Par 5’s are good for the game.

The sleeve is still in for the long. Hopefully for the A-Tier it gets placed there. I agree, in the shorter location, 3 is almost impossible, 4 is relatively easy and 5 should be almost a guarantee for mpo players.
Note that the tees are labelled "Blue" which indicates they are designed for the 950-rated skill level. For those players, at 919 feet, there would be fewer than 10% birdies; so, too hard in many designer's eyes (especially for a par 5). But, at 100 feet shorter there would be 25%. So, it makes sense that the shorter position would be used for day-to-day play, and the long only for tournaments.
 
Sounds like the hole is fairly designed. I believe that a hole's stats should be a bell curve, with the bulk of scores being par.

"65 MPO players at the 2023 Titan Open. Round 1 had 14 Birdies, 61 Pars, 16 Bogies, 3 Dbl Bogies and one Triple Bogey."

14 birdies, 16 bogies, and the bulk pars. These are MPO scores, and us mortal humans can use the shorter pads to try and make par. I play in 60+ or MA4.
 
Sounds like the hole is fairly designed. I believe that a hole's stats should be a bell curve, with the bulk of scores being par.

"65 MPO players at the 2023 Titan Open. Round 1 had 14 Birdies, 61 Pars, 16 Bogies, 3 Dbl Bogies and one Triple Bogey."

14 birdies, 16 bogies, and the bulk pars. These are MPO scores, and us mortal humans can use the shorter pads to try and make par. I play in 60+ or MA4.
It is very fairly designed. I was thinking last night, in the longer position, 3 is nearly impossible, but in the short position you could 3 it with two perfect throws 400' shots. Adding to this, a lot of the long throwers didn't birdie it, while some of the more average MPO distances got the bird because of better shot placement.
 
I believe that a hole's stats should be a bell curve, with the bulk of scores being par.
That holds true for holes where the average score is near an integer. When the average score is between two integers, there could be two scores that are both nearly equally prominent; either {par&par+1} or {par&par-1}.
 
Good thoughts. I agree with most of what you said. Love me some well-designed par 5s.

Interestingly, I've noticed in my area that occasionally the powers that be decide that a well-designed hole is getting birdied/parred too often and decide to make the hole harder so that almost no one will birdie it.

That's annoying too. I dislike the tinkering. Just figure out the best design and stick with it. I wonder if Houck is aware of the change.

Did the powers that be say they moved the basket because it "was too hard"? Or was there possibly another reason in play, such as safety, erosion or maintenance issues?

You mentioned the bottom half of the field and them not needing to be able to birdie every hole. I agree. However, if you're throwing 400 feet, you're an outlier among the players out there, and most of them are probably still not making birdie on that hole, right?
I agree. We had this recently done to our local course. A few par 4s that were 425'+ were being eagled by the top 2 or 3 local guys. The ones in charge decided to change a bunch of par 4s to par 3. Now unless you can throw 400'+ on wooded holes there's no way to make birdie. The entire course par dropped by 7 strokes with no change in design. Adding longer pins or tees is better than just dropping pars.
 
I think this whole discussion is hopeless if you are trying to solve this problem, but are not allowed to consider skill levels being a huge factor.

Having shorter tees/baskets as an alternative isn't a solution if we are talking about a group of various skill levels playing the same layout for an event, which...is the only way any of this matters at all.

I suppose I just don't even understand why par even carries so much psychological importance for some people.

Is the root of all of this just about avoiding hurt feelings for calling a result a bogey vs par?

Par has nothing to do with whether I like a hole. If it has elements of risk/reward that lead to different results, its a good hole to me typically.
 
I agree. We had this recently done to our local course. A few par 4s that were 425'+ were being eagled by the top 2 or 3 local guys. The ones in charge decided to change a bunch of par 4s to par 3. Now unless you can throw 400'+ on wooded holes there's no way to make birdie. The entire course par dropped by 7 strokes with no change in design. Adding longer pins or tees is better than just dropping pars.
So is this whole topic just a push/pull over who's feelings to protect: course designers or players?
 
To elaborate further on our course, this course was installed in the mid 90s. So holes that were good par 4s or at least not eagleable back then are much more reachable. The design is no longer a good par 4, just takes 2 average shots to get to the pin but to get a 2 on the hole is not realistic for anyone but a 950+ rated player. What would be some advice on a hole like that, that was good 20 yrs ago but is now about a par 3.5 for 750-900 rated players?
I agree that par doesn't have anything to do with overall score and birdies should take excellent shots. But is just dropping par on a hole, changing it from easy birdie to very tough birdie , accomplishing anything? What experiences have you all had with this?
 
Comparing actual results to expectations is a pretty fundamental aspect of being human.
I suppose.

Seems a little weird to me that holes mostly seem to be complained about for being too hard. Tons of 200' par 3s get absurd birdie counts and no one seems too upset about deviating from 'expectations' there lol.

Not arguing I don't really have strong feelings here just seems odd to me.
 
