PAR is a mental health issue for golfers.... one man's opinion

[Badams69]

46 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Not sure why you think it’s not being acknowledged. As mentioned it’s part of the mental approach of the game and those who aren’t as good mentally on the course will have a harder time based on the number listed on the hole. Imo you are trying to make it out to be something bigger and it’s just the mental side of the sport.

 

It’s arbitrary decision by the inventors just like in basketball a free throw is a single point, yet a basket made from the arm spot in the flow of the game is 2 and if one makes a basket outside an arbitrary distance it’s worth 3 points. 

 

It is relative because it determines the club used and the shot to be played along with decision making on tee shots for whether one wants to hit driver and accept any risk of the results from that whether it be a shot offline, or a shot that leaves them with a distance they aren’t comfortable with just for the benefit of being closer to the hole, or does the golfer want to hit less club and sacrifice some distance of being closer to the hole to have a shot from a distance they are more comfortable with. Then for approach shots it matters as well again for club selection and determining what the risks are if they come up short or go long. So while a yard is a yard and a mile a mile the distance on a course isn’t about that measurement but the total distance left at the start of each shot. A short hitter may not have as many options as a longer hitter so the guy who drives it 250 probably has to hit driver on most par 4s where the guy at 280+ has different options off the tee. Same for their approach shots. The longer hitter can choose a shot and club based on distance and where the flag is at where the shorter hitter will only have one club option and that’s to play a full swing with a longer iron.

This is to make broadcasts interesting to watch. There are all kinds of stats given on a broadcast. Number of greens hit in regulation, number of birdies, Jin young ko’s GIR streak. Golf is boring to watch, and just like any other sport the commentators tell different kind of stories to draw the attention of the viewers. Some are personal stories, some are sport related and so on

You're right.  Thanks

[Badams69]

5 minutes ago, revkev said:

It's fascinating to me that if you ask anyone about their course management they will tell you that it's great, always.  I think you may be on to something here, they think it's great because it's so ingrained that we need to make par on a hole, whatever that par might be that we think we are making the correct choice when we pull the proper club to hit that 235 yard shot (I only have one club that hits it that far and then only from a tee in favorable conditions so maybe I should back down to 180 or 150 or 120 it doesn't really matter.)  

 

Generally speaking people play to their handicaps across the board - a touring pro is going to be better at course management than a plus handicap/scratch am who is better than a single digit handicapper who is better than a 12 who is better than an 18 who is better than a 24.  Honestly I see it all the time when I play in league and get paired with higher handicap players, they fire straight at pins that I wouldn't dream of aiming at even though I have a much higher probability of executing the shot.  But there are times when I make very poor choices from club selection, to shot avoidance, to God only knows what.

 

What should be ingrained is that par is the anticipated score for an expert golfer on the course.  Bogey is the anticipated score for an average golfer.  It was really fun to watch the US Open with two par 3's approaching 300 yards and a par 4 the same length.  Of course the hazards around the par 4 were radically different from those around the 3's so you couldn't make a 1 for 1 comparison but it really was interesting to watch the differing strategies based upon the differing capabilities - if 6 were a "bad" yardage guys chose to lay up even though they could easily hit it far enough.  I doubt that many of us have that sort of discipline or the ability to interpret Brodie any other way than I should hit it as far as I'm capable of on every shot. 

Thanks and excellent observations!   What I thought while reading this was ...... PAR as a built in "expectation" also can serve as a governor for excellence.  A hole that should take on average 4.25 strokes for our ability level, for instance ...... we'd feel a-OK if we walked away with a 5.  And we shouldn't be upset, not at all.  However if you underperform at .75/hole across 18 holes ........ well ..... we all know how that goes.  And that's likely a stretch for sake of making a point, but glad you brought that to mind.

I too, although I understood why, was humored by everything juxtaposing the approach to #6 last week vs other holes of similar length.  I grasped why in every aspect but it brought a chuckle to hear the broadcast building up the anticipation "is he going for it" ?   

How is it going for it there and not "going for it" when someone is simply hitting their tee shot on a par 3?  Are they not both "going for it" ....... why is it couched in such a way???   I offer up "PAR" as the culprit!  For better or worse.    

[Badams69]

52 minutes ago, cnosil said:

From my perspective, if you have read any of the responses to Fawcetts or Stagner Twitter account it is outside the norm for most players.  Most players don’t really understand course management and shot dispersion and how to mentally approach a hole.

Among those names ...... one would do well to chase down whatever they could find from

1. Jon Sherman and 2. Adam Young of THE SWEET SPOT podcast, The Strike Plan, and PRACTICAL GOLF.   

Maybe more digestible for most and a healthy complement to anyone looking to improve their game in a ..... PRACTICAL fashion. 

