Hey all I just had a little question that came to my mind after catching up with the east coast tour swing. If you were designing an 18 hole course assuming a mix of open and wooded holes and space was not an issue, what would you like to see as par (overall 54, 60, 65 etc.)? Does this change if you are designing a course for fun vs a championship-style tournament course? I'm curious because in my area of Colorado it feels like there is only one way to design a course and it's still all par 3s and on occasion a par 4. I was watching Deleware and I was super stoked to see par that high. When designing a course, is this a thought or does it just kind of happen as you survey and understand the land you are working with? Just curious thanks for the input!
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
Ideal Par for an 18 hole course?
- Thread starter nnewms
- Start date
Not a designer but have only played a few legit par 5s that have been something other than 1000 foot field shots. Seems like you need unique land for a real par 5, enough woods and elevation to make landing zones and placement shots more important than distance. To be truly special like the Delaware course, you also have to avoid gimmicky ways to increase difficulty like too many mandos/artificial OB.
Seems like there should be more places that have this capability, but it's rare for the average golfer to play courses like iron hill. Might also be that the average person prefers shorter holes, not sure.
Seems like there should be more places that have this capability, but it's rare for the average golfer to play courses like iron hill. Might also be that the average person prefers shorter holes, not sure.
No one right answer. There should be courses that are par 54 and par 60 and par higher, to suit the range of players and desires.
The little bit of course design I've done, was looking at the best use of the land and the best holes, regardless of pars.
If I had the pick of the land, too, I'd hope for a par in the low 60s---a mix of reachable holes and multi-long-shot holes.
The little bit of course design I've done, was looking at the best use of the land and the best holes, regardless of pars.
If I had the pick of the land, too, I'd hope for a par in the low 60s---a mix of reachable holes and multi-long-shot holes.
lines
Double Eagle Member
62...
mopar
Par Member
Quoted for truth. Let the land define the course.
Our sport isnt to the point of ball golf where it is financially viable to completely change the landscape for a course. We have to best utilize what we are presented.
That being said, in my mind at least one par 5 and at least a couple par 4s (or more) would be ideal...but not if the land doesnt present itself in a way to make that the best option.
Last edited:
R-Ogre
Double Eagle Member
69 heh
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2009
- Messages
- 6,838
The correct answer is 63 (1x2, 9x3, 6x4, 2x5). Other mixes near this set are almost as good.
However, the par needs to be set correctly for the skill level targeted.
Also, hitting the correct total par is way down on the list of priorities for things a good design should do.
However, the par needs to be set correctly for the skill level targeted.
Also, hitting the correct total par is way down on the list of priorities for things a good design should do.
He just posted so he could throw that Par 2 in there.
biscoe
* Ace Member *
It is a thought but not a primary directive.
Directive 1 is to design for the wants/needs/intended audience of the customer/land owner. After that the land gets to tell you what to do so to speak.
Thrown Disc Golf has 5 courses currently in process- their pars will wind up being (give or take a stroke or two) 56, 60, 61, 65 and 67. Given ideal property and allowed to do what I please I would tend to land in the 63-65 area more often than not. Of course few properties are ideal and there is seldom a design without some sort of other concerns encroaching upon it.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2009
- Messages
- 6,838
Maaaybe. Now I suppose I have to make something up to justify the rest of that post. So, here goes:
Most of the holes should be par 3 (or easier). That's what makes the game fun.
I like to have an ace run on the course. You don't have to call it a par 2, but "Par 2" induces a special kind of stress on players - like the drop on a free fall ride, they hate to see it coming, but giggle when it's over.
Par 4s and 5s (if there is room) offer a whole different thought process than "always try to land by the target". They will make the course feel like a real grown-up serious course. Even if they are Rec-level 4s and 5s on a Rec course. At least one hole of these holes should give players a chance to throw really far. These holes should provide lots of scramble opportunities. That's where real shot creativity is learned.
After about 63 throws, the scales tip from looking forward to throwing more to counting down how many throws until you are done. Only paid pros should be asked to do more. Players will also skip longer courses when time is short.
