• Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
    It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)

DGPT: 2021 Las Vegas Challenge Feb 25-28

Didn't he start playing last year or is it two years now.

He's played in the past but never really took it serious until late 2019 when he did that vid with Simon and Paul and then January last year is when he decided to try and become a pro disc'r, iirc.
 
If it was my company name on a course, I sure wouldn't want one where par was so soft.

For MPO par was too high on holes #3, #5, #6, #7, #9, #10, and #16. Total par should have been 55.

For FPO, par was too high on holes #8, #10, #13, and #17, but too low on #15. Total par should have been 65.
 
If it was my company name on a course, I sure wouldn't want one where par was so soft.

For MPO par was too high on holes #3, #5, #6, #7, #9, #10, and #16. Total par should have been 55.

For FPO, par was too high on holes #8, #10, #13, and #17, but too low on #15. Total par should have been 65.
We're in here talking about par is for sponsorship. I mean, listen, we're talking about par. Not a game. Not a game. Not a game. We're talking about par and sponsorship. Not a game.

tenor.gif
 
If it was my company name on a course, I sure wouldn't want one where par was so soft.

For MPO par was too high on holes #3, #5, #6, #7, #9, #10, and #16. Total par should have been 55.

For FPO, par was too high on holes #8, #10, #13, and #17, but too low on #15. Total par should have been 65.

it's hard to set par when the course is designed without aiming for par. 3, 5, 6, 9, and 10 (MPO) are simply too easy. Too many pros can throw a shot (or two) that distance within their confidence range for putting with the lack of obstacles. Instead of designing holes that average 2.2 or 3.2 and rounding up, design them at 2.8 and round up (or better yet, 3.2 and round down).
 
If it was my company name on a course, I sure wouldn't want one where par was so soft.

For MPO par was too high on holes #3, #5, #6, #7, #9, #10, and #16. Total par should have been 55.

For FPO, par was too high on holes #8, #10, #13, and #17, but too low on #15. Total par should have been 65.

On a different note, Innova has never been known as the ones to push the envelope. Rather, they like to go with the flow.
 
If it was my company name on a course, I sure wouldn't want one where par was so soft.

For MPO par was too high on holes #3, #5, #6, #7, #9, #10, and #16. Total par should have been 55.

For FPO, par was too high on holes #8, #10, #13, and #17, but too low on #15. Total par should have been 65.

Last thing. For the men, do you mean par should have been 56? If I understand you, 16 was a legit par 4, and you didn't mention 18 changing. so 54 + 1 + 1 = 56. Or are you calculating par for the course as a whole?
 
If it was my company name on a course, I sure wouldn't want one where par was so soft.

For MPO par was too high on holes #3, #5, #6, #7, #9, #10, and #16. Total par should have been 55.

For FPO, par was too high on holes #8, #10, #13, and #17, but too low on #15. Total par should have been 65.

So is the sport is too easy and makes outsiders look at it and question it's validity?
 
it's hard to set par when the course is designed without aiming for par. 3, 5, 6, 9, and 10 (MPO) are simply too easy. Too many pros can throw a shot (or two) that distance within their confidence range for putting with the lack of obstacles. Instead of designing holes that average 2.2 or 3.2 and rounding up, design them at 2.8 and round up (or better yet, 3.2 and round down).

Even with a properly sized basket those holes would still yield too many birdies. 600 foot par 4 with a 100 foot wide fairway? C'mon man.
 

Latest posts

Top