[Msrwbdas]

We are all concerned with "par". It is how we measure a course (par 70, par 72) our holes (par 3, 4, 5 even 6) our success (2 under par, 10 over par) and how we understand where our heroes stand during a tournament.

We use it all the time but does it have any real value?

At my home course we have a hole, the number 1 handicap hole, that is of moderate length (just under 400 yards) but is a dogleg and the green is fronted by a pond. It is a hard hole for most players and extremely difficult for most women. There has been discussion about changing the par on this hole from 4 to five for the women and they are outraged.

With the exception of being able to know the relative score of competitors DURING A ROUND, I find par to be, essentially, meaningless.

Whether par on a hole is 3, 4, or 5 does not matter; what matters is what you score. If you score 4, you score 4 regardless of whether it is considered a bogey, par or birdie.

Is there a reason we are so consumed with PAR?

[Ferrotoral]

Old #7. Strategically placed bunker, a FW you can drive through and water in front of the green. That is one really tough hole.

I think we are all consumed with par because it is a measuring stick that everybody can relate to.
Its what the best in the world shoot at and it is one of the few things we can compare with them.

[abishiots]

I use it as a tool for comparison. It's a value placed on the course and if you shoot near it you shot well. I think of it as the standardized score for the course.

[Doctorpills]

I agree with JB. However, there isn't anything that doesn't say golfer's can't set his/her own personal par. For example, a golfer may turn a par 72 into a par 90 to reach his/her personal milestones. That par 4 you mentioned could be a par 5 or par 6 for that individual.

[DoctorDeryOne]

a golfer may turn a par 72 into a par 90 to reach his/her personal milestones. That par 4 you mentioned could be a par 5 or par 6 for that individual.

I completely disagree with this statement. You are graying the lines between a personal milestone, as you put it, and par. They are 2 very different things. My goal/milestone right now is to shoot in the low to mid 80's alll of the time with a bad round being 90. If I achieve that milestone, I will not tell people that I am shooting par golf, because I am not. And as far as the hole Jean is talking about, it should not be changed. Par is supposed to be difficult, not something that can be achieved by everyone on every hole with ease. If that were the case, we would all be on tour. Just my opinion.

[Kt-viagra]

Par is my metric for improvement. I know what I normally shot, and I know what par is. My goal is to get those numbers to be the same. It is as simple as that for me.

[fotochicaes]

It's just a target. If you don't like it, then ignore it. It's a necessary part of carrying a handicap, and it's certainly needed for Stableford scoring. I would find it weird and unsatisfying to play a course where par wasn't observed or mentioned. It's a measuring stick - a way to know how you stack up against the "standard".

I know that some of you say the score doesn't matter, that you don't even carry a scorecard. I can't do that. I play for score on virtually every 18 hole round. I'm not out there just to bat the ball around the course. Having par to measure against tells me how well I did against the standard.

I know of one par 5 hole that is nearly impossible to make par on (I've never parred the hole). In my mind that doesn't make it a par 6, it just makes it a very difficult par 5 where I'm happy enough to walk away with bogey.

[JacksHH]

I completely disagree with this statement. You are graying the lines between a personal milestone, as you put it, and par. They are 2 very different things. My goal/milestone right now is to shoot in the low to mid 80's alll of the time with a bad round being 90. If I achieve that milestone, I will not tell people that I am shooting par golf, because I am not. And as far as the hole Jean is talking about, it should not be changed. Par is supposed to be difficult, not something that can be achieved by everyone on every hole with ease. If that were the case, we would all be on tour. Just my opinion.

Are there not plenty of courses that have holes that Pro's play as par 4's while us mortals play as par 5's? PGA National has two such holes. Are those courses wrong because they are diluting the experience because the members play a Par 72 while the pros play a par 70? In a situation where the hole is playing significantly above average for people (say- ladies) I think they have every right to adjust par. I play on a course where there is a 470 yard par 4 and a 460 yard par 5. The dogleg, wind, and slope make the Par 5 a true par five and the par 4 a long (but reachable) par 4. Is this course wrong since you could conceivably reach the par 5 as easy as you could the par 4?

