Badams69

Lot of truth in here. No doubt. I would like to point out that our blind devotion to the numbers on the bottom of the club is also to blame. Our clinging to "it isn't a proper 7 iron" is a bit of an issue as well. And a bit odd to me given we know the new 5 is the old 4 and so on. (please don't arrive thinking about educating us all (or me) about new tech causing this or that CG and higher/lower this or that- we are all very aware). For instance ...... I have two old sets where the lofts are well higher per designated # from those on my more up to date set. However, you obviously understand that if I were to compare any of these sets, the designated number on said iron is not a fair or proper way to reference them. My Eye2 6 is the more direct comparison to my current 7 and that travels up and down the bag. So, when we cry foul about the current PW leaving us in limbo around the 48-50* loft range, that is just us being silly. So, no they don't have the identical options at the top or bottom of the bag as before, but a 3 iron today is an old 2 iron. As for options, I would agree it seemed so much simpler back when ...... we got that vast proportion of our gapping pre-prescribed for us. We then simply worked around it and figured out how to score our best. I put forth that we sort of blindly follow recommendations today rather than simply do what golfers for eons have always done. Work with what you have and figure out how to manipulated those lofts and clubs to your benefit rather than run around searching for someone to tell us how to fix it. Golfers suffer from not relying on themselves more as a result. Not all golfers, but it is a thing. Neat as all this tech is, nothing replaces figuring it out on your own at some point. 50/56. 52/56, 50/54/58 , 52/56/60 ........ whatever you have .... you have more than enough to score !!!!

You're right in line with those points. What I enjoyed about listening to this was how they flush it out with some reference data points to help generally quantify it. And listening to in depth golf discussions, is better than most TV or other stuff at times. We used to try and help our players with little cheat sheets to keep in their Scorecard Holder.

These guys study how weather affects your ball. It's a good listen from a great podcast. Lot of great info here. Ex..... Downwind drives ..... further or do we mis-estimate its' impact. LINK

Good rounds! What I assume these are either different courses? Or, forgive me I don't focus on every facet of GHIN calculations, does it change depending on the conditions of the day? (read about that somewhere as I was setting up my hdcp a while back. You're right 100%, it goes right with that personal par discussion, and it is right with the topic, in my opinion. People, also referred to as golfers, absolutely and often get the heebeejeebees as they get nearer par than they are used to being. Maybe not after 3 but the further it pushes on, it becomes like a pitcher/no-hitter type thing. Except most golfers do bring it up, if nowhere except inside their own head, it's impossible not to. Why? P A R is a mental health issue! LOL

Date 06/25/2023 Course Name Indian Creek Golf Club - Creek Gross Score 82 Course Handicap 10 Gross Strokes over/under par 10 Net Score to Par 0 Net Score 72 Net Birdies or better 4 Longest Drive 305 Good day out despite the scorching heat. Aside from about 4-5 loose putts and shots, it went better than it has been lately. If my speed was more in tuned with the greens today it would have been a few less. Hitting my putts where and how I wanted, but that didn't match what the putt needed too often to hole anything beyond the norm. But many had a better chance than usual from outside 10'.

Therein lies the arbitrary nature, to me. If you or they can and often do this, doesn't that actually modify the expected scoring? Yet we all, yes all of us, still treat it as if nothing has actually changed. I argue, only because PAR says to.

Golfs a silly game no doubt. As cnosil has highlighted. Closer is better, normally, but a different approach does not preclude good scoring either.

Had to change my avatar. Going to see my favorite artist this week. Bryan Adams! Here is an interesting point..... He has several hits you know of that he wrote for other artists like: Celine Dion, 38 Special, Joe Cocker, Glass Tiger,, Kiss to name a few. Don't confuse him for some of the bigger hits, that's not the him that is best. For you Beatles fans here is a treat:

Good one! Liked that show. Cool. You have reached a level of golfing enlightenment! Which is not nothing, it's harder than most endeavors.

Ok ....... I'm saying golf doesn't need it and it's presence isn't helpful. So we are left dealing with something when we are up to our elbows in alligators already trying to fight this game. Obstacles to good golf come at you from all sides. This one, simply isn't one I think may be as necessary as we all have accepted it is. As Bruce Hornsby said, 'That's just the way it is, it is, it is" "but, don't you believe it!" I simply DON'T believe it. Total par..... fine. Hole par.... hogwash made up nonsense and highly arbitrary!!!

