When the TD chooses to use a 1000-rated player as the expert, it's Gold par. When they choose to use a 950-rated player, it's Blue par. The choice can make a 5 or 6 throw difference in the sum of the pars they set for a course.
That's not in the definition. And you know that because . . .
That expounds on the definition, it does not "ignore" it.
What you are doing is making up your own definition. You can call it "expounding" if that makes you feel better, but you're just making it up.
Can you just imagine: "Well officer, its true that the speed limit is 55 but, because that speed limit was established in the 1970's during an oil crisis and when cars weren't as safe now, the 65mph that I was travelling isn't a violation of the speed limit so much as just "expounding" on it.
But, more importantly, please tell us how everything would all fall into place and we would have a par utopia if you could convince me that I didn't follow the definition. Perhaps there is another approach to get to where you want us to be.
I know that you want to make this about, "well what definition would you make up to make this all better?" but the problem is that I am not advocating changing the definition as you are. What I am pointing out is that you are making up your own definition. I know that you don't see it that way so lets explore the definition of SOCMOBR. In order to get there we have to immediately discard a few parts of the real definition.
First, errorless play goes out the window. You don't worry about errors - because you don't have the data for that. So, if someone nails a tree off the tee box on their drive, that and the subsequent throws go into your data. Arguably, this inflates SOCMOBR par, but who knows? Ultimately this doesn't matter to you because, as you've admitted, you're just trying to get to an arbitrary, and acceptable to you, number of birdies.
Second, you don't consult with the TD of the tournament to determine what the TD regards as an expert. You make up your own definition of "expert" with an arbitrary rating chosen solely for the purpose of reducing birdies to another arbitrary number that you deem appropriate. And, your definition of expert, isn't part of the current par definition.
Additionally, you seem to ignore completely other documents when it suits you to do so and then reference them when convenient. For example, the design standards and par guidelines clearly link par to distance and foliage density, but you ignore that, insisting that par is not (or shouldn't be) tied to distance, but then discuss par for different skill levels which is, presumably, derived from those same supporting documents. If it's not, then you are simply giving different meanings to the word expert, something not supported by the definition. "Expert novice" anyone?
Perhaps the worst part of what you do, especially in relation to the second point above, is what I see as the arrogance to be willing ridicule people who disagree with you, using SOCMOBR inspired charts and suggesting that you should give an "award" for the TD who varies the most from your dictates, allowing more birdies than you deem appropriate.
So, the SOCMOBR definition of par:
Par for any hole is the score that 1000 rated players get on that hole.
Too simple? Just "expound" on it.
FWIW, I don't ascribe evil intentions to you. And I don't think TDs should be able to take cover from criticism of the choices that they make. I think that it would be more honest of you to determine what type player the TD has defined as an expert than to claim that their par designation was inaccurate. Maybe you've done that, but it's hard to get past the scoring distribution charts, TD shaming and most-deviation-from-SOCMOBR award talk solely aimed directly at the embarrassment of birdies that you see in Tour events. Ultimately, that might get you the birdie reduction that you desire without falsely claiming that TDs are "inaccurately" setting par.
And until the design standards, par guidelines and par definition are all aligned and the PDGA decides who an expert is, your errorless and distanceless SOCMOBR analysis that uses its own definition of "expert" will always use a different definition of par than the one promulgated by the PDGA.
