#11  
Old 04-15-2011, 12:23 AM
jenb's Avatar
jenb jenb is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: DFW TX USA
Years Playing: 14.4
Courses Played: 88
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,431
Niced 27 Times in 18 Posts
Default

PDGA has a colorful chart that everyone ignores as far as I can tell.

http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/ParGuidelines.pdf
Sponsored Links
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-15-2011, 12:27 AM
prerube's Avatar
prerube prerube is offline
Maryland State PDGA Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Clinton, MD
Years Playing: 12.5
Courses Played: 256
Posts: 11,412
Niced 47 Times in 26 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jenb View Post
PDGA has a colorful chart that everyone ignores as far as I can tell.

http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/ParGuidelines.pdf
Great post Jen, you could have ended all debate in this thread
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-15-2011, 12:36 AM
JoshEpoo JoshEpoo is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Forest Lake, MN
Years Playing: 12.5
Courses Played: 66
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,216
Niced 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Also, I've seen tournaments at this course play par threes for every hole (even the two that are marked as par fours). Does this practice make any sense?
Playing everything as par 3's makes for a simple scoring system. What your score ends up being is only important relative to what everyone else shot, not what course par is. Par is pretty meaningless at this point in disc golf's evolution. Shooting par at one course might be a good score while -15 could be reasonable at another. The really short holes we have in disc golf mess up the system. It's much easier to throw a disc <200' accurately for a tap out birdie than it is to hit a wedge 150 yards for an easy deuce.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-15-2011, 12:36 AM
Dave242's Avatar
Dave242 Dave242 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake Forest, IL
Years Playing: 25.5
Courses Played: 386
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 4,508
Niced 22 Times in 10 Posts
Default

That chart and CR Par come up with the same results the vast majority of the time. What the PDGA chart does not give any guidance on is forced lay-ups (as in hard doglegs) and forced carries (say over water).

The "big" philosophical difference is that the PDGA chart is based on scoring averages. As you see, the distances for any given par is based on "light" or "heavy" foliage. CR Par's position is that Par should be only a result of length (effective length). Fairway width is a Design issue, not a Par issue.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-15-2011, 12:41 AM
Dave242's Avatar
Dave242 Dave242 is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lake Forest, IL
Years Playing: 25.5
Courses Played: 386
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 4,508
Niced 22 Times in 10 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoshEpoo View Post
Par is pretty meaningless at this point in disc golf's evolution.
And, some people see that as an issue in DG's evolution and are trying to change it.

IMO, getting a larger percentage of the playing population to understand scoring spread and how hole design effects that will lead to hole design and course design that is intentional and meaningful. When that happens, "seeing" Par will be easy: 1-throw holes are Par-3's, 2-throw holes are Par-4's, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-15-2011, 12:58 AM
JoshEpoo JoshEpoo is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Forest Lake, MN
Years Playing: 12.5
Courses Played: 66
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,216
Niced 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave242 View Post
And, some people see that as an issue in DG's evolution and are trying to change it.

IMO, getting a larger percentage of the playing population to understand scoring spread and how hole design effects that will lead to hole design and course design that is intentional and meaningful. When that happens, "seeing" Par will be easy: 1-throw holes are Par-3's, 2-throw holes are Par-4's, etc.
Well I would argue par is pretty meaningless in golf too. The problem I see is that it's just a lot easier to accurately throw a disc than hit a golf ball. There are a lot of disc golfers, even amateurs, who are sinking 30' putts at 80% or higher. To even approach that kind of consistency, even in a pool of the best golfers on the PGA tour, you have to get inside 10'. When you take disc golf's shorter holes, higher accuracy, and larger effective putting radius and then try to adopt a par rating system similar to golf you end up with something stupid.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-15-2011, 01:04 AM
JoshEpoo JoshEpoo is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Forest Lake, MN
Years Playing: 12.5
Courses Played: 66
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,216
Niced 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Hmmmm. Reading the Close Range par stuff now...
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-15-2011, 01:09 AM
jongoff09's Avatar
jongoff09 jongoff09 is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Central Arkansas
Years Playing: 10.5
Courses Played: 33
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,877
Niced 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

I wish disc golf would standardize par like ball golf has. Although, some ball golf courses have the same "problems" as we see common in disc golf. I played a ball golf course earlier this week with a 390 yd par 5. I hit my drive and left myself with an easy wedge shot to the green for an eagle putt. I would be furious if I ever scored more than a 4 on that hole. I don't think I have ever seen a ball golf hole that I didn't think I could birdie though like I do in disc golf.

In ball golf, over/under par isn't how you can tell how good you are from course to course, the "rating" and "slope" tells how easy/hard the course is. Something like that is also what I would like to see in disc golf. I know the PDGA has "SSA," but that isn't in use on every course and also changes based on the scores by the players.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-15-2011, 01:10 AM
JoshEpoo JoshEpoo is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Forest Lake, MN
Years Playing: 12.5
Courses Played: 66
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,216
Niced 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I think it's a good system, however I think the flaw is probably the assessment of the "Close Range" values in which a skilled player can get up and down in 2. I think that range is probably closer to 225' for pros, higher on a wide open shot, and even Ams are expected to be able to throw a putter 125' accurately for a layup. With those values in mind, holes less than 225' become par 2s (and I've seen this in some PDGA tournaments abroad on even longer holes).
Reply With Quote
 

  #20  
Old 04-15-2011, 01:10 AM
devin_707's Avatar
devin_707 devin_707 is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Austin, TX
Years Playing: 9.7
Courses Played: 20
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 611
Niced 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by greg_lange View Post
In ball golf, par is the number of shots it takes to get to the green plus two.

At my favorite course, there are three par threes that take two shots to reach the green. By that, I mean there is no player in the world that can reach these greens in one shot. I was lucky enough to play this course with Nikko Locastro last year and so I truly believe I'm not exaggerating.

So, what's the rule of thumb for determining hole par?

Should every hole be "birdiable" by somebody without making a lucky long shot?

Also, I've seen tournaments at this course play par threes for every hole (even the two that are marked as par fours). Does this practice make any sense?

Thanks and sorry if this a topic that comes up all the time.
May I ask which course you are referring too? I live in Austin, and am not too far from SA.

I would think that every hole should be birdiable by its par. There is one par 4 hole at Cat Hollow (My local course, #5) that is 599 feet. We usually play it as a 3 because it is very possible to three it with decent shots, though they would technically be considered birdies according to course par. Getting a 2 on this hole would be impossible though, unless you hit a field ace. Therefore I would think that considering it a par 4 is correct, since that would still give you the opportunity to birdie it, opposed to calling it a par 3 which gives you 1 to a million shot at getting a 2 on it.
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
How many blind par 3's are too many on an 18 hole layout? Dana Course Design 44 09-25-2014 08:23 PM
Poorly designed par 4,5,and par 6 holes and bad high par courses optidiscic Course Design 159 09-12-2014 11:53 AM
Should an uphill 600+ ft hole be a par 3? StoneWallKid Disc Golf Courses 80 08-23-2012 10:52 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


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.