I wouldn't argue anything against your points ..... I would say one is arbitrary looming presence in the game and the other is the nature of the beast called competition. Would that be a decent distinction? Golf on a certain level is much more about your strokes vs theirs ..... than how either of your strokes relate to par. And the mental health issue is much more isolated, in my observation to the par on said hole than to overall par for the course.

WOW ...... the beauty of "course to yourself" dropping balls and working on thing on course! Best times I have ever had in golf!!! Congrats on getting into the club and having more opportunities to play this silly/great game!

Great read! Look forward to checking that book out.. Had the great pleasure of spending time with Byron Nelson when I was a young golfer. He was so generous to me! As for personal par? In the game as we know it, it has a place. If nothing else it is a tool to help manage expectations. I posted the origins of par earlier in the thread. It was interesting how they describe bogey as what an amateur should expect on a hole if played well. And that is fairly accurate from what we see day in and day out on the course. As it pertains to my point for the thread where PAR is a mental hurdle. I think it is evidence to support that claim. WHY .... would we need to alter par as a strategy? Well ...... because it is a mental obstacle to our best golf. Not exactly sure why there has been push back on this point within this thread. The evidence is immense and abundant. I've seen more evidence it's a real thing in the rebuttals here than in my points or others who have semi-concurred. LOL Either way I am glad you shared that and if Hogan or Casper can ignore a pre-prescribed way to play a hole ....... others should take much more note of that than they normally do. AND many do quite often. Until they don't !!!! Thus the mental health issue strikes again

Fair to say I have posted a few times in this thread. One thing I hope is not coming across is ..... having goals in golf is bad. I've even mentioned that for individual play PAR can serve as an opponent of sorts. Personally I think it is great that you are striving and sounds like you're close to the goal put forth! I have other thoughts relative to this aligned with other points I've made, but in this instance I like that it is driving you. With that said ..... if par didn't exist, I sense you wouldn't be aimlessly wondering the course wondering how you would establish a goal for yourself, it would just be different. Heck, I even wonder aloud if that goal, absent PAR, might be lower !!!!! smile might not be

Fair. Keep in mind, discussing how to deal with the point I put forth in the thread, is not identical to the point put forth. One is recognizing the other is coping. I still haven't heard anything denying how PAR is perceived in our game, and how it permeates perception. Heard far more to say it is deeper than I thought and I already thought it was ocean deep. As stated before, Broadie and Fawcett each do validate or preach exactly what you state. And I believe it 100%. With that said, although built on statistics, it does boil down to a general rule to recognize benefits of knowing tipping points. But you have to know the tipping points and also not ignore the individual executing the plan simultaneously. The example I gave was within a response to another post a side point within the discussion (but also showed me the benefit of removing par from the brain) 1. If discussing the repeated use of say a 7 iron, that I was referencing, keep in mind ... we were dealing with some pure beginner golfers having to enter tournament play weeks after starting the game. They had to find a way to navigate a course, not only in the least strokes but also with an amount of golf balls they could actually carry in their bag - LOL. but serious they could lose em all. 2. Not sure that anything i stated disagreed with what you state "advance as far as possible to increase opportunity for a lower score". In this instance, player (who shoots 68-75) says they prefer their 9i to their pw and not by just a tad ...... If they hit into their 9i zone 5 times a round and their PW zone 5 times (which we did make them prove in play without knowing it) their chances dramatically changed for a) knocking it stiff b) avoiding major misses. One thing we all know is that as lofts increase on full shots there is a tipping point where hitting it full becomes less reliable. Balls can ride up the face or some have tendency to dig too much and long/short dispersion gets out of hand even if just an additional 5-8 yards. Also for most golfers a normal full swing is often more reliable than their touch swing that they don't have locked in. So in one of the instance by getting to 9i yardage rather than moving into PW or feel wedges. They actually increased their particular odds. Because their stock offering was far more reliable. Thus ..... getting to 9i was in accordance of as far as possible to increase their opportunity for lower score. Or else we wouldn't have advised it. Did it always work? Don't know. But I am confident it helped them avoid higher scores. relative terms as this kid was low 70s and 60s but while they were adequate short game, they weren't mickelson or anything. So - while in general, you are correct and yes that is what Broadie and Fawcett discuss ....... it is, like lots of things, nuanced to the golfer in question. We did have others who were good with driver and stone dead with their short game ..... they bombed it and dealt with the remainder to their benefit. You'll be happy to know that we also taught them to use the google maps and the measuring tool to find their driver holes and identify holes where driver would not have the needed room. Our kids were well versed in the concepts put forth by Fawcett. But, we didn't just blindly follow to the point players didn't get to highlight their strength over their individual weaknesses.

