Par-how to define @ Worlds

[Schoen-hopper]

Speaking of multiple tee pads, what are the typical distances between the blue/red/white positions in ball golf? How much farther back are you from one to another, and would those same distances work for disc golf?

Here is a document that helps answer that question.

http://pdga.com/documents/PublicPar.pdf

The course designers group has one that is the same but 9 ranges of foliage instead of 2, and gives all the different scoring averages along the par spread. 

The answer to how many feet between tees to keep the par the same for the defined different skill levels red (850 rated), white (900), blue (950), & gold (1000).... depends on the type of hole and what par. 

Let's make it easy and say you want a sparsely treed (2 out of 9) par 3 with as close to a 3.0 scoring average possible.  It would be..
225 feet for red,
275' for white,
350' for blue,
450' for gold.

The more open the hole, the bigger the spread between tees, and the higher the par the bigger the spread.  But not too much difference.  Here is the numbers for a par 3.0 sparsely wooded par 4...
475' for red,
550' for white,
650' for blue,
750' for gold.

Take a corridor shot (7 out of 9 on the foliage scale) par 4.0...
375' for red,
425' for white,
500' for blue,
600' for gold.

I also think including par 4's & 5's in courses are the way to go.  The problem is that this take a lot more land and more trees.  Par 4's and 5's should be tricky thoughful holes that require placement shots, not open bomb after bomb.  Much more difficult to design, but the payoff would be huge.  Something else that this distance par chart shows.  Most of our fairly long course that is just par 3ish to pros can make a great upper par course for the white level.  The difference is that a lot of these holes would be considered par 4's.  It'd be nice to see par 65 courses where 3 sets of tees all play par 65 for the respective divisions.

[dickthediscparker]

New courses should all hold a 1000 rating at around 62-63 and a par of 67-68.  That should just be in the design.  I know not every peice of land we aquire can hold that type of course but when we have the land to work with like I dont know BV or Shawnee lets UTILIZE it to it best potential. 

I would be interested to know from Jack, Rick, Chap and others that deal directly with Parks and Rec's, to get new courses approved what they think about this part of Dick's post?  I just wonder about using "public' parks to design and build 'pro' courses?

Here's a thought I haven't heard, and this is longer term or something that could possibly be done on new builds or as tee pads are put in at SMP etc...what about multiple tee-pads? This would be a solution similar to ball golf.  A golfer might be able to shoot close to Par or below Par from the white tee's but push them back to the tips, and it's a completely different game.

I guess what immediately comes to mind is the cost of 3-4 pin locations is still cheaper than two tee pads?

I'm more interested what you think... What is your idea of disc golf.  Seeing every hole in front of you and having a shot at a 2 every time?  Or maybe a shot that could lead to a shot that could lead to a birdie 3?  or 4?  And have a mix.  I think that the idea of having a par 67-68 is a fine idea.  There are actually many of people who would agree with me.  This isn't about making a "Champion style course" this is about making GREAT courses.

[CD]

... and as the daylight hours get shorter in late summer, we could ALL play from the red and white tees! Think speed-of-play...

[Timko]

New courses should all hold a 1000 rating at around 62-63 and a par of 67-68.  That should just be in the design.  I know not every peice of land we aquire can hold that type of course but when we have the land to work with like I dont know BV or Shawnee lets UTILIZE it to it best potential. 

I would be interested to know from Jack, Rick, Chap and others that deal directly with Parks and Rec's, to get new courses approved what they think about this part of Dick's post?  I just wonder about using "public' parks to design and build 'pro' courses?

Here's a thought I haven't heard, and this is longer term or something that could possibly be done on new builds or as tee pads are put in at SMP etc...what about multiple tee-pads? This would be a solution similar to ball golf.  A golfer might be able to shoot close to Par or below Par from the white tee's but push them back to the tips, and it's a completely different game.

I guess what immediately comes to mind is the cost of 3-4 pin locations is still cheaper than two tee pads?

I'm more interested what you think... What is your idea of disc golf.  Seeing every hole in front of you and having a shot at a 2 every time?  Or maybe a shot that could lead to a shot that could lead to a birdie 3?  or 4?  And have a mix.  I think that the idea of having a par 67-68 is a fine idea.  There are actually many of people who would agree with me.  This isn't about making a "Champion style course" this is about making GREAT courses.

The problem with a pro par 68 course is that a rec player would shoot an 85+ on it, and spend 3 hours out there.  I think one of the appeals for those who aren't as serious (crazy) as a lot of us is that disc golf doesn't take all afternoon to play.   We have to remember that there are casual players and families that play this game as well, so we have to make a course enjoyable for them.  I like a 550' dogleg hole in tight wooded courses as much as the next guy (probably more), but having a shorter 250' straight tee shot on the same hole gives people options.  Didn't some guy say something about most fun winning somewhere?

