Another "Every Hole Being a Par 3" Thread

[SirRaph]

Have you ever had a discussion with someone who's never played disc golf, and when they ask the inevitable "are there different pars like in golf?" you sort of hesitate a bit?

I don't know if it's just me, but I feel like the "everything's a par 3" is a bit discomforting. I feel like it detracts from the sport a bit when you bring a new player to a course and they ask, "what par is this hole?" And you reply, "3, everything is a three...well, you're a beginner, so it's a 4...well, a 5, I guess. It's whatever man, just have fun..."

I know we don't like to create unnecessary parallels between our sport and ball golf, but let's look at ball golf's par 3.
Usually it's a mid-iron shot for beginners to novices, and a short iron or wedge for pros. But anyone that has any experience whatsoever would never have to pull out a driver on a par 3.

Yet, there are par 3s in our sport that even pros have to "happy gilmore" drive it to even get within approaching distance. Why not make those a par 4? Or even a par 5. If a pro has to pull long range driver first shot, then fairway/mid driver next, that is a quintessential par 5: two great shots get you an eagle attempt.

So, okay, we're not ball golfers, we're different. But doesn't the varying par in ball golf serve a purpose?
I think:
1) It's supposed to give a player an idea of where he sits skill-wise. Hmmm...I wonder what other golfers shoot here? I wish there was something to tell me an "average" score here. Possibly something to tell me what "par" for the course is...
2) It helps a course designer differentiate his course. A long par 3 for challenge. A par 5 with some risk/reward for an eagle attempt. Maybe the designer decides to make his course rewarding to players with short game prowess -- so he makes all the par 3s get-able, but everything else you're scrambling for part. Etc. Etc.
3) It helps newer players judge their skills with a little more accuracy. 650ft hole? Par 3. 350ft drive. 260ft approach. Sink the 40 ft putt. That should be something to be ecstatic about for a newer player. Instead, it's par.


I can understand why every hole was a par 3 when the sport was young and a Stringray was an "ultra long range driver". But as the discs, the players, and the courses evolve, so too should the par system...in my humble opinion.

 

[smarkquart]

The point you make right at the end about a Stingray kind of sums it up. So many holes nowadays are easily birdied, yet is it feasible to have a ton of Par 2s? Should we have par 2s just so Pros do not get insanely low scores like 11 under par on an eighteen hole course?

I have seen many newer courses going in with holes reaching 500 to 800 feet long just so that we can have some Par 4s. Highbridge Gold Hole 8 I think is something like 1500 to 2000 feet long. Unique yes, possibly the only legitimate Par 5 I can think of that involves open distance.

This is not a statement towards you, but more so a challenge towards course designers, what can we do to create more non-Par 3 holes? Either longer distance or more technical holes seem the only alternative. Will not in both cases frustrate a newer player anyway? Should we confine newer players to pitch and putt courses (by Pros' standards) just so they can learn drive, approach, and putt?

I see several courses are now listing two separate pars, one for pros and one for rec players. This seems a viable alternative, however, the idea that everything is par 3 just makes adding the score, the math involved, easier to do. Having a rec par listed at least gives that newer player an idea of how they compare of those of the same level. I can think of at least several dozen holes in my area where it would be a legitimate Par 3 for a pro, meaning that they will likely get 2s but should have absolutely no problem saving par, and yet could be a legitimately listed Par 4 or 5 for a rec player without making them feel demeaned by the higher listed par.

 

[Dr. Burd]

I'd be totally stoked to par that 650 footer. If your "new player" isn't, then he probably doesn't enjoy this sport much in the first place.

Pars are really irrelevant anyway. It just provides convenient terminology and a measure against other players. Total number of throws is what we're interested in.

Even if you toss a couple "Par 4s" and a signature "Par 5" into the mix, Climo is still going to shoot 45 and I'm still going to shoot 60 (on a good day). Now I get to say I'm a scratch golfer and The Champ can rack up that lifetime Eagle tally... but my driving still sucks and now Nikko feels bad about his Birdie. :wink:

 

[charris414]

This is a discussion that has been smoldering probably ever since the first wide-rimmed "ultra-fast" driver came out 10 years ago, and changed how disc golf could be played at the highest levels.

IMO, there is a distinct difference between a "pro/advanced/intermediate/rec Par 3 hole" and a "World Class Par 3 hole". A good description is this: every course has that [however many] "tweener" hole(s), that you know is deuce-able if you just had the distance and/or accuracy of a 1000 rated player. But you are usually satisfied getting your solid 3, annoyed but accepting of that okay 4, pissed off at the crappy 5, and over-joyed at the very occasional 2.

