Is Anyone Ever Truly Happy With A Bogey?

[JESII]

A successful round of golf is usually the result of managing expectations and creating momentum (i.e. a string of pars lasting 6 holes instead of just 4). Finding a way to start a hole with the thought that a bogey will be fine is a great way to encourage both of those goals.

Yes.

[Peter Pallotta]

JES - Interesting. I never thought of it like that.

George - Yes, someone else's idea of good play...but that someone else was a good player and so worth trying to emulate, no?

Peter

[George Pazin]

George - Yes, someone else's idea of good play...but that someone else was a good player and so worth trying to emulate, no?

Sometimes.

[JESII]

Peter,

It starts with the idea that a round of golf is not a collection of individual holes but rather a single effort.

How often do you stand on a tee with absolutely no emotions from the prior hole? People talk about forgetting what just happened, but they only intend for you to do it after bad holes...not very realistic to me.

[Peter Pallotta]

I think I understand what you're saying, George, and probably agree with you.  But I'm finding that to be able to emulate that play 'sometimes' I pretty much have to be able to emulate it 'most times'...given that I'm gonna fail on that 'much of the time'

But yes, good play for me might often mean not trying to reach the green in regulation, but I'm not sure that buying wholesale into that attitude/approach is creating much good karma, scoring wise.

Peter  

JES - thanks.

[John Kavanaugh]

The best way to go home happy is to finish stronger than how you start.  You can't compare a three putt bogey to a one putt anymore you can finishing tenth from first with tenth from twentieth.  I can't tell you how many times after a good choke on Sunday I have tried to convince myself that I should be happy I played good enough of Saturday to get there.  I find myself a happier person now that I get my choke out of the way early and give myself character points for finishing strong.

[Mike_Cirba]

Sully,

Can I book a half-hour session on your couch?  

I believe I'm firmly in need of a sports psychologist and I like your thinking.

Of course, you could also perform a full frontal lobotomy while you have me there.   I'm quite convinced with that little operaton I'd be scratch in no time.  

[Dan King]

Peter Pallotta writes:
"Par" is the result of standard good play. Good play is synonymous with well-struck and well-excuted golf shots.  Consistently well-struck golf shots are the result of hours and years of hard work, and a wholesome desire to achieve a level of mastery in the playing of this great game. So "par" is a reflection/indication of having had some success in that pursuit. How can we not be disappointed when we fail?

Why Par? Aren't low scores the result of standard good play. Just because someone arbitrarily called this hole a par-4 and this other hole a par-5, should have nothing to do with the type of score we will be happiest with. The lower the score on the hole, the happier we will be, the more successful we are in our pursuit.

And relying on arbitrary numbers for our satisfaction can be counter-productive. When you are a new golfer, working hard at your game, your par should have nothing to do with what the U.S. Amateur Champion will score on a hole. It should have more to do with your strengths and weaknesses at the time.

And, if in match-play, is there anyone who wouldn't be more pleased to win the hole with a par instead of a bogie?

Couldn't you say the same thing about the score, regardless of its relationship to par? Wouldn't you be more pleased winning a match with a one than a two? A four than a five? A seven over and eight?

One of my most memorable matches I won a hole with a 10. I'm fairly sure it wouldn't be nearly as memorable if I had won it with a four (but then we are talking happy, not memorable.)

Cheers,
Dan King

Expecting the world to treat you fairly because you are a good person is a little like expecting a bull not to attack you because you are a vegetarian.
 --Dennis Wholey[/i]

[Peter Pallotta]

Dan - good post, good points. Some reactions:

'Why par?' Because it's actually quite a sane (if arbitrary) measuring stick.  And after a certain skill level is attained, it's actually quite a gentle teacher, i.e. less demanding than the birdie, but more diciplined than the bogie. It allows room for various ways of achieving it, and even room for one poor shot or calculation.

But in truth, I'm just trying to find a 'logical' explanation for a feeling I have, i.e. I do feel better after a par than after a bogie, every time, and I certainly do measure whether I am (objectively) getting better or worse as a golfer by how well I do relative to par. 

I also love the feeling of a pefectly struck long iron or putting a good solid roll on a putt, regardless of the results...but I wouldn't want to quantify how I'm progressing by that method.

Peter 

[PThomas]

from what i hear i think i'd be real happy with 18 of them at Oakmont!

