waves and bridge.
Group 2 (3) consists of ball managing lanes; pyramids, flat loop and cones.
Group 3 (4) are straight shot lanes; straight lane with window, sticks, pipe and wedge with window.
Group 4 (4) are lanes where you most of the times use the board; kidney, straight lane, angle and lightning.
Group 5 will be the leftovers only to be used in a special situation. Passages, sloped lane/circle without obstacles and plateau.

When I write that a lane should always be included, there’s always a slight possibility to remove it.
Group 1:
The loop should be in the cup, except when it’s a bad obstacle or if it’s like in Steyr where the ball could take over a minute to reach the hole. Double waves should be included if there’s a normal way to play, not when you can play a stone or Euro 60 like in Prague. If the bridge will give aces to a proper shot and a 2 for a bad shot, include it!

Group 2:
Pyramids and cones should always be included. The flat loop should be included as long as the ball is let out into the green in a constant way.

Group 3:
Sticks should always be included. If there is a wedge with a window that should be included as long as the opening is more than the minimum 10cm or you play with such line that you pass the hole on every shot. The straight lane with window should be excluded as long as possible since it doesn’t present many ways to play the lane. The pipe can be included if the ball is let out of the pipe in a constant way. You should never lose a lane on bad luck.

Group 4:
I know that this group is not really group with lanes with only board shots, but I can’t divide lanes into more groups than I already have.
Kidney should only be included if the main way to play is off the right board or if you play inside the obstacle with a ball bouncing 15cm+. All other shots are too easy and the probability of a tie is too high. If the lightning requires a straight shot it should be included, if a board shot is the main way to play there shouldn’t be a big 2nd chance to get an ace if you miss the hole the first time. Angle should be included in most cases. Also straight lane should be included as it offers a lot of different ways to play.

Group 5:
Passages are seldom a good constant lane and when it is constant it’s generally to easy, don’t use. Sloped lane/circle without obstacle is not a very interesting lane to play, but could be included if you can’t get 9 good lanes. Same goes for plateau if it is high enough. A low plateau is as useless as a volcano.

So again I will take some of the international courses I’ve played on and have a look to see what lanes I would’ve included.
Geldrop: Loop (group 1), double waves (1), bridge (1), pyramids (2), cones (2), sticks (3), wedge with window (3), lightning (4) and angle (4). That makes three lanes from group 1 and two lanes from each of group 2-4. No lane from group 5 is used as we already have nine good lanes.
Steyr: Double waves (1), bridge (1), cones (2), flat loop (2), sticks (3), wedge with window (3), pipe (3), lightning (4), and angle (4). This time group 3 gets three lanes and the rest two lanes. At first I think I remembered that the flat loop wasn’t that constant and I was considering using either kidney (even though most played straight, it demanded a good shot) or the passage.
Bergheim: Double waves (1), bridge (1), pyramids (2), flat loop (2), sticks (3), wedge with window (3), lightning (4), angle (4) and passage (5). This passage was good if me memory isn’t that bad, which it actually is normally. The loop could actually be considered here since you had to have good temperature on the ball and the shot was much more demanding than in Steyr. So if the passage would be removed, the loop would fill in.

I’ll be back with the felt lanes.

Comments (5)

Sweden Viking (Pierre Geerhold) | Delete

17 Aug 2009 at 21:10
Kevin, in Sweden we do only play on 1 type of surface at each competition except the Swedish championships where we play on 2 surfaces. This is mostly (i think) due too the lack of 2 surfaces at each playing ground. There is a few competitions thats played with a combined surface.

United States of America Meadowlark (Kevin Lacey) | Delete

17 Aug 2009 at 19:40
Thanks John

Sweden Johny (Johny Forss) | Delete

17 Aug 2009 at 19:30
Hello Kevin!
You can also have a look at http://www.nifo.se/show/index_eng.htm. Click on "Drawings" and then on "NIFO Competition courses". There you will find drawings of different Feltcourses with name. Good luck!

Finland JJM (John Mittler) | Delete

17 Aug 2009 at 18:47
You have a good taste Kevin, last year I tried to convince the organizers to remove both of these lane types, Labyrinth and Net, as we arranged European Championships in Tampere. Well the others didn't agree to it, because "easy lanes = good for the local not very skilled players" / "difficult lanes = bad for the local not very skilled players".

The names of lanes vary a bit. I use Swedish / Finnish versions (and their English translations), but WMF rulebook uses English translations of German versions. In some cases the same name means a different lane in Germany or in Sweden. (A bit funny, but not actually surprising, that WMF uses German name variants for the Swedish felt course standard.)

