Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
saevel25

Should we change how we define par?

Note: This thread is 1565 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Should we change how we define par?   

56 members have voted

  1. 1. Should we change how we define par?

    • Yes
      1
    • No
      55


54 posts / 3251 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

http://www.golfwrx.com/367952/in-memory-of-par-ending-an-era-of-exasperation/

The author of this article proposes that there should be a tier system based on your average carry distance which defines what par is on the hole. 

By his chart, a guy who hits the ball 250+ would have a par 3 up to 275 yards. While a guy who hits it 190 off the tee would have a par 3 up to 175 yards. 

Here are a reason why I think we should not change what par is.  

It allow you to compare yourself to what a scratch player would shoot on that hole. If you are an 18 handicap and you get a birdie then you did really good. If you change par to match the golfers ability it really devalues what par is. I rather keep par as a hard achievable goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Wait, a so I could be expected to play a par 3 as long as 275 yards? So they are saying that par 3 could be so long that it requires a driver from the tee? That sounds much worse than how it is now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

3 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Here are a reason why I think we should not change what par is.  

It allow you to compare yourself to what a scratch player would shoot on that hole. If you are an 18 handicap and you get a birdie then you did really good. If you change par to match the golfers ability it really devalues what par is. I rather keep par as a hard achievable goal.

I agree with this, par is a standard across the board, for all skill levels.  There's no reason to change it just to make golf SEEM easier.  I fully support the practice that many higher handicappers use, that of defining a "personal par" for themselves on every hole, I think it offers them a goal that they can meet and occasionally exceed.  Net par is also there for a player to measure himself by, assuming he's avid enough to want to establish a handicap, official or otherwise.  Some changes just don't need to be made.

As an aside, bogey was the original standard score for a hole.  Par came to be used a bit later, and eventually superseded bogey as the standard score. 

http://www.scottishgolfhistory.org/origin-of-golf-terms/bogey/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

They already have this system in place, for many years, they call them tee boxes, pick one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad idea, this makes the game even more complex to understand. Plus it does not change how many strokes I need to get the ball in the hole or something. There is already a handicap system that gives people strokes based on their ability. Besides, they can always tee it forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Par is par.  Changing what that means is like taking a yardstick but instead of 3 feet, sometimes calling it 4 feet or 5 feet.  Stupid idea.  Like MrDC said, we already have a perfectly functioning system for adjusting to players' ability, and one that doesn't muck around with what we all understand.  While I grant that many courses could do a better job of offering a greater variety of tee boxes, with a wider spread from the longest to the shortest, that is a shortcoming of the individual course, not the game itself.  

All this would do is have 30 handicappers playing from the back tee because now par is 85, so they take their 103 strokes of "bogey" golf, and spend 5½ hours hacking around a course that is 1000 yards too long for their ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

This is just an extension of everything that is happening today in this country, likely from the same people that brought us participation trophies.  

Some people feel bad not scoring par, so let's change par so it's easier for them to feel good about themselves.  As @David in FL said, we have different tee boxes to make up for the distance gaps between players.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 hours ago, saevel25 said:

http://www.golfwrx.com/367952/in-memory-of-par-ending-an-era-of-exasperation/

The author of this article proposes that there should be a tier system based on your average carry distance which defines what par is on the hole. 

By his chart, a guy who hits the ball 250+ would have a par 3 up to 275 yards. While a guy who hits it 190 off the tee would have a par 3 up to 175 yards. 

Here are a reason why I think we should not change what par is.  

It allow you to compare yourself to what a scratch player would shoot on that hole. If you are an 18 handicap and you get a birdie then you did really good. If you change par to match the golfers ability it really devalues what par is. I rather keep par as a hard achievable goal.

Agree with this. I would not be in favor of a change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Oh, I thought this was another PEZGolf thread. :-D

 

 

 

Looks like most people don't like the idea based upon the GolFWRX ratings"

Your Reaction?
  • LIKE25
  • LEGIT1
  • WOW2
  • LOL2
  • IDHT1
  • FLOP7
  • OB6
  • SHANK52

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The world is changing to one where people aspired to challenging goals and failure was an incentive to do better or approach things differently to a culture of everyone should get a trophy and everyone is a winner. 

I try and par every hole. Right now I only par about three a round. But that keeps me aiming for a goal and benchmark. I'd probably be worse than I already am if I played this feel good par proposed system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I voted yes, but only for one reason. I play on a very long course, with  very long holes. My suggestion would be to re-look at the length of any par. We have a par 4 on my course that can't be reached by the club pro unless it is summer, so surely that is wrong. Maybe the answer is to look at what tees are used by which golfers ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted no. Current par is the number everyone is tested by, and/or compared to. 

Now I think it's ok for the individual to have their own reference number. In my case, when I go out, I am always looking at the number 80. That's the number I am aiming at. Sometimes I am a little better than 80, most times I am not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

46 minutes ago, paininthenuts said:

I voted yes, but only for one reason. I play on a very long course, with  very long holes. My suggestion would be to re-look at the length of any par. We have a par 4 on my course that can't be reached by the club pro unless it is summer, so surely that is wrong. Maybe the answer is to look at what tees are used by which golfers ?