In Jean's situation, if changing the par to a 5 is more indicative of how the hole plays for women, why not change the par? Who wants the average score on a par 4 to be >6? (just making up numbers here). If the hole forces a layup for all but the BEST women players- then by all means it is a par 5 and not a par 4.

Edit: It wouldn't change anything, truth be told. It would shuffle handicap holes around and might change the slope of the course. In the end though: an 85 is an 85 regardless of what par is. whats the difference between +13 and +12?

[TOPERink]

Agreed, I like to see a baseline such as par to know what I should be relative to or compared to. I think it also helps when playing a multitude of different courses as well.

[Ferrotoral]

Are there not plenty of courses that have holes that Pro's play as par 4's while us mortals play as par 5's? PGA National has two such holes. Are those courses wrong because they are diluting the experience because the members play a Par 72 while the pros play a par 70? In a situation where the hole is playing significantly above average for people (say- ladies) I think they have every right to adjust par. I play on a course where there is a 470 yard par 4 and a 460 yard par 5. The dogleg, wind, and slope make the Par 5 a true par five and the par 4 a long (but reachable) par 4. Is this course wrong since you could conceivably reach the par 5 as easy as you could the par 4?

In Jean's situation, if changing the par to a 5 is more indicative of how the hole plays for women, why not change the par? Who wants the average score on a par 4 to be >6? (just making up numbers here). If the hole forces a layup for all but the BEST women players- then by all means it is a par 5 and not a par 4.

Now I have a different take on it perhaps because I am very familiar with the hole and in some ways that is not fair. By changing the par, you are changing only based on skill level in this case (or age some would say). There is not a person that has come to our outing that would feel this should be a par 5.

Now that is not taking anything away from Jean or the members at this course. They are all very good golfers that I have played with including Jean that sells himself short on here. He is that darn good.

But this hole is only a par 5 for them because of the demographic of members and their distances. I have never once thought about laying up and normally go at the green with a 6 iron. 7 if he cut the corner. Being that the course is not private anymore, it would be very hard to sell this as a par 5 based on that in my opinion without changing every hole for every player that goes on to a course based on driving distance and skill level.

That goes back to another part that should be addressed. Maybe it should just be more about offering another set of tees that is further up for golfers that are struggling to reach a green in regulation based on distance. Because 386 yards or so is not a par 5 in my opinion.

However if people are struggling to reach the green, there is an easy fix, rather than changing par for everybody, offer another set of tees that is closer to the hole. Then the only thing holding anyone back would be ego in my opinion and that is not something that Jean or anybody else I played with there cared about.

I mean isnt the entire reason for multiple tee boxes to alleviate these issues? This course just does not manage the tee boxes properly in my opinion for their members. Simply putting a forward tee in front of the next one is not the best plan and something should be done with actual measurements, because this hole in particular kills many of the members because of it.

[uneniaPhenits]

everyone makes a good point here...
IMO - par is a good comparison/measuring tool. it's an obtainable target/goal. it's what you should strive for every round or every hole for that matter, if not better.
but par can be frustrating at times. so what helped me out a lot was when i was a bogey golfer, 45 for 9 holes was what i used as a comparison/measuring tool. let's face it, when you're a 15-20 hdcp, it's not too often that you will be shooting in the 30's for 9 holes, so why kid yourself and clutter your mind with reaching 36? narrow it down and go hole-by-hole...par is great, bogey is good, double-bogeys ok, triple-bogeys bad. work on cutting down on your 6, 7, 8's and eventually you will see your scores drop.
i've since gotten better and now par is my measuring/comparison tool.
but there's no reason to get all worked up about it because believe me, you could go out and shoot par any given day and there's no doubt that, while it was a great round, you will still look back and think where you could've saved a few strokes and shot even better.

