Teach me about "par"

[Frank Delicious]

There are a lot of bad courses out there.

[PMantle]

A 400-foot hole could easily be a par four if you had to throw 240 feet to the corner of a fairway, then turn 90° to the right and throw another 160'.

[iacas]

I do take exception to iacas saying that there is too much luck in disc golf. If you play courses that luck plays a major role I'm sorry but you are not playing good courses.

I'm basing this opinion not off the courses I've played, but off the tournaments I've watched online. Two players throw and one hits a tree and goes 50 yards left, the other hits two inches farther right on the tree, barely nicks it, and that's enough to correct its line and it ends up parked. All from discs that had just missed the fairway by a little. IMO disc golf lacks the general feeling of graduated penalties found more easily in golf.

Those two throws would be one thing if they occasionally happened. Ruling luck out entirely is pointless. Golf has luck too. But luck should be minimized, and right now, IMO disc golf has too much luck factor, particularly on shots that don't hit that ten-foot gap 200 feet off the tee. A disc that just misses it is sometimes MORE likely to bang off a tree and end up in bad shape than a disc that misses it widely and somehow finds a few holes and ends up in good shape.

Plus, what Frank said. There probably ARE a lot of bad courses out there, which unfortunately makes luck a bigger factor in disc golf than it probably should be.

[Frank Delicious]

luck in ball golf is smaller because it is usually the way the ball bounces once it lands or if you just managed to clear a bunker or if the ball releases to the pin or not. Unless you are way off course on a drive/fairway shot luck doesn't come into play halfway through the flight of the ball too often, more at the end of the flight.

[keltik]

I'm gonna stand by the statement I made earlier. We need to just use the top two lines of Chuck's Chart and be done with it.

[JR]

These days some do just wing it to 500'+ above every obstacle even with a hyzer. That was something the commentators were talking of during the Discgolfplanet.tv coverage of the previous Memorial. Discs fly farther each year and what pros and ams reach is in a state of flux now.

[JR]

I do not understand what you are trying to convey.

For a competent player par is a futile term. They should not aim at getting a birdie or a par.Par is futile you don't aim to gain par or birdie on any hole really. you aim for the best repeatable result. If you attack too hard chances are you'll be bit at one time or another and play below your skill. That is not a way to win. Be all you can be on any given throw do not try to be more than you are if there is risk. If you modify your shot planning to get any score you should be good enough to reach it realistically and know what the others are likely to shoot. That is the projected par before a round that you have to beat to lead. If you don't aim for the lead but take some safety margin and are consistent enough to be competent anyway some that charge too hard will likely mess up and be behind you and those that are hot are ahead of you. For a single round. There are many rounds in many events so not leading by taking a sensible good score might not be so bad if the guy that was hot. Charging hard each time might not be doable in the next rounds. If they are you're talking of elite level performance and how many can challenge the McBeths, Shustericks, Locastros, Feldbergs, Wysockis and others that are known to string multiple better than world class rounds per event in a row? Good luck shooting 1040+ rated rounds for the entire event. More power to you if you succeed. For the rest of the majority of us goal setting should be different. Even those elite guys that get hot streaks at times for a few months in a row cannot get 3-4 top rounds per event in indefinitely.

Climo once said in an interview that he does not play against the other players he plays against the course. It is nice if you're that good. Many battle against themselves before they can start to attack the course. You should not try to score any arbitrary number and modify how you throw. You should try to get the best risk/reward analysis throw on any given throw from the tee to the basket. If you banged first available you don't try to throw 600' if your max is 400'. When you are competent shooting the best risk/reward option is good enough to challenge the opposition too. Finals in good attacking places or after seeing the opposition failing might be a good time to make a move whether it is to lay up or attack hard whichever way gives the best chance of getting an advantage in score. There are few other times to break to rule of best average risk/reward option for every throw. There are hundreds of throws in larger tournaments so any one shot will not usually totally ruin the event. It might kill your chances of a victory playing against the elite. How many of us do or realistically expects to win against them? And do you expect them to throw better or worse than they can AKA playing within their limits based on a changed par? If they don't play according to par or birdie at all to start with?

[PMantle]

That's no different than golf, and par and golf will never be separated. I think we agree on principals, but not on conclusions.

[chainsmoker]

I'm gonna stand by the statement I made earlier. We need to just use the top two lines of Chuck's Chart and be done with it.

If we have to use the chart I totally agree

There are a lot of bad courses out there.

true

[Frank Delicious]

JR par is pretty important and a good evaluation tool for players to gauge their skill level.

[JR]

That's no different than golf, and par and golf will never be separated. I think we agree on principals, but not on conclusions.

I'm not a golfer and as such can't comment on how important it is there i was talking of disc golfers.

Frank i wrote in an earlier post that the way i see it par is only useful for up and coming players as a yardstick and i have no problem with it whatsoever.

[keltik]

[JR]

Grinz!

[Frank Delicious]

That's no different than golf, and par and golf will never be separated. I think we agree on principals, but not on conclusions.

I'm not a golfer and as such can't comment on how important it is there i was talking of disc golfers.

Frank i wrote in an earlier post that the way i see it par is only useful for up and coming players as a yardstick and i have no problem with it whatsoever.

Well that is my fault as I only really read 1 out every 4 posts of yours. sorry.

[Mark Ellis]

Par is a cryptid that is reputed to inhabit frolf holes in courses across the USA and, indeed, the world. It is similar to supposed lake monsters in Scotland and elsewhere, though its description varies from one account to the next. Popular interest and belief in par has varied since it was brought to the frolf world's attention in approximately 1964. Evidence of its existence is anecdotal and extremely flimsy, with minimal and much-disputed photographic material and pseudo-mathematical "proofs" of its existence.

The most common speculation among true believers is that par represents a vestige of a line of long-surviving red herrings of the genus chuckkennedia. The scientific community regards par as a modern-day myth, and explains methods of "calculating" or "measuring" it as a mix of hoaxes, extreme mathematical ignorance, and wishful thinking. Despite this, it remains one of the most famous - and perfect - examples of pseudoscience, and is revered by scores of frolfers the world over. The mythical creature has been affectionately referred to by the nickname "Three" for nearly 50 years.