Par 3 or Par 4? That is the Question...

[taxman]

don't live your life by par.

when i've had conversations with "ball" golfers and they talk about score they aren't saying "this many under", or "this many over". they say there score. "man, i played x course today and shot a 83. wow that course is tough." if i'm having fun and just playing a round of disc golf for laughs i don't even keep score. i just mentally remember how much time i was looking for discs in the rough or how many nice tosses i had.

if i want to compare scores with someone i say "i had a great game at Avalanche park yesterday, i shot a 49!" (avalanche is a 17 hole course, i'm not THAT good)

 

[bazkitcase5]

if the par listed on the sign is obviously meant for rec players, then I will play all par 3s

however, if the par listed on the sign is pro par (more in line with what an expert level player is expected to shoot), then I will play the listed par - there simply is no reason to think of getting a 4 on a 900 foot hole as getting a bogey

examples like idlewild, renny gold, moraine, and the idgc courses, it makes more sense to play the listed par - like at the W.R. Jackson course at the IDGC, the listed par is 69, but that is pro par, you are playing like a pro if you shoot 69 or better, so why would you play everything in your head as a par 3 and say your 15 over or worse? seems like a lot of trouble

IMO, when par is listed correctly, you should know that if you are under par, you are playing like a pro, but our game has developed a habit of making public pars, so newer players will not feel bad about shooting too much over par - the faster we break this trend, the better IMO

 

[Olorin]

Seeing how this is everyone's favorite topic, can we just make Olorin's explanation/rant an automated response everytime somebody brings it up?

Rant? Do you consider my post on Gold CR Par to be a rant? I consider it as just sharing information.

But here's a bona fide rant (for the 87th time!!)

Why Disc Golf needs consistent par standards:

1.)In tournaments when a player is late you need the par for a hole to know what penalty score to give that player. (The penalty is par + 4 for missed holes.)
2.)For tournaments a consistent standard allows over/under scoring for spectators and the potential TV audience. A reason to have a hole by hole par established is to compare golfers on different holes. Climo is shooting -7 and Schultz -6 but Climo has played 2 more holes is easier (especially to TV viewers) than saying Climo is at 43 after 17 holes while Shultz is at 37 after 15
3.)So that players can judge their progress by comparison to a consistent standard for what an expert player can expect to score on a hole. This acknowledges the reality of par 4, 5 and even par 6 holes.
3.1. One of the first questions that most new players ask is "What is par on this hole?" We should be able to give them a consistent and universally accepted answer.
4.)It is easier to keep track of scores in relation to par than by the total numerical value. This is why most players report their score as "6 down" rather than "48".
5.)The reality of disc golf being a golf type game is that the terms "par", "under par", "bogey" and "birdie" naturally accompany the sport. It would be strange to have a sport with the word "golf" in it that doesn't use these terms. If we're going to use the term "par" then it should have a standard method of determining it.
6.)In tournaments such as Worlds with multiple courses you need par to be able to compare players in different pools playing different courses.
7.)Par is a key factor for comparing the difficulty of different courses. Otherwise there is an insurmountable "portability error". A very useful Difficulty Factor is Level Scoring average minus Level Par. This will only be useful if there are consistent, universal standards for par, though.
8.)Expectations of par affect your mental outlook and your performance. This especially comes into play when you play a new course. If Renaissance Gold is a par 54 then it's insanely hard, but if it's par 70 then it's not as tough. If you think you should take a 3 on a 1000 ft. hole then you will try way too hard, but if you accept that it is a par 5 you can relax and pace yourself.
9.)If the term "par" is defined in a multitude of ways by many different people then the term loses its meaning, so it becomes worthless along with the related terms such as "birdie, bogie…".
10.)To be able to determine handicaps.

Also go to the "What is par?" thread to read more about how these exact same questions have been previously discussed and answered.

 

[DiscGolfCraig]

Rant? Do you consider my post on Gold CR Par to be a rant? I consider it as just sharing information.

But here's a bona fide rant (for the 87th time!!)

