Because in real golf, even if you're an average recreational player, you can walk up to a hole that challenges the best players in the world, and if you hit a great shot (or 2 if it's a par 4) and drain a putt, you can make birdie.
-
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)
Par Talk
- Thread starter Steve West
- Start date
Because in real golf, even if you're an average recreational player, you can walk up to a hole that challenges the best players in the world, and if you hit a great shot (or 2 if it's a par 4) and drain a putt, you can make birdie.
bnbanbury
Eagle Member
I can't agree with this at all. When you look at courses at difficult golf courses on the PGA tour there are holes that almost no one in the field has a real look at birdie and a recreation player would be lucky to get down in 5-7 shots. There are dozens of 450+ yd par fours, not reachable in two by a recreational golfer.
The hardest courses on the PGA tour and in major championships, where the idea is to protect par, have a number of holes that the players in the field are playing for par, not birdie. Whether we should care about protecting par in disc golf and make holes that are incredibly difficult to birdie is another discussion but it could certainly be done if a TD wanted to.
Protecting par and birdiable are 2 totally different things! Nicklaus said that "par 3s are the great equalizer". All it takes is 1 GREAT (really rare BUT possible) shot even by a tyro and a birdie results. Yet if not GREAT, bogie or worse happens.
bnbanbury
Eagle Member
I was responding to the post that noted that holes that PGA golfers play can be birdied by recreational players, which is often not the case on difficult courses. I am not arguing that there should at least be a heroic shot option for birdie for professional players. I am saying that if you want to protect par from 1025+ rated disc golfers you have to make pins that are completely inaccessible to most amateur disc golfers.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
I think Karl channeling Nicklas, nicely summarizes the point. It doesn't take a great shot in disc golf to make a bird. It takes a biiiiiig mistake or an unlucky break, to make bogey. This is true, even for many Ams.
It shouldn't be that on most holes a straight enough, or hyzer enough shot leaves you a drop in. Not for the top level events. If players wanna do that in league, that's fine.
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
This is why figuring out a clever way to make our 15+ foot putts as uncertain for top pros as much as 5+ footers are for PGA pros would help our easy birdie problem whether par 3s, 4s or 5s.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
This notion comes about because it allows players to convince themselves they've done something special. If you set the bar low, and crush it, gee aren't you awesome. It's the give everyone a trophy option.
OB studies in the work place now show that staff raised in the "trophy" for everything environment, get depressed and non productive if they don't get regular "wins." Pats on the back - employee of the week, day, whatever - small awards - etc. Those raised in a you have to earn it environment work harder, are more productive and tend to rofl when they are given a medal for being the employee of the week.
Not everyone is a great disc golfer. Half of us are below average. Right now we are the give everyone a trophy sport. Maybe, at least for the top levels, we should convert to the you have to earn that birdie, sport?
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2009
- Messages
- 6,837
I don't think we should put much emphasis on protecting par from top rated players. Hot rounds by top players should be way under par.
With correctly set par, non-impressive rounds by merely good players will no longer be way under par.
Lazerface
Eagle Member
Agreed. Subjectively speaking I hate the idea of changing the target, but if I'm being honest with myself I think it's a forward thinking solution. I know you're not talking about small baskets specifically, but it's the most common proposition.
One thing that is cool about disc golf is we have more aces both from the tee and from the fairway than ball golf. We also have dramatic 60 foot putts from the top players go in quite often. I understand this counterargument from the naysayers of changing the target. I don't know that the extraordinarily rare ball golf ace is a good thing.
Also, I'm not sure disc golf in 35 MPH wind with narrow baskets would be watchable at all.
I would like to see the shield idea piloted in a tournament, but I don't like it personally. I would rather greens be designed thoughtfully so players have a limited, but fair point of entry. That does not accomplish that "land on the good part of the green" goal, and I don't have any real good ideas outside of extremely well designed pits of some sort.