[John Mayhugh]

In retrospect, sure.  But I think it's hard to plan for bogey when you are standing on the tee, at least in a casual match.  I'm not a tournament player.

I was fortunate enough to play several rounds at Prairie Dunes earlier this year.  The 5th & 8th holes were both ones that I should have played to make bogey on, but never could make myself.  I kept thinking this time I'll make a par.  Those two holes, for me, were as tough as anything at Oakmont.

[BCrosby]

Dan say:

"Why Par? Aren't low scores the result of standard good play. Just because someone arbitrarily called this hole a par-4 and this other hole a par-5, should have nothing to do with the type of score we will be happiest with. The lower the score on the hole, the happier we will be, the more successful we are in our pursuit."

The above runs counter to my experience. The fact that par is an arbitrary number does not mean that we care any less about the score we post relative to it. The par assigned to a hole sets a framework of expectations.

Whether or not rational, we care a lot about par. We can't help it.


Bob

 

[Eric Smith]

(from another page 1 thread)

I'll always be fond of Shipyard; its where I passed the PAT, 78-77 on the number,  helluva 4 footer on the last. 

Wish I remembered how to play that way!

What I didn't mention about that 4 footer was that it was a bogey and most importantly, a planned bogey.

Please pardon my lengthy stroll down memory lane

The final hole for the 36 hole tournament was a par 4 that I always seemed to have a hard time with; water on the right tee to green and a narrow little green that was awkward to approach (for me). Bogeyed it on day 1 and shot 78.  Next day would need 77 or better to pass on the 155 number.

My first thought was that I didn't want to put pressure on myself to have to make par on the finishing hole (Galleon 9th) coming down the stretch the next day.

Next day: Make the turn with a 38 and proceed to bogey 10, 11,12 and 13, now 6 over and would have to finish the remaining holes 1 under to pass; the pressure had me now, I thought. (Remember I didn't want to have to par 18 because I was scared of it). 

I Par 14.

15 is a tough par 5, but my easiest chance for birdie because the tees are up. Good drive, safe 6 iron second to lay up (water left of the green) and lo and behold I hole my sand wedge from 80 yards for eagle! and in that instant the pressure subsided and I felt a bit of divinity in the air.

Par 16 and 17.

The tee shot on the par 4 18th? A smooth 6 iron out there in the middle about 180 yds. Another 6 iron second that nearly reaches the green, a semi bladed chip that goes 25 feet past the pin, a lag from hell first putt that I leave 4 feet short and the afore mentioned helluva four footer for my planned bogey. Yes, I was truly happy with my bogey.

[BVince]

You have to be satisfied with no matter what number you make, because after you make it, you can't control it.  Write it down and move on to the next tee.

I support this quote

[Dan King]

Peter Pallota writes:
'Why par?' Because it's actually quite a sane (if arbitrary) measuring stick.  And after a certain skill level is attained, it's actually quite a gentle teacher, i.e. less demanding than the birdie, but more diciplined than the bogie. It allows room for various ways of achieving it, and even room for one poor shot or calculation.

Isn't it a very specific skill level, when you are trying to compete with the U.S. Amateur champion as a baseline. There are plenty of pros unhappy with a par on a specific hole, because they expect to do better than the U.S. Amateur champion. There are plenty of us that should be accepting of a bogey because we are not as good as the U.S. Amateur champion. Not happy, because the goal is to always make the lowest score, but accepting. Annika Sörenstam had a goal of shooting 54, level 3s. This doesn't mean she was upset everytime she scored something higher than three. But you can bet everytime she scored something higher than a three she would have been happier with a three. Just as she would have been happier with a two or a one.

But in truth, I'm just trying to find a 'logical' explanation for a feeling I have, i.e. I do feel better after a par than after a bogie, every time, and I certainly do measure whether I am (objectively) getting better or worse as a golfer by how well I do relative to par.

And when did you feel happier about a higher score than a lower score? If tomorrow we changed courses to a par of 54 rather than 72, would you really suddenly feel different about your scores? If you play a U.S. Open course where they changed the par to a four from a five, would you really feel any different if you scored a five on the hole a week after the U.S. Open?  You'd rather it was a four -- that is the nature of the game -- but you'd prefer it to a six. Would the five you made on the hole the week after the U.S. Open be any different the the five you made on the hole the week before the U.S. Open?