Why Disc Golf needs consistent par standards:

1.)In tournaments when a player is late you need the par for a hole to know what penalty score to give that player. (The penalty is par + 4 for missed holes.)
2.)For tournaments a consistent standard allows over/under scoring for spectators and the potential TV audience. A reason to have a hole by hole par established is to compare golfers on different holes. Climo is shooting -7 and Schultz -6 but Climo has played 2 more holes is easier (especially to TV viewers) than saying Climo is at 43 after 17 holes while Shultz is at 37 after 15
3.)So that players can judge their progress by comparison to a consistent standard for what an expert player can expect to score on a hole. This acknowledges the reality of par 4, 5 and even par 6 holes.
3.1. One of the first questions that most new players ask is "What is par on this hole?" We should be able to give them a consistent and universally accepted answer.
4.)It is easier to keep track of scores in relation to par than by the total numerical value. This is why most players report their score as "6 down" rather than "48".
5.)The reality of disc golf being a golf type game is that the terms "par", "under par", "bogey" and "birdie" naturally accompany the sport. It would be strange to have a sport with the word "golf" in it that doesn't use these terms. If we're going to use the term "par" then it should have a standard method of determining it.
6.)In tournaments such as Worlds with multiple courses you need par to be able to compare players in different pools playing different courses.
7.)Par is a key factor for comparing the difficulty of different courses. Otherwise there is an insurmountable "portability error". A very useful Difficulty Factor is Level Scoring average minus Level Par. This will only be useful if there are consistent, universal standards for par, though.
8.)Expectations of par affect your mental outlook and your performance. This especially comes into play when you play a new course. If Renaissance Gold is a par 54 then it's insanely hard, but if it's par 70 then it's not as tough. If you think you should take a 3 on a 1000 ft. hole then you will try way too hard, but if you accept that it is a par 5 you can relax and pace yourself.
9.)If the term "par" is defined in a multitude of ways by many different people then the term loses its meaning, so it becomes worthless along with the related terms such as "birdie, bogie…".
10.)To be able to determine handicaps.

Also go to the "What is par?" thread to read more about how these exact same questions have been previously discussed and answered.

Consider this the out of office reply so my brain can check out when this topic comes up again.

 

[trifocal]

Did somebody say "Par!" ?

Reason # 2 is a good reason to establish par for a course. Maybe someone has said it before, but disc and ball golf are about the only competive/recreational sports where athletes compete on a field of play over a space that differs considerably from the back and forth of hockey, b-ball, baseball, etc. That back and forth activity creates a natural flow for score and whether your team is ahead or behind.

During a tourney, players are scattered all over the course and the only point of reference is their relationship to par. Its kinda cool actually, this way of playing because conditions are changing all over the course all the time and that creates plusses and minuses for all the players as they journey across The Course.

Low score wins of "course", but par is the reference point, like room temperture, for everyone to be able to judge who's hot and who's not.

 

[biscoe]

agreed- par does matter, especially from a design standpoint, unfortunately too many courses are designed by those with no grasp of this concept.

 

[ShaZaun]

I think it all depends on the length and difficulties of the hole..... being a rookie I like those short 3's that I can birdie but there are plenty of tough 3's that I bogie..... on one course i play It's listed as a 4 but I usually get it in 3....... I like the confidence booster that is but it is easy for a 4...... one course is a 5 and it takes me that many to get it in....... I guess it depends on how expeirenced you are might depend on the style, length, difficulty of the course you prefer.... I personally like courses that have a good variety of tough and a few feel good holes.....

 

[magictenor1]

Go Olorin!! Most people I know who play any kind of golf report their scores as relates to par so par does matter. Of course we need more consistent standards for par but why would you ignore what the course designer says par is and play everything as a 3? Noone goes to a ball golf course and ignores the listed par. I used to play BG and their is a wide variety of difficulty in courses just as there is in DG. I had a friend who was a good golfer and on our home municipal course he would shoot under par a lot but I played with him on a championship type course and he shot around +15. There will always be easy and hard courses. You should seek the courses that you feel good about playing but I always play the listed par. If everyone does this then it is easy to compare scores on a given course.

 

[srm_520]

I guess bottom line is do what you want, but I want to design a course in relation to par, but push its limits. In golf, there are 399 yard par 3's, 500 yard par 4's, and 650 yard par 5's, so I would say push it. Until disc golf becomes more standardized - for example - how do you base a par on foliage density? How vague and subjective is that?? The PDGA has guidlines, but nothing in stone - so I don't mind designing a varied and challenging "par 3" course. Nothing 900 feet, but something 450-500 for most golfers or 550-600 for alternate tees - I don't think I'll hear complaints.

 

[srm_520]

It seems like such a hot button issue - why not poll it up like everything else. Make your say in one easy click.