"Perfection is unobtainable." - Tin Cup

[fotochicaes]

Now I have a different take on it perhaps because I am very familiar with the hole and in some ways that is not fair. By changing the par, you are changing only based on skill level in this case (or age some would say). There is not a person that has come to our outing that would feel this should be a par 5.

Now that is not taking anything away from Jean or the members at this course. They are all very good golfers that I have played with including Jean that sells himself short on here. He is that darn good.

But this hole is only a par 5 for them because of the demographic of members and their distances. I have never once thought about laying up and normally go at the green with a 6 iron. 7 if he cut the corner. Being that the course is not private anymore, it would be very hard to sell this as a par 5 based on that in my opinion without changing every hole for every player that goes on to a course based on driving distance and skill level.

That goes back to another part that should be addressed. Maybe it should just be more about offering another set of tees that is even further up for golfers that are struggling to reach a green in regulation based on distance. Because 386 yards or so is not a par 5 in my opinion.

However if people are struggling to reach the green, there is an easy fix, rather than changing par for everybody, offer another set of tees that is closer to the hole. Then the only thing holding anyone back would be ego in my opinion and that is not something that Jean or anybody else I played with there cared about.

I mean isnt the entire reason for multiple tee boxes to alleviate these issues? This course just does not manage the tee boxes properly in my opinion for their members. Simply putting a forward tee in front of the next one is not the best plan and something should be done with actual measurements, because this hole in particular kills many of the members because of it.

Bingo. My home course has just made some significant changes to the tee boxes for this very reason. Ever since the course was built 40 years ago, the back 9 has had 4 par 5 holes for the women (total par of 74) because they didn't have the budget to build enough tees and they were far too long to be called par 4. They have finally managed to make the changes which were planned almost 20 years ago, and next month they will open the new tees.

The two holes That they changed have always been long par 4's from the middle and back tees, now they will be par 4 from the forward tees too, but still long to match how they play from the other tees.

[JacksHH]

Now I have a different take on it perhaps because I am very familiar with the hole and in some ways that is not fair. By changing the par, you are changing only based on skill level in this case (or age some would say). There is not a person that has come to our outing that would feel this should be a par 5.

Now that is not taking anything away from Jean or the members at this course. They are all very good golfers that I have played with including Jean that sells himself short on here. He is that darn good.

But this hole is only a par 5 for them because of the demographic of members and their distances. I have never once thought about laying up and normally go at the green with a 6 iron. 7 if he cut the corner. Being that the course is not private anymore, it would be very hard to sell this as a par 5 based on that in my opinion without changing every hole for every player that goes on to a course based on driving distance and skill level.

That goes back to another part that should be addressed. Maybe it should just be more about offering another set of tees that is even further up for golfers that are struggling to reach a green in regulation based on distance. Because 386 yards or so is not a par 5 in my opinion.

However if people are struggling to reach the green, there is an easy fix, rather than changing par for everybody, offer another set of tees that is closer to the hole. Then the only thing holding anyone back would be ego in my opinion and that is not something that Jean or anybody else I played with there cared about.

I mean isnt the entire reason for multiple tee boxes to alleviate these issues? This course just does not manage the tee boxes properly in my opinion for their members. Simply putting a forward tee in front of the next one is not the best plan and something should be done with actual measurements, because this hole in particular kills many of the members because of it.

Great points JB. I don't know the hole and that obviously makes a huge difference in this situation. I was picturing (in my head) a hole in the 400+ range where the dogleg forced you to leave 200+ to the green, over water. In this case I can see women REALLY struggle to get over the water in 2. I don't know many women golfers that have a consistent 210 yard carry in their bag. If there is a forced layup I can see how a 5 is appropriate (an EASY five, but a five none-the-less).

