Par 3 isnt viable for some holes

[JC17393]

If a sucky golfer wants to play the same tees as a scratch golfer, the par is no different for him just because he's lousy.

But in golf, if that sucky golfer is choosing to play the same tees as a scratch golfer, he's also choosing to play the "harder" course and whatever comes with it (such as a score astronomically over "par"). Or he could play the forward tees where, because of the shorter distances, his scores are going to be closer to "par"

In disc golf, there is no choice to be made as far as what tee to play in a lot of cases. So the choice the player has to make is whether to utilize the "pro" par (and have a final score astronomically over "par") or the "rec" par (and have a score closer to "par" for his skill range).

 

[iacas]

That's a cop out.

Hardly. This "let rec players have a higher par" seems to be a pervasive mindset in disc golf. Elsewhere it was argued as a bonus to help new players want to stick with the game by giving them more rewards earlier.

You're ignoring the idea that if golf had only one tee, designers would find a way to make it accessible to different levels, they obviously think that's important since golf courses have multiple tees currently.

That's speculation on your part, and you're wrong because par in golf is what an expert player is expected to make.

Disc golf's solution to that exact same problem is differentiating pars. It's exactly the same.

It isn't. You've said I'm missing the point a time or two now, but you're missing that point. It's not the same. It's not even close to the same.

What about people who are between the intended skill levels of tees on a golf course?

It doesn't happen. So they hit a 7-iron for their second shot instead of an 8-iron. It's not at all the same as playing a 350-foot hole as a par three for pros and a par 4 for amateurs.

Golf tees don't vary in distance very much. Men under the age of 60 tend to play the back tees or the one or two sets forward of those. Women and children tend to play the front tees or the one back of them. Seniors will play the ones just back of the forward tees.

The tees on a golf course are not set for skill levels. They're set for distances, and nothing more. They're set so that the golfer can play the hole as it's designed - if they drive the ball 220, then the hazards that are in play on a 390-yard hole for them will be at about 220 from the tee, and for a guy that hits it 275 will be at 275 from the tee - which means they'd play the tees close to 445 yards. And there's probably a set in between them, and that's it.

That's not a skill level. It simply allows the senior golfer, or the guy who wants to drink some beers, to reach most of the greens in regulation given their distance. It doesn't guarantee that their other skills will actually LET them hit even a single green in regulation.

The tees in golf are not set for different "skill levels." They're set so that players can play the course as designed given their distances. Par remains the same, whether you're 35 and playing the back tees or 85 and playing the forward-most tees.

But in golf, if that sucky golfer is choosing to play the same tees as a scratch golfer, he's also choosing to play the "harder" course and whatever comes with it (such as a score astronomically over "par"). Or he could play the forward tees where, because of the shorter distances, his scores are going to be closer to "par"

And in disc golf, he could shoot 90 and be +18 or 90 and be -5 because the "rec level par" is higher from the shorter tees.

Furthermore, their scores won't vary by as much as you think. Look at the course ratings and slopes and do some math if you want - the ratings aren't 20 shots different. They're often one, two, three strokes different. The handicapping system does a pretty good job.

In disc golf, there is no choice to be made as far as what tee to play in a lot of cases. So the choice the player has to make is whether to utilize the "pro" par (and have a final score astronomically over "par") or the "rec" par (and have a score closer to "par" for his skill range).

See above. The scores don't vary that much switching tees in golf. A 445-yard hole might be a 395-yard hole from tees two or three sets forward.

-----

Now, if you'll stop responding to me, I'm happy to just drop it, but again, I'll respond if you ask it of me. Or PM me if you want to discuss it but not publicly.

 

[DavidSauls]

Part of the problem of correlating golf and disc golf, especially in relation to "par", is that our courses vary so much more greatly. We have 100' holes and 1000' holes. We have single-tee courses and courses with multiple tees, with the short being only half the distance of the long, and sometimes playing the hole quite differently. Obstacles and O.B. vary vastly from course to course, from wide open to threaded through dense woods.

 

[iacas]

Part of the problem of correlating golf and disc golf, especially in relation to "par", is that our courses vary so much more greatly.

I disagree. Par is what an "expert" (not "elite") player would be expected to score. I've heard it said that a 1000 rated player is roughly a "scratch" golfer so maybe that's your "expert" player. That's probably too high - maybe it's 950 or 970 or so.

If you apply that standard, I think you can come up with realistic pars.

If there were different levels of par for women "expert" players and men "expert" players, that'd be okay too. That's the definition.

---------

Here's the crux of it for me: clearly, the concept of "par" in disc golf is an issue. If it wasn't, there wouldn't be discussion about it. Yet there's so much discussion, that every time it pops up again, people smack their foreheads and exclaim "oh no, another par discussion!" Then prerube links to other threads, or people do it for him, and so on.