Stagner, Broadie, and Fawcett are staples but PRACTICAL golf should be right there with them for any golfer. 

The skills approach by A.Young is tremendous way for anyone to see extremely rapid results that matter.  Research is pretty clear on external vs internal focus when it comes to golf improvement.

Some of the best content I have ever come across and I've devoured a healthy portion of golf stuff through the years.

[revkev]

43 minutes ago, Badams69 said:

Thanks and excellent observations!   What I thought while reading this was ...... PAR as a built in "expectation" also can serve as a governor for excellence.  A hole that should take on average 4.25 strokes for our ability level, for instance ...... we'd feel a-OK if we walked away with a 5.  And we shouldn't be upset, not at all.  However if you underperform at .75/hole across 18 holes ........ well ..... we all know how that goes.  And that's likely a stretch for sake of making a point, but glad you brought that to mind.

I too, although I understood why, was humored by everything juxtaposing the approach to #6 last week vs other holes of similar length.  I grasped why in every aspect but it brought a chuckle to hear the broadcast building up the anticipation "is he going for it" ?   

How is it going for it there and not "going for it" when someone is simply hitting their tee shot on a par 3?  Are they not both "going for it" ....... why is it couched in such a way???   I offer up "PAR" as the culprit!  For better or worse.    

I do think that the traps around 6 made it different from the par 3's - they may have all been close to the same length but the angle behind the tee allowed us to see that 6 was a completely blind shot and the green side views showed it was a blind shot with a trap that made it extremely difficult to hit the green where as the par 3's were open in front and you could certainly kick the ball on the green from the left side on one of them (I forget which now.)  So there were shots that went into the trees/heavy rough left that looked terrible that were actually only 25 or 30 feet offline - had they hit the shorter grass on the hillside they would have kicked on.  Also one of the par 5's was a 3 shot hole for the entire field and that was fun to watch - I love seeing pros play 3 shot par 5's because they manage the angles so well.  It's a great reminder.  My club has great par 5's that really require careful management because the greens are so well guarded - plus they require different placement based on where the pin is set - the first par 5 is incredible - because it's very difficult for a long player to fit a 200 yard shot onto that green and there is not a good bail out other than left if the pin is not in the back - if the pin is back you are nuts to go for that green in two but I see people do it all the time - its a 1/10 shot - I almost always win that hole in a match play against a big hitter - I can sometimes get it to where I could reach if it were a matter of straight distance but no way I'm stopping a 4 wood in a good spot.

[Badams69]

12 minutes ago, revkev said:

I do think that the traps around 6 made it different from the par 3's - they may have all been close to the same length but the angle behind the tee allowed us to see that 6 was a completely blind shot and the green side views showed it was a blind shot with a trap that made it extremely difficult to hit the green where as the par 3's were open in front and you could certainly kick the ball on the green from the left side on one of them (I forget which now.)  So there were shots that went into the trees/heavy rough left that looked terrible that were actually only 25 or 30 feet offline - had they hit the shorter grass on the hillside they would have kicked on.  Also one of the par 5's was a 3 shot hole for the entire field and that was fun to watch - I love seeing pros play 3 shot par 5's because they manage the angles so well.  It's a great reminder.  My club has great par 5's that really require careful management because the greens are so well guarded - plus they require different placement based on where the pin is set - the first par 5 is incredible - because it's very difficult for a long player to fit a 200 yard shot onto that green and there is not a good bail out other than left if the pin is not in the back - if the pin is back you are nuts to go for that green in two but I see people do it all the time - its a 1/10 shot - I almost always win that hole in a match play against a big hitter - I can sometimes get it to where I could reach if it were a matter of straight distance but no way I'm stopping a 4 wood in a good spot.

That's what it's all about!!!!!  Golf is a great game and seeing different strategies is fun.  They are all wise when they work.

- golfing your ball to the best of your ability!!!  I recall one par five that was a nightmare tee shot with cliff feet from the right fairway mow line, trees and homes along the left.   So - I told my buddy that during tournament play I was going to reverse the hole and hit my layup shot (there was a huge ravine blocking access from 60-15 yds from the green) off the tee .... 5-7 iron and then hit a FW or hybrid down to whatever that left.  Whatever it took to remove the trouble/potential penalties as best I could.  Have seen many an 8 or higher on that hole across several summer amateur events.   And although I didn't execute perfectly on a super gusty day ..... I hit my fourth shot from about 80y super tight and walked away with 5.  Which was about the best I felt I could score there anyway.  Someone else made birdie in the group - yet I felt far happier than them based on the mental ease that I felt while playing the hole due to plan.  No shot ever posed much in the way of risk and had I not scuttled my 2nd shot (thus my 3rd was literally a lil chip down the fairway to improve my positioning although I was with range to "reach it", the shot was a booby trap for me based on how I was playing and other factors)  ..... I easily could have had a nice look at four.   