When we put Peninusla Park in in Iowa City, every hole has 2 teepads and 2 pins.  Which means every time you step up to the hole, you have options.  While we don't have any par 5's, there are 7 par 4's possible.  So when playing from all the "longer" tees (sometimes the white, sometimes the red tees), you can have the possibility of a par 61 course.

[Schoen-hopper]

The anwer for recs playing the par 68 course is as you say... you need mulitple tees.  Then you can have a par 68 course for them too.  But more likely, you would want tees for int. and advanced.  Rec. players should play shorter courses, which are a dime a dozen (perhaps exaggerating here).  We have plenty of those, but how many par 64+ courses do we have?  On the tee color, red is for 850 rated, which is rec, white is 900, intermediate, blue is 950, which is advanced, gold is 1000, pro.

[dickthediscparker]

Sure ... I would like to point out though that when I play ball golf courses I shoot a 105-120 on average.  Yes I suck .. But I still pay $35 green fees and buy $25 6 packs.  And I'm all for alternate tee pads.  So yes they would be nice.. More so that once you play for a time you hopefully will step up and no long play the "ladies" tee as it were.  No offense ladies.. I'm sure most of you have beat me once.

[Timko]

What about something like Renny Gold, where there are two baskets per hole?  I know Charlotte is starting to overlay a lot of their smaller, older courses with gold level configurations.  That way, you get to keep the shorter course for rec players, and have a longer course for more experienced golfers.

[David E]

What's more expensive to install AND maintain: a second basket or a second tee pad?

I think this thread started with a comment about -100 under par will give some of those not famliar with the sport the impression that disg golf is "easy" or something similar(becasue of the reference to ball golf). I'm with those that believe -30's will win it next year. And if we get winds like those at this year's WO....look out!
~~~~~
Two, or multiple tee pads, shooting to the same basket is about as close to ball golf as you can get. There are 3-5 tee boxes on a ball course, all shooting at the same green and the same pin with the same par (except sometimes ladies get a stroke advantage as well.

.....in the end this is an interesting thread....

[dickthediscparker]

That is not actually true.   Greens have different hole positions that play very different to a golfer.  One could be in a tricky spot behind a bunker yet against the fringe forcing you to play long and cut back .. While some sit in flat areas making it easier to get up and down.  In disc golf our different pins mimic that aspect. 

Further more it takes I believe less concrete to put in a pin than it does to pour a teepad.  Unless the pipe sticking out of the ground is expensive I don't think the cost would be too great.  Unlike the time / labor / cost or teepads.

[David E]

Dick - you missed my point....at any given time, there is one and only one hole/pin on a golf hole. Some suggested earlier that perhaps there could be two baskets on each hole, I was pointing out that in ball golf all golfers shot at the same pin on the same hole. To make holes fair or playable for multiple skills levels, there are multiple tee pads.

Also, of course there is less concrete; but the post and the basket might cost more than the cost to pour the pad one time (Again, in response to multiple baskets).

[dickthediscparker]

Its easy to miss a point when everyone writes a book here.  Multi baskets are already a problem with swope and the infamous red baskets.  I'll quit giving my opinion anyway... I can't keep up with all you guys and your words...

[David E]

I agree - this one's been beaten!

[Dan Weinert]

Well there are a lot of par 2 holes out there.. Cliff drive is an example of a challenging course.. The best golfer will walk away with an 8 under if they shoot lights out.   But thats it.  I'm sure someone WILL come along and do better but not every time.  So courses need to be designed with a little more length and alot more thought.  The days of building swope or prairie center are gone.  New courses should all hold a 1000 rating at around 62-63 and a par of 67-68.  That should just be in the design.  I know not every peice of land we aquire can hold that type of course but when we have the land to work with like I dont know BV or Shawnee lets UTILIZE it to it best potential.  We are known for our world class courses and we should only improve and try to push the boundries to reach a new platform in our course design.   I think considering 75' "circles" around our baskets to be greens is a good start.  It will make us possibly rethink the way we design holes.  Yes they may get longer but the par 4s will be par 4s and the par 5s (dare we do it) will take 4 SHOTS to get there and one solid putt.   What about bunkers like those in Highbridge but put them around that 50-75' mark where you have to avoid areas in your landing path our your 30' back.   Though the idea has it's flaws the mere thought might interest more ideas. 

WOW Dick...were you talking about Smithville way back then???

Dan