But like the poster above, par is just a way to track your own individual progression against the course. Since we have ratings rather than handicaps, it really is total throws over however many holes, rather than what you should be able to do on each individual hole.

Furthermore, since there isn't a firm definition for what constitutes a par 3 v. par 4 v. par 5 hole (is it pure distance, is it the accuracy required, is it some combination of both?), it's really tough to say.

 

[juju1]

Highbridge Gold Hole 8 I think is something like 1500 to 2000 feet long. Unique yes, possibly the only legitimate Par 5 I can think of that involves open distance.

I thought that hole was a par 6.

 

[ChrisWoj]

Disc golf's par and Ball golf's par are based on the same things: how many shots it takes a top pro to get to the hole, plus two. Everything tends to be par 3 because almost no courses really HAVE par 4's or 5's. And nothing can be a par 2 unless it is a putting course.

And yes - HBG8 is considered one of two (I believe) par 6 holes in disc golf.

 

[Aubin1]

Par comes from ball golf. let's face it... ball golf and disc golf are not analogous.

Just look at the math:

Ball golf, 400 yard par 4 (average hole). 1200 feet. A pro will drive around 300 yards(900 feet), pitch up, and sweat out a 15-30 foot putt. they get a 4, maybe a 3. the putt is less than 1% of the total distance, yet is not even close to a gimme for a pro player.

Disc golf, a standard average par 3 would be about 350ft ( 200-500 in between...) a pro player can drain a 35 footer after a mediocre drive. that putt is TEN PERCENT of the distance of the hole, and is a much easier shot than the sub-1% putt distance of ball golf.

Even if you make the disc golf hole a par 4, the math stays the same. It's the huge difference in putting that makes 'par' not really work for disc golf. I propose getting rid of par altogether, just add the strokes.

 

[smarkquart]

Highbridge Gold Hole 8 I think is something like 1500 to 2000 feet long. Unique yes, possibly the only legitimate Par 5 I can think of that involves open distance.

I thought that hole was a par 6.

I was just guessing at the par because the last time we were out there we could not find anything listing the pars or distances. I just remember getting a 6 and thought that no way that could be par.

Sitting down and thinking about the distance involved, a pro who has accurate 400 foot drives in a row could be getting it in 5 on a consistent basis, but this type of person who plays accurate and consistently deserves a birdie for this skill. I guess it would be a "legitimate" Par 6.

 

[jubuttib]

^^ What he said.

It's really the putting which messes up the pars more than anything. Putting in disc golf is just so infinitely easier compared to golf.

About discouraging new players, that's one argument I don't really understand. Why should a new disc golfer playing way above par be any different from a new golfer playing way above par? I remember when I started golf for the first few rounds I was closer to double-par for a few rounds, and even now that I've played for years my HCP is 18, which means on average I score bogey on every hole. I've only played disc golf for under a year total, and I'm already shooting -3 to +3 rounds on average. This if anything seems weird to me.

 

[DiscGolfTeeSigns.com]

Have you ever had a discussion with someone who's never played disc golf, and when they ask the inevitable "are there different pars like in golf?" you sort of hesitate a bit?

no, never. i tell them yes there are pars just like golf. i imagine there are a lot of pars in bawl golf that are generally disregarded. but that's not something i need to get into to answer their question.

guys who think DG is all 3's either can't do math, play only shitty courses, or both. Austin's 3's are 3's, 4's are 4's, and 5's are 5's.

 

[SirRaph]

Disc golf, a standard average par 3 would be about 350ft ( 200-500 in between...) a pro player can drain a 35 footer after a mediocre drive. that putt is TEN PERCENT of the distance of the hole, and is a much easier shot than the sub-1% putt distance of ball golf.

That's a very good point.

 

[Yehosha]

The PDGA has made it pretty clear that par should not always be 3, but for some reason some people disagree. They'll argue that only the total number of shots thrown matters. The PDGA guidelines clearly lay out when a hole should be a par 4, 5 or 6 here. It's based off hole length, density of foliage, and what type of player you are designing the course for.

Also from PDGA on par:

Courses will typically have pars marked on tee signs ranging from 3 to 5. For sanctioned events, it's necessary to indicate pars on the event flyer for all holes to provide for the proper penalty if a player is late. For tournament play, holes from the Gold or Blue tees up to 550 feet will be mostly par 3 based on their difficulty. Holes with effective lengths over 500 feet are candidates for par 4s and holes over 800 feet are candidates for par 5s. There are a handful of par 6 holes in the World over 1200 feet. Some challenging holes in heavy woods could have a par higher than 3 or 4 even if they aren't as long as the reference lengths stated above. Not every length is good for all divisions. There are certain lengths that are better than others depending on the skill level intended to play the hole. For example, holes where most players in a division/skill level would likely shoot the same score probably should be lengthened, shortened or toughened to provide a better challenge to spread their scores.