Why did this stand out?   Well - I had made a 10 on it and an 8 or higher more than once previously when I was chasing certain scores rather than just laying out a plan that was simple and easy not to foul up.

[revkev]

1 hour ago, Badams69 said:

That's what it's all about!!!!!  Golf is a great game and seeing different strategies is fun.  They are all wise when they work.

- golfing your ball to the best of your ability!!!  I recall one par five that was a nightmare tee shot with cliff feet from the right fairway mow line, trees and homes along the left.   So - I told my buddy that during tournament play I was going to reverse the hole and hit my layup shot (there was a huge ravine blocking access from 60-15 yds from the green) off the tee .... 5-7 iron and then hit a FW or hybrid down to whatever that left.  Whatever it took to remove the trouble/potential penalties as best I could.  Have seen many an 8 or higher on that hole across several summer amateur events.   And although I didn't execute perfectly on a super gusty day ..... I hit my fourth shot from about 80y super tight and walked away with 5.  Which was about the best I felt I could score there anyway.  Someone else made birdie in the group - yet I felt far happier than them based on the mental ease that I felt while playing the hole due to plan.  No shot ever posed much in the way of risk and had I not scuttled my 2nd shot (thus my 3rd was literally a lil chip down the fairway to improve my positioning although I was with range to "reach it", the shot was a booby trap for me based on how I was playing and other factors)  ..... I easily could have had a nice look at four.   

Why did this stand out?   Well - I had made a 10 on it and an 8 or higher more than once previously when I was chasing certain scores rather than just laying out a plan that was simple and easy not to foul up.

Isn't "don't foul up" one of golf's numerous nicknames?  Clean ones that is. 

[Badams69]

3 minutes ago, revkev said:

Isn't "don't foul up" one of golf's numerous nicknames?  Clean ones that is. 

No kidding. The further I get away from playing all the time and a lot better, the more that's my whole mental approach.  Or maybe that is wisdom induced anxiety!

That book - GOLF IS NOT A GAME OF PERFECT ....... talk about low hanging fruit for a title! 

[revkev]

5 hours ago, Badams69 said:

No kidding. The further I get away from playing all the time and a lot better, the more that's my whole mental approach.  Or maybe that is wisdom induced anxiety!

That book - GOLF IS NOT A GAME OF PERFECT ....... talk about low hanging fruit for a title! 

Life is not a game of perfect either. It’s what makes golf and life delightful. 

[Badams69]

29 minutes ago, revkev said:

Life is not a game of perfect either. It’s what makes golf and life delightful. 

Agree there.  Oddly I think it is why I generally like people who truly are GOLFERS the best. 

We get it that good times and bad times don't last. 

That you can do everything right and get a poor result and vice versa.

We also know that finding and object to point the finger at outside yourself is neat, but not anything that is going to benefit your bottom line.

We get it that one poor hole does not preclude a great day, and one perfection event (hole in one) does not equal a victory overall.

Makes perspective on life make so much more sense in every facet. 

If only we learned that every day is not the No. 18 hdcp hole nor or they all No. 1 either.  You get a variety of all of them and have to figure out how to get through it alive! 

[Hook DeLoft]

Obviously, the subject here is course management.  If we all played as proposed in the OP's post, we would shoot better scores.  BTW, in one of Billy Casper's US Open wins, he laid up every day at a long par 3, pitched up and made par each day.

[Badams69]

3 minutes ago, Hook DeLoft said:

Obviously, the subject here is course management.  If we all played as proposed in the OP's post, we would shoot better scores.  BTW, in one of Billy Casper's US Open wins, he laid up every day at a long par 3, pitched up and made par each day.

Thanks and good point about Casper.  We had a high level girl who did that 3 straight years on a 150y par 3 (mostly due to high winds, hard ground, terrifying bunkers and a doozy of a lake protecting the green .... she hit 15 yards short chipped up and took 6 or 7 across 36 holes on that hole, while the field was averaging about 10.  She made it to state every year at a very high level.  Every other coach looked at us like we were purple when she began doing it and they realized it was intentional.

 

Not sure, if I am expressing this wrong.  It is not simply course management as it is taught. It is the more the mere existence of some force greater than ourselves as golfers. 

