Is less more?

[Billipo]

As winter sets in I got lots of time to play virtual disc golf design. Part of that is dicing and slicing course numbers for all those course tweaks that can shoulda, coulda, woulda been made.

In doing this I am always looking for that at least one more potential design improvement on each course.

At one course the 2021 PDGA event yielded 900 rated round from white tee as a 66 and from Blue a 950 rated round 66.33 on this Par 66 course. Can't get much closer to intended course par. Maybe all is good?

This course does have a par 3 hole that stuck out for score distribution. It plays similarly difficult from the white and blue layout at 2.55 shots (3 years of event data). All scores were birdies and pars (except a negligible 2 bogeys). DGCR logic says make the "easy" hole more difficult.

At first glance I could see that the "easy" hole could be made a touch longer or more difficult. Length hole?, tuck in target?, and/or smaller target? This is based on all the DGCR discussion of what scores should be for a good hole and par discussions.

Then I got a thought. Would it make sense if the hole is changed to make it even easier?

This hole is really the only hole on the course seems reasonably ace-able. Gotta get players to willingly add to event ace funds! I tend to have that ace-able hole on every course.

Is the current 50/50 score spread as good as a 30/70 score spread even if it favors the birdie on a par 3?

Interested in thoughts.

 

[Steve West]

A 50/50 split encodes 1 bit of information. 70/30 (or 30/70) encodes .88 bits.

Or, 50/50 is a scoring spread width of 2.00, while 70/30 (or 30/70) is 1.84.

If there are fewer than 59% twos (for the targeted skill level), it's a par 3.

 

[txmxer]

Not the expert, but without seeing some 4's, it does sound like a par 3 for the referenced players that's vanilla.

They hope to get a 2, but rarely get worse than 3.

Without playing the course, I don't know if that's a bad thing or not. It could give players a chance to reset after some tough holes? Or if it's early, a chance to get in a groove?

I think take it in context of the course. Maybe talk to some of the players about how it fit in to the round ?

 

[txmxer]

Oh, and per stats, if you want to create scoring distribution, raise the basket—maybe put it in a mound—my preference over just a taller pole.

I know that's verboten to some, but it is a simple adjustment that produces scoring spread based on what we've been told.

 

[oldmandiscer]

A 50/50 split encodes 1 bit of information. 70/30 (or 30/70) encodes .88 bits.

Or, 50/50 is a scoring spread width of 2.00, while 70/30 (or 30/70) is 1.84.

If there are fewer than 59% twos (for the targeted skill level), it's a par 3.

Shouldn't you follow disc golf rules for Par?

If the avg score is 2.49 it needs to be a Par 2.

 

[oldmandiscer]

As winter sets in I got lots of time to play virtual disc golf design. Part of that is dicing and slicing course numbers for all those course tweaks that can shoulda, coulda, woulda been made.

In doing this I am always looking for that at least one more potential design improvement on each course.

At one course the 2021 PDGA event yielded 900 rated round from white tee as a 66 and from Blue a 950 rated round 66.33 on this Par 66 course. Can't get much closer to intended course par. Maybe all is good?

This course does have a par 3 hole that stuck out for score distribution. It plays similarly difficult from the white and blue layout at 2.55 shots (3 years of event data). All scores were birdies and pars (except a negligible 2 bogeys). DGCR logic says make the "easy" hole more difficult.

At first glance I could see that the "easy" hole could be made a touch longer or more difficult. Length hole?, tuck in target?, and/or smaller target? This is based on all the DGCR discussion of what scores should be for a good hole and par discussions.

Then I got a thought. Would it make sense if the hole is changed to make it even easier?

This hole is really the only hole on the course seems reasonably ace-able. Gotta get players to willingly add to event ace funds! I tend to have that ace-able hole on every course.

Is the current 50/50 score spread as good as a 30/70 score spread even if it favors the birdie on a par 3?

Interested in thoughts.

If that's you most birdied hole I think your course is fine for your event. If it was pushing 60-70% like many on the DGPT then I think changes are needed. Or multiple over 50%.

 

[Steve West]

Shouldn't you follow disc golf rules for Par?

If the avg score is 2.49 it needs to be a Par 2.

This is from the Par by Average Score section of the the PDGA Par Guidelines.

Par by Average Score

    Determine the average score of Experts for the Skill Level.
    Use the following table:

Average Score 	1.00 to 2.44 | 2.45 to 3.69 | 3.70 to 4.94 | 4.95 to 6.19 | 6.20 and up
Par                   2              3              4              5              6
 
Par is not average, so this table adjusts for the tendency of holes to generate numerous scores 
that are higher than bogey, but hardly any scores that are lower than birdie.

 

[Billipo]

One thing I didn't mention.

Not in data since MA2 player. On White tee there was an one ace on the hole during a tournament 2020. This is only one ever that I can recall during a tournament on any hole at the course since like 2010. On casual rounds i know 2 open players carded aces on this hole. Don't know of any others.