Maybe some type of landscaping bush (the kind people make animals out of) that was cut in a way that we could place it 15 to 20 feet away from the basket and it obstructed putts, while not eliminating a putt completely, and at the same time didn't catch a bad drive/approach that would of otherwise ended up 40 feet away. I'm imagining some type of bush with a thin profile where you would be forced to pitch over it, or kneel and put under it. Sort of like the block house bushes posted in this thread but trimmed to a much thinner profile so less errant shots would have the potential for a lucky outcome, but it could still challenge putts. It's hard because our top players are just so damn good at putting.
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
There are ways being considered to increase the challenge for putts in the circle and at the same time not remove the excitement in our game seeing top pros making putts outside the circle and also not reduce the frequency of aces. One option would even slightly increase the number of aces.
...and that laugh.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
Chuck, I thought at one point you posted that the narrower baskets didn't increase spread? They just move everyone in a lump. Am I wrong?
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
The skinny baskets have so far been shown to reduce spread among the highest rated players at those events.
Lazerface
Eagle Member
But this is PAR talk. It does not need to increase spread. It just needs to make scores relative to PAR more "realistic". That is the position of you and Steve though. I stand firm it's mostly a non-problem and should be solved through course design and depth of talent and not through a retrospective data analysis on existing courses.
Chuck, you can't just leave us hanging. What kind of changes are being entertained that would yield such a comprehensive solution (make putting harder, but keep the excitement of long putts/aces).
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
You'll have to be left hanging for a while at least. I can't get any work done when I have to explain and maintain thread discussions on all of them. Our GDT has work to do to get the experimental program put together with details on each of the options available for testing.
lyleoross
* Ace Member *
Nothing is that simple. Yes, it's an easy solution to move scores up, but clearly that isn't my only thought or else I wouldn't have asked. Basket structure that doesn't increase spread doesn't enhance the game any IMO. I like OB Mandos etc. for those things, much better. Without score separation, you're left with too many pros sitting X under, i.e. the same score, long term.
Chuck are there differences in scoring separation at DeLa vs courses with less challenging greens?
Bullseye circle proposal for MPO, par 3's remain as par 3:
Designate, for example, 2-4 holes as "bullseye" holes. If your drive lands outside the bullseye circle, a bullseye miss penalty of 1 throw is added to your score for that hole. These holes are played as any other holes, with that one exception.
The DGWT bullseye circle works for me.
Simple to implement and would accomplish the objectives of the gangsta par crowd (since par spelled backwards is rap, I had to throw that in!).
opcorn:
Designate, for example, 2-4 holes as "bullseye" holes. If your drive lands outside the bullseye circle, a bullseye miss penalty of 1 throw is added to your score for that hole. These holes are played as any other holes, with that one exception.
The DGWT bullseye circle works for me.
Simple to implement and would accomplish the objectives of the gangsta par crowd (since par spelled backwards is rap, I had to throw that in!).
opcorn:Are you?
Since ANY player can occasionally hit a 'miracle shot', making something "completely inaccessible" to lesser players means making such 'not reachable' due to distance only - as really good players CAN throw further than not really good ones...but ANY player can "get lucky". Therefore I doubt that's what you mean.
I'm guessing to 'protect par' - which as Lyle mentioned probably can't be done - one would have to narrow up all the lanes to any basket...quite a bit. This would separate the great from the not-so (statistically) but it's hard to ask trees to "tighten up their ranks"
DG_Before_Breakfast
Double Eagle Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2012
- Messages
- 1,410
We need to simulate the contours of ball golf greens by inserting variable speed, automated fans in the 10 meter ring.
mjoyce
Birdie Member
I agree. Mostly a non problem that should be solved through course design.
It's been said earlier in this thread but there are courses where the par very accurately reflects a great round. Moraine State Park and Deer Lakes come to mind. While I know that McBeth destroyed the par at 2015 worlds he's much better than a scratch golfer.