 

[valkyriefb11]

Can we add a 5th option ... WWOD? (What would Olorin do?)
Id just vote for that

 

[DAN E.]

Leviathain in Ludington has par 4's,but we play it as all 3's.It's just easier.

 

[discgolfne1]

It really doesn't matter what you call par. What matters is how many strokes it takes you to complete the round. That's why I like calling all holes a par 3. It keeps at least that a standard and then you can say I was over by "x" number of strokes, or under by "y" number of strokes. What you are really saying is how far off of 54 you were (on a standard 18 hole course)....basically how many strokes you took. When people tell me they shoot 5 under on a course, I assume they mean 49. It frustrates me when people go by something other than par 3 disc golf, because then I really don't know how they shot because they are using a different standard than me. Most people that I play with play everything par 3.

Well said... What maters is your final score which is a double digit number. Keeping par at 3 makes it easier to compare EVERYONE's score everywhere.

 

[ERicJ]

Everything is not a Par 3. That's just friggin' common sense....

Count or keep track of your score by counting every hole relative to a score of '3' because that's faster and easier.

But every hole is not a Par 3...

Steve, if you're designing a course that has holes over 500' or with some significant foliage or hazards you should seriously consider upping the Par values.

ERic

 

[bazkitcase5]

Well said... What maters is your final score which is a double digit number. Keeping par at 3 makes it easier to compare EVERYONE's score everywhere.

how does that help you compare scores everywhere?

if you play the W.R. Jackson course as I mentioned earlier and shoot a 69 - you shot par - if every course had pro par set accurately, then everywhere that you shoot par, people know roughly how well you shot

if you do everything as a par 3, then at easy courses you shoot par or 5-10 under, but at the Jackson course, you would have shot a 15 over - nobody knows how well you shot unless they know what course you played

 

[Olorin]

Can we add a 5th option ... WWOD? (What would Olorin do?)
Id just vote for that

valkyriefb11,

Thanks for the vote of confidence, and you did peg it that I wouldn't vote for any of the choices. Some people seem to think that I rant about this, but for anyone who just joined DGCR today, and doesn't know it yet, I'd vote for Gold CR Par.

 

[srm_520]

Everything is not a Par 3. That's just friggin' common sense....

Count or keep track of your score by counting every hole relative to a score of '3' because that's faster and easier.

But every hole is not a Par 3...

Steve, if you're designing a course that has holes over 500' or with some significant foliage or hazards you should seriously consider upping the Par values.

ERic

There is one hole on the course that plays over 500 feet and that is the alternate box, so I justify it. From the regular box is 450', and I would say medium to light foliage, so again I don't think I would hear complaints. The heaviest treed holes are under 300 feet, so I think we have a good par 3 course.

Dave thinks we could have it up within a couple of months - meaning totally finished i.e. concrete and signage, so you'll have to come play it a judge for yourself. I can't get the .kml file to work right or I would just send it to you.

 

[_.-Dut-._]

I guess bottom line is do what you want, but I want to design a course in relation to par, but push its limits. In golf, there are 399 yard par 3's, 500 yard par 4's, and 650 yard par 5's, so I would say push it. Until disc golf becomes more standardized - for example - how do you base a par on foliage density? How vague and subjective is that?? The PDGA has guidlines, but nothing in stone - so I don't mind designing a varied and challenging "par 3" course. Nothing 900 feet, but something 450-500 for most golfers or 550-600 for alternate tees - I don't think I'll hear complaints.

If you wanted to make several par 3 420ish' holes you wont have a problem. However once you start pushing toward 500 it needs to become a par 4. Especially if it has obstacles, woods or other.

 

[Lewis]

It all depends on what you mean by "par." When I use the word, I'm describing what an expert player should expect to get on a hole (or a course) on a good day. An expert golfer shoots around par on any given day. An expert disc golfer should do the same. So if you're regularly shooting under par but never winning tournaments, par is set too high.

There are two ways to look at the "this course's par is wrong" argument. One group of people will say "These 200 foot open holes should be Par 2." Another group will say "These 500 foot wooded holes should be Par 4." I agree with both groups, and I think the "Par 3 ONLY!" zealots are trying to change the meaning of the word for the sake of a personal scorekeeping convenience.

 

[_.-Dut-._]

There shouldnt be any such thing as Par 2. Three is as low as it should go.