To elaborate further on our course, this course was installed in the mid 90s. So holes that were good par 4s or at least not eagleable back then are much more reachable. The design is no longer a good par 4, just takes 2 average shots to get to the pin but to get a 2 on the hole is not realistic for anyone but a 950+ rated player. What would be some advice on a hole like that, that was good 20 yrs ago but is now about a par 3.5 for 750-900 rated players?
I agree that par doesn't have anything to do with overall score and birdies should take excellent shots. But is just dropping par on a hole, changing it from easy birdie to very tough birdie , accomplishing anything? What experiences have you all had with this?
I feel like your course situation is different. 425' is not a good distance for a hole unless it has another layer to challenge people. The original situation was making the hole easier because not enough people were able to "birdie 4" the hole. Getting a 4, 5, or 6 is dependent on skill level. Changing the hole because it's too "hard" is arbitrary.
 
I suppose.

Seems a little weird to me that holes mostly seem to be complained about for being too hard. Tons of 200' par 3s get absurd birdie counts and no one seems too upset about deviating from 'expectations' there lol.

Not arguing I don't really have strong feelings here just seems odd to me.
That's the other aspect of human nature: always seeking to get more than what is earned. Thus, the huge negative reaction to any attempt to take away what had been an undeserved free lunch.

The other side of that is that the more realistic the expectations, the greater the joy in actually exceeding them.
 
"I agree. We had this recently done to our local course. A few par 4s that were 425'+ were being eagled by the top 2 or 3 local guys. The ones in charge decided to change a bunch of par 4s to par 3. Now unless you can throw 400'+ on wooded holes there's no way to make birdie. The entire course par dropped by 7 strokes with no change in design. Adding longer pins or tees is better than just dropping pars."

I agree with this. We have a hole at the local course here that's 479' narrow fairway with many trees, OB left and right. Par 3. The basket is on a side slope, so roll aways are common. I don't know of anyone who has birdied the hole. A drive of 450' that manages to miss all the trees, stay in bounds, and not roll away still leaves a 30' putt, with awkward footing and basket angles. Par on this hole is very difficult. This is way outside the bell curve that holes should be. The bell curve for this hole would look like 0 birdies, 25% pars, 50% bogies, and 25% double bogie/+.
 
"I agree. We had this recently done to our local course. A few par 4s that were 425'+ were being eagled by the top 2 or 3 local guys. The ones in charge decided to change a bunch of par 4s to par 3. Now unless you can throw 400'+ on wooded holes there's no way to make birdie. The entire course par dropped by 7 strokes with no change in design. Adding longer pins or tees is better than just dropping pars."

I agree with this. We have a hole at the local course here that's 479' narrow fairway with many trees, OB left and right. Par 3. The basket is on a side slope, so roll aways are common. I don't know of anyone who has birdied the hole. A drive of 450' that manages to miss all the trees, stay in bounds, and not roll away still leaves a 30' putt, with awkward footing and basket angles. Par on this hole is very difficult. This is way outside the bell curve that holes should be. The bell curve for this hole would look like 0 birdies, 25% pars, 50% bogies, and 25% double bogie/+.
Regardless of how anyone scores, you're not going to make the hole easier so people can "birdie" it. I feel in the original situation, it's already a par 5 that was scoring 5.5 or so. You can't make a par 6, so people wanted a more "scoreable" hole and turned it into a par 4.5.
 
"I agree. We had this recently done to our local course. A few par 4s that were 425'+ were being eagled by the top 2 or 3 local guys. The ones in charge decided to change a bunch of par 4s to par 3. Now unless you can throw 400'+ on wooded holes there's no way to make birdie. The entire course par dropped by 7 strokes with no change in design. Adding longer pins or tees is better than just dropping pars."

I agree with this. We have a hole at the local course here that's 479' narrow fairway with many trees, OB left and right. Par 3. The basket is on a side slope, so roll aways are common. I don't know of anyone who has birdied the hole. A drive of 450' that manages to miss all the trees, stay in bounds, and not roll away still leaves a 30' putt, with awkward footing and basket angles. Par on this hole is very difficult. This is way outside the bell curve that holes should be. The bell curve for this hole would look like 0 birdies, 25% pars, 50% bogies, and 25% double bogie/+.
While this hole goes too far in my book I do appreciate good, tough par holes.
 
I agree with this. We have a hole at the local course here that's 479' narrow fairway with many trees, OB left and right. Par 3. The basket is on a side slope, so roll aways are common. I don't know of anyone who has birdied the hole. A drive of 450' that manages to miss all the trees, stay in bounds, and not roll away still leaves a 30' putt, with awkward footing and basket angles. Par on this hole is very difficult. This is way outside the bell curve that holes should be. The bell curve for this hole would look like 0 birdies, 25% pars, 50% bogies, and 25% double bogie/+.
The hole you detail here sounds like a par 3. This hole also sounds like a blue par 4, a white par 4, and a red par 4. To bring us back to the thread topic it also sounds like a green par 5 and a purple par 5.
 
Top