#1  
Old 10-14-2019, 01:23 PM
keepitfun keepitfun is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 29
Niced 12 Times in 9 Posts
Default Par 4 and 5 Design Mistake

For any designer considering par 4 and 5 or even 6 please be aware that often higher par holes emerge as easier to par or birdie and can potentially weaken the challenge of your course

All too often a par 4 allows for a chance for recovery for an errant initial drive. Despite added length of the hole or even rough or woods many times a design allows a player to recover without being tested if his initial drive was errant. This is why often a well designed par 3 allows for greater scoring separation than many par 4s and 5s and 6s. The pressure on a par 3 hole is often greater off the tee as there is not as much chance for recovery.

In this age of greater distance due to disc technology and accrued wisdom and shared knowledge of how to gain maximum distance it is alarming to me how often par 4s and 5s become the blander holes and the par 3 holes truly are more significant.

In short, designers should attempt to punish errant shots where recovery requires skill and is where recovery is not routine......this is not simple and there are many challenges and things to consider.

Just a thought that doesn't come up enough and I know not many will care about but I think it is vital to the sport to create such holes and make every throw important

I think a par 4 requires a good shot followed by a good shot and not a bad shot followed by a good shot to earn a birdie chance.
Sponsored Links

Niced: (1)

Last edited by keepitfun; 10-14-2019 at 01:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-14-2019, 02:32 PM
Jimb's Avatar
Jimb Jimb is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: WV near Cumberland, MD
Years Playing: 12.8
Courses Played: 107
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,752
Niced 364 Times in 173 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by keepitfun View Post
I think a par 4 requires a good shot followed by a good shot and not a bad shot followed by a good shot to earn a birdie chance.
Interesting post. Good food for thought.

In regards to your comment that I quoted, what do you think about a bad shot, followed by a great recovery shot, for a birdie chance?

I’m ok with that. And, if I’m not mistaken, I believe that this is a philosophy used by John Houck in his designs. I’m pretty sure he uses an acronym that I can’t remember. But I think this is basically the gist of it.

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-14-2019, 03:09 PM
InnocentCrook's Avatar
InnocentCrook InnocentCrook is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Dry Ridge, KY
Years Playing: 19.5
Courses Played: 146
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,398
Niced 398 Times in 175 Posts
Default

I like to break down par 4's and 5's so that each "throw" should be a decent hole. If I put a basket at the landing zone, would that be a fun hole? Ask the same question when standing at the landing zone and looking to the basket. (Or second landing zone in the case of a par 5.)

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-14-2019, 05:03 PM
DavidSauls's Avatar
DavidSauls DavidSauls is online now
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newberry, SC
Years Playing: 24.5
Courses Played: 125
Posts: 15,237
Niced 3,544 Times in 1,537 Posts
Default

We have Par 4s & Par 5s that give players multiple chances to screw up. That attempt at a great recovery shot is sweet if it works, but might mean double-bogey, or worse, if it doesn't.

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-14-2019, 05:30 PM
Golden Tuna's Avatar
Golden Tuna Golden Tuna is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO.
Years Playing: 18.8
Courses Played: 140
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 759
Niced 419 Times in 186 Posts
Default

This will undoubtedly devolve into the Par conversation. But, I'm intrigued, so I will ask you to clarify something:

You said, "I think a par 4 requires a good shot followed by a good shot and not a bad shot followed by a good shot to earn a birdie chance"

Since "good" is relative, are we talking a good shot for MPO, FPO, MA1, MA2, or MA3?

Should we not say (for example) a 250' shot followed by a 250' shot, followed by a 175' shot to earn a putt for birdie.
>Then the question(s) are, "on a wooded course, or wide open", "is there ob", "what are conditions like"?

Could there be a reason the PDGA rule book is written with such ambiguity...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-14-2019, 07:09 PM
DavidSauls's Avatar
DavidSauls DavidSauls is online now
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newberry, SC
Years Playing: 24.5
Courses Played: 125
Posts: 15,237
Niced 3,544 Times in 1,537 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by keepitfun View Post
All too often a par 4 allows for a chance for recovery for an errant initial drive. Despite added length of the hole or even rough or woods many times a design allows a player to recover without being tested if his initial drive was errant. This is why often a well designed par 3 allows for greater scoring separation than many par 4s and 5s and 6s. .
Comparing a poorly-designed par-4s & -5s with well-designed par-3s?

