Why we don't make birdies

[bvdisc]

There is a nice piece from the NYTimes on why ball golfers miss their birdy putts more often then par putts. It totally applies to disc golf. Anyway, for those who are interested here's the link:

Why we miss stupid putts (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/16/sports/golf/16study.html?hpw)

[snap7times]

so true so true

[Joshua Olmsted]

I feel like I do this at least once a round at Pier, I'll miss all the 30 foot birdies but put me on a big par save and the pressure forces a good putt out of me.:slapface:

[Chuck Kennedy]

According to this study, the way to improve scores would be to lower the listed pars on the holes. What we now have for par 3s become par 2s and par 4s become 3s, etc. Then, you would putt better to avoid a "bogey" 3 on a par 2...:headbang: :shocked:

[TreeLove]

Pure genius! (I have tried telling myself a birdie putt is actually for par, but as Justin Leonard put it, "you can't fool yourself.")

[Wes Hansen]

I shall apply this tonight at LL league. It will be my first time playing a par two course!

[Wes Hansen]

Perhaps John Daly has only been trying to find a way to forget what par is.

[REDFIVE]

This makes sence for sure. When you throw a good drive you are relieved and not as concerned with the next shot at that moment because you accomplished your goal for the shot. If you were to throw a bad shot you get a little down or feel a sence of panic. This creates more focus on the next shot or more thought about the hole ingeneral. If you throw an up shot that doesn't make it into your gimme zone the same process takes place. Focus and a sense of urgency take over. There is more time to get ready for the par putt.

I am not sure ithat changing the par will translate to disc golf as well as it would help ball golfers since we deal mostly with par threes. It will be fun to try the next time I play though. Good article.

[Scott]

The problem I seem to have with clutch putts is failure to take advantage of my opponent's slip-up, regardless of whether it's for par or birdie. If I'm playing match (either tourney or bag tag) and I see my opponent is about to bogey (or worse) I tend to choke away the opportunity.

I think the concept of this article applies - Subconsiously I know that I can miss a putt and not lose any ground. :headbang:

[T-what?]

Great article! :biggrin2:

[Trozzle!!!]

I have always had a problem with people getting upset about what Par is on a hole. Saying, "This hole should be a par 4, not a Par 3". Like 13 and 18 at Hornings Canyon course.

This line from that article is how I feel on that subject.

Of course, it makes no sense at all: each stroke counts as one on a scorecard, whether for eagle or triple-bogey on any particular hole. The goal is to finish with the fewest strokes, regardless of what each might be artificially termed.

Too many people get hung up on what Par is on a hole. Sure you may have had more birdies than your opponents, but you also had more double bogies, triple bogies....Having more birdies than the others doesnt mean you always win!!!

[REDFIVE]

After every round or practice session I make myself make three 35-40 foot putts in a row before I am allowed to be done for the day. the first two usually seam to be fairly tame but the third and final putt has preasure all over it. Especially if I had made the first two right off the bat. Pick a distance that pushes you but is something reasonable. If 15 footers are your gimmes move to 20-25. Don't set yourself up for failure.

I also like to see how many gimmes in a row I can make. I will set a goal and stand 20-25 away and go until I miss. The closer to my goal I get the more preasure is created. Use the preasure to create focus. From doing this I have a much easier time moving past the idea of how important the putt is and just going through my routine to calm myself before I bang the center of the chains.

Putting is the shnit!

[TYVEK]

I have always had a problem with people getting upset about what Par is on a hole. Saying, "This hole should be a par 4, not a Par 3". Like 13 and 18 at Hornings Canyon course.

This line from that article is how I feel on that subject.

Of course, it makes no sense at all: each stroke counts as one on a scorecard, whether for eagle or triple-bogey on any particular hole. The goal is to finish with the fewest strokes, regardless of what each might be artificially termed.

Too many people get hung up on what Par is on a hole. Sure you may have had more birdies than your opponents, but you also had more double bogies, triple bogies....Having more birdies than the others doesnt mean you always win!!!


I always get upset that there are 500+ ft holes that are called par 3! I get upset when people say that all holes should be par three just so that they dont have to test out there mathmatic skills. it is time to step up to the real world and make course par what they realy are instead of just slapping a 3 on it. if an average pro cant put their drive within 50-75 feet of the basket, then it should be a par 4 hole. par does matter.

[ChUcK]

The problem is not that suggested par limits are unrealistic. The problem is that the concept of "hole par" exists at all. It just shouldn't matter, but we convince ourselves and everyone around us that it does. Course pars (SSA, or something similar) make sense, and are a great way to compare skill levels across the board.

I'm going to find the guy who first introduced the concept of hole-par and make him pay for all my missed birdie opps.

Scorecard math is still just as easy no matter what the hole-pars are listed as. Simply add up any scorecard as if the holes were all par-3, and add/subtract from 54 like you always do. Or, add it all up as if every hole was a par five, then add or subtract from 90.

Nice find, BVD. I might like reading this paper they're writing, but I suspect it will be a tad full of statistical jargon, and not as exciting as watching Tiger putt.

[REDFIVE]

Par is irrelivent if a three is more like a four it is the same for the whole field. It still effects the scores in the same way it just doesn't look as good on the card. A three may gain you some strokes on the field and is just as good as a bird. Come play sumner meadows this winter we have some fours and fives for ya!

[Garrett]

As a noob still, I have to admit that I still look at each hole as an individual goal, to either meet par or beat the par and not looking at the entire round as the goal. In due time I'll be changing that and probably should sooner than later, as well, *start keeping score!*, which we haven't been really doing yet.

[bvdisc]

I totally agree the concept of "par" is a construct that messes people up. For those who say that par matters then you're making it matter. The concept of par is just a construct to help us talk about scores. A stroke is a stroke whether it's for two, three or four on a hole. If you can learn to leave the concept of par behind you'll be better for it.

The one place that par is useful is in talking about your score, you can say I shot a one up instead of a 55. Other then that it doesn't matter.

The problem is not that suggested par limits are unrealistic. The problem is that the concept of "hole par" exists at all. It just shouldn't matter, but we convince ourselves and everyone around us that it does. Course pars (SSA, or something similar) make sense, and are a great way to compare skill levels across the board.

I'm going to find the guy who first introduced the concept of hole-par and make him pay for all my missed birdie opps.

Scorecard math is still just as easy no matter what the hole-pars are listed as. Simply add up any scorecard as if the holes were all par-3, and add/subtract from 54 like you always do. Or, add it all up as if every hole was a par five, then add or subtract from 90.

Nice find, BVD. I might like reading this paper they're writing, but I suspect it will be a tad full of statistical jargon, and not as exciting as watching Tiger putt.

[Joshua Olmsted]

I'll chime in, as I always do when the par discussion comes up and say this. Saying that par "messes everyone up" or "is completely irrelevant" is silly, it may mess YOU up, or may be irrelevant for YOU. just because par might mess you up doesn't mean others don't appreciate the idea and incorporate it into their game. I believe having pars other than three will hopefully encourage more course design that has longer holes, and a number of players like to have par set, even if it is irrelevant, if you hate the concept of pars, ignore it, but it doesn't mean that everyone should as well.

[Chuck Kennedy]

I'm going to find the guy who first introduced the concept of hole-par and make him pay for all my missed birdie opps.

http://www.popeofslope.com/courserating/par4.html