Par is implicitly gold par. Other par-like numbers are ersatz par, but not really par.
The length under 500 feet strongly says par 3. A throw that goes OB is not errorless so cannot be taken for granted to increase par.
Performance of the general player population is not a good way to set...
The hole you detail here sounds like a par 3. This hole also sounds like a blue par 4, a white par 4, and a red par 4. To bring us back to the thread topic it also sounds like a green par 5 and a purple par 5.
Maybe maybe not but one can concurrently sanction two leagues for the same sanctioning fee as one D-tier with all the freedoms of the league designation and get nine more weeks as bonus!
When Worlds was close enough to matter and people nearby were very hungry for points I ran two leagues...
When I see someone throwing discs I like but don't bag I tell myself I need to get around to making that second favorites bag.
It's been years and I still have not actually done it.
I always like this idea in theory, although it would greatly undercut the proceeds generated from the AM field. I wouldn't be sad about the few for-profit TDs that suffer but it's likely to severely limit fundraising.
Structural counter-bagging measures are good.
I have considered varying the payout depth by division:
Open 30%
ADV 40%
INT 50%
REC 60%
NOV 70%
Bigger prizes in higher divisions without transferring prize money between divisions.
As someone who does a significant amount of coursework, I don't want my time to be wasted hearing my name mentioned.
As someone who does a significant amount of coursework, I specifically want the time of players who don't show up for coursework to be wasted...