Likewise, a well-designed par-4 will create better scoring separation than a poorly-designed par-3.

*

Since par-4s and par-5s require multiple long throws, perhaps it would be fairer to compare them to a sequence of two par-3s.

Niced: (2)
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-14-2019, 07:22 PM
Steve West Steve West is offline
Par Delusionary
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Years Playing: 45.6
Courses Played: 366
Posts: 5,012
Niced 1,720 Times in 844 Posts
Default

Most poorly designed par 4s will produce better scoring separation than most well-designed par 3s. Increasing the average score on a hole by making it longer usually has a strong effect on scoring spread.

However, the broader point that par 4 and 5 holes are not as efficient as par 3s is still valid. Sure, the extra distance almost always "works", but not as well as if that distance had been used for more par 3s or par 2s.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-14-2019, 07:31 PM
keepitfun keepitfun is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 29
Niced 12 Times in 9 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimb View Post
Interesting post. Good food for thought.

In regards to your comment that I quoted, what do you think about a bad shot, followed by a great recovery shot, for a birdie chance?

without getting too caught up in semantics and mathematics I would define the shots as

bad throw equals zero
good shot equals one throw
great shot equals 2 throws

thus 2 good throws would equal a bad shot plus a great shot now putt for birdie
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-14-2019, 07:47 PM
Steve West Steve West is offline
Par Delusionary
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Years Playing: 45.6
Courses Played: 366
Posts: 5,012
Niced 1,720 Times in 844 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by keepitfun View Post
without getting too caught up in semantics and mathematics I would define the shots as

bad throw equals zero
good shot equals one throw
great shot equals 2 throws

thus 2 good throws would equal a bad shot plus a great shot now putt for birdie
How often do you throw and end up no closer to the target and in no better position? Almost never. Sure, a lot of times you don't end up as close as a good throw would have gotten you, but you gained something. I'd say bad throw is more like one-half.

Great throw would be two throws, but usually a Recovery throw would only make up for a bad throw. Two good throws to a putt is a par 3. A bad throw plus a Recovery throw and putt is a par 3.

A great throw and a putt is a birdie on a par 3.
Reply With Quote
 

  #10  
Old 10-14-2019, 07:58 PM
keepitfun keepitfun is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 29
Niced 12 Times in 9 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by InnocentCrook View Post
I like to break down par 4's and 5's so that each "throw" should be a decent hole. If I put a basket at the landing zone, would that be a fun hole? Ask the same question when standing at the landing zone and looking to the basket. (Or second landing zone in the case of a par 5.)
landing zones, or places from which the next shot is optimal and playable, open up a can of worms and I agree it is a good design practice in general but

-how big do we make the landing zone
-be wary of the design practice of cutting up a hole into short increments that do not allow further penetration towards the green, you know that hole that is 600 foot par 5 but split into 200 foot segments that force 3 precise shots in a row to get to the green but you must play landing area to landing area.....while there is a test of skill in making 3 perfect 200 foot throws in a row, underrated by many, to achieve birdie It has been my experience that these grinders test consistency rather than tempting a great shot, they also tend to limit the advantage of more capable players....I like it used in moderation as consitency is a test of skill but these holes are wildly unpopular on courses where it is overused
-then there are the obvious concerns of landing zone disc golf on sharp turning holes: is the rough thick enough to thwart cheater lanes and if not are the throws long enough and straight enough to not tempt a cheater lane....a 300 foot drive to a landing zone that produces a clear look to a basket 200 feet away is superior to a hole that is a 200 foot drive to a landing zone that enables a 300 foot approach to the basket....generally the latter will provide a better cheater line, unless yo have dense foliage that eats disc but again that's no fun either

I agree with landing zone golf but only if the fairway can be further penetrated along the fairway....generally of course there are no absoluts
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
Poorly designed par 4,5,and par 6 holes and bad high par courses optidiscic Course Design 159 09-12-2014 11:53 AM
Did I make a mistake? smitdavi Discs 47 10-24-2013 11:29 AM
Favorite Mistake? LmidgitD General Disc Golf Chat 24 06-20-2011 03:18 PM
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 11:29 AM.


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