BCrosby writes:
The above runs counter to my experience. The fact that par is an arbitrary number does not mean that we care any less about the score we post relative to it. The par assigned to a hole sets a framework of expectations.

I'd argue golfers care if they shoot the lowest number possible on a hole. Par is completely irrelevant. We can set whatever expectations we want. As par is supposedly what we would expect the U.S. Amateur champion (I've been saying that but I believe it is actually the finalists) then if you are better than the U.S. Amateur champion par would be a low expectation. If you are not as good as the U.S. Amateur champion, then par is too high of an expectation. Doesn't make it wrong to shoot high, it just is what it is.

If you changed the game of golf to where the objective was to shoot as close to par as possible, then I understand why it is important. But since the game is to shoot as low a number as possible, par is irrelevant.

Whether or not rational, we care a lot about par. We can't help it.

Got a mouse in your pocket?

Cheers,
Dan King

Keep high aspirations, moderate expectations, and small needs.
 --William Howard Stein

[Mike McGuire]

During a presentation to  our members Ron Prichard was asked what about his design regarding the bogie player. His reply:

The most important thing the bogey player should realize is  - he is a bogey player.

My comments:
Too many bogey players think the holes should be set up to give them a good chance at par.
The bogey player is not owed a landing area for his mishit drive or a wide open spot to lay up his second shot or an easy pin to have a chance at his par. He may have to tack around hazards and should accept the fact that on some holes par will be lucky to achieve.

[George Pazin]

During a presentation to  our members Ron Prichard was asked what about his design regarding the bogie player. His reply:

The most important thing the bogey player should realize is  - he is a bogey player.

My comments:
Too many bogey players think the holes should be set up to give them a good chance at par.
The bogey player is not owed a landing area for his mishit drive or a wide open spot to lay up his second shot or an easy pin to have a chance at his par. He may have to tack around hazards and should accept the fact that on some holes par will be lucky to achieve.

I respectfully disagree.

My experience is that far more par golfers expect a hole to be setup to give than a good chance at par than bogey golfers expect a good chance at par. Bogey golfers seem to accept other things more than par golfers, whether it's quirkiness or blindness or whatever.

No one is owed anything on a golf course, but my experience is again that the better the player, the more he feels like the golf course owes him something.

Me, I'm satisfied if I can find my ball and hit it again.

[BCrosby]

Dan -

Par is a fascinating concept. At a bunch of levels. A couple of thoughts:

First, par is rarely arbitrary. With a few exceptions, it has some reasonable relationship with the hole to which it is attached.

Second, the fact that par sets scoring expections for a hole means that par matters. Whether a given player's expectations are the right ones or the wrong ones is a separate issue. My expectations are usually wrong. But the fact that I have those expectations means par matters.

Third, par also matters because it gives you a window into how your competitors view the hole. Part of the scoring expectation thing is not just the expectation that an individual has, but also an expectation of how his competitors will play the hole, which, in turn, effects how he will play the hole. If a tweener hole is a par 4 on the card, you can bet that more of your competitors will be going for the green on their second shot than otherwise.

Bob



 

[BCrosby]

Is there any other sport that has a concept anything like "par"?

I can't think of one.

Bob

[Peter Pallotta]

Dan, Bob - good posts; interesting debate. An architect's use of par as a tool (to entice, suggest, demoralize, and reward) tells me that they think the concept both relevant and important. That players react differently to the conscious and unconscious expectations that par creates (some more soberly, wisely, and realistically than others) doesn't mean that those expecations aren't there, and real.  (Why else would we be talking about it so much; doth we protest too much?) And yes, what does it mean that no other game seems to have any such concept?

Peter     

[Dan King]

BCrosby writes:
First, par is rarely arbitrary. With a few exceptions, it has some reasonable relationship with the hole to which it is attached.

Holes are now designed with par in mind, naturally these holes will have a relationship to that number.

The fact that the USGA can change a holes par number before a tournament without changing the hole shows how arbitrary the number is. The facts pro take this scorecard change into consideration while playing the holes shows how mentally weak these players have become.

Second, the fact that par sets scoring expections for a hole means that par matters. Whether a given player's expectations are the right ones or the wrong ones is a separate issue. My expectations are usually wrong. But the fact that I have those expectations means par matters.

