Par Talk

[The Last DJ]

What about a "golden" number for par on an 18-hole course? For example, ball golf uses 72 which doesn't necessarily translate to disc golf. I've played a few par 72 courses like Idlewild and The Black Course. While they are both fantastic courses, they are definitely nowhere near newb-friendly. I've heard many designers argue that a number in the low 60's is ideal for an 18-hole disc golf course.

 

[CaptainAnhyzer]

 

[lyleoross]

No matter how hard you hit that horse, your disc ain't going any farther.

 

[ru4por]

I really liked it when the "What is Par" thread was just closed. Maybe lightning will strike twice.

 

[Steve West]

I think the biggest discussion point is "to the green +1 shot" vs "to the green +2 shots".

The +2 shot crowd does not want par 2s and the +1 shot crowd does not want the tournament results to be like -50 to -70.

I dont care, i count throws. I find it especially ridiculous when somebody asks about par while we are playing safari-skins.

I had never heard anyone espouse the "to the green +1 throw" theory until a few days ago. I don't of anyone (other than those who come onto a par talk thread to claim they don't care about par) who even acknowledges it.

 

[Cgkdisc]

More like "To the green + 1.3 throws" but who's counting.

 

[Putt for D'oh]

Kinda feels like threads discussing Par are more suited for the Watercooler section. Par and politics... the end result of an online discussion is about the same for both.

 

[DanJon]

If you want to talk about Par in relation to the Pro Side of the game, then you need to acknowledge the fact that our pros currently feel they should be able to birdie every hole.

If you can fix that attitude, then I think it would help quite a bit.

You could then say, that easy Par 4 is actually a hard Par 3, and shooting par on that particular hole is a good thing.

I think it would be easier to digest that, then to try and push the Par 2 idea.

With that said, I understand that a lot of courses out there do have very easy Par 3's.

 

[XC_Eddy]

Par 2's are crazy. No way around it. You can only birdie if you ace it? Craziness. I feel much better about easy and hard par 3's than par 2's. Not all pars of the same number have to be equal.

 

[Cgkdisc]

How do you birdie Par 2 miniature golf holes without an ace? The fear with Par 2s seems to be that disc golf would then be seen as too easy or an inferior form of golf. However, consider that miniature golf has been much more financially successful for many course owners (Putt Putt franchisees, for example) than disc golf has yet to be for most pay-to-play facilities.

 

[ODRB]

I always enjoy chuckers that ask "what's par on this hole?".

Who the @#$^ cares? Just throw your newb hyzer and move along.

I always enjoy asshats asking on every tee "Steve, how far is this one?" Who the &$*% cares. It is pitch black, you're super drunk, and we just walked 4 miles to get here. Throw your putter and move along.

#hasanybodyseenthebridge

 

[Stardoggy]

I always enjoy asshats asking on every tee "Steve, how far is this one?" Who the &$*% cares. It is pitch black, you're super drunk, and we just walked 4 miles to get here. Throw your putter and move along.

#hasanybodyseenthebridge

I don't see how that relates. Also, those holes should mostly be par 2's.

 

[ODRB]

I don't see how that relates. Also, those holes should mostly be par 2's.

Nothing should be a par 2. That's dumb.

 

[Steve West]

Par 2's are crazy. No way around it. You can only birdie if you ace it? Craziness. I feel much better about easy and hard par 3's than par 2's. Not all pars of the same number have to be equal.

What is the origin of this notion that you should be able to birdie any given hole? Serious question for anyone.

To me, the hole that is most obviously par 3 is the hole where no one ever scores anything but a three. Yet, some would say that hole must be a par 4, because otherwise it could never be birdied.

 

[DavidSauls]

What is the origin of this notion that you should be able to birdie any given hole? Serious question for anyone.

To me, the hole that is most obviously par 3 is the hole where no one ever scores anything but a three. Yet, some would say that hole must be a par 4, because otherwise it could never be birdied.

My guess is that it just comes from the fact that for so long, so many holes---almost all holes---have been birdieable, at least by the pars that have been assigned to them. To the point that "birdie" is the new "par"---people seem to think that a birdie is what you get for playing a hole well.

The Inalienable Right to Birdie.

 

[DG_Before_Breakfast]

My Par is making a weird noise...

 

[chevis]

a birdie should be a reward for excellent play on a hole. bogie should be punishment for screwing up on a hole. par is just ok.

