This is just plain wrong, ARC. Sorry to disappoint, but the way they handicap holes actually takes into account the average golfer. I think you have something in your mind about slope vs. rating, are are mis-applying it to this debate, which isn't really a debate.

Like 4 different arguments are being conflated by inference.

BO is judging a hole's hardness by total strokes over par.
I'm judging a hole's hardness by total % over par.
BO is positing that there is some inflection point in skill level wherein the relative difficulties of par 3s versus par 5s changes. (Par 5s are easier than par 3s for good players/par 3s are easier than par 5s for bad players. The inflection point is some point where we go from "good" to "bad")
I am saying there is no inflection point. Disparities in the curves certainly exist but there is no inflection point if you are judging a hole by % over par (if you go that route).

The USGA handicapping is definitely flawed, ARC could just be pointing out another problem.

But we keep score by an aggregate number of strokes throughout a round. If we kept score by taking an average of what our relative percent was to par across all holes, maybe you'd have an argument.

I'm not saying your math is wrong. I'm saying your argument is wrong and there is no reason to look at it that way.


I suspect you will take the part where I said "you're right, if you look at it that way, you're correct" and chalk that up as a win, but you're completely wrong in thinking that to begin with. No one in the history of golf ever finished a round and told his buddy "I shot 33% over today"

Whoever made that stat tracking database you pulled your data from obviously doesn't know anything about golf to include that box.

When I was a newer golfer I know for sure that par 5s were among the hardest holes for me.

Anyway, I went for a lesson last night as our spring sessions were starting to wear off and I was resorting back to old habits. My pro quickly pointed out that I had stopped moving my hips on the backswing again; I actually went 5-7 frames with absolutely no hip movement from when my hands were knee high in the backswing. This is what is leading to the little loop-de-loop or hitch that I've developed. It gets worse the longer club I go to (with the exception of driver for some reason, that's a whole different swing for me and it's money) so we jumped right into 4 irons off the deck to work on a better motion. After he got me moving my hips around instead of sliding back with them I started really hitting the ball better. The curve wasn't exactly what we were looking for, but I was taking better divots and getting the ball up in the air nicely so it was a huge improvement.
I'm playing one of the best courses in Toronto this weekend so hoping I don't go in there with too many swing thoughts in my head now.

I'm a 4.2 handicap right now and my scoring averages are as follows:
4.72 on par 4s
5.67 on par 5s
3.68 on par 3s

I think this is a bit skewed for me though as the vast majority of my scores are at one course with 3 par 5s, where 2 out of the 3 are legitimately tough holes (one of them...#11 at Mira Vista is perfectly designed in my opinion like my optimal par 5).

I think the handicap rankings are a joke. I think the #18 handicap at Mira Vista is a 230 yard par 3 with a creek on the left and OB right, and surrounded by bunkers. I've literally considered the pros/cons to laying up with a 4 iron (which only goes 185 for my non-pro ass.)

Maybe I should have clarified. While I appreciate designing a course for all level of players, my beef is how the par 5s play for a good player. I mean, if we were really designing for higher handicaps, we'd just call a normal par 5 a par 7. Like you said, just forcing a player to hit more shots creates more variability, and therefore difficulty for the higher handicaps.

I don't think my theoretical design of a 530 yard reachable par 5 which is extremely tight and full of danger, but still easily bridieable (or whatever...), really hurts the high handicapper, who is playing for pars and bogeys anyway.

And just to address the "par doesn't matter" argument I'm sure will be advanced by someone, I get it, but just don't buy that. We score the game in relation to par, so it simply does matter. Even if I shoot a "79" at Mira Vista, I think of it as clearly better than a 79 at River Crest, because River Crest is a par 70 and Mira Vista is a par 71. (It's also a much tougher course but that's not the point).

Spotts: I got a second huge endorsement for Osprey Valley and me and a buddy are heading up there either this Tuesday or Thursday to try their $160 unlimited golf deal. Really looking forward to it.

Oh man, you're going to love it! Don't let the dusty, unpaved parking lot or the mediocre clubhouse get to you when you check in. You have just pulled to heaven and you'll realize it when you see the range!

Btw, I think they consider Thursday a "weekend" for their all-you-can-play deal, so Tuesday may be the better choice. Either way, it's a great deal. I played 3.5 rounds there on the special once, so it worked out to about $40 a round.

I'm playing Eagle's Nest Sunday morning, followed up by Muskoka Bay x 2 Wednesday and then Black Bear Ridge the following Saturday. Stacked line up imo.

Of course not. But if you shot "10%" over par lets say you shot a 79. That 79 can feel different if you played the par 3s at -1 and the par 5s at +4 or something than playing the par 3s at +2 and the par 5s at +1. I'd expect the player of the former round to tell someone, if asked, that they played the par 3s in -1. Because that is very good - especially for shooting a 79.

I'm not sure what your second comment means. I just saw it on oobgolf so I mentioned it. It's got average scoring across the site for par3/4/5. You can post whatever data you have.

As far as myself the par 3's typically make or break my round. My home course 2 weeks ago I was +12 on the par 3's. The week after I got that down to +1 and I ended up breaking 90. For myself the par 3's are what I count on to help my round.

No. Done correctly, the number one handicap hole is the one with the biggest difference in a scratch golfers average scores and a bogey golfers scores.

It's not a measure of objective difficulty, it's where the bogey golfer most needs a handicap stroke.