It sounds like, based on your description, that it is a lack of distance (and poor tee-box placement) that is causing the problem and not the yardage of the holes. In that case I agree with you that you can't water down the par. To me it boils down to a "design problem" or a "player problem". I wouldn't water down a hole for a player problem, but I would for a design. Your idea of new teeboxes (that take some of the dogleg out of play?) seems like a much better idea- and one that I would prefer to having a different par Male to Female.

[Ferrotoral]

Great points JB. I don't know the hole and that obviously makes a huge difference in this situation. I was picturing (in my head) a hole in the 400+ range where the dogleg forced you to leave 200+ to the green, over water. In this case I can see women REALLY struggle to get over the water in 2. I don't know many women golfers that have a consistent 210 yard carry in their bag. If there is a forced layup I can see how a 5 is appropriate (an EASY five, but a five none-the-less).

It sounds like, based on your description, that it is a lack of distance (and poor tee-box placement) that is causing the problem and not the yardage of the holes. In that case I agree with you that you can't water down the par. To me it boils down to a "design problem" or a "player problem". I wouldn't water down a hole for a player problem, but I would for a design. Your idea of new teeboxes (that take some of the dogleg out of play?) seems like a much better idea- and one that I would prefer to having a different par Male to Female.

They place a sandtrap right at the dogleg, so that unless someone has carry, they are left with a long approach due to having to play left of the bunker. That to me says that for that demographic, they need to fix the hole, not the par rating. Move the bunker to the left side making the hole only a layup if someone carries it too far off the tee. Then you move a set of tees up by 20-30 yards (forward tees) and you have a straight shot that will leave 150 in.

Its not a hard fix, and it is a great golf hole in my opinion.

[JacksHH]

They place a sandtrap right at the dogleg, so that unless someone has carry, they are left with a long approach due to having to play left of the bunker. That to me says that for that demographic, they need to fix the hole, not the par rating. Move the bunker to the left side making the hole only a layup if someone carries it too far off the tee. Then you move a set of tees up by 20-30 yards (forward tees) and you have a straight shot that will leave 150 in.

Its not a hard fix, and it is a great golf hole in my opinion.

And those changes make perfect sense. Unfortunately the response will be "What costs more: Moving a bunker and building a new teebox, or reprinting score cards." That's sad.

[Edifsdubs]

It's just a target. If you don't like it, then ignore it. It's a necessary part of carrying a handicap, and it's certainly needed for Stableford scoring. I would find it weird and unsatisfying to play a course where par wasn't observed or mentioned. It's a measuring stick - a way to know how you stack up against the "standard".

I know that some of you say the score doesn't matter, that you don't even carry a scorecard. I can't do that. I play for score on virtually every 18 hole round. I'm not out there just to bat the ball around the course. Having par to measure against tells me how well I did against the standard.

I know of one par 5 hole that is nearly impossible to make par on (I've never parred the hole). In my mind that doesn't make it a par 6, it just makes it a very difficult par 5 where I'm happy enough to walk away with bogey.

I pretty much agree on all points.

[BrianGoldsmith]

I agree with JB. However, there isn't anything that doesn't say golfer's can't set his/her own personal par. For example, a golfer may turn a par 72 into a par 90 to reach his/her personal milestones. That par 4 you mentioned could be a par 5 or par 6 for that individual.

I completely disagree with this statement. You are graying the lines between a personal milestone, as you put it, and par. They are 2 very different things. My goal/milestone right now is to shoot in the low to mid 80's alll of the time with a bad round being 90. If I achieve that milestone, I will not tell people that I am shooting par golf, because I am not. And as far as the hole Jean is talking about, it should not be changed. Par is supposed to be difficult, not something that can be achieved by everyone on every hole with ease. If that were the case, we would all be on tour. Just my opinion.

What I take Sean to mean is not literally changing the par of any holes or any course; People who shoot bogeys or worse all day every day should not be disappointed by getting a bogey. A scratch golfer or some other low handicapper would be disappointed at bogeys. If you are consitently shooting 1 over par on average for every hole you play, then bogey is your "par". You should be disappointed in a double bogey (your "bogey") and excited about getting pars (your "birdies").