The club pro not reaching the hole in the winter is not necessarily a good metric. We have three par 4 that are not reachable in the winter by 99.97% of the players from the tips. 474 , 506 and 468 yards where the first and last ones are against a wind in the winter time. There are only a couple players I know who can reach with driver and iron in 40F weather, and I know of a few more. Many mid-cappers are playing their hybrids and fairway woods from the blue tees which are about 20-30 yards shorter. The rest of the golfers just don't expect to make a regulation par in the winter. Most even have trouble in the summer, but that doesn't make them par 5 holes. It just means they should be playing the shorter course or the red (ladies) tees which are still 6000 yards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

19 minutes ago, Lihu said:

The club pro not reaching the hole in the winter is not necessarily a good metric. We have three par 4 that are not reachable in the winter by 99.97% of the players from the tips. 474 , 506 and 468 yards where the first and last ones are against a wind in the winter time. There are only a couple players I know who can reach with driver and iron in 40F weather, and I know of a few more. Many mid-cappers are playing their hybrids and fairway woods from the blue tees which are about 20-30 yards shorter. The rest of the golfers just don't expect to make a regulation par in the winter. Most even have trouble in the summer, but that doesn't make them par 5 holes. It just means they should be playing the shorter course or the red (ladies) tees which are still 6000 yards.

By pretty much anyone's standards that hole is extremely long for a par 4 and actually hovers right around what most courses would consider a typical par 5. However, having a par 4 that long probably goes a decent way towards a higher course rating, and on a course with a higher rating I'd expect to have either longer hole lengths, more trouble via hazards and OB, or both.That being said, he said the course Pro couldn't reach unless it was summer, not that he couldn't reach it in the winter. So that sounds to me like that hole probably plays longer than it should for a par 4. It would be helpful if we knew which hole it was on what course so that we could make an evaluation of it ourselves though.

Edited by Jeremie Boop

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

4 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

I fully support the practice that many higher handicappers use, that of defining a "personal par" for themselves on every hole, I think it offers them a goal that they can meet and occasionally exceed.  Net par is also there for a player to measure himself by, assuming he's avid enough to want to establish a handicap, official or otherwise.

I agree that net par is basically the same measure since HCPs already track pretty accurately by driving distance. The guy's system also makes your expected score all about distance, which does not reflect reality. Distance is a bit more important, but accuracy is a significant part of scoring. Better players tend to be both longer and more accurate than higher HCPs, but not all long players are accurate enough to score up to their distance potential.

Also it seems that the suggested system would require extra signage on each hole describing the par from each tee for each player tier. This extra signage could just as easily convey the net par for their HCP for each tee. If no extra signage is provided than some math on the tee is required to figure either 'new par' or 'net par'. So no real advantage that I see.

The whole tee-it-forward campaign is about moving up so that you will be playing closer to your 'personal par' based on your HCP / tee distance. IMO the lack of a decent range of tees for a wide range of skills is more the issue than 'par' itself. Focus new golfers on their reduction in total score and HCP improvement, which is usually encouraging. If you've plateaued, you've plateaued under any scoring system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

By pretty much anyone's standards that hole is extremely long for a par 4 and actually hovers right around what most courses would consider a typical par 5. However, having a par 4 that long probably goes a decent way towards a higher course rating, and on a course with a higher rating I'd expect to have either longer hole lengths, more trouble via hazards and OB, or both.That being said, he said the course Pro couldn't reach unless it was summer, not that he couldn't reach it in the winter. So that sounds to me like that hole probably plays longer than it should for a par 5. It would be helpful if we knew which hole it was on what course so that we could make an evaluation of it ourselves though.

First of all, it's crazy to play the tips in the winter. You'll even find me on the ladies tees when the temperatures are in the 30s, if I'm even on the course.

IIRC, the hole he is talking about is right around 475 yards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 1565 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Affiliates

    SuperSpeed
    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo
  • Posts

    • It’s literally a board right? I’m not even sure what it does. Does it have a fulcrum?
    • I keep seeing advertisements on social media for something called Down Under Board.  I did a search and all i can see is people using it or people saying how it changed their game but doesn't really tell you what it is for and how to use it.  I think it is for balance, but I can't really tell.  Can someone that uses it explain if it is good or if it is just a gimmick?  Having said that, wouldn't you be able to just make one with ply wood and save about $140?  How do you know what is the right size for you?  Thanks, just curious. 
    • When I was growing up we were taught not to use swear words, and, in front of our parents, in mixed company,in public, we did not. Things have changed a lot since then, and what was once unacceptable, is now fairly common. I still try to hold to my old standards, but I don't worry if someone else has different standards. I don't really have a problem with JT, but if he found a different way to express himself, I'd be ok with that. There are a lot bigger things to worry about than this.
    • It's the GAP of distance you're looking for, then no one could help you but yourself.  Since you're the only one who'll know which cub to fill between the 200 yd.-240 yd. It may be two clubs for 215, 225/230, oe just one for the general between the 200-240 if you don't need precision yardage. I feel the hybrids will have better control and give you more consistent yardage than the fairway woods could.  Being closer to the irons..... However, not many could take away or add a 5 yards for distance over 170 no matter what type of golf club in their hands.  Only the few who could play 170-200 like the average golfer's 120-150 control .  Keep it in mind of what type of shots you'll need to use the extra club for ?    Mostly from the tee ?  From the fairway or combination of fairway and more challenging lie ? In the 70's and the 80's I bag the driver, 3 wood, putter and 1-SW .  But the loft on the irons were quite a bit weaker than today's "longer" irons.
    • At his level, its all between his ears and coming out via his swing. That's an obvious oversimplification of the situation but he just doesn't have that confident swagger thing going on. I watched him hit the one OB where Faldo was questioning his set-up and then yank. I have to think when you lose your confidence to some degree from a 10 to say a 7 you got to get it back up there on that big stage. Seems like any weakness is exploited at that level especially the mental game. I could be totally off base. 
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Cantankerish
      Cantankerish
      (46 years old)
    2. Dimes44
      Dimes44
      (37 years old)
    3. Donald Belcher
      Donald Belcher
      (84 years old)
    4. jimnm
      jimnm
      (41 years old)
    5. Zachase715
      Zachase715
      (28 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...