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

[revkev]

1 hour ago, bAdams69 said:

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

Of course, modern touring pros ignore the pre-prescribed ways to play holes all the time - only in reverse - they try to drive par 4's and hit it on par 5's in 2. 

 

My current golf league assigns tees played strictly by age.  Suddenly I have the chance to knock it on the green on two of the par 5's - I used to be able to do that from the tips and could do it from the whites (regular men's) up until 5 years ago or so.  I bemoaned the fact that I couldn't do it anymore even though I could easily play both holes with a driver, a 7 wood and a wedge - that's really not that tough an ask.  So far I haven't put it on either green but I've been around the green three of the four times I've played them - the other time I laid up because I was concerned that I couldn't hit my 4 wood high enough to get over a tree that was on my line - 

 

Left a very comfortable 103 yard gap wedge that I knocked to 6 feet and made birdie on - go figure.  

[Badams69]

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: 

 

[Badams69]

6 minutes ago, revkev said:

Of course, modern touring pros ignore the pre-prescribed ways to play holes all the time - only in reverse - they try to drive par 4's and hit it on par 5's in 2. 

 

My current golf league assigns tees played strictly by age.  Suddenly I have the chance to knock it on the green on two of the par 5's - I used to be able to do that from the tips and could do it from the whites (regular men's) up until 5 years ago or so.  I bemoaned the fact that I couldn't do it anymore even though I could easily play both holes with a driver, a 7 wood and a wedge - that's really not that tough an ask.  So far I haven't put it on either green but I've been around the green three of the four times I've played them - the other time I laid up because I was concerned that I couldn't hit my 4 wood high enough to get over a tree that was on my line - 

 

Left a very comfortable 103 yard gap wedge that I knocked to 6 feet and made birdie on - go figure.  

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

[Badams69]

9 minutes ago, revkev said:

Of course, modern touring pros ignore the pre-prescribed ways to play holes all the time - only in reverse - they try to drive par 4's and hit it on par 5's in 2. 

 

My current golf league assigns tees played strictly by age.  Suddenly I have the chance to knock it on the green on two of the par 5's

 

 

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.

[revkev]

Another discussion that could go here is player comfort level with scoring relative to par. I know guys who are aware that they need x on 9 or 18 to shoot x - they’ve even added scores up on the card waiting to put that last number in.

 

My last two league scores were 37,38 75.  I short a 77 at my club last Sunday afternoon. The 75 was a  8.4 differential. The 77 a 5.3.  Which was the better round? 
 

Relative to par the 3 over 75.  For handicap purposes it was the 77 by a long shot. It lowered my index from 8.5 to 8.0

[revkev]

6 hours ago, bAdams69 said:

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

Honestly around 100 was the closest I could get safely - I had about a 40 foot high tree blocking my path to the green with a grove of trees around 20 feet high behind it - My normal ball flight is a draw and that tree was just right of the target, exactly where I needed to start the ball to reach the green.  I could have tried to hit a cut around it but I don't cut the ball well and even had I pulled it off I could easily have caught one of those trees up by the green and been toast.  I hit an 8 iron way right, far right part of the fairway - it went 140 according to shot scope - 5 yards farther and I was in the rough - I suppose I could have tried to hit a sling hook with 7 wood that could have gotten closer - I could also have over hooked it into a fairway trap 50 yards short of the green or blocked it right into the deeper rough.

 

I did what csnoil or any one else would recommend and chose a shot that I had a 90 percent chance of pull off to the closest point that I could get to the green - the other 3 balls that were around the green in 2 ended up in tough places - one in a trap (I stink at traps - hit a reasonable shot but still have 20 feet) and the other two just in bad lies - it's way too small a sample size - I would have hit the same clubs if I had the same shots all over again.  I'd hope to not hit the 4 wood a little chunky like the one that ended up in the trap.

[Badams69]

3 hours ago, revkev said:

Another discussion that could go here is player comfort level with scoring relative to par. I know guys who are aware that they need x on 9 or 18 to shoot x - they’ve even added scores up on the card waiting to put that last number in.

 

My last two league scores were 37,38 75.  I short a 77 at my club last Sunday afternoon. The 75 was a  8.4 differential. The 77 a 5.3.  Which was the better round? 
 

Relative to par the 3 over 75.  For handicap purposes it was the 77 by a long shot. It lowered my index from 8.5 to 8.0

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

[Stuka44]

On 6/24/2023 at 2:58 PM, Badams69 said:

Therein lies the arbitrary nature, to me.

I came across this late, just wanted to give you my take.  In all fairness I did not read every post.  I believe you are 100% correct, and it is IMO one of the things that hurts the game in some ways.

First of all for all but 1-3% of ALL people who will ever play this game, PAR is a number that represents fantasy.  It is not a realistic number for 90 % of anyone who will play golf to base their manner of play on.  "I have to learn to hit driver"  "If I want to par the hole I HAVE to hit driver off the tee".  This leads to frustration and people having WOEFULLY unrealistic expectations when they play.