Par should be set for each tee/basket position combination on a hole based on the player skill level they were designed for. http://www.pdga.com/documents/design-skill-level-guidelines provides assistance to determine pars. This document: http://www.pdga.com/documents/par-guidelines provides a more specific way to determine par based on length and foliage elements of holes for each player skill level. The hole length used to determine par (not for the signs) should be adjusted up or down based on a 3-to-1 factor (i.e. 30 feet adjustment for every 10 feet elevation change) if the hole has a significant upslope or downslope. So players know what standard has been used for par, it should be indicated on scorecards and tee signs as Blue Par or Red Par, which hopefully matches the tee color(s) used. When less precise estimates are used to determine par (i.e., not using color skill levels), use the terms Expert or Pro Par for longer tees and Standard or Amateur Par for shorter tees.

I look at par not just as a means of keeping score, but also as a universal way to compare your scores across a variety of courses and a variety of players. If you tell someone you shot a 5 under, it doesn't matter what course you played on or if they know anything about it, they will know you played a decent game. If you tell someone you shot a 58, how will they even know what that means. That could be really good or really bad, who knows.

 

[BIG MACK]

I usually tell folks that MOST holes are a par three, but there are longer holes that could easily be par 4. To keep them from getting disheartened, I just tell them that par doesn't really matter...it all comes down to counting your throws for each hole, adding them up at the end of the round and comparing them with the rest of the players. The fewest amount of throws wins. Counting throws is objective (simple), determining par is subjective (complicated).

 

[mzuleger]

guys who think DG is all 3's either can't do math, play only shitty courses, or both. Austin's 3's are 3's, 4's are 4's, and 5's are 5's.

Well then... if I have to choose one I guess I'll go with the "shitty courses" excuse.

 

[Maks]

i dunno about most u guys but the "everything is par 3 " statement is just something i say to keep scores easy to keep track of. many of the courses ive played have par 4s and 5s. we (my group) just say everything is a par 3 so we are all on the same page.

i hope this is the case with most of ya cause if you do not have real par 4s and 5s that kinda blows.

 

[thecomet]

My 2 cents:

First off, I have always thought of pars, in a more competitive setting, as relfecting the difficulty of the holes on the course so things like late penalties can be assessed properly. You don't want someone missing a really hard hole to get the same penalty as someone missing a really easy hole, because then they got an advantage simply because they started on one of the harder holes.

When I play casually, I take everything to be par 3's. The reason for this is simple: many courses in my area don't have pars posted on signs or official scorecards, holes change quite a bit (from different basket locations to permanent course changes), and counting everything as a par 3 is a convention people have adopted to compare scores. If someone says "you are at 2 down and I am at 4 down, right?", I know what they are talking about, because it is a convention that everyone takes everything to be a par 3. Plus, it is easier to go back and double check when you are doing pars versus pure throws. It is much easier to remember that I got 3 twos and 1 four for a total of 2 down than it is to remember why I am at 34 after 12 holes. From my experience, most people against this convention are people with inflated egos who can't settle with par (or worse) after playing a hole perfectly, and they will say things like "I got a birdie 3". Ironically, they are generally perfectly willing to call their 2 on a 120ft open hole a birdie.

People often talk about ball golf's "par" when they talk about disc golf's "par". Ball golf is a totally different beast, and I think it is a bad decision to try to make disc golf's "par" like it. There are two reasons for this. First, ball golf is really easy to assign pars for, since hole length is such an overwhelming decider of difficulty on any given hole. This is just not the case in disc golf, since the prevalence of obstacles so dramatically alters the difficulty. Plus, 2 putts is a very good number to add for the par of the ball golf hole, as a 1-putt almost always (if the green was hit in regulation) marks either a great putt or a great approach shot, and a 3-putt almost always marks either a poor approach or poor putting. In golf, that magic number would probably be closer to 1, but probably not 1 itself (more like 1.5 or something), so the issue is further convoluted. Take, for example, your average 250' disc golf hole with a moderate amount of obstacles in the way. Nobody would argue that the amount of throws it should take to get to the basket in regulation is 1, but how many putts should be allowed? I wouldn't say 1, because it seems like either the drive or putt would have to be better than par-level to 1-putt the hole after hitting it in regulation. But I wouldn't say 2, either, because 2-putting a hole is almost always less than desirable in this circumstance.

