Course Conditions

[ChrisMacG]

Originally Posted by zipper

I'm going to disagree with you on the missed hole part. I will try and get a look at the rules book, but even if it says, par + 4 and par is meant to vary I think that is a mistake.

It makes a lot of sense to me to have a missed hole scored at +4 over par, especially when there are variable pars. Everyone plays the same holes in a tournament, just not in the same order. If you know you are going to start on a par 5 hole where you have never scored less than 8 strokes on the hole, there should not be any incentive to missing the start of the tourney because you know you will only get a +2 penalty.

Originally Posted by zipper

I'm pretty confident that card assignments are alphabetical (or have typically been so). If my last name always puts me (first round) at a par 5 hole, and it always puts you on a par 3 hole, and we're late every year for this same tournament, I'm punished more severely than you simply because you're a Jubin, and I'm a Ross.

In your example you are punished +2 stokes over par for your hole and Eric is punished a +4 over par for his hole. This is exactly why it is fair to have the +4 over par rule.

And yes, it is in the rule book as +4 over par. This is why accurate par for a course is important.

[zipper]

While Eric's interpretation is correct, it still seems sloppy to me, that feeling has nothing to do with the rules as they are laid out.

The notion that a player is going to time his/her start in a tournament to take advantage of this is wacked IMO. Think about all the things that could go wrong. You're also working on the assumption that a player has simply conceded the 8 strokes, most of the players I know would never concede this. You're also talking rec players, simply based on either 7 or 8 for the most part. While technically, the point has merit, the incidence would be very low (non-existent IMO). As for the argument that every player plays every hole, well, clearly in this situation they don't and that results in an unfair situation, relatively speaking.

I posted this on the PDGA site and I like VeganRay's reply. "Showing up late should be a DQ." That solves the problem nicely.

Nonetheless, as a point of discussion, the rule as it stands is unfair, but then we've moved away from the original point. The two courses, while reasonably hard for the local fair, do not compare well to the top courses in Texas or the country. Ask someone what they think is good and tough and you get Waco, Austin courses, Dallas, but never, Tom Bass. Since the original discussion was how do we make the situation out at Tom Bass better, I still argue that long and difficult is not enough, courses that challenge all aspects of your game, with multiple tees are going to be played more and get more attention.

BTW - at this point, I think good arguments can be made that Spring Valley is in many ways better than these courses. What I hear about Winwood without seeing it suggests it is as good if not better. These courses aren't better because they are longer, but because they are more technical.

[zipper]

BTW - in order for the take advantage of the par in missing holes strategy, the player has to show up, see his hole placement, disappear till after tee off, get back to time the next hole, all without looking incredibly guilty. "No really, I couldn't get the portajohn door open..."

[Smokin' Joe]

HEY!!!!

That was going to be MY excuse! LMAO

[ERicJ]

Originally Posted by zipper

Funny, just like that you point out the problem with SSA, the TS configuration is different from the day to day configuration. The day to day for Powell, used to be SSA 51. I haven't looked at it in a couple of years. That said, you made me think about it, and I think the Willy may have been SSA 55, standard configuration. Still, I stand by my notion that I think moving these courses into a more technical configuration is a good idea. If we take TS vs. the standard layout, clearly, we are acknowledging that for an A tier we need a tougher configuration. I'm saying that our overall approach to that should be more technical for the day to day play out there. That may be selfish but that concept has been support by every Pro I've ever discussed this course with. I do concede the notion that Ams should be able to play here, hence multiple Tee placements.

SSA - I hadn't looked at them in some time and you are right, I couldn't immediately locate them. If the PDGA is going to argue that this is a concrete and usable tool in course rating and measurement, then they need to make them available clearly for every round and for standard configurations on in the ground courses. I will be sending a note to PDGA Chuck.

Redesign:
Sure I'm all for making Bass a more technical course if you have the means to do so.

TS vs. Everyday configs:
Obviously I've got a short history here, but Wilmont plays virtually the same both ways. And Powell only changes to add new holes because the temp "Tourney" course steals some of them.

SSA:
Based on four rounds played in last year's Southwest Handicap Mini the standard config of Powell is SSA ~= 52.3.

Is this the tool you're looking for to check out SSAs?
http://www.pdga.com/course-ratings-by-course
It can either get you in the ballpark of what you're looking for or confuse you greatly as there's no significant detail about the layout actually used in play. E.g. see Tom Bass.

Are you suggesting that the PDGA provide/assign SSA values to courses above and beyond sanctioned events?

[mattman]

Originally Posted by zipper

While Eric's interpretation is correct, it still seems sloppy to me, that feeling has nothing to do with the rules as they are laid out.

