No.

Cool. I'll tell my friend he's an idiot

Meeting up with Nxt this afternoon for a round of golf. Thinking I might get cruuuuushed

sweep his leg

100 foot putts hu4rollz?

Gave myself way too many straight putts that resulted in 3 putts. Just a horrific display of putting with UCB despite hitting the ball okay.

Had a good time with him today, he played pretty good himself and got to experience some deep bunkers that they apparently don't have in Ohio

UCB, deeper than scarlet bunkers?

Hopefully they were uphillers at least. Those are the easy ones!

He was in one that probably had a 7-9 foot face. We have a few that are 10ish feet and one or 2 that can be like 15 feet.

It's not a really long course, more of a 2nd shot golf course and if you miss in the wrong spots Pete Dye screws you really hard.

What course did you guys play at?

Speaking of games between different HCs, we play the following variant:

We play high/low and the HC differential between the twosomes applies towards the lowest HC holes (ie HC holes 1-5 if there is a 5 diff), but only applies to the higher of the high-low scores. For instance, if team A has 3-4 and team B has 3-4 but gets a pop, then team B gets a bean.

We play KP on 3 pars (only if KP actually pars), sandies (up and down for par from green side sand), sandzies (birdie from fairway sand), and barkies (hitting wood and still making par). All of these are in addition to the team scores on the hole.

Winner buys drinks in the clubhouse, and our group typically plays for $1 per point. Coughs are encouraged. The tightwad strategy is to lose by one point to get a cheap beer.

I'm curious what other variants are played...what's your game?

Fun pic from the day. #17 - Par 3 that is 185 yards.



Course was pretty amazing - definitely a change from what I'm accustom to back in Ohio. I've yet to play more than 9 holes at Scarlet (and it was years ago) so I can't comment on whether the bunkers were deeper or not.

Three things I learned though from Nxt:

1. My driver fitting was pretty good. He complimented the ball flight of my driver.

2. Nxt hits his whole bag higher than I hit my lob wedge

3. Nxt knows way too much about golf. Way too much...

Also - reminiscing about the good old days of online poker is always fun with someone else who experienced it.

wow, that's a pretty daunting hole!



Last night I hit up the driving range and had a total melt down. The hitch that I thought was gone came back in full force. I was shanking, thinning, fatting, slicing almost every shot. I have a lesson tonight with my pro and we've certainly got some stuff to work on. ungh

Why aren't Par 5s harder? I always hear about risk/reward,but that's basically a bunch of crap. The scoring averages on par 5s always make them the easiest holes. If I were designing courses, I would try and make my par 5s have the same stroke average relative to par as the 4s and 3s. Doesn't mean make them all 3 shotters because that is obviously boring, but maybe find a way to design a hole that is truly risk reward where it's either a tough 3 shot hole, an easy birdie/eagle chance if you pull off a great 2nd, or a bogey/double bogey if you don't pull it off.

You're not considering the average golfer, you're simply thinking about how good players pay them.

Sure, to a good player the par 5's are the easiest in relation to par. But to a bad player, they are the most difficult. Main reason is there's more shots to **** up. Par 3's are the easiest for a bad player for that reason. And that's precisely why the #18 handicap hole is almost always a par 3 and the #1 handicap hole a par 5. Doesn't apply at all to a good player though so you're not going to be able to design that course you'd like for all players.

BO

That is wrong, BO.

Average strokes on a par 5 (for a bad or good player) will be a lower % over par than average strokes on a par 3 (for a bad or good player).

If a par 3 averages 3.9 and a par 5 averages 6.1 the par 3 is harder, even though it's only .9 strokes over par compared to 1.1

Because it's scoring almost 33% over par while the par 5 is scoring just over 20% over par.

Pretty sure it has everything to do with the short game.

This is just another example of you trying to separate yourself from the peasants ("Well, for GOOD golfers par 5s are easier but for the rest of you guys longer = harder I guess")

This is ridiculous.

Here are my stats:

Par
3: 53% over par
4: 45% over par
5: 36% over par

OOBGolf data:
Par
3: 33% over par
4: 30% over par
5: 22% over par

The longer holes might be "harder" aggregate but certainly not relative.

I know what you are saying, though. It's always kind of 'bothered" me that the par 5s are known as the "scoring" holes and the 3s you try to hang on to par. But par is just a name. If they wanted to get specific they could call this hole a par 3.2 or this hole a par 4.9... who cares.

Also, they can probably get the holes to average around par simply by manipulating the hole location. Easy hole? Stick the pin on a ridge. Tuck it. Harder to do this with holes that play tough but they could do this if they wanted. The problem is then you toe the line between meeting some goal that doesn't really matter and providing a fair golf hole. It would be absurd to hit a par 5 under regulation but 3 putt because the hole is tucked and on a ridge or a slope that slopes off the back of the green or something absurd and you're afraid to go past the hole.

I laughed a couple years ago when noted crybaby Bubba Watson was COMPLAINING after his round because he couldn't even reach the par 5 with D/D. It's like... dude... it's a ****ing PAR 5 BRO. What an idiot. I forget where it was but it was over 650 yards I think. If Bubba can't reach it it's definitely a true 3-shot hole for the Tour.

To quote Johnny Mac, YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS!!

You're really going to measure over/under par based on percentages? Instead of the actual strokes over/under? Oh my holy crap.

Take a look at a scorecard, any scorecard, and look at the handicap holes. The par 5's are in the harder half, the par 3's are in the easier half. The majority of the time the par 3's are always 15-18.

While I'm nearly certain this post was made for the sole purpose of getting under my skin, I'll simply say this. You are wrong. It has nothing to do with ability, it has nothing to do with how long you've been involved in golf. It has everything to do with the fact you are wrong.

Cliffs - you are wrong.

BO

this was the first time I can say Bo made a really good point.

Cmon BO this really makes sense. If you score a 5 on a par four that is 125% of par but a 6 on a par 5 is 120% of par and 125 > 120 so obviously all par 4s, when bogied, are harder than all par 5s when bogied.

But when you birdie it, 75% < 80% so when birdied a par 4 is easier than a par 5. It's math. Basic stuff really.

Excellent level.

BO

I would show you the math for eagles and double bogies but I don't want to blow your ****ing mind.

I actually think the best holes for tournaments are ones that average something like X.5 .. Like if a par 5 averages 4.5. It seems like an easy hole. If a player doesn't make a 4, he feels like he's giving away a stroke to the field.

Aren't hole handicappings done in relation to a scratch golfer (and not par)?

So while you might be right that the disparity between how much worse a bad players players par 5s than par 3s is greater than how much worse a good golfer plays par 5s than par 3s, it isn't enough to answer his question.

Because at any skill level, the par 5s are easier than the par 3s in relation to par. You are pointing out a difference but it's not enough to satisfy his question. It's just enough to make you feel better than worse golfers by making it an "us" vs. "them" question - which it's not. It's a short game vs. long game question first and foremost. After that, relative skill level also might factor in.