Old 05-01-2012, 04:23 PM
DavidSauls's Avatar
DavidSauls DavidSauls is online now
* Ace Member *
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newberry, SC
Years Playing: 23.1
Courses Played: 124
Posts: 13,779
Niced 1,499 Times in 738 Posts

We might as well. By several definitions of "par", and by my mindset when playing them, they ARE par-2s.
Sponsored Links
Reply With Quote
Old 05-02-2012, 07:59 PM
Steve West Steve West is offline
Par Delusionary
Join Date: Dec 2009
Years Playing: 44.2
Courses Played: 306
Posts: 4,091
Niced 909 Times in 481 Posts

Originally Posted by Rockwell View Post
Then it seems we'll need to rename many of our par 3s out there par 2s if it is defined by not moving up or down in the standings. (assuming par is set for pro level players)

I'm not saying I disagree with your idea, but par 2s are certainly implied with this definition.
Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2012, 12:54 AM
Menacewarf's Avatar
Menacewarf Menacewarf is offline
Double Eagle Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: West Maine
Years Playing: 9.8
Courses Played: 60
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,957
Niced 2 Times in 2 Posts

Maybe just not design par 2's for a given skill level? idk? It would be more clear if more courses were directly designed for a certain skill level.

Sure it's true sometimes. Examples I can think of are Maine, where almost every course is private and thus designed for intermediate (maybe 900 rated) par. I'm thinking Creative rec, cranberry valley, Dragan field, and Scarborough. All nice courses but almost completly 900 based in terms of par 4's and 5's and the abundance of of 1000 rated par twos.

I don't tournament much but am 930 rated and can 3 every par 5 at all those courses. I throw a bit longer than my rating but a rating is still rating. I really don't mind it though because theses courses are just sooooo based towards a high leval recreational or casual player. The par's work great for this. I play them with my two fairly competent lady friends and they can almost always make a run at par if not for the whole course but for half.

I myself just play every hole a par three in my own head on these types of courses to keep the hunger alive, and while not a high rated player, can show long moments of 1000 rated play, and find it makes me better to at least try a little to play to that standard.

One will really note the difference by playing a Maine course and then dropping down to maple hill gold where most par fours are not birdie holes for all but the best of the best.
Reply With Quote

Old 05-05-2012, 08:37 AM
Cgkdisc's Avatar
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is online now
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 29.3
Courses Played: 658
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 11,524
Niced 701 Times in 383 Posts

Realistically, there are no par 2s for White (900) and Red (875>) levels. Holes have to be pretty wide open and under 175 for Blue level par 2s. The problem you run into is with most public courses being designed for Blue or lower level golfers, several holes will likely become par 2s for gold level players, typically Open division. While ideally courses should be designed without par 2s for the skill level the layout is designed for, unless you're designing a gold level course, there will likely be par 2s on it when gold level players play it.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

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

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:37 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.