The WMF versions are found here:
F -- http://www.minigolfsport.com/rules/2_6.pdf
E -- http://www.minigolfsport.com/rules/2_5.pdf
B -- http://www.minigolfsport.com/rules/2_4.pdf

Some other versions, with different name variants, are found here:
F -- http://www.minigolfnews.com/docs/Odense_WM_F_A4.pdf
E -- http://www.minigolfnews.com/docs/Odense_WM_E_A4.pdf
E -- http://www.minigolf2008.com/en/courses/Tampere_E_A6.pdf
B -- http://www.minigolf2008.com/en/courses/Tampere_B_A6.pdf

United States of America Meadowlark (Kevin Lacey) | Delete

17 Aug 2009 at 18:34
Carl-Johan, is there anywhere online where I can see pictures of some of these lane designs with their names attached?

I have actually played an eternit and felt course in Stockholm a few years ago (summer 2004) when I visited Hans Olafsson for a few days on a European vacation. He took Robin Ventura and myself to a course and showed us how to play all the lanes correctly. I recognize most of the names of the eternit lanes, but am not so good when it comes to the felt lanes. I have never seen a beton course in person, only online.

I am really interested in your blog and opinion about the skill of individual lanes. In Putt-Putt, there are probably somewhere around 150-250 different standard hole designs, which doesn't include unique hole designs that are found at some courses. The hole designs aren't always the same length, although most of them aren't noticeably different. Sometimes they are mirror imaged as well. Some hole designs are obviously more skillful, easier/tougher or require more luck than others.

My experience from the 2 or 3 hours of playing in Stockholm was that there are a lot of very skillful lane designs. I really like the fact that the European game has 3 different course types and that many (all?) events are played on more than one type. Is it typical to play on just 2 types at an event? Do you ever play on all 3 or just 1 type?

I enjoyed playing on both the eternit and felt course and am not sure which I liked better. In some regards, I thought the eternit course or at least some of the lanes were just too easy, but it was definitely fun and skillful. No one really to blame but yourself when you missed. Are individual lanes usually the same toughness in general or does it depend on the location. There were a couple lanes in particular which I didn't really care for at the course I played, such as Labyrinth and Jump into Net, but I really liked almost all of the lanes. I hope this doesn't come off as me saying something bad about your game, because overall I thought both courses I played were very skillful and enjoyable and probably at least a little more skillful than Putt-Putt even. Any game that minimizes the luck required is great.

I'm enjoying trying to learn more about your game and will be following the WMF Championships again. I followed them in 2007 as well. I'm hoping to be able to come over and play an event in Europe sometime in the future and have talked to a few other Putt-Putt players who sounded interested as well. Hopefully within a couple years.
Add comment
Please note that you have to login, to be able to add comments


 

UPCOMING EVENTS   More »




LATEST RESULTS   More »

 29 Oct 2022

Olde Scotland Yard Course Championship

 22 Oct 2022

Clifton Heights Course Championship

 29 Sep 2022

European Champions League Final

 23 Sep 2022

Open African Championship

 17 Sep 2022

Miniest Open

 17 Sep 2022

Branson Open

 17 Sep 2022

6th Matterhorn International Pro-Am




LATEST NEWS

Sweden 29 Mar 2024 at 11:49 | 
Interview with Ulf Kristiansson

World 08 Mar 2024 at 19:50 | 
Celebrating International Women's Day!

Czech Republic 12 Feb 2024 at 15:14 | 
Adventure Golf Tournament Updates

United Kingdom 10 Nov 2023 at 12:50 | 
Foul Play at the Seaview Hotel - Interview with Glenda Young

United States of America 16 Oct 2023 at 13:27 | 
Gary Hesters Grabs First USPMGA Masters Tournament

Sweden 11 Oct 2023 at 12:54 | 
2023 World Championships General Class Held in Sweden

Italy 17 Aug 2023 at 14:07 | 
German Domination at the Youth European Championships

Austria 03 Jul 2023 at 13:10 | 
Women of WAGM 2023 - A Perspective from Vanette Block

Sweden 29 Jun 2023 at 12:39 | 
World Championship Training Groups Announced

Austria 20 Jun 2023 at 13:26 | 
Austria Reigns at WAGM 2023

United States of America 06 May 2023 at 14:10 | 
Mosk Grabs the Buckle in Texas