Help Determining Par on Dixie Lee DGC

[Jimb]

I'm adding 2nd tee placements to my private course. I'm torn on setting par on a couple of the new pin placements. I'm looking to set a reasonable/ standardized par number. I'm hoping to get some input. I'll describe the holes and post a couple pics. This first post refers to hole #7.

The total length will be about 290'. The first 220' follows a gentle left turning path that's 8-12' wide. Then there is a severe, almost 90 degree, dog leg left. The desired/clear landing zone is about 20' "deep" from 220'-240'. The pin is then about 70 feet away and about 10' up. So the effective distance to the pin is about 100' from the desired landing zone when you take into account the elevation increase.

That's my bag sitting 60' away at the Red tee placement.
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=559&pictureid=5397

The brush pile won't always be this high. It's particularly high in this picture because of all of the work I've been doing cleaning up the property.
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums/picture.php?albumid=559&pictureid=5398

[Apothecary]

all par 3.

[Jimb]

Let's assume that I'd like to consider other options beyond par 3. :)

[mashnut]

That one actually sounds like a fairly straightforward par 3 to me. A drive to a landing zone that's within "close range" of the hole, and two strokes to get up and down from there.

[discpicable]

It's like that old disc golf saying. If you can see the basket from the tee, then the par shall be three. If you can't, it shan't.

Ok, I just made that up.

[magictenor1]

I am not in the all par 3 camp but in this case 3 seems logical as mashnut pointed out.

[grodney]

Will a large percentage of players be able to get within 40ish feet on their drive? If not, it's a par 4.

Will a really large percentage of players get a 3 on this hole? If so, consider shortening or lengthening.

You already said you have a "landing zone" for the drive. This means you are designing it as a 2-shot hole. Thus, it is a par 4.

Just my opinion.

================================================== ==============

Par is a design label.

If the hole was designed to be reached in 1 shot, it is a par 3.
If the hole was designed to be reached in 2 shots*, it is a par 4.
If the hole was designed to be reached in 3 shots**, it is a par 5.

If you can't easily tell how many shots a hole was designed to be reached in, there is probably a design problem with that hole.

And, yes, it does matter which skill level the hole was designed for.


Notes:
* Or, at the player's discretion, 1 heroic*** shot.
** Or, at the player's discretion, 2 heroic*** shots.
*** "heroic" implies risky and really really good.

[tstack10]

Anything under 325 even with pretty heavy woods is a par 3. Maybe around 350ft plus heavy wooded could be a par 4. In wide open spaces par 4s should be over 550 or so. It would take me two solid throws to birdie a par4 that length.


Here I could shank and shot and make three it looks like. Good luck it's your course so take it all in and make and informed decision.

[Jimb]

First of all. Thanks to everyone for their input so far. This is the kind of discussion that I was hoping for.

Will a large percentage of players be able to get within 40ish feet on their drive? If not, it's a par 4.

Will a really large percentage of players get a 3 on this hole? If so, consider shortening or lengthening.

You already said you have a "landing zone" for the drive. This means you are designing it as a 2-shot hole. Thus, it is a par 4.

Just my opinion.

And I want to address this reply directly. I like your ideas. (Maybe because I'm leaning towards par 4 to soothe my own ego.)

The landing zone is blind from the tee. If you hit the zone with your drive, it leaves you a minimum of 70', plus the 10' elevation increase, for 100' effective length to the basket. And it's a 90 degree turn so I don't think that anyone could get within 40' of the pin with their drive unless it was a fluke.

Unfortunately, the limitations of the property don't let me make this hole any longer and this is the 2nd of two tees I'm asking about. I'm assuming that the 60' shorter tee is par three, but the length of the tunnel drive from this tee make me want to get some opinions.

Thanks again everyone.

[waynewf]

I say once you set it all up, let par determine itself naturally. No need to try to put these holes in someone's little "par box!"

Since it's your private course, I say you play each hole 50 times. Track your scores and use your average to determine par. If you just happen to get 5's almost everytime on the hole in question, then it's reasonable to call it a par 5.
It's your course right? If someone can come in and shoot under par on your course, good for them!

[Olorin]

I'm adding 2nd tee placements to my private course. I'm torn on setting par on a couple of the new pin placements. I'm looking to set a reasonable/ standardized par number. I'm hoping to get some input.I suggest that you use Close Range Par (http://sites.google.com/site/discgolfcoursedesign/Home/par/CRpar) as your standard to set par.
First you have to determine the course level, though. Going by this one hole alone it's probably White or Red level.