The idea of par, leads to slow play.  Golfers slow down, and grind more and more, as their score goes up on a hole, above that mythical PAR NUMBER, FOR EACH HOLE.  You are correct, the number PAR 3, compels most people who have no control over a 4 iron lets say, to hit that club, because 2 on it is BIRDIE, and 3 is a PAR, and by God this is the club that will reach the green.  PAR says "anything less and you are a failure".  Which is why SOOOOO many golfers continue to hit clubs "THEY SIMPLY CAN NOT HIT", and make decisions, and try shots that they have almost no chance of pulling off which leads to much higher scores for them.

Any I will disagree with Cnosil again. PAR  and hitting golf balls as far as you can toward a hole to make PAR is not relative to most golfers.  Someone shooting 120 + for 18 holes  I'm sorry is not better trying to hit a 3 wood on a second shot, on a par 5 when they only get it off the ground one out of 15 swings, than they are hitting 2 7 irons which they get off the ground 80% of the time.

How much different would golfers, ESPECIALLY BAD ONES, approach the game if  they were not PUMMELED with the COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC PAR NUMBERS, on the scorecard, on the hole signs.  How about a course where you showed up, and the scorecard listed.   

MAXIMUM SCORE 126

Hole #1... 330 yards....Maximum score 7.

Hole #2.... 460 yards... Maximum score 8

Hole #3...   190 yards  Maximum score 6

I agree, the idea of PAR, does have negative effects. 

 

[cnosil]

1 hour ago, Stuka44 said:

 

Any I will disagree with Cnosil again. PAR  and hitting golf balls as far as you can toward a hole to make PAR is not relative to most golfers.  Someone shooting 120 + for 18 holes  I'm sorry is not better trying to hit a 3 wood on a second shot, on a par 5 when they only get it off the ground one out of 15 swings, than they are hitting 2 7 irons which they get off the ground 80% of the time.

 

It’s not about PAR, it is about dong what it takes to get the lowest score.  

We don’t disagree; If the player can only get 3 wood off the ground 1 out of 15 times that wouldn’t be the club they can advance the farthest or that would optimize their ability to score the lowest they can.   Although we could say that If they get their sand wedge off the ground 95% of the time they should hit 6 sand wedges instead of 2 7 irons.  

[Badams69]

5 hours ago, Stuka44 said:

I came across this late, just wanted to give you my take.  In all fairness I did not read every post.  I believe you are 100% correct, and it is IMO one of the things that hurts the game in some ways.

First of all for all but 1-3% of ALL people who will ever play this game, PAR is a number that represents fantasy.  It is not a realistic number for 90 % of anyone who will play golf to base their manner of play on.  "I have to learn to hit driver"  "If I want to par the hole I HAVE to hit driver off the tee".  This leads to frustration and people having WOEFULLY unrealistic expectations when they play.

The idea of par, leads to slow play.  Golfers slow down, and grind more and more, as their score goes up on a hole, above that mythical PAR NUMBER, FOR EACH HOLE.  You are correct, the number PAR 3, compels most people who have no control over a 4 iron lets say, to hit that club, because 2 on it is BIRDIE, and 3 is a PAR, and by God this is the club that will reach the green.  PAR says "anything less and you are a failure".  Which is why SOOOOO many golfers continue to hit clubs "THEY SIMPLY CAN NOT HIT", and make decisions, and try shots that they have almost no chance of pulling off which leads to much higher scores for them.

Any I will disagree with Cnosil again. PAR  and hitting golf balls as far as you can toward a hole to make PAR is not relative to most golfers.  Someone shooting 120 + for 18 holes  I'm sorry is not better trying to hit a 3 wood on a second shot, on a par 5 when they only get it off the ground one out of 15 swings, than they are hitting 2 7 irons which they get off the ground 80% of the time.

How much different would golfers, ESPECIALLY BAD ONES, approach the game if  they were not PUMMELED with the COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC PAR NUMBERS, on the scorecard, on the hole signs.  How about a course where you showed up, and the scorecard listed.   

MAXIMUM SCORE 126

Hole #1... 330 yards....Maximum score 7.

Hole #2.... 460 yards... Maximum score 8

Hole #3...   190 yards  Maximum score 6

I agree, the idea of PAR, does have negative effects. 

 

thanks for chiming in!!!! 

lot of good points and I think you already know I would agree with most all!

I will say that cnosil's phrasing does have the caveat about advance as far as possible ...... caveat being "to increase chances of lower scores" or something to that effect.   Which then would agree with you ....... if 7 iron is that club which reliably does so, then that's the qualifer.

Find the max score listing an interesting concept.    It is maybe worth considering the original way golf was played, where there was simply no such thing as "par".

I listed it somewhere in the sea of long winded responses, but golf played without prior to 1911, still exceeds the years played since.  And PAR was instituted in 1911.

It just encourages dumb golf, for all other things it may be used for positive, it still has that effect.

