Originally Posted by Golfingdad
Originally Posted by Meltdwhiskey
But I see his point, too. Even though courses have different ratings and conditions - I'd still think of a 'world record' or something similar as an under par score b/c of the different pars. I'd find it slightly better than the raw 59.
Even in the specific example I gave? David Duval played a course that was 337 yards SHORTER and had a rating of 1.7 (whoops, just realized my math mistake earlier, sorry about that) shots EASIER, albeit with a slightly higher slope.
This means that REGARDLESS of the par shown, experts believe that a scratch player would have a tougher time, by over 1.5 shots on average, on the par 70 course.
I guess you either don't understand the USGA rating system OR perhaps you just don't trust it.
No - I get you. I understand the rating system and I trust it.
You have taken it to an even more precise level and I totally agree with you that taking as many conditions and ratings into account as possible would be best to determine which round is more impressive than another. Appleby's is better. And if all the par 70's have a higher rating than all of the par 72's where these 59's took place because of the par 5's becoming par 4's thing - then there is no validity to the original post.
But it seems to me that most PGA events are 72's (not sure). If half of the PGA 59's are on Par 70/71 courses, they are possibly over represented. Maybe because it is easier to shoot 59 on a par 70? It is a pretty small data set - so it could be a coincidence.
But without more knowledge, I would guess the methods to judge them is:
Least Accurate - Stroke Score without par or rating taken into account
Slightly More Accurate, but beginning to lose an audience because 13 isn't a round number - Under Par Score
Really accurate, but most people don't care to take it that far - The GoflingDad / Course Rating Analysis
Also, I might have transferred some of my own experience (the par 70 at my home course mentioned above) to these 59's these guys. But I always feel I've left something out to say I shot 89 - when I wouldn't have broken 90 on a par 72. I was kind of carrying this concept to these record rounds. Maybe that is off topic.
FWIW - when talking to friends of mine that have and understand handicaps, we kind of talk in differentials, which is more or less the GoflingDad / Course Rating Analysis method. When playing different courses, slopes, tees, etc - differentials is really the best way to convey how well we played. And I prefer talking about it in those terms. But so few people have handicaps really.
Full disclosure - it is possible I'm not totally following all the scenarios as close as I normally would. I'm supposedly watching a pretty technical yet incredibly boring webinar on configuring our phone system. I probably should have just stayed out of this. This might be the worst post I've ever written.