 

[Lazerface]

How do you birdie Par 2 miniature golf holes without an ace? The fear with Par 2s seems to be that disc golf would then be seen as too easy or an inferior form of golf. However, consider that miniature golf has been much more financially successful for many course owners (Putt Putt franchisees, for example) than disc golf has yet to be for most pay-to-play facilities.

Two problems.

1) It's considerably easier to ace in mini golf than disc golf (speaking in context of professional level disc courses) I have never played a professional level mini golf course, but I've seen those guys on TV and it's pretty sweet. I bet they have had their fair share of PAR talk as well.

2) The success of miniature golf has ABSOLUTELTY nothing to do with the PAR on the score card. Yes, this is a complete assumption, but a very rational one.

I'm not convinced that disc golf scores relative to PAR hamper sponsorship interest, new player interest, or media interest in any way. Would it be a bit easier to have a conversation with someone who knows nothing about the sport if our PAR was 1 to 1 with ball golf? Sure, but a simple explanation about how we are throwing Frisbees VS hitting a ball with a stick and our sport is considerably easier than ball golf should clear up any confusion rather quickly.

DEFINITION: In golf, par is the predetermined number of strokes that a scratch (or 0 handicap) golfer should require to complete a hole, a round (the sum of the pars of the played holes), or a tournament (the sum of the pars of each round).

The above definition is why we are divided on this issue. A scratch golfer in ball golf is REALLY GOOD. A scratch golfer in disc golf (on the average course) is not so good. Steve sees this as a big problem. A PAR problem. I don't. I just accept the fact that golf came first and our sport is much easier for a multitude of reasons and it's not because we have our PAR wrong. It's just because our birdies are easier. Yes, I see how this becomes very circular.

I just disagree that solving this non-problem is important. I don't necessarily have good argument, but I think it's important we are "putting" for birdie. In my mind PAR as it relates to game play supersedes PAR as it relates to the overall score. I realize that is counterintuitive given the definition of PAR, but it seems to be a popular school of thought.

If the argument is that our PAR does not fit the definition, I agree.

If you think that means it must be changed, I disagree.

 

[Steve West]

...
DEFINITION: In golf, par is the predetermined number of strokes that a scratch (or 0 handicap) golfer should require to complete a hole, a round (the sum of the pars of the played holes), or a tournament (the sum of the pars of each round).

The above definition is why we are divided on this issue. A scratch golfer in ball golf is REALLY GOOD. A scratch golfer in disc golf (on the average course) is not so good. Steve sees this as a big problem. A PAR problem. I don't. I just accept the fact that golf came first and our sport is much easier for a multitude of reasons and it's not because we have our PAR wrong. It's just because our birdies are easier. Yes, I see how this becomes very circular.
...

If the argument is that our PAR does not fit the definition, I agree.

If you think that means it must be changed, I disagree.

No, the problem is that we often run tournaments for Open players without setting the par to what the scratch disc golfer should get.

Of course disc golf is easier than ball golf, and of course birdies will not be as difficult as ball golf. That doesn't give us free reign to go entirely to the other end of the spectrum and make sure all holes are easily birdieable.

Par is reset every time a TD runs a tournament. So, I don't know what exactly would "not change" or how that would save any resources of any kind if we decided par was too small a problem to fix.

I'm just advocating that in the future they set it according to the actual definition (or the definition you gave, which is practically the same thing).

 

[araytx]

What is the origin of this notion that you should be able to birdie any given hole? Serious question for anyone.

To me, the hole that is most obviously par 3 is the hole where no one ever scores anything but a three. Yet, some would say that hole must be a par 4, because otherwise it could never be birdied.

My guess is that it just comes from the fact that for so long, so many holes---almost all holes---have been birdieable, at least by the pars that have been assigned to them. To the point that "birdie" is the new "par"---people seem to think that a birdie is what you get for playing a hole well.

The Inalienable Right to Birdie.

What's funny (peculiar) to me in this debate is that SO MANY think holes should be birdie-able (using a ball golf term), yet most often it's the same ones say, "we don't need to be like ball golf." I am more with Steve on the par issue. I think hole pars should be accurate for the hole. Not "What you play it as," not "what you think it should be to be 'birdie-able'," but accurate for the hole. And like Steve advocates, this means statistically accurate.