 

[JohnToulupe]

Hey Badams69, I couldn't agree more with your take on PAR in golf. It's fascinating how that little number can mess with our minds and impact our decisions on the course. Your examples of players going for the green on long par 3s instead of playing smart are spot on.
I've fallen into that trap myself, trying to match PAR and ending up with higher scores. It's like we're programmed to chase that elusive goal, even when it might not be the best strategy.
Also, I would personally recommend checking out this 24-hour mental health hotline. Taking care of our mental well-being is crucial both on and off the golf course.

Edited August 8, 2023 by JohnToulupe

[ShimmyCocoBop]

On 6/23/2023 at 3:22 PM, DaveP043 said:

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

I read "Lowest Score Wins"  a long time ago and thought it was a great book until the part where they tell you how to swing.  

Their mechanics were similar to "Stack & Tilt / 5 Simple Keys" and were very sound, but I wanted more of the mental/strategic/philosophical understanding.

 

[GolferXY]

I agree with your general point that [if I interpret correctly] par creates perhaps unrealistic expectations and a mental hurdle for most golfers and often colors how we choose to play a hole to get par rather than playing to minimize total number of strokes per 18.  Par breaks the game into individual holes, but in most scoring systems it is total strokes that determine success for the round, not whether we parred a certain number of holes along the way.

However, such is not true for professionals, especially those televised tournaments where drama is entertaining and sought out by sponsors, advertisers, and announcers.  In that pro scenario, every hole is a chance for drama and an easy way to compare golfers during competition that lasts 4 hours a day for 4 days.

Likewise, there are certain secondary games that benefit from the tradition of tracking scores on individual holes, Yes Phil Mickelson, I'm talking to you!  This tangential competition, where competitors compare scores relative to par to seek a victor on individual holes, benefits from a standardized scoring expectation.  This is not the thrust of your idea I know, but is a consideration if trying to determine the relative worth of the par as a standard of success.

Having said that, I like your mental approach and will try to incorporate it into my game in future.  A middle of the road [not fairway, alas] golfer such as myself should benefit from approaching the round as a whole rather than attempting to validate my success by individual holes.  In this way I hope to avoid crushing emotional distraction the next time I follow up a birdie with a duck hook into the woods on the next tee!

Good convo.

 

XY

 

Edited August 12, 2023 by GolferXY

[truckermaster]

It's all about creating a level playing field, right? Whether it's golf or boxing, having set rules keeps things fair and competitive. Now, onto does bruxism from ssri go away... Speaking from personal experience, I've had my fair share of ups and downs with them. While they can be a lifesaver for many dealing with mental health issues, like anything, they come with their quirks. Bruxism, for instance, can be a pesky side effect. I've had it myself, and it can be a real pain. But here's the thing: it's usually temporary. For most people, it tends to fade away as your body adjusts to the medication.

Edited April 2 by truckermaster

[THE GOLF GUY]

On 8/12/2023 at 2:07 PM, GolferXY said:

I agree with your general point that [if I interpret correctly] par creates perhaps unrealistic expectations and a mental hurdle for most golfers and often colors how we choose to play a hole to get par rather than playing to minimize total number of strokes per 18.  Par breaks the game into individual holes, but in most scoring systems it is total strokes that determine success for the round, not whether we parred a certain number of holes along the way.

However, such is not true for professionals, especially those televised tournaments where drama is entertaining and sought out by sponsors, advertisers, and announcers.  In that pro scenario, every hole is a chance for drama and an easy way to compare golfers during competition that lasts 4 hours a day for 4 days.

Likewise, there are certain secondary games that benefit from the tradition of tracking scores on individual holes, Yes Phil Mickelson, I'm talking to you!  This tangential competition, where competitors compare scores relative to par to seek a victor on individual holes, benefits from a standardized scoring expectation.  This is not the thrust of your idea I know, but is a consideration if trying to determine the relative worth of the par as a standard of success.

Having said that, I like your mental approach and will try to incorporate it into my game in future.  A middle of the road [not fairway, alas] golfer such as myself should benefit from approaching the round as a whole rather than attempting to validate my success by individual holes.  In this way I hope to avoid crushing emotional distraction the next time I follow up a birdie with a duck hook into the woods on the next tee!

Good convo.

 

XY

 

My favorite mental approach is , one shot at a time . Don’t think par , birdie or anything else when hitting your tee shot.

[GolferXY]

I have found that the best way to enjoy golf is indeed one shot at a time.  I prefer scotch.

[RickyBobby_PR]

13 hours ago, THE GOLF GUY said:

My favorite mental approach is , one shot at a time . Don’t think par , birdie or anything else when hitting your tee shot.

Agree. The score will be what it is after the hole and after the round. Control that which you can which is the shot in front of you

[rubidius]

It's fascinating how this works. There does seem to be some resistance to this idea in the thread, but hey, that's the beauty of discussions like these. As for finding ways to overcome these mental obstacles, I think it's important to take note of how legends like Hogan and Casper approached the game. They didn't let pre-prescribed norms dictate their play, and that's something we can all learn from. By the way, if you're struggling with alcohol addiction or know someone who is, finding an AA helpline can be a lifeline.

Edited May 1 by rubidius