59 on a par 71 vs. par 72

[hurley9192]

So, on the pgatour.com website, there are people trying to argue that 59 on a par 71 is harder than a par 72 because you don't have as many birdie/eagle chances. Is it just me or is that the most backward argument ever?

I think it matters what the relative course rating and slope is...who cares about par. Shooting 59 on a par 54 par 3 course isn't as impressive as shooting 59 on a par 90 all par 5 course. A 500 yard hole that they call a par 5 isn't easier than a 500 yard par 4 to shoot a 4 on.

[golfro]

a 500 yard hole that they a call par 5 is easier... because 4 strokes is a birdie...not a par.

maybe im not getting what you're saying... but take two courses, both 6800 yards long, one par 71, the other par 72. The 71 is harder since speaking yardage wise, it means you have one less stroke to cover the same yardage.

[Harry SasQuatch]

The people arguing that a 59 on a par 71 are internet message board losers who have nothing better to do than try and start controversy on a topic they'll never even come close to knowing anything about. Twelve birdies are easier to get than 13. I swear, some people need to hit their computer with a sledgehammer. A little sunlight and real-world interaction would be beneficial. The flourescent lighting in their parent's basement has gotten them quite delusional.

[hurley9192]

how is it easier to get a 4 on a 500 yard par 5 than a 500 yard par 4? It's easier to score 1 under par, but the score on the card is the same. My argument is not whether it's easier to shoot "par", but easier to shot a particular score. You are correct that to shoot par it is easier on a par 72 (rating, lenght and slope being equal), but you would also shoot a higher score...a 72 vs. a 71. I'll take a 71 on a par 71 any day over a 72 on a par 72. However, I would rather shoot a 59 on a par 72 than a 59 on a par 71 since I would be 13 under vs. 12 under.

[hurley9192]

So, Harry...does that make us also internet message board losers? LOL

The people arguing that a 59 on a par 71 are internet message board losers who have nothing better to do than try and start controversy on a topic they'll never even come close to knowing anything about. Twelve birdies are easier to get than 13. I swear, some people need to hit their computer with a sledgehammer. A little sunlight and real-world interaction would be beneficial. The flourescent lighting in their parent's basement has gotten them quite delusional.

[BSH]

It's a valid question.

And yeah...I see your point but I'd agree with golfro. One less stroke to cover the same yardage...

Paul Goydos....shoots 59 and says something about shooting his height instead of his age. He's funny sometimes.

[sean_miller]

how is it harder to get a 4 on a 500 yard par 5 than a 500 yard par 4? It's easier to score 1 under par, but the score on the card is the same. My argument is whether it's easier to shoot "par", but easier to shot a particular score. You are correct that to shoot par it is easier on a par 72 (rating, lenght and slope being equal), but you would also shoot a higher score...a 72 vs. a 71. I'll take a 71 on a par 71 any day over a 72 on a par 72. However, I would rather shoot a 59 on a par 72 than a 59 on a par 71 since I would be 13 under vs. 12 under.

Two different arguments. There are often more hazards and tougher pin placements on short par 5s, whereas on long par 4s, they usually cut you some slack considering it's no gimme even reaching the green. I believe it's called nit picking.

[kpaulhus]

Ill take a 75 on a par 71 or 72. Doesn't matter to me

[Chillmoon91]

That just plain ridiculous

[DavidFehertysBike]

It doesn't matter. All that matters is the number. Just because you have a course with an extra par 5 doesn't mean anything. You still play 18 holes.

[zeg]

I tend to think your intuition is probably right. As you say, par is a mostly meaningless number, so really you should compare ratings. All else equal, the easier rated course is most likely the one it'll be easier to shoot a lower score on. This is *almost* a tautology.

I see what they're getting at about birdie-ing par 4 and 5 versus par 3, but they're ignoring that a birdie on a par 3 is the same number of strokes as an eagle on a par 4 and a double-eagle on a par 5, so that's the comparison you need to make since you're talking about absolute score. Their logic is just broken.

[brgolf]

hurley9192

Assuming all things are equal and the players play to greens in regulation ie 3 shots to reach a par 5, then 59 on a par 71 is easier by the simple fact that a scratch golfer should shoot 1 shot less on that course than a par 72. He will still have 18 chances to make birdie on the shorter course.

The 59 is easier on a par 72 argument would require an extra birdie. This cannot happen if the player is reaching par 5s in 3. However if the player plays 59 on the par 71 reaching the 3 par 5s in 2 leaving eagle chances, then he would have 3 eagle chances. If he reached the par 5s in 3 on the par 72 he would have 4 eagle chances, instead of 3 eagle chances and a birdie chance because 1 par 5 is a par 4.

So the conclusion is that on the par 71 course, one shot less is a given, while on the par 72 you have to make it.

[golfro]

hurley9192

That about sums it up. Great post.

[hurley9192]

actually, no, it's not one less stroke...it's the same score. It's under par vs. par, but the same score.

It's a valid question.

[senorchipotle]

the fiinal number is the only thing that matters. par 71 or 72 you still have to hit 59 strokes, so neither is more difficult than the other.

[hurley9192]

But Golfro, that was my argument all along...it's easier to shoot 59 on a par 71 than a par 72 because you have to make less birdies on a par 71. The other guys were saying it's easier on a par 72 because you have an additional par 5 so another birdie chance. That is akin to saying that adding 40 yards to one of the par 4's makes it easier to shoot a certain score, which is completely backward. I am talking about score here, not 13 under vs. 12 under.

That about sums it up. Great post.

[brgolf]

how is it easier to get a 4 on a 500 yard par 5 than a 500 yard par 4? It's easier to score 1 under par, but the score on the card is the same. My argument is not whether it's easier to shoot "par", but easier to shot a particular score. You are correct that to shoot par it is easier on a par 72 (rating, lenght and slope being equal), but you would also shoot a higher score...a 72 vs. a 71. I'll take a 71 on a par 71 any day over a 72 on a par 72. However, I would rather shoot a 59 on a par 72 than a 59 on a par 71 since I would be 13 under vs. 12 under.

You need to sort of the assumptions you are making because people need to be talking about the same thing. If the same hole (400y) was for one mans round a par 4 and the next mans round a par 5 then their 59s would be equally impressive. I think the discussion you are raising assumes that the par 72 course is a proportionate length and therefore the par 5 would be suitably longer.

The ease at which a player will shoot par is identical and the number of strokes they may beat par by will be an identically easy/hard task so if the person shoots 60 on the par 72 his performances will be equal to a 59 on a par 71. The last part of your response I agree on as it is the correct conclusion.

[hurley9192]

correct...basically it comes down to this...if someone told you they would give you $1000 to break 80. Would you choose a par 72 or par 71 course given similar rating, length, etc.? Most on the pgatour.com site were saying it would be harder to break 80 on a par 71 so they would take a par 72 since it is easier.

In reality, my home course is like this...a few years back we redid our course and changed a 530 par 5 to a 484 par 4. Is it easier to shoot par? No, but it is easier to break 80 now.