Go Back   Disc Golf Course Review > General Disc Golf Discussions > General Disc Golf Chat

View Poll Results: Which of these best describes Hole 18 at the Utah Open?
A par 2 where 38% of throws are errors, and 1% of throws are hero throws. 6 25.00%
A par 3 where 24% of throws are errors, and 33% of throws are hero throws. 16 66.67%
A par 4 where 16% of throws are hero throws, and 23% are double heroes. 1 4.17%
A par 5 where 37% of throws are hero throws, and 21% are double heroes. 0 0%
A par 6 where 16% of throws are hero throws, and 62% are double heroes. 1 4.17%
Voters: 24. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1001  
Old 05-20-2017, 04:40 PM
DavidSauls's Avatar
DavidSauls DavidSauls is online now
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newberry, SC
Years Playing: 23.4
Courses Played: 125
Posts: 14,242
Niced 2,055 Times in 980 Posts
Default

Apologies, Lyle, for lumping you in with us.
Sponsored Links
Reply With Quote
  #1002  
Old 05-20-2017, 04:58 PM
DG_player DG_player is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 499
Niced 128 Times in 87 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc View Post
Doesn't matter if you believe par isn't meaningful without over and under. Those words are not part of the actual definition in ball golf nor disc golf. Par 2s still have an "under" just tougher. Your interpretation makes assumptions that are not there in fact, just in what many perceive for common usage.
Too be fair, where in the definition does it say anything about par matching expected score?

The only definition I've ever seen is errorless play with 2 shots to hole out from close range.

It's so vague it could easily be argued that it supports the concept that a hole should be birdieable. Is it really "close range" if the only way to make it in one shot is with a field ace?

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #1003  
Old 05-20-2017, 05:14 PM
DavidSauls's Avatar
DavidSauls DavidSauls is online now
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newberry, SC
Years Playing: 23.4
Courses Played: 125
Posts: 14,242
Niced 2,055 Times in 980 Posts
Default

from definitions:

Par

As determined by the Director, the score an expert disc golfer would be expected to make on a given hole with errorless play under ordinary weather conditions, allowing two throws from close range to hole out.

*

Yes, the "close range" is ambivalent. You might argue that, since you're allowed 2 throws to hole out, it doesn't matter whether you can hole out in 1 throw (without a field ace). You might argue that, since it's all about expected score, then it's the range at which a an expert is expected to hole out in 2 throws.

You might also argue that it's the 10-meter circle, or putting, but you've have to explain why they didn't say that.
Reply With Quote
  #1004  
Old 05-20-2017, 05:16 PM
DavidSauls's Avatar
DavidSauls DavidSauls is online now
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newberry, SC
Years Playing: 23.4
Courses Played: 125
Posts: 14,242
Niced 2,055 Times in 980 Posts
Default

.....Me? I'd argue that the vagueness of "close range" is the main reason for this debate.
Reply With Quote
  #1005  
Old 05-20-2017, 05:19 PM
Cgkdisc's Avatar
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is offline
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 29.7
Courses Played: 668
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 11,729
Niced 912 Times in 464 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DG_player View Post
Too be fair, where in the definition does it say anything about par matching expected score?

The only definition I've ever seen is errorless play with 2 shots to hole out from close range.

It's so vague it could easily be argued that it supports the concept that a hole should be birdieable. Is it really "close range" if the only way to make it in one shot is with a field ace?
There's no question that including the "2 shots" in the definition means a score less than 2 must be possible. Thus an ace should theoretically be possible on a par 2 hole. But the term birdieable sort of implies it should be commonly available not just rare like an ace. My point is a hole can meet the definition, be a par 2 and doesn't need to be birdieable in common understanding as long as a score 1 less than par is physically possible, i.e. ace.
Reply With Quote
  #1006  
Old 05-20-2017, 05:25 PM
DG_player DG_player is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 499
Niced 128 Times in 87 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc View Post
My point is a hole can meet the definition, be a par 2 and doesn't need to be birdieable in common understanding as long as a score 1 less than par is physically possible, i.e. ace.
The only way a par 2 could meet the definition, is if close range was defined to be a distance greater than the length of the hole.

Niced: (2)
Reply With Quote
  #1007  
Old 05-20-2017, 05:37 PM
Cgkdisc's Avatar
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is offline
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 29.7
Courses Played: 668
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 11,729
Niced 912 Times in 464 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DG_player View Post
The only way a par 2 could meet the definition, is if close range was defined to be a distance greater than the length of the hole.
Not exactly. We make integer throws that count 1 each. But we can average scores between 2 and 3. If close range is estimated at 200 feet for 2.0, then a hole with an effective length less than 300 feet could produce enough 1000-rated 2s to where it was more a par 2 than a par 3. In fact, all par 2s would average greater than 2.0 and typically under 2.5 unless there are especially punitive hazards like an island design.
Reply With Quote
  #1008  
Old 05-20-2017, 05:47 PM
DavidSauls's Avatar
DavidSauls DavidSauls is online now
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newberry, SC
Years Playing: 23.4
Courses Played: 125
Posts: 14,242
Niced 2,055 Times in 980 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DG_player View Post
The only way a par 2 could meet the definition, is if close range was defined to be a distance greater than the length of the hole.
I'd agree.

If "close range" is the distance from which an expert should be expected to hole out with 2, and the tee is within that range, then the player should be expected to get a 2 on the hole.
Reply With Quote
  #1009  
Old 05-20-2017, 05:50 PM
Disczealot Disczealot is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Years Playing: 7.6
Courses Played: 18
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 101
Niced 16 Times in 13 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DG_player View Post
The only way a par 2 could meet the definition, is if close range was defined to be a distance greater than the length of the hole.
I agree with you here, but what defines close range?

Maybe, if an expert uses a putter to reach the basket, it's close range?
Reply With Quote
 

  #1010  
Old 05-20-2017, 05:55 PM
DG_player DG_player is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 499
Niced 128 Times in 87 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc View Post
Not exactly. We make integer throws that count 1 each. But we can average scores between 2 and 3. If close range is estimated at 200 feet for 2.0, then a hole with an effective length less than 300 feet could produce enough 1000-rated 2s to where it was more a par 2 than a par 3. In fact, all par 2s would average greater than 2.0 and typically under 2.5 unless there are especially punitive hazards like an island design.
You need to re-read the definition:

"Par

As determined by the Director, the score an expert disc golfer would be expected to make on a given hole with errorless play under ordinary weather conditions, allowing two throws from close range to hole out."

If the length of the hole is greater than close range, it will take at least 1 shot to reach close range. By definition, once you reach close range you add 2 throws. The minimum possible is 3. The definition doesn't care if it's never actually going to require 2 throws to hole out from close range because the shot to reach close range is simple.

Niced: (2)
Reply With Quote
Reply

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Par 4s - multiple in a row or sprinkle par 3s into them? ToddL Course Design 9 02-23-2018 10:47 AM
Poorly designed par 4,5,and par 6 holes and bad high par courses optidiscic Course Design 159 09-12-2014 11:53 AM
Cgkdisc and jeverett talk about par Steve West Course Design 53 05-05-2012 09:37 AM
Deuce or die par 3's or play for par, par 3's? BrotherDave Disc Golf Courses 14 04-29-2011 01:04 AM
Par and Pro Par for multiple tees with different pars? marcusmpe General Disc Golf Chat 6 04-26-2010 07:13 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:38 PM.


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