PAR just existing is the point.  I

t looms over so much and yes, we do have to cope with it and manage our games.  But, it is so ingrained in the game that even discussions of it, in my opinion fall short of recognizing the power it holds.    It IS semi-arbitrary in the context of a game that simply is won by lowest total.  Total of one golfer vs the other golfers - on a competitive level.  And I am simply saying ....... in that context there is no need or use for some third party score to be involved, but it is. Whether we acknowledge it or not.  It is in most all aspects of how we discuss performance of any kind.   Which, to me is detrimental to truly being able to achieve true course management.  It is almost akin to a house actually being haunted - LOL  

It would be as if football teams had an expected point total they were supposed to meet. Or something of that nature.  It is just THERE..... being over it or under it has no relevance as to how you will finish in a competition.  In reality ..... but then there is the power of perception hole by hole and THAT is crazy.

Yes - I know it isn't going anywhere and that mostly this is not a discussion many enjoy, as most are trying to just minimize it to something else.  Which is fine, I just get a kick out of looking a tad deeper into this game and aspects that impede all of us (or 99%) from our best performance.  

[Hook DeLoft]

17 minutes ago, Badams69 said:

Thanks and good point about Casper.  We had a high level girl who did that 3 straight years on a 150y par 3 (mostly due to high winds, hard ground, terrifying bunkers and a doozy of a lake protecting the green .... she hit 15 yards short chipped up and took 6 or 7 across 36 holes on that hole, while the field was averaging about 10.  She made it to state every year at a very high level.  Every other coach looked at us like we were purple when she began doing it and they realized it was intentional.

 

Not sure, if I am expressing this wrong.  It is not simply course management as it is taught. It is the more the mere existence of some force greater than ourselves as golfers. 

PAR just existing is the point.  I

t looms over so much and yes, we do have to cope with it and manage our games.  But, it is so ingrained in the game that even discussions of it, in my opinion fall short of recognizing the power it holds.    It IS semi-arbitrary in the context of a game that simply is won by lowest total.  Total of one golfer vs the other golfers - on a competitive level.  And I am simply saying ....... in that context there is no need or use for some third party score to be involved, but it is. Whether we acknowledge it or not.  It is in most all aspects of how we discuss performance of any kind.   Which, to me is detrimental to truly being able to achieve true course management.  It is almost akin to a house actually being haunted - LOL  

It would be as if football teams had an expected point total they were supposed to meet. Or something of that nature.  It is just THERE..... being over it or under it has no relevance as to how you will finish in a competition.  In reality ..... but then there is the power of perception hole by hole and THAT is crazy.

Yes - I know it isn't going anywhere and that mostly this is not a discussion many enjoy, as most are trying to just minimize it to something else.  Which is fine, I just get a kick out of looking a tad deeper into this game and aspects that impede all of us (or 99%) from our best performance.  

I get your point about the mental effect of par.  If we didn't have that term for each hole and for 18 holes aggregate, we might well play better. 

[Badams69]

5 minutes ago, Hook DeLoft said:

I get your point about the mental effect of par.  If we didn't have that term for each hole and for 18 holes aggregate, we might well play better. 

I'd hope so (better) ..... it would be different in many ways I'd presume.

[cnosil]

12 hours ago, Badams69 said:

Not sure, if I am expressing this wrong.  It is not simply course management as it is taught.

  It IS semi-arbitrary in the context of a game that simply is won by lowest total.  Total of one golfer vs the other golfers - on a competitive level.  And I am simply saying ....... in that context there is no need or use for some third party score to be involved, but it is. Whether we acknowledge it or not.  It is in most all aspects of how we discuss performance of any kind.   Which, to me is detrimental to truly being able to achieve true course management. 

How is course manage taught and how does course management reference par?   How would you teach course management since you indicate it is different than any other method out there?  
 

your proposed approach is probably a great strategy for people learning the game as they have a perception on how the game is supposed to be played and structure their play as you describe….based on PAR.  Better players are probably more savvy at what true course management is and ignore par.   

[Badams69]

17 minutes ago, cnosil said:

How is course manage taught and how does course management reference par?   How would you teach course management since you indicate it is different than any other method out there?  
 

your proposed approach is probably a great strategy for people learning the game as they have a perception on how the game is supposed to be played and structure their play as you describe….based on PAR.  Better players are probably more savvy at what true course management is and ignore par.   

Well, that is a great question, but what I am actually trying to point out here is that ...... this point is more about the effects of PAR.   

PAR as in its' interwoven nature in the game.

It is as if it is a presence more powerful than any other.  One that serves little purpose, one that mostly is absent in any other sport.  A prescribed expectation, regardless how it arrived or the trued definition of it, it is generally accept as ..... what should happen on such hole.