I don't think he meant (at least I didn't take it this way) that if someone shoots a 90 he should say he shot even par. The way I took it is you should play to what you are shooting on average, and not be disappointed that you aren't reaching those Par 5's in 3, or many Par 4's in 2 and havi9ng birdie putts all day long. Do what you do and try to improve to the point where you aren't getting as many bogeys. I shoot over 90 all the time, and while I would never say shooting 90 is like shooting par, it could be my own personal par, so to speak. As RXGus said, it doesn't change the score, just how you perceive how good or bad you did on the hole or the round. If you shoot 7-over par 79 on a par 72 course and are a scratch golfer, you still beat me even though I shot a 2 under par 88.

For handicap purposes, you gotta do it the way it's supposed to be done. But why beat yourself up because you can't par those par 5's all the time? As long as the actual score is whatever it is, why worry about what anyone considers it to be to their "par"? An 88 is an 88 no matter what. But if someone considers 90 to be par and they shot 2 under for what they normally shoot, who cares? As long as they aren't bragging that they beat you and your 85 which was 13 over the "real" par, does it really matter?

I think people are reading much more into what people are posting than needs to be. He didn't say to record it a better score in relationship to par, just how the golfer conceives it in his mind.

[CGECngjA]

I think a hole can be unnecessarily difficult, golf courses with as many as 5 or 6 tee boxes are a great idea and solves a lot of these problems. I will have to google earth the hole mentioned to see what is being talked about. If you haven't done it for a difficult hole take a look at the satellite picture sometime, it can give you a different perspective that could inspire a new idea about how to play the hole.

[Rapiddude]

A useful tool. Par lets you compare yourself with other golfers. I do agree though that often people become too obsessed with par and it ruins their game and they enjoyment of golf
Sometimes you just have to be realistic about your own game and just accept that fact that, "par" for you may be bogey or even double bogey. For where my game is right now, bogey is par for me. If I play smart and make some putts, getting a bogey on every hole is a very realistic expectation. Im OK with that considering that a month ago I struggled to make double or even triple bogey.

[Doctorpills]

What I take Sean to mean is not literally changing the par of any holes or any course; People who shoot bogeys or worse all day every day should not be disappointed by getting a bogey. A scratch golfer or some other low handicapper would be disappointed at bogeys. If you are consitently shooting 1 over par on average for every hole you play, then bogey is your "par". You should be disappointed in a double bogey (your "bogey") and excited about getting pars (your "birdies").

I don't think he meant (at least I didn't take it this way) that if someone shoots a 90 he should say he shot even par. The way I took it is you should play to what you are shooting on average, and not be disappointed that you aren't reaching those Par 5's in 3, or many Par 4's in 2 and havi9ng birdie putts all day long. Do what you do and try to improve to the point where you aren't getting as many bogeys. I shoot over 90 all the time, and while I would never say shooting 90 is like shooting par, it could be my own personal par, so to speak. As RXGus said, it doesn't change the score, just how you perceive how good or bad you did on the hole or the round. If you shoot 7-over par 79 on a par 72 course and are a scratch golfer, you still beat me even though I shot a 2 under par 88.

For handicap purposes, you gotta do it the way it's supposed to be done. But why beat yourself up because you can't par those par 5's all the time? As long as the actual score is whatever it is, why worry about what anyone considers it to be to their "par"? An 88 is an 88 no matter what. But if someone considers 90 to be par and they shot 2 under for what they normally shoot, who cares? As long as they aren't bragging that they beat you and your 85 which was 13 over the "real" par, does it really matter?

I think people are reading much more into what people are posting than needs to be. He didn't say to record it a better score in relationship to par, just how the golfer conceives it in his mind.

Thanks Smalls, that's what I meant. As the golfer gets better he makes those personal adjustments. The golfer still has to post his scores relative to legitimate par.