We almost NEVER discuss "what is par?" on golf forums. It's simply not an issue. Par is par. Par is what an expert player will likely score on a hole.

---------

I take back what I said above. I don't care enough about this to continue discussing it, so even if you respond, you have my word I'm done.

Cheers, best wishes, and in the end, we all like and enjoy this sport, even if we disagree on stupid crap like this.

 

[magictenor1]

Iacas. You keep saying the different tees in golf are due to distance and not skill level but for most golfers (disc and otherwise) distance has quite a bit to do with your skill level.

 

[McFer]

I disagree. Par is what an "expert" (not "elite") player would be expected to score.

Difference is, disc golfers expect birdies, not pars.

 

[djros]

If the different tees have nothing to do with skill level, then why does the score card for my local golf course have suggested handicaps for the different tees? Blue is suggested for handicaps of 10 or below. White is suggested for handicaps of 11-20. Red is suggested for handicaps of 20 or greater.

Also, golf courses have numerical ratings for difficulty ("slope" and "rating") which are effectively used to adjust "par" for a player's skill level. You do need a handicap for them to be useful, but almost every course has these ratings. The USGA explains how to use them here:

http://www.usga.org/playing/handicaps/understanding_handicap/articles/different_tees.html

Slope and rating aside, in golf, if I want a greater challenge for my skill level, I will play a longer set of tees and see how close to a normal score (relative to par) I can shoot. Similarly, in disc golf, I could challenge myself by trying to shoot closer to "pro par" on a given course layout with only one set of tees. I understand that I should always be attempting to shoot the lowest score I can, but the "par" of a hole changes the mental approach to the hole. By playing a course with "pro par," I might play some holes differently than I would with "rec par." For instance, I may take a more aggressive line in attempt to shoot "pro par" than by trying to shoot "rec par", perhaps a more aggressive line than the course designer intended. If I choose to challenge myself in this I way, I do so expecting poorer play and higher scores than normal. However, if I do not want to challenge myself in this way, I think I should be able to play a course and know how well I played that specific course according to how it was designed to be played for someone at my skill level. Golf accomplishes this with not only different par ratings on holes, but by adjusting "par" to ones skill level with different tees, handicaps, slopes, and ratings. Disc golf is not well established enough to have a system so complex, but it can at the very least adjust "par" for skill level by having "pro par" and "rec par" to allow players to know how well they played a course compared to how well they were expected to play that course.

 

[ScottyLove]

I'll just add that the LENGTH of the hole, while makes some difference, is the very LEAST attribute of what par should be on a hole. Seviren Lang in Indiana was used in the 2012 US Masters and is a 339 ft hole. Sounds like a par 3, huh? No way! It's a par 4 all day long. Double dogleg through the woods. Even the most skilled pros will only card 3 once in a while if they get a lucky kick on the second shot.

So yeah... it's chaps my ass a bit when those who never play in major or A-tier tournaments on gold level layouts say something like "Pro par is 3 on all holes"... there's no such thing as "pro par"... that's and invalid term. There are simple and easy to follow guidelines. 550 all down hill with minimal tree is a pretty simple 3 for any skilled player. 550 through heavy woods with no fairway is a tough 4 every time... which is why I think my home course is a 55 when #15 is long and 54 when short. Our course signs are outdated and show several par 4 and par 5 holes, but that's simply incorrect... novice or pro.

So while length only plays a small part, skill level plays ZERO part. Par is par is par... nothing really to debate. Hole construction, obstacles, flight lines, mandos, OB, and length are what affect par.

 

[Cgkdisc]

"Effective" length is still the dominant factor statistically that helps determine the appropriate par for a skill level in disc golf, almost as much as in ball golf. Effective length accounts for elevation adjustment and for doglegs. Changing the length of a disc golf hole by about 30 feet on the same terrain will change the scoring average about 0.1 for gold level.

 

[jenb]

PDGA has a chart providing guidelines for par based on hole length, density, and skill level.

http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/ParGuidelines.pdf

What may be a par 3 for pros may not be a par 3 for you.

I typically recommend that new players use par 4 for most every hole at first. As you improve, just look at the basket from the tee and ask yourself, "Is it conceivable that I could actually ace this hole, if I got really lucky?" If yes, then it's a par 3 for you. Otherwise, it's a par 4. For me, this exercise helps me set my expectations properly and lay up, so that I don't blow up on the hole trying to get a 3.

 

[superium]

I disagree. Par is what an "expert" (not "elite") player would be expected to score. I've heard it said that a 1000 rated player is roughly a "scratch" golfer so maybe that's your "expert" player. That's probably too high - maybe it's 950 or 970 or so.

If you apply that standard, I think you can come up with realistic pars.