The notion that a player is going to time his/her start in a tournament to take advantage of this is wacked IMO. Think about all the things that could go wrong. You're also working on the assumption that a player has simply conceded the 8 strokes, most of the players I know would never concede this. You're also talking rec players, simply based on either 7 or 8 for the most part. While technically, the point has merit, the incidence would be very low (non-existent IMO). As for the argument that every player plays every hole, well, clearly in this situation they don't and that results in an unfair situation, relatively speaking.

I posted this on the PDGA site and I like VeganRay's reply. "Showing up late should be a DQ." That solves the problem nicely.

Nonetheless, as a point of discussion, the rule as it stands is unfair, but then we've moved away from the original point. The two courses, while reasonably hard for the local fair, do not compare well to the top courses in Texas or the country. Ask someone what they think is good and tough and you get Waco, Austin courses, Dallas, but never, Tom Bass. Since the original discussion was how do we make the situation out at Tom Bass better, I still argue that long and difficult is not enough, courses that challenge all aspects of your game, with multiple tees are going to be played more and get more attention.

BTW - at this point, I think good arguments can be made that Spring Valley is in many ways better than these courses. What I hear about Winwood without seeing it suggests it is as good if not better. These courses aren't better because they are longer, but because they are more technical.

with out writing a book, I would say Windwood is very pleasing on the eyes as well as spring valley. Just nice to get out in the woods. I think it would be advantageous for HFDS to do what ever it can with all the resources to maintain Tom Bass. Keep the money raised in town.

[ERicJ]

Originally Posted by zipper

I'm going to disagree with you on the missed hole part. I will try and get a look at the rules book, but even if it says, par + 4 and par is meant to vary I think that is a mistake. I'm pretty confident that card assignments are alphabetical (or have typically been so). If my last name always puts me (first round) at a par 5 hole, and it always puts you on a par 3 hole, and we're late every year for this same tournament, I'm punished more severely than you simply because you're a Jubin, and I'm a Ross.

7 strokes per hole solves that problem. I promise that if this situation every occurs, the PDGA would hear about it in the loudest possible fashion.

TD's get lazy and have used alphabetical hole assignments in the past. But technically that's not by the (rule)book. Check the rules:

Originally Posted by PDGA Rulebook

B. All players within a division for the first round should be grouped via two methods:

(1) Random grouping; players within a division may be randomly grouped for the first round and grouped by cumulative score for each round there after.

(2) Player Rating grouping; players within a division may use player rating to set first round groups. Highest rated player starting on the lowest number hole, the second highest rated player starting on the following hole, etc. This process would continue until all starting holes have been filled.

--http://www.pdga.com/rules/1-6-grouping-and-sectioning


I guess you could try to debate whether alphabetical is random, based on different players showing up, but that doesn't hold much water. A true random assignment would (most probably) have the exact same set of players starting on different holes each time.

[ERicJ]

Lyle, 7 Strokes per hole is easily justified as unfair.

Assume Avery is intended to start on hole #3: easy par 3, 255' hole on which the MPO scoring average is 2.3.

Assume Nikko is intended to start on hole #14: a tough par 5, 800' hole on which the MPO scoring average is 4.6.

Both players manage to lock themselves in portajohns and can't free themselves until 30+ seconds after their respective tee times.

In your scenario of "everyone gets a 7", Nikko is punished 2.4 stokes vs. the field, but Avery is punished 4.7 strokes vs. the field.

In the PDGA scenario of "everyone gets par + 4", Nikko is punished 4.4. strokes vs. the field, and Avery is punished 4.7 strokes vs. the field. A much more even penalty for the same offense.

[mattman]

what is the par during tournaments? Thought you guys put at 3?

I shot a heck a lot better out there on Sunday after all! Never shot even until now.

Originally Posted by ERicJ

Lyle, 7 Strokes per hole is easily justified as unfair.

Assume Avery is intended to start on hole #3: easy par 3, 255' hole on which the MPO scoring average is 2.3.

Assume Nikko is intended to start on hole #14: a tough par 5, 800' hole on which the MPO scoring average is 4.6.

Both players manage to lock themselves in portajohns and can't free themselves until 30+ seconds after their respective tee times.

In your scenario of "everyone gets a 7", Nikko is punished 2.4 stokes vs. the field, but Avery is punished 4.7 strokes vs. the field.

In the PDGA scenario of "everyone gets par + 4", Nikko is punished 4.4. strokes vs. the field, and Avery is punished 4.7 strokes vs. the field. A much more even penalty for the same offense.

[ERicJ]

Originally Posted by mattman

what is the par during tournaments? Thought you guys put at 3?

Which tournament?

Birdshot likes to use par 3 for everything. TxSDGC has used real par values for the three years that I've been involved.