News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


TEPaul

Hole stroke allocation
« on: December 21, 2002, 06:59:33 AM »
Here's an interesting question.

If a club took say a short par 5 and did absolutely nothing to the hole except drop the par to 4 would the hole's stroke allocation necessarily need to change (on the card)?

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Jeremy_Glenn.

Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #1 on: December 21, 2002, 07:33:02 AM »
TEPaul,

No, it wouldn't.  Stroke allocation aren't related to par.  They do not measure the so-called "difficulty" of a hole (which is based mostly on par).  They mesure how difficult it is for a high handicap golfer to tie (or beat) a low handicap golfer on that hole.  

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #2 on: December 21, 2002, 07:39:20 AM »
Jeremy:

Right you are!

It's just amazing to me how many golfers do not understand that and even when it's explained to them will simply not accept it! Obviously just a great example of how the entire concept of "par" has totally filtered into golf and captured the mindset of modern golfers.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #3 on: December 21, 2002, 07:43:49 AM »
Matter of fact, that misunderstanding seems to be the primary reason Fishers Island will not accept the return of their 18th hole to a par 4 as it was when Raynor built the course and why my club is not really willing to make our 18th hole a par 4 or a par 5 depending on the occassion! NGLA should also think seriously about this application on a few of their par 5s instead of looking for ways to lengthen them. And the same with Maidstone.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:12 PM by -1 »

JohnV

Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #4 on: December 21, 2002, 08:07:18 AM »
Since which holes handicap strokes are allocated on only matters in match play this should be obvious, but you are right, it isn't to many golfers.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

ForkaB

Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #5 on: December 21, 2002, 09:28:15 AM »
John

Hole stroke allocation vs. par does in fact make a difference when playing in a Stableford.  I know it's not played a lot in the US, but it is a recognized form of golf.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #6 on: December 21, 2002, 10:37:44 PM »
We just went though this exercise with a private club's rennovation plan. The members have a short par-5 and wanted to either lengthen it or reduce par to 4. Having no room to expand the hole (or desire!) we presented the impact to their handicaps should the hole become a par-4 under our planning. Only those with low handicaps would be impacted as the maximum strokss allowed to be recorded would be reduced for this group of members.

I agree: Par is a fixation of modern golf. As I've said in numerous threads, "...par is an over-rated component of golf."

By the way, the hole stands sans a few bunkers and some green remodeling in our plan.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

Doug Siebert

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #7 on: December 22, 2002, 04:55:40 PM »
I thought psychological factors were taken into account when rating a hole.  I think most of us would agree that the vast majority of golfers would probably end up thinking and playing a 470 yard hole differently depending on whether its par is 4 or 5.

I understand that the ratings for the obstacles, fairway, green, etc. don't take par into account, but creating something that's just as hard as Cypress' #16 is possible anywhere by replacing the ocean with a pond, ravine or dense undergrowth, but it wouldn't have the same effect for those who stand on the tee.  Or am I wrong, and my hypothetical clone would be rated the same regardless of the lesser psychological impact?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
My hovercraft is full of eels.

Tom H.

Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #8 on: December 22, 2002, 06:48:13 PM »
TEPaul,
          What do you think of a course that does not assign the holes with handicap strokes?  At the beginning of each round there is a short "discussion" as to where one gets strokes. Sometimes it is the method you suggest. Sometimes not, regardless of par.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #9 on: December 22, 2002, 07:03:03 PM »
Tom H:

I sure wouldn't have a problem with that but others would probably consider it too arbitrary. American golfers don't seem to like the arbitrary and the thought of spending a few minutes discussing it would be nixed by the USGA as slowing up play and the duration of the round, I'm sure.

One of the things I've suggested, though, as a thought for the future would be to use the power of the computer to crunch data. If golfers would post hole by hole, any computer could spit out a card that would handicap golfers against each other perfectly by analyzing where any player ACTUALLY MOST NEEDED STROKES against any other golfer. Hole by hole posting will give golfers that info!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Tom H.

Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #10 on: December 22, 2002, 07:12:39 PM »
TEPaul,
          A course for which handicap strokes are not assigned is Friar's Head.  I don't know if that is because it is new with no data or by design.  However, it makes for a lively three minutes before the round begins, especially when the wind blows.  And it seems like it is always blowing from somewhere.  The course plays like a different course day to day, perhaps requiring a flexible handicapping system.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #11 on: December 22, 2002, 09:15:16 PM »
Tom H:

As I understand it Friar's Head may not have handicap stroke allocation and it may not even have yardage indications. I believe that may be something that Ken Bakst may have initiated and is interested in pursuing!

If so, I'm absolutely ALL FOR IT! I think that's a super idea that can potentially accomplish an interesting purpose and outcome at that golf course! The primary outcome and result would probably be to be able to play golf for pure fun and competition uncluttered by much of the minutae that has built up in golfers' heads in modern times, even if subliminally.

There're a number of contributors to this website who stay in touch with Ken Bakst from time to time and in my opinion he's a guy who works on about 12 1/2 cylinders. He's a person who has looked very deeply into all aspects of golf architecture and golf and Friar's Head is an indication of that in so many ways.

I do know his architects and there's no doubt Ken Bakst is a dream client to them and the feeling from him I think is mutual. It's a very impressive symbiosis that was created with client and architect on that course and it shows in very many ways.