I have always thought the sweet spot is somewhere in the low to mid 60s.....land definitely dictates the course but once you get close to 70 and above it gets to be a grind with not enough non-grinders sprinkled in to keep it fun and to keep the round interesting
once you hit par 68 it becomes a battle of attrition and weathering bogies instead of a battle of birdies and scoring
once you hit par 68 it becomes a battle of attrition and weathering bogies instead of a battle of birdies and scoring
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2011
- Messages
- 1,180
As stated above, every land and design is different but we're talking hypotheticals so my ideal is high 60's. This is for a tournament layout course and for players that want to test their abilities and play for the challenge of Disc Golf.
I'd have a couple of par 5's in there and more 4's than threes, i'd have at least one hole that Steve calls a par 2 and I call a must get par 3. I like multi shot holes though, I find them more fun than 3's if they are well designed with a distinct challenge set on each throw. I like more chances to throw great shots.
As there aren't many serious golfers or tournament level players out there, you have to design for the majority so my ideal course of 18 holes would probably be split into two loops of 12 or even 18 holes, or most likely one loop of 12 and one 18. The twelve would retain some 4's and split the par 5 and at least one four into 3's (one of the Gold threes might get redesignated into a 4 for the level of play) and the 18 would split all the 5's and 4's into distinct par threes. The 18 would be set with par around 920.
The 12 would be looking more at 950 rated The 18 would be a fun birdie fest for a good player but a challenge to the majority with chances of 2's but lots of places to mess up. I would also have a 9 or 12 hole beginner layout somewhere near the clubhouse, which would still be fun to play for experienced players.
This gives more players more chances to be on the course at the same time and gives them a helluva variety over the same bit of land. There would be a red/green, White, Blue and Gold course to play , or a mix of the three big ones. I really like hearing the question "which layout should we play today" variety is the spice of life and everyone has different time constraints and holes that appeal/don't appeal to them.
As long as planning permission is successful I'm making one like this at the moment, i'm excited to see how it comes out and Steve will be glad to hear the Golds are aimed to be set for 1000 rated play and not "British" par
I suspect the majority of rounds will be played on the British par layouts though.
I'd have a couple of par 5's in there and more 4's than threes, i'd have at least one hole that Steve calls a par 2 and I call a must get par 3. I like multi shot holes though, I find them more fun than 3's if they are well designed with a distinct challenge set on each throw. I like more chances to throw great shots.
As there aren't many serious golfers or tournament level players out there, you have to design for the majority so my ideal course of 18 holes would probably be split into two loops of 12 or even 18 holes, or most likely one loop of 12 and one 18. The twelve would retain some 4's and split the par 5 and at least one four into 3's (one of the Gold threes might get redesignated into a 4 for the level of play) and the 18 would split all the 5's and 4's into distinct par threes. The 18 would be set with par around 920.
The 12 would be looking more at 950 rated The 18 would be a fun birdie fest for a good player but a challenge to the majority with chances of 2's but lots of places to mess up. I would also have a 9 or 12 hole beginner layout somewhere near the clubhouse, which would still be fun to play for experienced players.
This gives more players more chances to be on the course at the same time and gives them a helluva variety over the same bit of land. There would be a red/green, White, Blue and Gold course to play , or a mix of the three big ones. I really like hearing the question "which layout should we play today" variety is the spice of life and everyone has different time constraints and holes that appeal/don't appeal to them.
As long as planning permission is successful I'm making one like this at the moment, i'm excited to see how it comes out and Steve will be glad to hear the Golds are aimed to be set for 1000 rated play and not "British" par
I suspect the majority of rounds will be played on the British par layouts though.
Mine was a lighthearted jab, because of the time you've spent elsewhere are par 2, that you just had to stick it in. I agree with you about them.
I also agree with your post here, and particularly that it's good to have one or two holes where there's pressure to get a 2. By whatever name.
Except skipping longer courses when time is short. Well, that part's true, of course, but whether it's a consideration depends on the intent of the owner. I think people will travel further to play longer courses, too. They fit a different niche in our world.