This first post refers to hole #7. The total length will be about 290'. The first 220' follows a gentle left turning path that's 8-12' wide. Then there is a severe, almost 90 degree, dog leg left. The desired/clear landing zone is about 20' "deep" from 220'-240'. The pin is then about 70 feet away and about 10' up. So the effective distance to the pin is about 100' from the desired landing zone when you take into account the elevation increase. With a 90 degree L bend you've got a forced layup on your drive. According to CR par a 2nd shot with an effective length of 100 ft makes it a par 4 (unless the course is Gold level, which I doubt. It's probably not even Blue level.)

To be honest with you, it seems that this is a poorly designed hole, and you're going to get lots of flack from others who play it. People aren't going to like being allowed 3 shots from ~70 actual length away, or a par 4 that's only 290 ft. Many will say (or at least think) that it's dumb. There will also be lots of 3s. This hole is a tweener between par 3 and par 4, and I think that's why you asked the question. The vast majority of players don't understand forced layups, effective length from elevation, and CR par. Plus many people think that L bend fairways are too gimmicky. So be prepared for lots of gripes from outsiders. But if you're the only one playing it then do whatever you want.

To make the hole better I'd suggest that you either move the basket 40 ft closer to the drive landing zone and make it a par 3 that rewards a good drive or a good long putt, or move the basket 50-100 ft farther back to make it a more legitimate par 4. People love to complain about the par on tweener holes, especially when they don't even know much about how to set par.

[DavidSauls]

What he said.

[Jimb]

I suggest that you use Close Range Par (http://sites.google.com/site/discgolfcoursedesign/Home/par/CRpar) as your standard to set par.
First you have to determine the course level, though. Going by this one hole alone it's probably White or Red level.

With a 90 degree L bend you've got a forced layup on your drive. According to CR par a 2nd shot with an effective length of 100 ft makes it a par 4 (unless the course is Gold level, which I doubt. It's probably not even Blue level.)

To be honest with you, it seems that this is a poorly designed hole, and you're going to get lots of flack from others who play it. People aren't going to like being allowed 3 shots from ~70 actual length away, or a par 4 that's only 290 ft. Many will say (or at least think) that it's dumb. There will also be lots of 3s. This hole is a tweener between par 3 and par 4, and I think that's why you asked the question. The vast majority of players don't understand forced layups, effective length from elevation, and CR par. Plus many people think that L bend fairways are too gimmicky. So be prepared for lots of gripes from outsiders. But if you're the only one playing it then do whatever you want.

To make the hole better I'd suggest that you either move the basket 40 ft closer to the drive landing zone and make it a par 3 that rewards a good drive or a good long putt, or move the basket 50-100 ft farther back to make it a more legitimate par 4. People love to complain about the par on tweener holes, especially when they don't even know much about how to set par.

Thanks for the input and for taking time to really try to understand where I was coming from with the question.

Space/land limitations have "forced" the issue with this hole. I've said to myself (and to the one other person who's played the course) that the hole definitely isn't an ideal setup. From the proposed, longer tee, 60' of length will be added.

When I first posted the question I was leaning towards a par 4 because of the par standards I got from PDGA information. So with the effective distance (100' or so due to elevation increase) from the landing zone, it would technically allow for an approach and 2 close range shots... just like you said. I figure that my first set of tees would probably be a red layout and the 2nd set (when finished) will be a white layout.

I've only played 5 full rounds that I kept score on since I posted the course. My average score for the hole is 3.6 shots. So it would definitely play as an "easy" par 4 for an experienced player. But for "red level" players, 4 would be a good score, I think.

Thanks again, everyone, for the input.

[Jimb]

Crap! I had a total mental block in my reply to my own post. Olorin, I forgot that I was basing my question upon the already longer, pending white tees for my course. I've only kept score from the short tees and have no scoring record for the actual tee placement that I asked about originally on this post.

I imagine that this hole, in the longer position, will be my white tees. The shorter hole that I've actually kept score for would be the red tees.

I need sleep. Sorry about any confusion.

[optidiscic]

Imagine the best possible score and add 2. Keep it simple. If the hole is in any way aceable it's a 3. And so on.