 

[Steve West]

One thing I didn't mention.

Not in data since MA2 player. On White tee there was an one ace on the hole during a tournament 2020. This is only one ever that I can recall during a tournament on any hole at the course since like 2010. On casual rounds i know 2 open players carded aces on this hole. Don't know of any others.

In all my work, I just fold aces into "2 or less". There are never enough to be significant.

 

[Billipo]

In all my work, I just fold aces into "2 or less". There are never enough to be significant.

But is there enough significance to keep players interested? Likely the only chance to ace a hole on the entire course.

 

[Steve West]

But is there enough significance to keep players interested? Likely the only chance to ace a hole on the entire course.

Oh yeah. People cannot rationally cope with low probabilities.

 

[oldmandiscer]

This is from the Par by Average Score section of the the PDGA Par Guidelines.

Par by Average Score

    Determine the average score of Experts for the Skill Level.
    Use the following table:

Average Score 	1.00 to 2.44 | 2.45 to 3.69 | 3.70 to 4.94 | 4.95 to 6.19 | 6.20 and up
Par                   2              3              4              5              6
 
Par is not average, so this table adjusts for the tendency of holes to generate numerous scores 
that are higher than bogey, but hardly any scores that are lower than birdie.

IDK how or why they came up with this scoring spread for Par. It is completely illogical and silly to me. Completely disagree with it.

 

[Steve West]

IDK how or why they came up with this scoring spread for Par. It is completely illogical and silly to me. Completely disagree with it.

Well then, I guess an explanation is in order. See the Par Talk thread.

 

[oldmandiscer]

Well then, I guess an explanation is in order. See the Par Talk thread.

There isn't one that is satisfactory. If a hole is avg 4.94 is 1100 feet, I'm not calling it a Par 4. Sorry.

 

[Billipo]

I'm gonna try to recalibrate.

Championship level par 66 course plays nearly deadnuts par by the numbers. One particular par 3 hole by the math doesn't fall in ideal scoring spread. nearly 50/50 virtually all birdies and pars on this hole. Always looking to make course as good as possible. "Nothing is permanent but Change" - Heraclitus?

Best Option...

1.) By the Book - Make the hole marginally more difficult to get closer to a 70% par 30% birdie maybe a few bogies. Pull off your best Sheldon Cooper keeping the disc universe in order.

2.) Intangible - Make hole a little easier making distribution more like 70% birdies and instill a small but reasonable only real hope when approaching the tee that a given player can card an Ace on the course. Just not so short everyone gets a participation trophy ace.

3.) No Change - Don't worry be happy! Stay the course. Leave as is - Hey the course plays par how many courses can say that? Quit thinking about disc golf and go do something productive.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

I'd vote for option 1.

 

[biscoe]

Some holes should be easier in respect to par than others. Variety is king.

 

[dmoore1998]

I would say leave it alone. The problem with "by the book" is that the book is written by the PDGA. It's not written by the people who play your course. What do those people say?

You could design all kinds of courses that play by the book for par, that nobody would want to play.

Frankly, I don't think you should let the PDGA influence any course decisions at all, unless it comes to modifying it to host a major tournament to fit their minimum guidelines.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Gotta admit biscoe and dmoore make valid points.

I posted on the general basis that a hole that gets birdied 70% of the time is likely to get very few bogies, basically boiling scoring down to a binary: 2 or 3. * ...something I'm usually not very fond of. But that's sight unseen.

*Even on an Ace run, aces shouldn't be all that statistically relevant.

Especially agree with dmoore: these decisions shouldn't be done on paper or formulaically. See how players feel. Set up temp baskets and see how different distances/placements play, and what players think of them.

 

[oldmandiscer]

I'm gonna try to recalibrate.

Championship level par 66 course plays nearly deadnuts par by the numbers. One particular par 3 hole by the math doesn't fall in ideal scoring spread. nearly 50/50 virtually all birdies and pars on this hole. Always looking to make course as good as possible. "Nothing is permanent but Change" - Heraclitus?

Best Option...

1.) By the Book - Make the hole marginally more difficult to get closer to a 70% par 30% birdie maybe a few bogies. Pull off your best Sheldon Cooper keeping the disc universe in order.

2.) Intangible - Make hole a little easier making distribution more like 70% birdies and instill a small but reasonable only real hope when approaching the tee that a given player can card an Ace on the course. Just not so short everyone gets a participation trophy ace.

3.) No Change - Don't worry be happy! Stay the course. Leave as is - Hey the course plays par how many courses can say that? Quit thinking about disc golf and go do something productive.

I originally said leave it alone but re-read your first post. I'm guessing the hole is 280-300 feet or so? You'd be fine making it easier for an ace run, 180-200 feet. The DGPT isn't coming there I assume so I don't see why one easy hole or ace chance is a big deal. The target audience is mostly out to have fun, so have some fun with it.

A super easy hole wouldn't make a fun watch for viewers, but your hole would be fun for players.