Less than regulation golf

[stealthhwk]

Whats with all the hate towards non regulation golf courses? I sometimes play a par 66 course and when describing my round to others, they seem to discount it if its anything less than 70. I just dont get it. Golf is golf, and par is par. The funniest thing to me, is while Ive shot 82 and 83 on the par 66 Ive also shot 103. It can be one of the toughest golf courses Ive ever played, and Id bet the golfers bashing it couldnt break 100 there. Why all the hate, and what are your thoughts on less than regulation golf courses?

[Hardspoon]

I don't think it's "hate"...it's just that everyone recognizes that if you play a par-66 course, you can't measure your round by the gross score.

One of the most fun courses (despite iffy maintenance) that I used to play in Philly was a par-62 (http://www.walnutlanegolf.com/).  I broke 100 there much earlier than I did anywhere else, but I didn't consider myself to have actually "broken 100."  That doesn't mean it wasn't fun, but I wouldn't compare my gross score there to a regulation course.

A lot of courses talk about how you'll need "every club in the bag"...this course definitely warranted that description.

 

 

[David in FL]

Damned if I know.  I shot 43 at Congo River last week.  Took a double on the windmill hole....

[Aguirre]

My favorite holes to play are Par 5s.

[DeadMan]

I enjoy a good executive course now and then. I do prefer par 70-72 courses, but I wouldn't ever hate on a course just because it's less than regulation. 

That said, reasons I prefer regulation courses:

1. Executive courses tend to have few or no par 5s, which are the best opportunity to score on. So, I'd rather play a course with more par 5s for that reason.
2. While this is not always the case, they tend to be in worse shape than regulation courses.
3. Along those lines, they tend to be boring courses.
4. This is probably the biggest issue - they tend to attract slow golfers.

We have a couple of good ones in the Denver area, along with a few bad ones that I avoid. The good ones are really good for honing your iron game with all of the different length par 3s they have.

[stealthhwk]

1 hour ago, Hardspoon said:

I don't think it's "hate"...it's just that everyone recognizes that if you play a par-66 course, you can't measure your round by the gross score.

 

 

This part I recognized early on, which is why I believe in full disclosure. When someone asks about a round at a less than regulation course I always start by telling them its par. And while an 82 on a 66 doesnt count as breaking 90, Id still say thats a very good score for myself as no matter the par, I strive for bogey golf. But even with full disclosure, people seem to be bothered by it. 

[Shindig]

I sent a text to a friend a few minutes ago about how excited I was to discover a par-3 course near me.  Also it has night lights. 

[cutchemist42]

i personally dont mind. My home course has 6 par 3s, 1 par 5, and 3 par 4s. The one par4 is a sharp dogleg that is basically an 8 iron than pitching wedge. It allows me to play for cheap though, and it translates well to other courses still when I play with friends.

[newtogolf]

Most people don't understand course ratings and assume anything under par 70 is a step above mini-golf.  Also, many people don't realize that their home course probably has tees that are sub 70 par for men.  The fairways and greens are just as protected as they are for the par 72, the distance is just reduced.  

[stealthhwk]

1 hour ago, newtogolf said:

Most people don't understand course ratings and assume anything under par 70 is a step above mini-golf.  Also, many people don't realize that their home course probably has tees that are sub 70 par for men.  The fairways and greens are just as protected as they are for the par 72, the distance is just reduced.  

Yeah, the distance is about 700 yards or so shorter than regulation courses I play but to me its a real test of golf. And it plays above par on the course rating if memory serves. Tight fairways and pothole bunkers like they have at the open. They also have a 180 yard forced carry over water and a par 3 with a green that slopes probably to the tune of 25 degrees. Land that thing in the wrong place and u wind up off the green in a thicket or in a four foot deep pothole bunker. I always tell people its hit the shot u need or write down an 8.

[70sSanO]

There is a local course I will play that is a Par 60 and it is a tight little up and down course with not a lot of margin for error.  It has no Par 5's.  It is a lot of fun.

I think these courses are looked down on because for some people the bragging rights are how far they can drive the ball.  They may look down on the course as not a real golf course, but then again they may only be able to play courses with 60-75 yard wide fairways so they can slice their 300 yard drives from one side to the other without fear.

