Please settle this argument...

[Scared_Discless]

no, fire-birdie.

It's catchy without being Cliché. I've changed my mind -Fire-birdie it is.

 

[_MTL_]

Yes, it's an eagle for an ace.

 

[The Hammer]

It's catchy without being Cliché. I've changed my mind -Fire-birdie it is.

YES!! Fist pump. :hfive:

 

[Cgkdisc]

From Wikipedia for both Stableford scoring and Eagle itself:
Eagle
The term "eagle" means scoring two under par (−2). Eagles usually occur when golfers hit the ball far enough to reach the green with fewer strokes than expected. This most commonly happens on par fives, though it occasionally occurs on short par-fours. A hole in one on a par-three hole also results in an eagle. The name "eagle" was used as a large bird representing a better score than a birdie.[2]

 

[pablo.diablo]

SEMANTICS

 

[the_pwnerator]

^^If Wikipedia says it, it must be true...

 

[pablo.diablo]

hole in one on a Par 5 is a DOUBLE DRAGON

 

[Will Burke]

As a self-proclaimed genius I would say yes in bolf. But because we are cooler the answer is no. Now if you did it with an "Eagle" does that make you right?

 

[_MTL_]

Sorry no that is a DOUBLE EAGLE

ALBATROSS is a hole-in-one on a Par 5.

No, that is not correct.

It would be a 2 on a par 5 or an ace on a par 4.

I've actually witnessed a 2 on a par 5 in disc golf.

 

[BENFTS]

I say Eagle and Aces are the same thing just different names.

An Eagle is defined as: A hole played in two strokes under par
An Ace is defined as: When a player throws the disc directly from the tee into the hole with one stroke

So an Ace is not always an Eagle because you can ace a par 4, and an eagle is not always an ace because you can shoot a 2 on a par 4. But an ace on a par 3 could also be called an Eagle, however Ace does sound cooler than an Eagle.

This

 

[JTacoma03]

par 4's are a made up by bad disc golfers.

:notsureifserious:

 

[Scared_Discless]

Now if you did it with an "Eagle" does that make you right?

No, but it does make you a criminal. :|

 

[b-mart]

Stupid argument...I'd say that he almost birdied a par three - par 4's are a made up by bad disc golfers.

I'm the first to admit that I'm a bad disc golfer... But let's look at where you live. Illinois. Haven't played it, but I have it on good authority that a lot of your courses are a waste of time. But if they're anything like the courses I've played in northern Indiana, then I actually agree with your argument. Anyone who considers a 250' hole with no obstacles a par 5 is most definitely a bad disc golfer.

..But if you've ever played a good course like SeaTac or Bud Pell then you'll know that not all holes can be done in three shots no matter HOW good you are. Maybe a pro could eagle hole three at Pell, but nobody else could...

 

[Pwingles]

No, but it does make you a criminal. :|

And a perv

 

[iacas]

Aces are eagles, but eagles on par 4s or 5s are more difficult to get because they require two or three good shots rather than just one.

 

[Pwingles]

Aces are eagles, but eagles on par 4s or 5s are more difficult to get because they require two or three good shots rather than just one.

This is correct. Also this is why the OP is wrong. An ace could an eagle, but an eagle cannot be an ace.

 

[The Hammer]

Aces are eagles, but eagles on par 4s or 5s are more difficult to get because they require two or three good shots rather than just one.

Perhaps for some people. However, if you have a big arm, the par 4's and 5's can be far easier to eagle.

 

[McJesus]

Im of the persuasion that its all semantics, personally if I get an ace on a par three, im calling it and ace, not an eagle, because without context, people are gonna automatically assume you got a 2 shot on a par 4. BTW, par three is the lowest a par goes. There is no such thing as a legitimate par 2, any markings saying something is a par two is incorrect.(Im almost 100% sure on this; correct me if im wrong)

 

[jasonc]

I'm the first to admit that I'm a bad disc golfer... But let's look at where you live. Illinois. Haven't played it, but I have it on good authority that a lot of your courses are a waste of time. But if they're anything like the courses I've played in northern Indiana, then I actually agree with your argument. Anyone who considers a 250' hole with no obstacles a par 5 is most definitely a bad disc golfer.

Yes, a lot of our courses are a waste of time. However, I'm not sure why that would matter at all for this discussion.

We have a handful of good courses in the Greater Chicagoland area...mostly in Joliet.

We also have McNaughton, Camden Sinnissippi, Foundation Park, and Wildcat Springs.

Plenty of 4+ rated courses in our great state. Can't wait to play em all!

 

[jasonc]

Im of the persuasion that its all semantics, personally if I get an ace on a par three, im calling it and ace, not an eagle, because without context, people are gonna automatically assume you got a 2 shot on a par 4. BTW, par three is the lowest a par goes. There is no such thing as a legitimate par 2, any markings saying something is a par two is incorrect.(Im almost 100% sure on this; correct me if im wrong)

Sorry, but you are wrong on this. I have seen a 90' hole that is a legit par 2 at this course. Hole #4.