"Par is a pox on the designers palette.....an unseen devil of poor measure."

[paul cowley]

....it conflicts me.

[paul cowley]

So true, so true my friend!

[paul cowley]

...no seriously...its oft been discussed here, and it does have value as a way to help score a match....but its hardly the best friend of a designer in the dirt.

Think about it.

[paul cowley]

I just did and I'm not sure I came up with anything.

[paul cowley]

Well then try thinking of it from a designers perspective.

[paul cowley]

oh....OK.

[Rich Goodale]

One of the crazy uncles in my family was named Win Haycock.  He used to make things in his barn, bring them out to a stall he had set up in his front yard, sell them to himself and then go back into his barn and make more things, using the profits from his earlier sales.  Any chance we are related, Paul?

[Mark Bourgeois]

Paul,

Your New Year's Resolution held up longer than anyone else's (Doak I think made it to Feb).

You've fallen down in sight of the tape!

Helpfully,
Father Time

Rich, an economic perpetual-motion machine, if not for the small efficiency losses incurred by bookkeeping. That, or a tax-shelter scheme.

[paul cowley]

One of the crazy uncles in my family was named Win Haycock.  He used to make things in his barn, bring them out to a stall he had set up in his front yard, sell them to himself and then go back into his barn and make more things, using the profits from his earlier sales.  Any chance we are related, Paul?

No Rich, I don't think so......but he sure sounds like an interesting gentleman I would have enjoyed meeting.

....and I guess your right. I probably just ought to accept Par as one of the givens....buy into it ....then go back in the barn and produce something that I can sell again anew!

End of my sub-set Discussion Group.

I'm back.  

[Peter Pallotta]

Paul -

well, it's maybe best then to cast that unseen devil "against type".

You know, like the way that Sergio Leone cast Henry Fonda as the bad guy in How the West Was Won...or how Cary Grant was the nebbish archeologist in Bringing Up Baby.

Sorry, that's all I got this morning.

Peter

[TEPaul]

Hey, Pablo, could I get in on this conversation or do you figure there's too many participants already? 

"One must keep his own counsel. If one's hat hears his counsel he must cast his hat into the fire."
Henry VIII

You know how I feel about par on a course. I think alternate cards should be used with a number of different hole pars (but never different hole pars on the same card). Frankly, the very best way to minimize the psychology of hole par is to simply have a single par for the entire course rather than hole pars. That way golfers will still probably think of par but they will play individual holes without a hole par number in mind.

[JMEvensky]

I still like the line,even though it was apparently authored by Sybil.

Apologies in advance if this question is stupid,but how exactly does par impact the design of a golf course?

Absent "par",would you be more likely to build a 900 yard hole if the land/features called for it?

Would you more frequently design back-to-back(or back-to-back-to-back) 3's,4's,or 5's?

Is an asymmetrical scorecard(31-41,as example) a mortal sin?

Really not trying to be a prick,just curious.If par didn't matter,or if there was an "entire course" par,what options would be open to you that aren't open now?

TEPaul,are there such things as courses with an "entire course" par?Seems like a pretty cool concept.

[BCrosby]

Paul - I don't mean to butt in, but you and you and you do raise a question that I and other I's that show up on my channel have also wondered about. But I've forgotten the question.

Any hooo...,

Rich - Was your uncle's last name Madoff by any chance?

Bob
   

[Tony_Muldoon]

....it conflicts me.

So true, so true my friend!

...no seriously...its oft been discussed here, and it does have value as a way to help score a match....but its hardly the best friend of a designer in the dirt.

Think about it.

I just did and I'm not sure I came up with anything.

Well then try thinking of it from a designers perspective.

oh....OK.

“Two Paul Cowley’s, there’s only two Paul Cowley’s,
Two Paul Cowley’s...”

(to the tune of "Wantana mera". With apologies to the Bhoys.)

[Tom_Doak]

Paul, that's a good quote.

You'll be interested to hear that, quite to my surprise, I visited The Valley Club of Montecito last week to see how their new greens turned out, and discovered that they had used the closing of the course to drop par from 72 to 70!

However now I am sure they will think about those holes in a different light, because of their par value.  They may not be over the pox yet.  Uh-oh ... I never had the chicken pox as a kid, either.

[Peter Pallotta]

Paul - in keeping with the tone of this thread and the "two Pauls", here's what I feel about par:

Peter: Don't tell me you're a dupe for par.
Peter: I'm a dupe for par, yes. A major-league sap.
Peter: But it doesn't mean anything, par. What does it mean?
Peter: It means everything. It's how I measure myself. It's how I keep score. It's my eternal opponent. It's the White Whale. 
Peter: But it's just a concept, Ahab
Peter: So is Love, brother.
Peter: Maybe - but love makes people happier.
Peter: Until the dame splits town with your best friend and next month's rent. 
Peter: Which means what?
Peter: Which means you take the good with the bad, or you better just stay home. The agony and ecstasy, friend - riding high in April, shot down in May

Peter: Do you have a cigarette? I’m all out
Peter: I was just going ask you for one.
Peter: Shit
Peter: You’re telling me.

Peter: But do you mean you strive for par every time, hole by hole, every hole and every day, no matter what the conditions?
Peter: You have to play the hand that's dealt you. What difference does it make if it’s raining? Are we men or are we mice?
Peter: Well, Paul Cowley and TE Paul don't agree with you, just to name two.
Peter: Paul and TE are golfing sophisticates. They're the high-hats, they're the swells. I'm a rube.  I'm a country bumpkin. Par is par.   
Peter: But don't you get it? That's just want the architects want. They want you to take par seriously - that's how they mess with your head; that's how they get you making stupid choices; that's how they get you dancing on the strings they're pulling.
Peter: Exactly. And I want to dance. So why would I want to take that tool away from them. They don't have many, especially with the new technology making the game so much easier.
Peter: Hey pal - don't kid yourself. You need all the help you can get. You're not that good.
Peter: You're right, I'm not. But I hope to be one day soon
Peter: And in the meantime?
Peter: In the meantime, I'm not bigger than the game. I don't want the game to change for me and my limitations. And I like it the way it is.
Peter: Now you’re just confusing me. I thought you were Mr. Nature-boy, always touting naturalism, simplicity, freedom and all that other new-age stuff
Peter: Yes, but I still need something to ground me, don’t I? I mean, I still want to remember that I’m playing a game and competing, don’t I?  Listen, I could be playing the most naturalistic golf course ever found, but if it's got a short Par 5, I’m gonna be thinking it’s my chance for birdie, believe me.
Peter: You’re missing my point…
Peter: If I just wanted to get stoned on nature, I’d get stoned on nature. Why lug a golf bag around?

Peter: I’m going out for cigarettes
Peter: Wait up, let me get my wallet.

Peter: I still think you’re missing something here, something very important.
Peter: I know I am – that’s why I’m talking about it with you. What the hell do I know?

Peter

[paul cowley]

Good post Peter....we appreciate it.

Does churning ones internal discourse denote a designers weakness, an inability to 'fix'.....or a strength, least one tend to 'gel'?

Is it time to go to bed yet?

I don't think so my friend.

Oh, that's just great.