I'm saying it is so much looming over this sport and blindly accepted as part of the sport.  No questions asked.  But WHY????   Why does it matter?   And what would happen to psyche of any golfer good or bad, if it vanished. 

With all due respect, so far, every counter point or summarization I've read, just accepts that it IS and don't ask questions.   Well, I'm saying it exists, likely always will, and unknowingly has a negative impact on how we ALL OF US perceive the game in every aspect.  How we approach it, digest it, judge it, etc .......

That's all

[TylorJudd]

On 6/21/2023 at 6:13 PM, Badams69 said:

Ok: 

  I'd love to hear anyones take on this.  Polite debunks would be the preference 

So - it is and has been my premise for quite some years that PAR as established is a psychological impediment to many, both good and bad players.

Although PAR has it use, for a variety of factors within the game of golf, the concept of par on any given hole and how it impacts many golfers is the aspect I am pointing focused on here.  

 

Ex:  Par 3 with real trouble around the green but tons of open area both short and long.  For argument, let's use a 235y par 3 playing maybe 195y for another tee. (but I think this holds up across any distance, and have watched it play out in high level amateur tournament over and over.

We are lying to ourselves if we don't stipulate that the overwhelming majority of golfer WILL pull enough club to get there, or so they think,  they will not bend a knee to the prudent play.    Thus, bringing in 5, 6, 7, & even 8s.   Where as the prudent and most statistically smart play would be to hit to the safe area that runs up to let's say 25y short.  And safely proceed from there.

The oddball safer plan they consistently play to have a putt at par, almost guaranteeing they walk away with 2, 3, or 4. (maybe they hole out the pitch).

The most common plan? ...... go for the guarded green MAYBE make a 2 or 3..... likely do well to make 4, and almost certainly make many 5s, 6s, and even higher.

WHY? simply because it is called a par 3.  (this would hold up if we were discussing an similar approach on a par 4, and further if we juxtaposed with decisions made if this were a 2nd shot of similar length, but called a par 5).

Don't believe me?   Just look at last weekend.   Holes that were longer than a par 4 everyone hit it at the green.  And the one called a par 4, they most often laid up.  Not the best example, as there were nuances between the holes mentioned, but it highlights what we all know to be a pattern.

 

This runs through par 4s and par 5s all the same.  People will go for a par 4 because "they are supposed to" when they shouldn't (in two), and lay up on par 5s many times when they would be better served going for it as well.    We've all been there, done that.

You guys know these circumstances, even as you read this to find fault, you can't deny having experienced this for yourself and watched it time and again.

 

My argument is simple.  If we didn't let some arbitrary number tell us how a hole "should" be played we would all be better off, often FAR better off avoiding heaps of penalty strokes for some golfers.   

Alternative approach:

At all times, we should stand on any hole and execute the plan for that hole that we feel gives each of us, based on how we like to play (attack a hole), the best chance for the most likely lowest score time and again. Not "IF" things go just right. **With adjustments for varying situations (1 down on 18, not playing best, crazy weather, etc).  

HOWEVER - my ultimate contention is, the power that PAR has over so many decisions made on the course should never be.  For any golfer of any level.

• We treat the par for the hole sometimes as if it is some all knowing/all powerful guiding light and the rule of what is right, as we blindly follow too often to our slaughter.   
• We treat the overall course par as if it is some sort of retirement account that we are trying desperately not to burn through before death, when in reality for so many par for the course and our score have never met each other and wouldn't recognize each other.  Although they are ships passing in the night somewhere along the back nine. 

We all know this doesn't stop here, the psychological toll we embrace as we relate a bad hole to par, is tormenting and often damn near debilitating.  We don't say 7, we process it based on how poor it is relative to ..... big bad wolf ...... PAR.   And the further it gets above it the reaction is often in direct proportion, but that is not conducive to good golf.  We all know it weighs heavily on the next hole, and any future negative event becomes a multiplier to this feeling.    If we just said the number, it might have less of an impact.  Triple is only two strokes off bogey ..... but it sounds and feels inordinately greater.

 

Know your game, play to do well, which unfortunately in golf more often should be interpreted as AVOID THE BIG NUMBERS rather than CHASE THE SMALL NUMBERS.

Case in point is the US OPEN so many time across the years, it isn't the golfer who had the most spectacular week, it is often the one who avoided the most pitfalls.

ONE OF THOSE PITFALLS for most all of us is the ever haunting concept of "IS THIS A PAR FOUR OR FIVE?" ............ and how that affects our plan of attack.