A par 4 where the scratch averages 4.0 and the bogey averages 5.0 is ranked more difficult than a par 4 with a 4.5 and 5.25 average.

Yes, that's how I understand it. That's what I meant but I was lazy in wording. By "in relation to a scratch golfer" I meant they use the scratch as the base. But I should have added that they then compare it to a worse golfer and the larger the difference the harder the handicap of the hole. But I didn't because I think most people already know that.

The point is BO's point of the par 5s being the harder handicap holes does not help prove his point that par 5s are easier than 3s only for good players. It suggests different drop-offs based on skill level but I still contend that the par 5s are easier, no matter how good you are, than the par 3s.

He just saw a potential opportunity to remind everyone that he is on one side of the golf spectrum and all the peons are on the other side.

Just from playing with my dad who is probably a 24 handicap or so, Id be in the camp that the par 5s are far more difficult for him than the par 3s. I really dont see how the par 5s for legit bad golfers could be easier than par 3s. I definitely think par 5s are much easier for scratch golfers than par 3s are. I have no numbers to back any of this up, just experience with playing with my dad on a regular basis for the past 10 years and then playing with my friends who are relatively good.

Same here. When i was a newer golfer I can pretty much remember par 5's going like this; top/duff a driver, try to hit a hero shot with a 3 wood and top it, smarten up and hit a few 7 irons until I get near the green, hit a chip or two, a putt or two and make double. That was pretty much my par 5 story for a few years.

My last 146 rounds as per OOB golf:

Index: 6.9

Par 3 avg: 3.49
Par 4 avg: 4.55
Par 5 avg: 5.26

So par 4s are the worst for me relative to par (absolute value ARC, not talking percentages).

I do significantly better on par 5s, but I'm kind of a beast.

So you'd make between a 7 and a 9 and mark down double? lol.

What did your par 3s look like? From the sound of your striking on the 5s I doubt you were hitting many greens at all, and with 2-4+ chips+putts ... not to mention water balls, unplayables, bunker shots, etc. (though water is a smaller issue on par 3s than on 5s).

Anyway the anecdotal stuff doesn't matter when there are data to actually look at.

Need to post this somewhere to vent my frustration and hopefully stay optimistic.

A few weeks ago, I strained an intercostal muscle (muscle that expands/contracts between your ribs) when I was on the range over-swinging, and it took me about 2.5-3 weeks to get back on the course. I shot a 35 on the front 9 the day it happened, and came back with a 39 after the intermission. My good play resulted in the decision to register in the Delaware Amateur Qualifier, which was to be held June 2. It turns out that once I started ramping up my practice, my swing experienced a load of problems, which was to be expected after taking a few weeks off. Nonetheless, I was confident in my chances to qualify, even though I've had some pretty epic collapses in DSGA qualifiers over the years.

Now, it turns out that there weren't enough entrants in the qualifier to warrant a tournament with a proper cut, so the DSGA decided to transfer everyone who was registered into the Amateur itself. Hooray! I'm finally going to get the chance to play in this tournament, and I was becoming more and more confident with my swing over the past week.

Then, we arrive at yesterday. Out on the range again, I feel something similar to the tweak I felt in late April when my intercostal was strained for the first time. Ready to go out for a 4:00 round, I decided to try and loosen up a bit more and see if the pain would go away. Alas, it only got worse and I was forced to quit after two holes. It turns out that I've strained the same damn muscle, and will have a good 2-3 weeks before I can swing a club again.

The Delaware Amateur is scheduled for June 24-26 (with 36 holes to be played the first day), so whether or not I can play is truly going to come down to the wire. I did try to hit balls a week too soon when it happened before, so I'm hoping to avoid such a setback this time. If I am lucky enough to give it a try, I'll probably have two days to get my swing in gear. I'm going to take the weekend off and start putting in some heavy short game work on Monday, but it's pretty frustrating that I might not be able to play in a tournament that I was prepared to go really hard at preparing for. I guess the moral of the story is not to play too much or rush back too fast. Still, hopefully rest and ice will do the trick.

If anyone is experienced with this type of injury or has any rehab ideas, please share.

SS

Squats brah it'll strengthen your core

I just had the exact same thing. Muscles between my ribs were very sore to the touch. Ice, ibuprofen, and rest. Then just making sure I'm warmed up and stretched out before my round.

I have come to really enjoy the ARC experience. The probably intentional misreading/misreporting of other poster's comments and the dogged determination to introduce wrong headed approaches to settled processes coupled with a deeply held belief in the rightness of each opinion set forth as gospel.

Wasn't this one of Paul Casey's injuries from a few years ago?

I like ARC's posts. He's often wrong about things but some of one-liners are pure gold.

So I see everybody else agrees that par 5's are more difficult for newer golfers. I also have to assume that ARC is the only one still jabbering on about how that's not the case.

So the rest of us should be quite comfortable on our side of this debate that's really not a debate.

BO

You don't see too well. And this isn't what the actual data shows. The average oobgolf'er is not a good golfer.

I'm not "jabbering on". I stated that you are wrong, showed data proving why, and am now lying down being fed grapes by half naked toga-adorned women. You slanked away from the thread for like an entire day.

I'm right, you're wrong. But take solace in the undisputed fact that you are a better golfer than me.

Really excited to play tomorrow with what is now a nagging injury to my left ankle. But I'm not Lebron, I'll fight through it, it only hurts when I'm swinging a golf club, so it shouldn't be an issue. Feels like I broke something, the back swing is the worst.