Good question and it would matter. Keep in mind I am not trying to start some underground effort to abolish PAR. Sometimes it is helpful to bring things to light that are so entrenched that they aren't even discussed, is all. The architecture may or may not change. Courses developed into 18 holes from a variety of hole amounts. I've read from 22 holes to 12 holes and all between. They moved to 18. This had nothing to do with par being established. It happened eons before par existed. I sense a disconnect between the nature of my point, and that is likely my fault. I'm not at odds with PAR. Or see it as unattainable, and thus frustrating. I simply mean it isn't discussed or viewed properly. I've cited dozens upon dozens of examples that are abound in the golf world, no golfer has ever totally escaped the effects. If one says they have, it's most likely they are lying to "right fight". lol One ex: the view of "i have a birdie putt" and "eagle putt" .... the label is simply a reference point for the statement easily known to other golfers and that is great. What isn't great .......? It takes on a nature of exactly the phrasing, each putt is different in nature and thus needs a label, not verbally but psychologically. Kinda of like how people put their best foot forward for x or y. They sense their golf game has to step up for this moment. in a sense. It heightens things and that is a rush and all, but doesn't mean it is overall best for someone's score consistently. Because that hype, has pitfalls when one of those putts is missed ..... and spirals when another miss of that type follows. We both know it happens all throughout the game. "That all being said any Golfer can play any course as they see fit, smart, hero or otherwise!" Totally agree - but they normally DON'T! Even if they often do, when they don't ....... often PAR is looming.

Cool, that 6330 looks like an 8802 back from space camp! or The Terminator got him a nice putter Sweet. Thanks for letting me know.

So is that the nike that cheating Patrick used before? Love that slant neck! Also - I've been using a Grace with the older insert (or I think it the older one). You find this one to be pretty consistent off the face???? I'm highly intrigued.

You know I follow baseball and thought I knew enough about those days...... but that is an interesting fact that you just don't hear enough about! Imagine without fences the bigger guys weren't the ones getting "homers".

Gotcha! I like your style good points. Although I do think they simply didn't give two spits about those old fighters. Might as well have been dogs or cock fights. Lot of disregard there. But that is recency bias I suppose. Sure I would have watched the heck out of those old fights had I been around. Unless I could use my 4-iron, I definitely wouldn't have been a participant.

Absolutely! Golfers are good people. Except the cheaters! As you point out CHARACTER revealed. I admit it has been super tough as I age and play far less, find myself hitting horrific shots and just having to seal my lips, hide my head in a sense. But try desperately not to rage or anything of that sort. It is hard knowing how many hours I spent on this for years, to see what I've become - LOL Mental game is where it's at. Golf is best achieved, Mickelson said to Feherty, by super smart people and super dumb people. Those that just do and don't question, and those that fully grasp it and execute that vision. I know a lot of super players who don't fit either end, but it is a good point for kicks.

Would it be ok if I said that would be most equivalent to a course being 18 holes? Or a tournament being 18, 36, 54 or 72 ? Courses used to have all sorts of hole amounts. 22, 12 etc But very good point.

BOOM !!! LOL No mention of PAR LOL

Appreciate the input. No argument that hdcp system allows two dissimilar golfers to compete. However, in fairness with no handicaps in place among about 10 teens and early 20's golfers (breaking par regularly or at worst mid 70s) where I grew up playing, we didn't have any issue figuring out how many strokes to give and not give as we competed. I imagine you do the same. I put forth there is an answer ........ PAR as presently perceived is not good for golfers of any level. It may not harm all the same but in my opinion it does nothing to help. It is arbitrary and mostly misunderstood by almost all. Or again it would have decimals - LOL We both know it isn't going away. I'm not silly. Just hope to shine a small light on some of the effect it can bring into the game unwittingly. Nerves or disappointments that are not always accurate to the situation of playing the game.

And that is to be saluted! This concept I bring up isn't our fault it's the game as we know it. So much so that it is a hard concept to even contemplate. Golf without par on a hole? What? That's silly ..... LOL Well, golf with rules existed for 167 years without par. Par has now been in play for 112.