- Joined
- Dec 19, 2009
- Messages
- 6,964
This is a spin-off from the "Multiple pins - why?/why not?" thread.
Here are the gaps Chuck was looking for in his quest to make sure all holes offer enough birdies.
Bottom Line: If we set the gaps so at least half the holes of that score offer 10% birdies or more, then no par 3 hole should average over 3.22, and no par 4 hole should average over 4.42, and it gets fuzzy after that but perhaps no par 5 should average over 5.33.
This does not mean that par should be adjusted higher when the average score exceeds these limits.
This means those holes should be wiped from the face of the earth. (Or made easier so as to bring the number of birdies up, or made harder so they are legitimately the next higher par.)
If the gaps were based on hole lengths, they would tell us that no holes should be between 445 and 500 feet long, nor between 830 and 990 feet long.
I must point out that ranges based on lengths or even average score would be far less effective than a straight-forward look at the number of birdies actually generated. If a hole doesn't produce enough birdies, change it. We have the data, we can do that sort of thing now.
Here are the gaps Chuck was looking for in his quest to make sure all holes offer enough birdies.
Bottom Line: If we set the gaps so at least half the holes of that score offer 10% birdies or more, then no par 3 hole should average over 3.22, and no par 4 hole should average over 4.42, and it gets fuzzy after that but perhaps no par 5 should average over 5.33.
This does not mean that par should be adjusted higher when the average score exceeds these limits.
This means those holes should be wiped from the face of the earth. (Or made easier so as to bring the number of birdies up, or made harder so they are legitimately the next higher par.)
If the gaps were based on hole lengths, they would tell us that no holes should be between 445 and 500 feet long, nor between 830 and 990 feet long.
I must point out that ranges based on lengths or even average score would be far less effective than a straight-forward look at the number of birdies actually generated. If a hole doesn't produce enough birdies, change it. We have the data, we can do that sort of thing now.