TAP or DOP instead of Par?

[Dave242]

Ah, yes---let's make DG as complex as possible, and alienate the families, noobs, duffers and chuckers [who, together, comprise 95% of our participants], so that the rest of local society looks at the 20 people taking up 37 acres and $35,000 of the budget of a public park and says, "WTF!?!"

Honestly, the "disc can accelerate after you release!" thread was at least humorous for its insight into the cluelessness of the delusional human mind.

This is just pathetically, selfishly sad. Its not broke, so YOU can't fix it.

This is a proposal to make things less complex. Can you drink to that? If so, have another. I'll buy. :thmbup:

 

[DavidSauls]

Among the hurdles, Dave, is there are people who don't want to change---and people who don't want to think about change. Having once made a mistake, they are committed to repeating it.

So Par is Par, but not like Par as the rest of the world knows it; it's a definition but not a benchmark. Never to be improved or replaced.

 

[DavidSauls]

To adress your idea directly:

Par is not broken beyond repair. All we need to do it remove the words "allowing two throws from close range to hole out". Then, set pars accordingly.

Calling it a different name in order to break the connection to current par is a nice try. Like Argentina renaming their currency to stop hyper inflation? However, everything we ask par to do is the same thing golfers ask par to do. It is "par". We just haven't defined it right, yet.

Whenever you say a hole takes this throw and this throw to complete, I chuckle. Even more so when you say "as the designer intended". There are so many ways to score a 2 or 3 or 4 in disc golf, I doubt there is even a way that could be called "the" way. This is the place we really don't want to be like golf. Trying to break it down into throw 1 throw 2, throw 3, etc. is what got us into this mess.

Just

* Stop the definition at "As determined by the Director, the score an expert disc golfer would be expected to make on a given hole with errorless play under ordinary weather conditions."

* Define an expert disc golfer as 1000-rate player

* Look to see (or estimate) which score at least 37% of 1000-rated players are getting.

That's par. All there is to talk about is whether 1000 or 37% are the right parameters.

Done. Fixes every problem. You're welcome.

Well done.

Well, except the fixes every problem discounts about 80,000 signs in need of replacement. Plus, I'd have to quit saying "Par doesn't matter" if a consistent standard, and benchmark to a certain skill level, were applied.

 

[bjreagh]

One of the things that bothers me most about par and disc golf compared to ball is moving the pin position. In BG the hole is moved daily, but does not change the par. In DG there are pin positions that can change par by 1 or 2 shots- I know courses that have E position 300' past the A position tucked tight down a fairway that curves twice. I always thought it was weird they are both considered par 3- no way to realistically compare how you play that hole each time other than knowing on the tee if its A I am getting a 3 if in E then a 4 or 5.

Most courses I have played don't have multiple tees, or multiple baskets. But have 1 set of tees and baskets that are moved on a semi-regular basis. (really quite the reverse of BG with 4 sets of tees and a green that is always the same.) My home course is set up sometimes with everything in A, sometimes in the longest, sometimes a mix- cool for variety, but difficult for comparing rounds using par.

I haven't fully comprehended TAP, but would it offer a solution to alt pin locations, other than saying a hole has a different par depending on the day you play it?

 

[DavidSauls]

I haven't fully comprehended TAP, but would it offer a solution to alt pin locations, other than saying a hole has a different par depending on the day you play it?

I don't think so. It looks like a "better par system, under another name". But when pin placements change a hole so that it will normally take at least one more shot to play, you're stuck with changing pars (or taps).

 

[DavidSauls]

One of the things that bothers me most about par and disc golf compared to ball is moving the pin position. In BG the hole is moved daily, but does not change the par. In DG there are pin positions that can change par by 1 or 2 shots- I know courses that have E position 300' past the A position tucked tight down a fairway that curves twice. I always thought it was weird they are both considered par 3- no way to realistically compare how you play that hole each time other than knowing on the tee if its A I am getting a 3 if in E then a 4 or 5.

Aside of the par debates, it's one of the things I like about disc golf. There is much more variety in our holes, and our courses. A wider range of distances, of obstacles, and aesthetics.

Which means that moving pins can create very different holes---double the distance, a whole new green, and/or an entirely different drive off the tee. It's hard to get that kind of variation on a (ball) golf course.

 

[bjreagh]

Aside of the par debates, it's one of the things I like about disc golf. There is much more variety in our holes, and our courses. A wider range of distances, of obstacles, and aesthetics.

Which means that moving pins can create very different holes---double the distance, a whole new green, and/or an entirely different drive off the tee. It's hard to get that kind of variation on a (ball) golf course.

