So you understand what I am working with, I use the course blueprints, latest (or requested) course/government/surveyor provided elevation data and whatever OSM sat image matches those the best. I will also use the 'imagery offset' in iD to get it as close to the elevation data as possible unless it is so off to cause confusion for anyone looking at the standard OSM layer.

The three node minimum is to establish proper yardages and sightlines for my output and something I have done for years. If the extra node on the Par 3 holes is an issue, I can leave it off (may be a hard habit to break) or make it less conspicuous.

(Checking out golf hole) Oh my, that is hilarious. #16 is especially humorous.

I loathe shared nodes. I understand they can be necessary, but when I come across a boundary, street, cartpath, and landuse feature all intersecting and sharing the same nodes, it makes it very time consuming to get anything done.

I'm not a fan of zooming too far in and increasing node count, but I may see about doing that on future courses where the imagery allows for me to be accurate within a foot or two. Unfortunately, all of this area I am currently working on has some of the worst sat imagery I have seen in a very long time.

Anyway, glad that we are mostly on the same page with similar goals.

If there are problem courses (like you the one you shared) that need some quick fixes/attention, I'd be happy to give them a run through and remedy the obvious errors. Just send me a note and link and I'll see what I can do.