John

[mcanadiens]

I play my home complex's executive course on a fairly regular basis and it's a tough little bastard. There's a bunch of holes over 200 yards. and the ninth and 18th are fairly difficult par-4s. It's great when I only have a few hours. I can get out of work a little early and still get 18 holes in before dinner. Sometimes, I've got weekend duties that squeeze my day down and the executive course is the only way to go.

Not hitting the drive is part of why some people look down on them. Another thing (and a very real thing) is that beginners are much more likely to play the par-3s. Now we've got foot-golfers to boot. I've learned the hard way to avoid that course on a Sunday afternoon from a pace-of-play standpoint.

 

[stealthhwk]

30 minutes ago, mcanadiens said:

I play my home complex's executive course on a fairly regular basis and it's a tough little bastard. There's a bunch of holes over 200 yards. and the ninth and 18th are fairly difficult par-4s. It's great when I only have a few hours. I can get out of work a little early and still get 18 holes in before dinner. Sometimes, I've got weekend duties that squeeze my day down and the executive course is the only way to go.

Not hitting the drive is part of why some people look down on them. Another thing (and a very real thing) is that beginners are much more likely to play the par-3s. Now we've got foot-golfers to boot. I've learned the hard way to avoid that course on a Sunday afternoon from a pace-of-play standpoint.

 

Ironically enough, I have the best pace of play at the executive course and the par 66 near me. The really new and really slow around here insist on playing the regulation courses for some stupid reason. The exec course is 8 par 3s and a par four that I can walk in an hour or so, and the par 66 has never taken me over three and a half hours

[No Mulligans]

12 hours ago, Shindig said:

I sent a text to a friend a few minutes ago about how excited I was to discover a par-3 course near me.  Also it has night lights. 

Sounds like it might be Arroyo Seco.

The course I play the most is a par 58 executive course, four par 4's, 14 3's.  That's my Goldilocks course, (it fits me just right).  

In the early morning I can walk it in less than two hours, and it's not long enough that it tires me out to walk it.  It also is full of hazards on every hole and has small undulating greens both of which provide a challenge.  I've gotten use to taking penalty strokes on this course, just part of the game. It's in the middle of the city but you are out in nature.  And oh yeah, for $30 a month I get free range balls and discounted greens fees including a $5 walking rate before 8 a.m. on weekdays.  My favorite course.  Some in my neck of the woods will recognize it.

[Dave2512]

More than reduced length exec courses usually are flat and mostly obstacle free. Don't see many rated near par. It's good clean fun but I don't go out of my way to play courses like that.

We have a rinky-dink 9 hole course in our town. It's literally greens and a few bunkers in the middle of a field. The grounds were so bad they had a local rule you could lift and place if there was a safety concern. Some of the greens are barely 20 paces wide.

[Fourputt]

17 hours ago, stealthhwk said:

This part I recognized early on, which is why I believe in full disclosure. When someone asks about a round at a less than regulation course I always start by telling them its par. And while an 82 on a 66 doesnt count as breaking 90, Id still say thats a very good score for myself as no matter the par, I strive for bogey golf. But even with full disclosure, people seem to be bothered by it. 

I think it qualifies as breaking 90 by anyone's standards.  That 82 is 16 over par.  16 over par on a par 72 course is 88, which the last time I checked is still under 90. 

[NJpatbee]

I have a decent par 32 executive 9 hole course just down the street which is great for practice or a quick 9 holes in an hour and a half.  The bunker are being allowed to grow into waste areas and there is no irrigation on the fairways but the greens are adequate. It is not my home course since I prefer a full length course with more definition and variety, and it is true that many novices are out there if you go at the wrong time.  But being so close I avoid the crowds and can have a good time.  It does have 2 par 3's over 200 yards, a 400 yard dogleg par 4, and a 450 yard par 5.  Certainly not a pitch and putt and it is real golf, but not he same conditions as most  of the full length courses in the area.

[No Mulligans]

6 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

I think it qualifies as breaking 90 by anyone's standards.  That 82 is 16 over par.  16 over par on a par 72 course is 88, which the last time I checked is still under 90. 

I see the wink... but, was the differential less than 18?  The course rating and slope and differential calculation takes care of all that.  "I shot a differential under 18" just doesn't have the same appeal as "I broke 90" though.