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 37.50%
A par 3 where 24% of throws are errors, and 33% of throws are hero throws. 9 56.25%
A par 4 where 16% of throws are hero throws, and 23% are double heroes. 0 0%
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 6.25%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1461  
Old 07-27-2017, 03:33 PM
PMantle's Avatar
PMantle PMantle is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Alexandria, La.
Years Playing: 6
Courses Played: 48
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 4,569
Niced 530 Times in 379 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtreadwell View Post
How can they hang their objections on it if it isn't clearly defined?
Easy. The numbers people don't use it at all. It's there. It matters. As Doof said, the score on a hole is meaningless without knowing how the score was made. Maybe ask https://www.dgcoursereview.com/faq.php?mode=show&id=16
Sponsored Links
Reply With Quote
  #1462  
Old 07-27-2017, 04:04 PM
jtreadwell's Avatar
jtreadwell jtreadwell is offline
Wizard of Plastic Land
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Southern NH
Years Playing: 8.1
Courses Played: 92
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,758
Niced 9 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PMantle View Post
Easy. The numbers people don't use it at all. It's there. It matters. As Doof said, the score on a hole is meaningless without knowing how the score was made. Maybe ask https://www.dgcoursereview.com/faq.php?mode=show&id=16
I'll be perfectly honest. I only stepped in to debate your logic in a flippant manner. Actual opinion would be that while there should be a standard as to what constitutes "Gold", "Blue", "aggressive lilac", etc, level courses, it doesn't matter what level of course is being played when determining the level of the competition. Pros playing a red level course are going to do better than ams on the same course, and the same can be said of any layout. What does it matter if they played a "blue" course and called it a pro tourney? Maybe the debate has moved beyond the catalyst already? I dunno, but for the record, +1 to the statistics guys.
Reply With Quote
  #1463  
Old 07-27-2017, 04:14 PM
PMantle's Avatar
PMantle PMantle is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Alexandria, La.
Years Playing: 6
Courses Played: 48
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 4,569
Niced 530 Times in 379 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtreadwell View Post
I'll be perfectly honest. I only stepped in to debate your logic in a flippant manner. Actual opinion would be that while there should be a standard as to what constitutes "Gold", "Blue", "aggressive lilac", etc, level courses, it doesn't matter what level of course is being played when determining the level of the competition. Pros playing a red level course are going to do better than ams on the same course, and the same can be said of any layout. What does it matter if they played a "blue" course and called it a pro tourney? Maybe the debate has moved beyond the catalyst already? I dunno, but for the record, +1 to the statistics guys.
I thought so lol.

+1 to the stat guys? Why? There is zero support for such an approach.
Reply With Quote
  #1464  
Old 07-27-2017, 04:25 PM
jtreadwell's Avatar
jtreadwell jtreadwell is offline
Wizard of Plastic Land
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Southern NH
Years Playing: 8.1
Courses Played: 92
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 2,758
Niced 9 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PMantle View Post
I thought so lol.

+1 to the stat guys? Why? There is zero support for such an approach.
It's the most logical approach and none of them indicated the debate was over as a result of a single post. The debate is NEVER over.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #1465  
Old 07-27-2017, 04:38 PM
PMantle's Avatar
PMantle PMantle is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Alexandria, La.
Years Playing: 6
Courses Played: 48
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 4,569
Niced 530 Times in 379 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtreadwell View Post
It's the most logical approach and none of them indicated the debate was over as a result of a single post. The debate is NEVER over.
It's been over. I'm just responding to continue to point out how many posters are discussing something other than par in a thread called par talk lol
Reply With Quote
  #1466  
Old 07-27-2017, 04:54 PM
curmudgeonDwindle curmudgeonDwindle is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: CLT
Years Playing: 39
Courses Played: 20
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 168
Niced 100 Times in 52 Posts
Default

"Don't worry about par. The practice of printing par figures is literally a mental hazard." - Bobby Jones

"Par may have more influence on a golfer's mental well-being than any trick an architect could produce." - Geoff Shackleford
Reply With Quote
  #1467  
Old 07-27-2017, 05:12 PM
tbonesocrul tbonesocrul is offline
Bogey Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Detroit, MI
Courses Played: 54
Posts: 70
Niced 34 Times in 20 Posts
Default

The definition says:

As determined by the director, the score an expert disc golfer would be expected to make on a given hole. Par means error-less play under ordinary weather conditions, allowing two close range throws to hole-out.

I think the problem is that people want to define close range statically but things like OB, elevation, or foliage can obstruct shots and require you to be much closer to properly execute. Close range range isn't defined explicitly and the first sentence states that par is also the expectation of a expert disc golfers score. Statistics are a tool that exists to help quantify the probability and expected value.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #1468  
Old 07-27-2017, 06:05 PM
lyleoross's Avatar
lyleoross lyleoross is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Years Playing: 22.6
Courses Played: 2
Posts: 4,098
Niced 892 Times in 543 Posts
Default

If I understand the crux of the current argument is the rule, par is the number of strokes, + 2 on the green (or from short distance). It's an interesting exercise to Google how par is determined. You find the strokes + 2 rule and the distance rule. But if you read a little deeper, most of the commentators point out that these are rules of thumb. That par is a more practical thing that is usually determined by how a scratch player performs on the hole. In fact of the dozen or so commentators I read, only two treated the strokes + 2 as a hard and fast rule, written in stone so to speak. They would be Doofenshmirtz and PMantle. Pretty much everyone else, pro golfers and guys who make a living writing about the sport, said it is almost always based on scratch play. Even that was not a given. All of the other commentators that commented, wrote that in the case where there is a pro tournament, course managers tend to lower par to fit the play of the pro athletes. Almost like they wanted par to have relevance to actual play.

Niced: (1)
Reply With Quote
  #1469  
Old 07-27-2017, 06:25 PM
PMantle's Avatar
PMantle PMantle is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Alexandria, La.
Years Playing: 6
Courses Played: 48
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 4,569
Niced 530 Times in 379 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lyleoross View Post
All of the other commentators that commented, wrote that in the case where there is a pro tournament, course managers tend to lower par to fit the play of the pro athletes.
Wait, where and when is this done?
Reply With Quote
 

  #1470  
Old 07-27-2017, 06:27 PM
PMantle's Avatar
PMantle PMantle is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Alexandria, La.
Years Playing: 6
Courses Played: 48
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 4,569
Niced 530 Times in 379 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbonesocrul View Post
The definition says:

As determined by the director, the score an expert disc golfer would be expected to make on a given hole. Par means error-less play under ordinary weather conditions, allowing two close range throws to hole-out.

I think the problem is that people want to define close range statically but things like OB, elevation, or foliage can obstruct shots and require you to be much closer to properly execute. Close range range isn't defined explicitly and the first sentence states that par is also the expectation of a expert disc golfers score. Statistics are a tool that exists to help quantify the probability and expected value.
The problem with that last part, as has been said many times, is if you really implement that, you then have thousands of par 2s all across the world.
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


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:04 AM.


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