I should have worded that different. It does not bother me about moving pins and the variety offered because of it- I enjoy that too. What bothers me is how par is flawed because of this [positive] fact. (But not so much where I really want to change the use of par, unless there was some superior way. I just play each hole as it is the best I can.)

I appreciate that people like Dave are least thinking about other possible systems.

 

[gstenger]

Sorry, but all of this debate about renaming Par seems kinda silly to me and reminds me of the following:
Nigel Tufnel: The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and...
Marty DiBergi: Oh, I see. And most amps go up to ten?
Nigel Tufnel: Exactly.
Marty DiBergi: Does that mean it's louder? Is it any louder?
Nigel Tufnel: Well, it's one louder, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing at ten. You're on ten here, all the way up, all the way up, all the way up, you're on ten on your guitar. Where can you go from there? Where?
Marty DiBergi: I don't know.
Nigel Tufnel: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we need that extra push over the cliff, you know what we do?
Marty DiBergi: Put it up to eleven.
Nigel Tufnel: Eleven. Exactly. One louder.
Marty DiBergi: Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?
Nigel Tufnel: [pause] These go to eleven.

(Quoted from here)

 

[ohtobediscing]

^^^Thanks, gstenger----but I feel the irony is lost on the vast multitudes, or just on the one who proposed an alternative to par in the first place.

Somehow, this harks of everyone-deserves-to-feel-good gradelessness in public schools.

 

[DavidSauls]

^^^Thanks, gstenger----but I feel the irony is lost on the vast multitudes, or just on the one who proposed an alternative to par in the first place.

Somehow, this harks of everyone-deserves-to-feel-good gradelessness in public schools.

I can't speak for the vast multitudes, but it's definitely lost on me.

 

[Dave242]

haha..... But, Innova beat you to the Spinal Tap reference years ago when they released their first Speed 11 disc. I cannot find the ad that had the stereo dials.

 

[Reginald]

I hate this thread

 

[knettles]

DVDA, one of Americas greatest bands!
"Now you're a man! A man, a man, a man..."

It's funny, I was discussing DVDA just the other day with friends while out on the course. Except not the band.

 

[Steve West]

Well done.

Well, except the fixes every problem discounts about 80,000 signs in need of replacement. Plus, I'd have to quit saying "Par doesn't matter" if a consistent standard, and benchmark to a certain skill level, were applied.

Yes, as you and Dave242 pointed out, I sort of forgot about one step: "Everyone adopts this definition." I just assumed that would happen, because it so obviously completely addresses each one of everybody's concerns.

I keep forgetting how humans "think".

 

[ScottyLove]

What about multiple tee pads and no more cheating on OB? Did anyone read my post? :gross:

Us peons would play the white tees and the uber golfers play gold tees. Re-throw from original lie on OB.

 

[Rockwell]

So Dave... with taps in play at worlds will schusterick is even? What hope does anyone else in the world have?

 

[Jenga54]

I don't think so. It looks like a "better par system, under another name". But when pin placements change a hole so that it will normally take at least one more shot to play, you're stuck with changing pars (or taps).

Yes, as you and Dave242 pointed out, I sort of forgot about one step: "Everyone adopts this definition." I just assumed that would happen, because it so obviously completely addresses each one of everybody's concerns.

I keep forgetting how humans "think".

ME: Hey there new potential DGer!
pDGer: How does this sport work?
ME: Complete the holes in the least number of throws, you win!
pDGer: So the holes, they're like, par 3, par 4, par 5?
ME: No, this course has mostly 2TAP with some TAP and even a 2TAP+1!
pDGer: But it's like pars, right?

 

[Dave242]

Yeah - you're on to something with that. That is pretty much how it works now. No one can really explain Par and why it varies all over the place depending on what course you are playing and/or who you are talking to. Or, why scratch golfers do not shoot Par. Or why golf isn't as easy as shooting 10 under par makes it sound. You have captured very well the confusion we currently have.....confusion that exists even if you try to become well versed.

At least with the TAP concept, if you put any effort into understanding it, you could explain it to pDGer like this:
"Instead of Par like they use in golf, we use something similar called TAP. It stands for 'Throws And one Putt' because it is simply a count of how many throws it takes to get to the hole with 300' being the maximum throw - and then one putt. It works much better for us than when we tried to use golf's definition of Par back when the sport was starting out. It will take a little to get used to.....it sounds funny now, but you'll get used to it quickly and learn to like it just like all the other weird terms we use in disc golf."

You can even do the little airquotes if you want when you say "Throws And one Putt"....and then be sure to also explain that anhyzer has nothing to do with bad flavored alcoholic water.

 

[aajpity]

It's fine as it is. This just sounds weird.

 

[Time2Shine]

I agree, It would be easier to just make everything par 3.