If there were different levels of par for women "expert" players and men "expert" players, that'd be okay too. That's the definition.

---------
We almost NEVER discuss "what is par?" on golf forums. It's simply not an issue. Par is par. Par is what an expert player will likely score on a hole.

The definition of par is "average" not "expert". The "average" player throws 250-350ft. If there's a 500ft or so hole that's fairly wide open it should be considered a par 4 since its going to take 3 consecutive "average" shots to birdie it. It can't be considered a Par 3 since even an "expert" player who can throw 400+ ft. will rarely deuce it. It would be considered an easy par 4 but its still a par 4 none the less.

 

[jenb]

The tees in golf are not set for different "skill levels." They're set so that players can play the course as designed given their distances. Par remains the same, whether you're 35 and playing the back tees or 85 and playing the forward-most tees.

It's rare, but I've played ball golf courses that have a higher par from the red tees than from the white tees. For example, women playing the red tees have 72 as par for the course, but then men playing from the whites have a 71 par.

 

[jmw1121d1]

More and More courses these days have par 4 and 5 holes. I honestly prefer that. I always here people say count your total strokes "thats all that matters", but really if you play a course a lot you want to see improvement on individual holes.

I'd rather break the course down to holes than the whole round. Having Par 4 and 5 makes it easier to see your improvements. Every hole a par 3 gets boring.

It is really a mental thing. If you are on a 700+ foot hole double dog leg in the woods it gets annoying to call that hole a par 3. I don't care what anybody says that gets frustrating. You want to shoot the hole well and good luck EVER making a 3 on the hole. The hole I am talking about is a real hole and has only been 3'ed twice in tournament play ever (MJ in 2012 at the azalea open is the only time I ever saw it 3ed). Consequently the hole is listed as a PAR 5 thank god. The whole "every hole is a par 3" thing is nuts to me.

Maybe it depends on the courses you play I don't know, but I play in the woods and some holes cannot be reasonably 3'ed by anybody but the absolute best players.

 

[Steve West]

The definition of par is "average" not "expert". The "average" player throws 250-350ft.

No, from the rulebook it's "the score an expert disc golfer would be expected to make on a given hole with errorless play " - in other words, the number of good (not miraculous) throws it should take the player to complete the hole. This will be lower than average, because bad shots, penalty strokes and the like do not figure in "errorless play" but do increase the average score.

"Expert", to some, means 1000-rated players only, and they have a good point. Perhaps that is "true par" or something.

However, for tournaments that are age or sex restricted, it would seem appropriate to use an expert of the right age or sex, even if that means something other than 1000-rated.

That leads to the use of different pars for different levels of players. Here, the expert is a Blue, White or Red level player.

It's easier than the golf system where every player calculates their own "net par" for every hole based on their sex, handicap, course rating and slope.

If there's a 500ft or so hole that's fairly wide open it should be considered a par 4 since its going to take 3 consecutive "average" shots to birdie it. It can't be considered a Par 3 since even an "expert" player who can throw 400+ ft. will rarely deuce it. It would be considered an easy par 4 but its still a par 4 none the less.

I judge errorless play by the proportion of expert (or appropriately skilled players) who get each score. If a hole is only rarely deuced, par is more than 2 because it takes unusually lucky or good throws to get a 2. If a large chunk (1/e) of players get a 3 (or better), that hole is par 3, because it is possible to complete the hole with 3 errorless throws. Even if there are a lot of 4's, 5's and 6's which bring the average score up to 4.5, that hole is still par 3. That's how it should be played to keep up with the leaders. Penalty throws and bad shots don't define how a hole is to be played errorlessly.

This definition seems to do the best job of letting par do what it is supposed to do:

- Let players measure their skill against a standard,

- Let players measure their performance against an unchanging (or at least very slowly changing) measure of the performance of the leaders in a competition (even if those other players started on different holes or have played a different number of holes),

- Indicate the strategy needed to keep up with the leaders, and least importantly,

- As a shortcut to adding up scores.

As for "expecting birdies", that is ridiculous. Par is errorless play; you can't "expect" to do better. You may be able to do better, but not that often. The reason players expect so-called birdies is because most par 2 holes are mislabeled as par 3's.

Yes, I know I left out "allowing two throws from close range to hole out." from the definition of par. Without defining "close range" that part has no meaning. To me, those are just the last two throws. If more than 37% of players score a two, the tee throw on that hole is close range.

Also, I hate the term "hole out", so I avoid it when I can.

 

[AndyJB]

Well, disc golf par shouldn't really be compared to ball golf par at all. Ball golf uses distance (usually) as a judge for their pars. Disc Golf tends to do the same, but that wrong, IMO. A 350 foot hold that is thickly wooded with no clear routes is much harder than a 650 foot wide open hole with 100 foot-across fairways and no obstacles. Both could be listed as par 4, depending on how you play it.