In disc golf, shot making skill plays a very huge part in determining hole difficulty. There are lots of holes that are really tough unless you have the right shot, in which case they are very easy. So, if a beginner ranked holes from easiest to most difficult, their list could be dramatically different from a top pro's, and two pros could have very different lists, etc. Although there will certainly be some discrepancy in golf, it is hardly as severe.

The second reason why ball golf is different is that par is so conventionally ingrained there. Players talk about handicaps, weaker players talk excitedly about getting pars on holes, etc. In some sense, it is a sport built around the notion of "par". In disc golf, we talk about getting deuces, or shooting 1000-rated rounds. We just don't have the notion of "par" built up so firmly and consistently like it is in ball golf. I don't think this is a shortcoming of disc golf... I just think that an absolutely universal notion is required like it has become in ball golf.

Ideally, as disc golf grows and becomes more organized, the PDGA could figure out some basic guidelines (this could simply be a list of qualities like the one they provide in the letter to new members and renewals explaining the lists of qualities open/adv/int/etc players generally have) for determining hole pars, and local organizations (like the MFA here in Minnesota) could publish lists of pars or official scorecards. That way, they would be universal, and we could start to use them and everyone would know them. The par 3 convention is going to start becoming less and less convenient as holes where people average 4 or greater start to become more prevalent. I think the big thing though is to not compare disc golf par methods to ball golf par methods, as ball golf is a much different sport and their notion of "par" works much better in their sport. I do, though, think that, since par is mentioned in the rules and players (perhaps because of ball golf) are generally so inquisitive about hole/course pars, it would be great to have a more organized and consistent notion.

 

[mzuleger]

i dunno about most u guys but the "everything is par 3 " statement is just something i say to keep scores easy to keep track of. many of the courses ive played have par 4s and 5s. we (my group) just say everything is a par 3 so we are all on the same page.

i hope this is the case with most of ya cause if you do not have real par 4s and 5s that kinda blows.

There's not a single hole that in my area that can't be done in 3... granted some of those are tough 3's but it can be done.

 

[jubuttib]

Ideally, as disc golf grows and becomes more organized, the PDGA could figure out some basic guidelines

Check out Yehosha's post on the previous page, the PDGA already has those guidelines.

 

[Roy]

i dunno about most u guys but the "everything is par 3 " statement is just something i say to keep scores easy to keep track of. many of the courses ive played have par 4s and 5s. we (my group) just say everything is a par 3 so we are all on the same page.

i hope this is the case with most of ya cause if you do not have real par 4s and 5s that kinda blows.

There's not a single hole that in my area that can't be done in 3... granted some of those are tough 3's but it can be done.

Go to mount morris/nordic mountain... it's probably about 40 miles or so from you. We play 2 of the holes as par 5 and a few more as four. It's a wicked course up and down the ski hill

 

[Dr. Burd]

Official guidelines for par would still be extremely subjective.

I'd like to see these "legitimate 4s & 5s" people are referring to. I've experienced Highbridge and can attest to the validity of those holes. I can't think of any other hole I've played that would require a minimum of 3 shots to hole out, pro or otherwise.

I don't see a problem with the metaphorical Par 2 holes we encounter on so many courses. Do or Die deuce holes separate cards just as well as a monster Par 5 does. For that matter, a Par 3 that 90% of the field struggles to shoot 3 on shouldn't be a Par 4 just because of the difficulty.

It still comes down to total throws compared against the rest of the field, and to that end, a standard of Par 3 works just fine up to a certain distance (say, 900 ft?).

... pars ... relfect(ing) the difficulty of the holes on the course so things like late penalties can be assessed properly

This is the only valid argument to the contrary I've heard.

I guess I would hope that the field was even enough that taking that 7 on ANY hole would be enough to take them out of the money. The way I see it, it's either going to penalize them ~4 or ~5 strokes (difficult 3 vs. easy deuce). I don't think that one stroke difference in a penalty is much to worry about. Hopefully the quality of the field and course chosen for the particular tournament level are properly matched.

Assuming they got the late arrival penalty on a difficult hole, it's reasonable to assume that they will only have one "gimme" stroke to take back on the easy deuce hole they could have potentially been late to. They're still up 3 strokes from most of the field after two holes. If they fight back through the crowd to place, they would have, in theory, shot significantly better than the 7 they took anyway, and the penalty served its purpose.