The Community of Disc Golfers and About All Things Disc Golf
Howdy y'all. Please help me settle a friendly dispute.
What is the par of your local courses? Are they all par 54? Do you make a 700 foot hole a par 3 because the score are "relative" to the others? I support the argument that creating par 4s and 5s on a course make it more interesting, but my fellow Santa Feans don't agree.
Thank you in Advance.
Regarding the par-6 1500' uphill hole mentioned in this discussion. Personally, I find that to be ridiculous. Why stop there? Why not make each target 1 mile and call it a par-25. Is longer really better?????
What is the purpose of a well designed course if you have to simply throw for a distance record multiple times just to get a chance to hit the chains after 5-6 throws?
I play daily on several local courses, and I have played many courses across the Country. The most enjoyable courses are the ones where I can at least get a chance for an ACE on several holes while having a chance for a duece on most of the others. I enjoy shooting chains! That's where the thrill comes for me, watching the "flight" into a pinpoint target.
I guess I just don't understand why you'd want to throw 5 drives, just to get to that "thrill" shot.
Otherwise, it's like throwing a disc across an open expanse for 4 shots, just to enjoy the final approach. If people really want longer distances, simply shoot for target-2 from the the number-1 tee pad.
I'd rather throw 18 thrill shots on a "well designed" course in the time it takes to throw 6 thrill shots on an "extended range" course.
That is just my opinion, to each their own.
To each their own, indeed. One of the great things about disc golf is the amazing variety of courses, from long to short, wooded to open, easy to challenging. There's bound to be a course that thrills everyone, each in his own way.
A 1600' uphill par-6 sounds excessive to me. But I remember a quarter-mile par-5 hole (on an extinct course) that was tremendous fun to play, despite my rather meager arm.
I like Chistmas Too but I aint jonesin for it
Well, we just went out and played that hole on Saturday. A couple of things should be mentioned in regards to that long hole. First off, we are only in the design process at this time so nothing is set in stone. Second, this course is going to be designed as a difficult course. If you don't like the idea of playing a difficult course, then you can pass it up. There are some of us out there that want to be challenged and get bored throwing ace runs all day. Ace runs are fun for a day or two and then we want something challenging again. Also, a longer ace is much more fun to watch than a chip shot. Our pin positions get changed regularly so that you don't get bored playing the same thing day in and day out. So we can have a position in an ace run place or it might get moved long. That way the course changes and doesn't get so monotonous.
Lastly, in regards to that long position, our design will probably have two separate baskets available. The lower basket will have maybe two to three separate positions and can be played if desired for daily play. We put in a stake on Saturday for a par 3 position (right where the hill starts to climb but still not too short). Those looking to challenge themselves can play to the longer basket. I played the longer basket with my friend the other day and got an 8. He got a 6. I could see someone with a large arm getting a 5. The bottom section of the hole is flat for a while and then climbs steeply. There are also cacti on the hillside. It is not for the faint of heart. We considered calling it IGKYA - It's Gonna Kick Your A$s! It is definitely a hole where you need to plan out each shot so that you don't get out of position and in trouble.
We as a group are trying to look forward and not be constrained by the old par 3 system that a lot of us find to be outdated. We want to have a course that is very challenging alongside a shorter but still challenging more "normal" course. We have the land to do it. We want something that people will talk about (which is apparently already happening) and a course that would be worthy of a tournament with top pros, testing them in all aspects of their game. Look at ball golf, it is the same way. They just played a tournament at Bethpage Black which is a very difficult course. I doubt that many non-serious ball golfers would be out on that course on a regular basis because they understand the difficulty level. But when the top pros get on that course it truly tests them which is what you want in a tournament. Granted distance is only part of someone's game but it is a definite factor.
Our objective right now is to set up some holes, get some stakes in the ground and start testing the layout later this year. If there are any DGers in the area we will post up when it might be possible to check it out. We have competing teams laying things out because we want to get the best possible design. So if something doesn't cut the mustard it will probably get cut. Decisions will get made on a hole by hole basis. We have two separate teams putting up the "long course" layout.
all of the courses around here are par 3's, some of them have course par marked on the tee signs but those are for the casuals. we play them all as 3's.
18 holes, Par 3 per hole = 54 is par. Start from there.
To answer the question;Coachman is a short par 54,most shoot under.Taylor has many pin placements and in its toughest it could be a par 57.Cliff Stevens is 21 hole par 57 with a hard to par 700ft hole,most shoot over par there.Forrest hills is open and long,it offers red and blue tees with pars of 54 and 57.The course is too new to tell if those are high or low.
Oops I should have said cliff is a par 63.
So if we are gonna do 4 and 5 for more distance then what about 2 for under 200'? hmmm....
I feel the same way Ryan. Things here are abnormal to say it politically... I understand that people say it doesn't matter and I believe that in a score by score comparison. But a 700ft hole is not a par three in the same way that a 200ft hole is not a par 4. People here don't seem to get that at all. Every time I try to explain the basis for par, it falls on deaf ears and garners dumbfounded looks. I have tried to stop it all together. I can't help it when I step onto the pro tee for 14 at Sipapu though...
That whole is an obvious par four. The state singles scorecards were averaged for Every division (adv and pro= pro tee, all else= am tee) and even with all divisions the average score on that whole was still over 4.3...
The only real answer that I have ever heard is "yes it is wrong, but it helps keep things easier with all par three's and it's been wrong so we are gonna keep it that way." I can live with that... It is stupid but feasible.
Frustrating. we need to get together and throw soon. Something about that midwesterner sense, missing. :)
Absolutely brother. In the end, the argument for par 54 all the time is simply laziness. Not to mention the fact that most players in our state have never played a long, tight midwestern course and don't understand the beauty of a par 68 or par 70 course.
We certainly need to get together soon, its been too long. I'll hit you up!
Par 3 has been used as mentioned for the ease of scoring and foundation of throw per basket.I play using 4 & 5 on baskets that have become a challenge as I age along with injuries.Age/injury factor should not be the argument for 4/5 par,just install those in the next game..throw/play on.Enjoy the flight.