I agree with all of this but the mental impediment. Par is the goal, like all sports have,one can make this argument across every sport. The singles box for tennis too small to make your serve, goalies too large for hockey, defenders too tall for basketball. Course management is a strategy, as all sports need to have. Par is a reference for your progress, and yes it certainly can be perceived as a barrier but honestly, if you can't break par from the tees you're playing or get close, you're probably playing the wrong tees. It was said at the start of this thread that Bravado plays a part and it absolutely does. This is a hard game, so if you're shooting in the 90's, why are you playing the blue/blacks, or even whites? The perception of men's and women's tees needs to go away. The tees are there as your progress goals. Who gives two shits that you play the whites or reds... It's your game for your enjoyment and this game will punish your mental fortitude if you let it get away from you. Take that out of the picture and play up on the tees.

[RickyBobby_PR]

6 minutes ago, Badams69 said:

Well, that is a great question, but what I am actually trying to point out here is that ...... this point is more about the effects of PAR.   

PAR as in its' interwoven nature in the game

You are posting the mental aspect of golf and how it affect course management. You keep trying to make this about a word and defend that thought but it’s just another way to talk mental aspect of golf and how to approach each shot aka course management. Those who handle the mental side better play better. They make better decisions to minimize the the damage which includes not always going for a green in two or three or on a par 3 that is at the end range of their distance laying up to eliminate a big score. Those who don’t either don’t understand course management or are ego driven.

Its pretty much that simple. 

9 minutes ago, Badams69 said:

With all due respect, so far, every counter point or summarization I've read, just accepts that it IS and don't ask questions.   Well, I'm saying it exists, likely always will, and unknowingly has a negative impact on how we ALL OF US perceive the game in every aspect.  How we approach it, digest it, judge it, etc .......

You don’t like that nobody is agreeing with your theory as you describe it but rather pointing out that we are basically saying the samething but using the words mental game/aspect and course management.

The stated par for that hole is what it is and those who don’t worry about it and take it one shot at a time play better than those who do worry about it after each shot play worse. 
 

Most have acknlowelge in some way yes the goal of par has impacts on people and their game, but again it gets to the mental part of the game.

[Badams69]

1 minute ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

You are posting the mental aspect of golf and how it affect course management. You keep trying to make this about a word and defend that thought but it’s just another way to talk mental aspect of golf and how to approach each shot aka course management. Those who handle the mental side better play better. They make better decisions to minimize the the damage which includes not always going for a green in two or three or on a par 3 that is at the end range of their distance laying up to eliminate a big score. Those who don’t either don’t understand course management or are ego driven.

Its pretty much that simple. 

You don’t like that nobody is agreeing with your theory as you describe it but rather pointing out that we are basically saying the samething but using the words mental game/aspect and course management.

The stated par for that hole is what it is and those who don’t worry about it and take it one shot at a time play better than those who do worry about it after each shot play worse. 
 

Most have acknlowelge in some way yes the goal of par has impacts on people and their game, but again it gets to the mental part of the game.

OK. If that is what you're getting from this that's fine. 

It is not what I'm saying and I'm not upset or trying to convince anyone to do anything. 

The point you're making seems to validate my point of how pervasive the concept is over how the game is approached. That's all.

You don't see it as detrimental to how people approach the game and that's well within you're rights to do so.

I'm fine with par personally and accept it. What I don't like as someone who teaches golf, consumes golf and enjoys golf ... is the existence of this element in our sport that hurts people in their pursuit of playing it their best.

Why does anyone need it? It's does NOT help anything.

[GolfSpy_SHARK]

A lot more reading to go, I am on page 2 but wanted to get my thought out before I finished before I forget.

I have not read decade or other things mentioned previously but I am a fairly black and white person @Badams69 are you suggesting that taking the number and idea of par away would aid people in shooting better scores because of the mental implication of thinking about what you should be shooting? This would suggest that removing that what I look at as the goal in par would aid in people swinging better and having a better overall golf game just based on a number.

[cnosil]

37 minutes ago, Badams69 said:

It is as if it is a presence more powerful than any other.  One that serves little purpose, one that mostly is absent in any other sport.  A prescribed expectation, regardless how it arrived or the trued definition of it, it is generally accept as ..... what should happen on such hole.