If Friar's Head is not applying distance indication or hole stroke allocation now, or if they never do, again, I'm all for that.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

allysmith

Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #12 on: December 23, 2002, 07:03:05 AM »
This thread is at last adding a level of sensibility to the discussion on par and its longevity. Is it possible that we could describe a golf course by a combination of a 'slope factor' and length? This would more clearly define a course to an unwitting visitor.
I may be wrong but I think it was Peter Alliss at the Carnoustie Open who stated that in Stroke Play golf 'Par is an arbitrary concept, a bit like the traffic lights in Milan'.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

Forrest Richardson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #13 on: December 23, 2002, 07:34:56 AM »
That's a brilliant quote, Ally! I will quote Peter on this many times...thanks.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
— Forrest Richardson, Golf Course Architect/ASGCA
    www.golfgroupltd.com
    www.golframes.com

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #14 on: December 23, 2002, 08:52:30 AM »
Clever quote.

I think it is dead wrong.

Par doesn't matter when you are playing alone or hacking around with friends. You hit your shots, enjoy the day, soak up the atmosphere.

Par only matters when ... well, when it matters. That is to say, in a tournament. It matters profoundly when you are competing against a field because par tells you important things about how the field perceives a hole. Which tells you how they are likely to play a hole. Which gives diffrerent weightings to your shot options.

Is it just coincidence that so many of the greatest holes in the world are "tweener" holes? No. 15 and 15 at ANGC. No. 17 at TOC. No. 16 at Cypress.

The par on a hole will affect my willingness to take risks. On a long par 4 with hazards around the green, I may correctly assume that is it more likely that the field will be taking the risk to reach the green in regulation. So I will be more likely to do so too.

If it is a par 5, the go/no-go decision is probably more open. I'm less sure of what the field will do; my lay-up choice is marginally more attractive.

As noted, none of this matters when I am out late one afternoon with my wife and the kids. But if my scoring matters vis-a-vis other golfers with similar skill levels, par matters.

Bob
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

BCrosby

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #15 on: December 23, 2002, 08:57:50 AM »
The reference above should have been to "no. 13 and no. 15 at ANGC." Sorry.

Bob
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

mike_malone

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #16 on: December 23, 2002, 09:09:33 AM »
This summer i played with two guys who always play against each other.The lower handicap golfer was complaining that he had to give strokes to his buddy on #13 and#15 and that the match may be over by the 16th tee.He wanted to have a stroke given to his opponent on either#17 or #18.
 Unfortunately,the way handicaps are figured now there is nothing that can be done.
 Interestingly,i looked at the opening day card from 1926 and #17 was a much lower number than it is now.I wondered if handicaps were figured differently than.Maybe they tried to spread the strokes out over the nine holes,instead of having them bunched early in the nine.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »
AKA Mayday

TEPaul

Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #17 on: December 24, 2002, 10:07:36 AM »
Bob Crosby:

Since this thread is really only asking about hole stroke allocation and how that may actually need alteration or not on a hole that might have its par altered without anything else being done to the hole, your last post about par and par alteration in stroke play is a bit off the subject! That's of no matter, though, since the subject of your post--ie, how a hole's par relates to stroke play psychology is a most interesting one, and has been discussed on here before.

However, for the purpose of this thread, JohnV is absolutely correct that hole stroke allocation does not really relate to stroke play golf (except for what Rich said--Stapleford system!). Hole stroke allocations are really only for match play golf.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »

TEPaul

Re: Hole stroke allocation
« Reply #18 on: December 24, 2002, 11:02:59 AM »
Bob:

You say:

"Par only matters when ... well, when it matters. That is to say, in a tournament. It matters profoundly when you are competing against a field because par tells you important things about how the field perceives a hole. Which tells you how they are likely to play a hole. Which gives diffrerent weightings to your shot options."

It might be more accurate regarding a hole's par in stroke play to say, "It matters because you THINK it matters", and in that sense you're definitlely not alone.

You say; 'it tells you important things about how the field perceves a hole', but it may be more accurate to say, you THINK it tells you important things about how a field perceives a hole.

And then you say all that gives you different weightings to your shot options.

But Bob--what happened to the idea that any golfer play any hole in stroke play golf in the FEWEST shots possible, of course always considering the risks of his shot options while attempting to do that?

I've played a ton of stroke play tournament golf in my life and I would say any of us might THINK we know what others may be thinking and even deciding to try and do on any particular hole, even as it relates to par, but how much does that really help us to KNOW what they're going to do or what they did?

Not much at all really, unless any of us might have the unusual opportunity to analyze carefully a hole by hole scoreboard of an entire field before going onto the course to compete against that field.

We can all see today on the Tour that a hole's par is not of all that much importance or consequence to intelligent course managers as they generally think about stroke play tournament golf in WHOLE round scores, not necessarily individual hole scores as that relates to par. That's why they talk about things like "patience" and "you can't win a tournament on Thursday but you sure can lose it."

I'm not exactly sure why you're referencing the "tweener" par holes like ANGC's #13 or #15 but do you really think an intelligent course and tournament managing touring pro at the Masters actually cares if the scorecard calls either of those holes a par 4 (instead of the par 5s they are called) as to how he plays those holes?

Or looked at in a different way!

Suppose the Masters actually removed all hole pars, or total course par from their card or the tournament altogether and let the players compete for the tournament only considering their total scores at the completion of the tournament.

Do you think then that any player would care what any other player was thinking or doing or how "par" mattered to him in how to play any hole, or even the entire tournament for that matter?

I'd doubt it--and so it shows that par is an arbitrary relative measure, basically utilized for other reasons in golf and that although we THINK it matters in stroke play golf, it really doesn't!

I will admit I do think in some ways it's sort of a useful relative measure to some golfers sometimes but ultimately it really doesn't matter and shouldn't in stroke play golf.

The history of how par first came into the game, and the eventual purpose it was used for is a most interesting one, though, and maybe a thread should be started about that. A good thread like that might point out even better what par is and isn't.

« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by 1056376800 »