If you set your expectations in relationship to par, then par is important to you. I'd contend you are making a mistake using that number for your expectation, and most of us would be better off using a more realistic number, depending on conditions, skills, etc...

Third, par also matters because it gives you a window into how your competitors view the hole. Part of the scoring expectation thing is not just the expectation that an individual has, but also an expectation of how his competitors will play the hole, which, in turn, effects how he will play the hole. If a tweener hole is a par 4 on the card, you can bet that more of your competitors will be going for the green on their second shot than otherwise.

Just because pros aren't the sharpest pencils in the drawer, doesn't mean we must all follow their lead. All golfers would be much better off deciding to go for a green or not go for a green depending on conditions and skill level, not some number on a scorecard.

s there any other sport that has a concept anything like "par"?

Golf doesn't even have a concept of par. Golf has a concept of shooting as low a number as possible. Some golfers choose to make par important, but that doesn't make it so for anyone other than themselves.

Stocks (not a sport) have the concept of par. That is where the term comes from.

Cheers,
Dan King

In 1890 Mr Hugh Rotherham Secretary of the Coventry Golf Club conceived the idea of standardising the number of shots at each hole that a good golfer should take, which he called the 'ground score.'  Dr Browne, Secretary of the Great Yarmouth Club, adopted the idea, and, with the assent of the club's golfers, this style of competition was introduced there for use in match play.  During one competition Mr CA Wellman (possibly Major Charles Wellman) exclaimed to Dr Browne that, "This player of yours is a regular Bogey man". This was probably a reference to the eponymous subject of an Edwardian music hall song "Hush! Hush! Hush! Here Comes the Bogey Man", which was popular at that time. So at Yarmouth and elsewhere the ground score became known as the Bogey score.
 --Robert Browning

[Bill_McBride]

Dan - good post, good points. Some reactions:

'Why par?' Because it's actually quite a sane (if arbitrary) measuring stick.  And after a certain skill level is attained, it's actually quite a gentle teacher, i.e. less demanding than the birdie, but more diciplined than the bogie. It allows room for various ways of achieving it, and even room for one poor shot or calculation.

But in truth, I'm just trying to find a 'logical' explanation for a feeling I have, i.e. I do feel better after a par than after a bogie, every time, and I certainly do measure whether I am (objectively) getting better or worse as a golfer by how well I do relative to par. 

I also love the feeling of a pefectly struck long iron or putting a good solid roll on a putt, regardless of the results...but I wouldn't want to quantify how I'm progressing by that method.

Peter 

Actually, an older measure of golf scoring was "bogey," which was the score an average golfer could expect to make on a given hole.  "Par" was reserved for the scratch man.  UK scorecards often still carry the "bogey" rating of a course.

If you are a 12 handicap, then a bogey on the #12 hole is a net par, or your "personal par" for that hole.  To think that 12 handicaps should be disappointed by not parring every hole is pretty laughable.

[CHrisB]

The facts pro take this scorecard change into consideration while playing the holes shows how mentally weak these players have become.

Just because pros aren't the sharpest pencils in the drawer, doesn't mean we must all follow their lead.

I realize that some with average ability and above-average intelligence like to fantasize about how much more intelligent and mentally tough they are than the pros they watch on TV, but these statements are just a little over the top.

Give Ernie Els your brain and he would have won 10 majors by now, eh Dan?

[Peter Pallotta]

Bill - yes, the bogey score concept is worth mentioning, if only to suggest that this kind of measuring stick has been around for a long time. It might be a more realistic standard than par, but it's no less arbitrary. I'd guess that there were as few average golfers playing bogie golf back then as there are average golfers playing par golf today.  I'm not saying that the 12 handicap should be disappointed if he doesn't par every hole; I'm only suggesting that the 12 handicap probably isn't satisifed when he doesn't par any individual hole....

Peter    
And just to be clear, I don't par that many holes in a round of golf. That doesn't keep me from enjoying the game immensely; but that's because I've had to learn to try to stay patient and positive, not because I think par is irrelevant

[Dan King]

Chris Brauner writes:
Give Ernie Els your brain and he would have won 10 majors by now, eh Dan?

I think it would have been a heck of a lot more than 10.

Cheers,
Dan King

I dreamed one night that I had 17 holes-in-one and one two, and when I woke up I was so god damn mad.
 --Ben Hogan