If we were to get rid of par, how do you evaluate individual performance?   How do you level a playing field for competition?    I scored 73, is that good or bad?  In most sports players are considered equal, we don’t handicap basketball, hockey, football, soccer players to enable two teams to be equal.   In golf if scores were just published as total strokes, how do you determine standings prior to the end?  Additionally most sports are played on the same measured playing surfaces.  Golf courses are all unique. 
 

using Par to determine how to best play a hole shouldn’t be done; which is what you are advocating.  A player should look at what is in front of them to determine how to play the hole.   As I said earlier the notion of par is bad for players learning how to navigate around a course since potentially leads to poor decision making.    That said par is necessary since it establishes a goal to evaluate individual performance on a golf course.   This is why we have been separating out strategy (don’t need par) vs performance Measurement (need par)

[Badams69]

54 minutes ago, Lacassem said:

A lot more reading to go, I am on page 2 but wanted to get my thought out before I finished before I forget.

I have not read decade or other things mentioned previously but I am a fairly black and white person @Badams69 are you suggesting that taking the number and idea of par away would aid people in shooting better scores because of the mental implication of thinking about what you should be shooting? This would suggest that removing that what I look at as the goal in par would aid in people swinging better and having a better overall golf game just based on a number.

I appreciate the question.

 

To an extent that is what I am fairly certain would result. What I am more confident in is that PAR influences how we perceive everything in this game and it permeates that approach in ways we are aware of and even ways we couldn't fathom. Think I've listed a few examples. But just think of how we discuss putts or shots .... as if they have different values because of how they relate to par, or how they impact our score relative to par.

Meaning we all intellectually know each is just a stroke but we place gradations of value on various strokes because of what the result is or isn't relative to par.

One silly cliche.... NEVER LEAVE A _____ PUTT SHORT. Not that everyone says it but it's common to hear about a birdie putt for instance.  WHY? It is one stroke whether for birdie eaglenl or a snowman.

[Badams69]

38 minutes ago, cnosil said:

If we were to get rid of par, how do you evaluate individual performance?   How do you level a playing field for competition?    I scored 73, is that good or bad?  In most sports players are considered equal, we don’t handicap basketball, hockey, football, soccer players to enable two teams to be equal.   In golf if scores were just published as total strokes, how do you determine standings prior to the end?  Additionally most sports are played on the same measured playing surfaces.  Golf courses are all unique. 
 

using Par to determine how to best play a hole shouldn’t be done; which is what you are advocating.  A player should look at what is in front of them to determine how to play the hole.   As I said earlier the notion of par is bad for players learning how to navigate around a course since potentially leads to poor decision making.    That said par is necessary since it establishes a goal to evaluate individual performance on a golf course.   This is why we have been separating out strategy (don’t need par) vs performance Measurement (need par)

Thanks again Cnosil. We both know PAR is here to stay and does serve a purpose. 

At the same time that doesn't preclude it from fouling up how we approach certain situations.  I wouldn't go as far as to say it impedes any good golf. Just that there is an aspect of it that screws with our heads. It isn't alone as we all know golf is wild game to process mentally and emotionally.

I would say if it didn't exist we'd figure something out to compete. Kids do it in the driveway playing 2 on 1 etc.  LOL. 

Thanks again! 

[cnosil]

5 minutes ago, Badams69 said:

 

One silly cliche.... NEVER LEAVE A _____ PUTT SHORT. Not that everyone says it but it's common to hear about a birdie putt for instance.  WHY? It is one stroke whether for birdie eaglenl or a snowman.

Poor instruction, poor shot management, lack of knowledge on expectation management.   I think the underlined part is the least problematic part of that statement.  

[cnosil]

1 minute ago, Badams69 said:

At the same time that doesn't preclude it from fouling up how we approach certain situations. 

Just another factor to make golf difficult.  

[Badams69]

2 hours ago, TylorJudd said:

I agree with all of this but the mental impediment. Par is the goal, like all sports have,one can make this argument across every sport. The singles box for tennis too small to make your serve, goalies too large for hockey, defenders too tall for basketball. Course management is a strategy, as all sports need to have. Par is a reference for your progress, and yes it certainly can be perceived as a barrier but honestly, if you can't break par from the tees you're playing or get close, you're probably playing the wrong tees. It was said at the start of this thread that Bravado plays a part and it absolutely does. This is a hard game, so if you're shooting in the 90's, why are you playing the blue/blacks, or even whites? The perception of men's and women's tees needs to go away. The tees are there as your progress goals. Who gives two shits that you play the whites or reds... It's your game for your enjoyment and this game will punish your mental fortitude if you let it get away from you. Take that out of the picture and play up on the tees.

Agree 100% from the standpoint you are talking about.  I'm saying it dictates our perception of too many variables in a game that is about total score.  

Let's take the tee example..... IF PAR was not a thing ......  why would someone need to play from different tees?  I think it is a valid question that honestly until that typing I hadn't even pondered at all.  IF PAR DID NOT EXIST ON A HOLE ....... what would it matter which tees you, I or anyone played from?  