For instance, I played my first ever tags match in Korea this weekend at a course called Beacon Hill. They have three holes listed as par 4 due to difficulty...not distance (the longest is actually less than 350 I believe) but making them Par 4s seemed reasonable to me. I saw someone get an Eagle on hole 8 (the longest of the par 4s) and he told me himself it was pretty much all luck and two good tree kicks on his drive.

So there's a lot more factors that SHOULD go into disc golf pars. But maybe that's just me.

 

[Kenny53691]

Well, disc golf par shouldn't really be compared to ball golf par at all. Ball golf uses distance (usually) as a judge for their pars. Disc Golf tends to do the same, but that wrong, IMO. A 350 foot hold that is thickly wooded with no clear routes is much harder than a 650 foot wide open hole with 100 foot-across fairways and no obstacles. Both could be listed as par 4, depending on how you play it.

So there's a lot more factors that SHOULD go into disc golf pars. But maybe that's just me.

I agree with you on this one.

 

[jenb]

"Expert", to some, means 1000-rated players only, and they have a good point. Perhaps that is "true par" or something.

IIRC, the average 18 hole course is par 54 and has a 50 SSA, and it is 10 points per throw on a 50 SSA course. That would suggest, to me, that par 54, on average, is set for a 960 rated golfer, and a 1000 rated golfer will, on average, score 4 under par in a round. But, from the following, I suppose your perspective is that the par is set too high because of par 2s being mislabeled as par 3s.

As for "expecting birdies", that is ridiculous. Par is errorless play; you can't "expect" to do better. You may be able to do better, but not that often. The reason players expect so-called birdies is because most par 2 holes are mislabeled as par 3's.

Yes, I know I left out "allowing two throws from close range to hole out." from the definition of par. Without defining "close range" that part has no meaning. To me, those are just the last two throws. If more than 37% of players score a two, the tee throw on that hole is close range.

I think the part about allowing 2 throws from close range to hole out is paraphrased from ball golf's allowing two putts. So close range is probably meant to be interpreted as putting range. Putting range means different things to different people, but I don't think it means "off the tee if 37% of players score a two."

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Don't forget: ball golf pars are calculated assuming the player two-putts. So 2 to reach the green + 2 putts = a par 4. Disc golf pars are based on one-putting to hole out, so a par 4 would be 3 to reach + a putt. Additionally, the fact that bolf typically has par 4 holes rather than par 3's inherently leads to more variation in scores.

The reason players expect so-called birdies is because most par 2 holes are mislabeled as par 3's.

I have to agree - pretty much every hole I ever birdie is quite reachable in 1. The only real birdies I've ever carded we're off of "Field Aces," or at least a putt from more than 30 ft out. In fact, you could argue that pretty much any hole that gets Aced should really be a par 2... obviously reachable within 1.

 

[Ty_Ty]

I personally feel pars are unnecessay in dg.

In ball golf we label holes as par3, par 4 or par 5. We know what clubs to expect to use on these holes and in what order.

(wedge-putter) par 3
(driver-wedge-putter) par 4
(driver-fariway-wedge-putter) par 5

What if holes didnt have pars, but a label for the newer players to determine its range/diffaculty/disc selection.
IDK maybe Levels 1-5?

(putter) Lv 1
(mid-putter) Lv 2
(driver-putter) Lv 3
(driver-mid-putter) Lv 4
(driver-fairway-mid-putter) Lv 5

i.e.
Hole 1: 350 ft straight shot with ob left and woods on the right -- (Level 3)
Hole 2: 699 ft Dog leg left with 100 ft elevation -- (Level 5)

The name of the game would still be to have the least amount of throws.

How much faster would our paly have improved if we learned to drive putters earlier in our career rather than later?

 

[KDencker]

I do not think that every "long" hole/basket should be par 4+, but I do think that people should think about what par should be. When people say "Play everything as par 3" doesn't work on some courses. A 400 foot heavy wooded hole should be a par 4. Course designers need to think about the question: How do I intend this hole to be played? If it is intended for you to hit a landing zone and then throw up, par 4 every time. Are you expecting most people to go straight to the basket, par 3. Yes, if someone tries to go for the basket on the intended par 4, there should be a risk associated with it. Maybe the green isn't as big and he'll land in a blush or forest if not right, it is next to water, etc.

This whole thing about pro par and rec par is stupid. One par and rec will play above it, while pros will play under it. That is how normal golf works right? Now, if an entire course is between 200-350 light wooded course (like most I find) then no problem with everything being a par three. But to say "everything in the world is par 3" stunts the growth of disc golf because there are no standards of how difficult the hole should be.