54 or course par?

[Spookyspence]

Originally Posted by DavidSauls

Fair enough. But if they're keeping by "all-par-3", they're probably confused by your scores.

Virtually everyone I know gives scores based on all-par-3, or just gives their total score. In my world, the folks who pay attention to the course par and give scores over/under it, are the exceptions.

In fact, it's so prominent that tournament scores are added this way and, if a tournament has more than 18 holes, people have to be reminded to tally their score accordingly. Inevitably, someone won't.

That is the problem! Not everyone keeps score the same way! Its kinda 50/50

And how is it confusing to keep your score based off the the holes you play? The game has a scoring system that works perfectly fine, and I don't see why people get annoyed when you use it.

[jeverett]

Originally Posted by Cgkdisc

None of the holes need any tweaking. There's nothing wrong with a few par 3s with scoring spread skewed upward with bogeys versus downward with birdies.

The Granite Ridge holes were designed as par 4s for blue level and have appropriate scoring averages and spreads for blue level. There are many blue par 4s all over the world that become legit par 3s for gold level. It's the same logic for blue par 3s with 2.6-2.7 scoring average that truly become par 2s for gold at 2.3-2.4 scoring average. But in this case, the whining is deafening from pros that you can't have par 2s. So they're set at an inflated par 3.

The problem with simply converting a par 4 Blue-level hole isn't necessarily the skewed score distribution.. it's intended flight lines. At the Gold-level, are the pros really intended to find some line to the basket that the blue-level players aren't? Or are they just as limited by the available flight lines as the blue-level players? Without seeing hole 1, I can only guess that an accurate drive from a Gold-level player isn't any closer to the basket after their first drive than an accurate drive from a blue-level player. Neither are in the 100ft. range after said accurate drive, making this hole by definition a par 4 at both skill levels.. and a reasonably-well designed one, by the scoring spread distribution. Hole 5 same thing. If the ideal drive for a Gold-level player is still placing them outside 100ft., that's not a par 3 (or it could just be a badly-designed par 3). Hole 9 is the only one that sounds like the intended flight line actually elongates.. and at the blue level it's a definitely par 4, but at the Gold-level is a tweener. That would be the one hole that I could really see it might be worth it to tweak.. that and any of those par 2 candidates you mentioned.. but that's another story.

[DavidSauls]

@Spookyspence

I don't get annoyed when people use the course par. It's perfectly understandable. However, some of them get annoyed when I don't, which I find odd.

Bear in mind that many people who use all-par-3, started out using course par. I know I did, so I have the perspective of having used both to keep score, and I definitely know which I prefer. With so many others using all-par-3, you must concede that we can't all be idiots.

[mjoyce]

Originally Posted by Speedly

Just use Easy Scorecard Pro, put course par in there. App keeps track for you, problem solved.

done and done

[DavidSauls]

Originally Posted by Spookyspence

And how is it confusing to keep your score based off the the holes you play?

Not too confusing. But---

(1) Scoring by course par in my head, I've reached a basket and forgotten what the par was. Especially in a large group with some bad throws along the way. Never happens with all-par-3.

(2) I've played courses where par wasn't shown on the sign, and I didn't have a scorecard. Not an issue with all-par-3.

(3) When writing scores on a scorecard and totaling them, it's much easier not to refer to each hole's designated par. You just scan across, drop a stroke for 2s, add a stroke for 4s, etc.

(4) I've played some courses with really ridiculous pars designated. What to do? Shoot 20 under? Call pars what I think they should be? Or just use the same system I use everywhere else?

(5) Scoring by course par puts me out-of-step with 95% of the players I play with. Your world may be 50/50, by mine's not.

(6) I find no advantage to scorekeeping based on the course par.

[DavidSauls]

Originally Posted by mjoyce

done and done

Don't have a smartphone, don't want a phone on the course, don't want to stop and enter scores each hole when I can MORE EASILY keep score in my head, doesn't solve the problem of inconsistently set scores, doesn't really solve anything except the math.

[Cgkdisc]

To jeverett - Hole 1 was designed as a 2-shot par 3 and never was designed as a par 4 for blue. Your use of CRP analysis fails for a hole like this. The actual scoring distribution and average bear this out on this hole and Granite hole 5. Granite 5 was not one of my favorite blue holes for gold level but still worked as a tough par 3. Few got within 100 ft due to the fairway shape. Or if they did, it may have required a technical shot over or around a wall of trees. Hole 9 is a bomber hole where gold level players could get closer to the pin by taking a more direct angle over the marsh in addition to their average distance being longer than blue level.

[scarpfish]

If people complaining about the all par-3 score keeping method ever have to check a large amount of scorecards during a tournament, I think then they'll understand why its so popular.

As for doing my own in head scorekeeping, due to the all par-3 method, I can play 18 holes very quickly and at the end of the round, only have to recall the holes that I got something other than a '3' on (score book suggests this is around 25% of the holes played on the home course) to get my round score.

[mjoyce]

Originally Posted by DavidSauls

Not too confusing. But---

(1) Scoring by course par in my head, I've reached a basket and forgotten what the par was. Especially in a large group with some bad throws along the way. Never happens with all-par-3.

(2) I've played courses where par wasn't shown on the sign, and I didn't have a scorecard. Not an issue with all-par-3.

(3) When writing scores on a scorecard and totaling them, it's much easier not to refer to each hole's designated par. You just scan across, drop a stroke for 2s, add a stroke for 4s, etc.

(4) I've played some courses with really ridiculous pars designated. What to do? Shoot 20 under? Call pars what I think they should be? Or just use the same system I use everywhere else?

(5) Scoring by course par puts me out-of-step with 95% of the players I play with. Your world may be 50/50, by mine's not.

(6) I find no advantage to scorekeeping based on the course par.

Originally Posted by DavidSauls

Don't have a smartphone, don't want a phone on the course, don't want to stop and enter scores each hole when I can MORE EASILY keep score in my head, doesn't solve the problem of inconsistently set scores, doesn't really solve anything except the math.

(1) 1 off the tee into the tree, 2 throw it towards the basket, 3 miss put, 4 make tap in

(2) ^ doesn't matter what par for the hole is what matters is how many strokes you get

(3)I prefer to just add the numbers together to get a total.

(4)total strokes

(5)I know people that do it both ways but most I play with just tell you how man strokes they shot in a round on a course.

(6) I find no advantage to scorekeeping based on the course par.

I do like the easy scorecard though it takes no time at all to enter the score into the phone. If you don't have a smartphone and don't have a phone on the course I understand your preference and to each his own.

It's nice to also have access to a record of all of your rounds at your fingertips so you can see your progression.

[Spookyspence]

Originally Posted by scarpfish

If people complaining about the all par-3 score keeping method ever have to check a large amount of scorecards during a tournament, I think then they'll understand why its so popular.

As for doing my own in head scorekeeping, due to the all par-3 method, I can play 18 holes very quickly and at the end of the round, only have to recall the holes that I got something other than a '3' on (score book suggests this is around 25% of the holes played on the home course) to get my round score.

I can see why all par 3 is popular okay, its easy! But when someone gives me a +/- score for a course they played its not accurate if they use this type of scoring. If everyone said the total number of strokes they had OR just kept track of their score like they are suppose to they could give me a accurate score.

I just don't see what the problem with keeping track of your score like you are suppose to is.......I could only imagine if people that play ball golf played every course as all par 3.