I'm not arguing for anything, for me this is just something I enjoy, a mental exercise of what is and why it is, and what if it weren't at all?  LOL

[Badams69]

1 hour ago, cnosil said:

Just another factor to make golf difficult.  

You can say that again!. 

Last thing I need these days.  Maybe that's why I'm even thinking of this.  LOL 

Worse I get the more obstacles I'd like dealt with 

[Badams69]

1 hour ago, cnosil said:

Poor instruction, poor shot management, lack of knowledge on expectation management.   I think the underlined part is the least problematic part of that statement.  

Now you are touching on my absolute biggest pet peeve in all of golf.   Never _____ never in.

Last I checked. . . . never in is simply NEVER IN regardless where else it ended up!

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, Badams69 said:

Let's take the tee example..... IF PAR was not a thing ......  why would someone need to play from different tees?  I think it is a valid question that honestly until that typing I hadn't even pondered at all.  IF PAR DID NOT EXIST ON A HOLE ....... what would it matter which tees you, I or anyone played from?  

For the challenge of the game. If one can easily score a 3 on a hole from tee box a rather easily the challenge would be to score that from tee box b or c. 

As @TylorJuddmentioned par is a goal. The goal of golf is to score at least par and to try to score better.

If there was no goal of the game it ouwodnt exist. Now there are people that go out and play for fun and dont keep score or at least not on a score card and they have fun, but the vast majority of golfers try to varying extents to get better at the game and that is usually determined by score in relation to par on each hole and in total.

Its not different than any other sport. Why is 10’ the height for basketball rims, they game would be more fun if it was 8’ where most people could dunk the ball or make shots easier because the ball doesn’t have to go as high.

[Badams69]

43 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

For the challenge of the game. If one can easily score a 3 on a hole from tee box a rather easily the challenge would be to score that from tee box b or c. 

As @TylorJuddmentioned par is a goal. The goal of golf is to score at least par and to try to score better.

If there was no goal of the game it ouwodnt exist. Now there are people that go out and play for fun and dont keep score or at least not on a score card and they have fun, but the vast majority of golfers try to varying extents to get better at the game and that is usually determined by score in relation to par on each hole and in total.

Its not different than any other sport. Why is 10’ the height for basketball rims, they game would be more fun if it was 8’ where most people could dunk the ball or make shots easier because the ball doesn’t have to go as high.

ok thanks.  Par is maybe a goal, but it shouldn't be.

It could also be seen as a limiting concept as well.

I stick by my argument and don't concur about the tee thing at all.  Unless PAR is the goal.  I'm saying it only is accepted because it is there and always has been, with all due respect all I hear when you explain your point of view, is how ingrained it is in a golfer's mentality.

You'll be happy to know - as a guy who also coached basketball for years and years - I have this same exact discussion about goal height and court size and why on earth kids and NBA would be asked to play on the same court with same goal height. (they aren't identical but close enough) NBA would get better with higher rims and wider courts.  

 

What I will absolutely agree with you on ....... as it stands par is a measuring stick and it is our job as golfers to try and get as near it up or down of it, as we can.  But I think, as stated, it is a negative to cause worse scores and that works on the better end also, it can serve like a depth in the ocean that is hard to push below (lower scores) and cause some to seek less pressure depths at all costs.  But I'm sorry to say - it is absolutely an arbitrary number.   If it were not, it would have decimal points abound.  Some holes are more of a par 4.5 than a 4 or a 5 and others even a par 5.8 etc .......  

We may  not agree and that's fine - thanks for the 2 cents! And the suggestions on clubs to check out the other day - I've been really digging into the old nike hybrids just in case.

[DaveP043]

5 hours ago, Badams69 said:

I'm fine with par personally and accept it. What I don't like as someone who teaches golf, consumes golf and enjoys golf ... is the existence of this element in our sport that hurts people in their pursuit of playing it their best.

Why does anyone need it? It's does NOT help anything.

As others have said, par is simply a standard, a measuring stick.  If golfers of lesser ability find it constricting, and I do accept that many do, they need to learn to conquer that.  Getting beyond par to better shot planning is a tool for a golfer to learn, just as increasing distance is a tool, learning to hit a draw is a tool, learning the Rules of golf is a tool.  For better or worse, many players choose to work on the physical but not on the mental or intellectual parts of the game.

What do you propose as an alternative?  Scorecards with only the yardage on them?  How would you revise the handicap system?  I don't see par as the problem, its a problem that each individual player needs work through in his (or her) quest to become a better player.

Oh, you might add to your list of good references Lowest Score Wins, another book based on Broadie's Strokes Gained research and concepts.