#1  
Old 08-15-2013, 10:25 AM
Dave242's Avatar
Dave242 Dave242 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake Forest, IL
Years Playing: 20.3
Courses Played: 366
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 4,346
TAP or DOP instead of Par?

All the talk of scores like -90 at Worlds got me thinking that we need to just ditch the term Par in our game……and I was going to jump in and suggest that. But that is a losing battle even if it is needed. That will never happen.....nor will coming up with a standard universally agreed upon and applied definition.

So, instead of ditching Par, I think we need another measure to communicate to DGers what Par essentially communicates to BGers.

What we are essentially interested in when looking at a score is knowing 1) how many Drives the course designer intended for an expert to get into the 10M circle (and if they player achieved that), and 2) if they made their Putt.
So, we should measure that. Let’s have a term/stat that measures that.

Here are the terms I thought of (exact term is up for grabs):
DOP – Drives and One Putt
TAP – Throws And one Putt
POT – Putt Once and Throws
POD – Putt Once and Drives

If we only count “Drives” that might be confusing on some holes where the designer has intended an expert to land say 100’ short of the basket…..then is the upshot a Drive? Doesn’t feel like a Drive! That hole would be a DOP-2. Course DOP very would rarely be achieved and basically never broken (to go under DOP you would need all Birdies and at least one legit Eagle - in today’s terms).

So, TAP would count the Drive, the Upshot, and one Putt. That hole would be a TAP-3 hole. TAP measures perfect play as intended by the designer.

I prefer TAP to DOP……but POT is the best term in that is specifies ONE putt (the clear differentiator to most people’s concept of Par). But, DG already has more POT than is needed. TOP would also work, but just does not sound right to me.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-15-2013, 10:34 AM
DeadEye's Avatar
DeadEye DeadEye is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: On the course
Courses Played: 7
Posts: 1,546
This thread isn't up to par.

Cwutididthere?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-15-2013, 10:38 AM
UTTERBACK's Avatar
UTTERBACK UTTERBACK is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Omaha, NE
Years Playing: 4.4
Courses Played: 41
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 511
This isn't particularly on topic, but I'd like to see a course par established without individual hole pars. Say a course is par 60 and leave it at that. If this type of thing were established, you wouldn't have people arguing about what par is for certain holes. There is a course in Omaha (Hummel Park) that is listed as a par 60. I feel that it should be closer to a 57 because there are some holes (hole #10) that are called par fours even though a well executed drive can leave a drop in deuce. To me, that is a par 3, but because it's one of the longer holes on the course and rarely two'd, people say it's a par 4. If hole pars were dropped, we could combine some strokes on those tweener holes everyone argues about and simply apply one number to all 18 holes. For example, say there are four holes like the one I mentioned that are arguably a par 3.5. If we put them into a single course par, we could say that those four holes should take 14 strokes. Odds are you're going to three a couple and four a couple. This is a horrible mess of ideas I've rambled out, but I think it kind of gets the point across.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-15-2013, 10:40 AM
sneakytiki's Avatar
sneakytiki sneakytiki is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Central CT
Years Playing: 12.4
Courses Played: 15
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 442
Why not keep the term par but define it as you are defining it? I think those acronyms sound silly.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-15-2013, 10:40 AM
BogeyNoMore's Avatar
BogeyNoMore BogeyNoMore is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Walled Lake, MI
Years Playing: 10.3
Courses Played: 167
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 6,104
DOP: no - too close to dope, and not all shots are drives.
POD: no - that's a group of whales
POT: no - too much of that on the course already
TAP: makes sense, but honestly: isn't that how we should define PAR, since it's deeply ingrained in the lexicon of the game and not going away?

I see no problem with PAR = number of good shots needed to reach the circle + 1 putt.
Issue: by that definition, a lot of holes would actually be Par 2's.

Those are my thoughts. Sorry if they don't add much.

Last edited by BogeyNoMore; 08-15-2013 at 10:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-15-2013, 10:47 AM
Rockwell Rockwell is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Years Playing: 8.4
Courses Played: 78
Posts: 180
Do we want perfect play to be -18 or Even? The -90 turns heads and raises questions, but it was the best player in the world over 135 holes.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-15-2013, 10:48 AM
DavidSauls's Avatar
DavidSauls DavidSauls is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newberry, SC
Years Playing: 19.2
Courses Played: 115
Posts: 7,537
Quote:
Originally Posted by UTTERBACK View Post
This isn't particularly on topic, but I'd like to see a course par established without individual hole pars.
SSA serves this purpose on courses that don't change much for tournaments, or week-to-week.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 08-15-2013, 10:48 AM
_MTL_ _MTL_ is offline
I think I'm important
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Years Playing: 21.3
Courses Played: 105
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,947
Send a message via AIM to _MTL_ Send a message via Yahoo to _MTL_
The more we get away from mainstream golf terms, the more difficult it is for our sport to go mainstream.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 08-15-2013, 10:50 AM
tarel's Avatar
tarel tarel is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lehigh Valley
Years Playing: 5.3
Courses Played: 53
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,282
Send a message via Skype™ to tarel
Can we use A2M or DVDA in DG please?
Reply With Quote
 

  #10  
Old 08-15-2013, 10:52 AM
bnbanbury bnbanbury is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: richmond,va/ north east, md
Courses Played: 39
Posts: 351
I think one of the problems with the scores that are silly under par is that people are looking at par the way it is laid out in the op, that is to say they look at how many shots it takes to get to the circle. The problem is that few of the expert players miss anything from in the circle. Many people have suggested smaller targets as a way to protect par, as 25' putts are automatic for many expert players. I think another thing to consider is expanding the definition of where the "putting green" is. For expert players i think a par 4 can be a hole in which 2 good shots leaves you a 40'-60' look for a birdie instead of two good shots getting you inside the circle.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Disc Golf Center

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.