Unusual Forward Tee Scenario

[Hawkeye77]

14 hours ago, Augster said:

Call it the “Men’s RED/GREEN Combo tees”. Where the only difference on the “combo” is that hole. That’s how I’d handle it anyway. 

Love this! And put up a sign that says, “If the women don’t find you handsome, they should at least find you handy!”

[Augster]

10 hours ago, rogolf said:

I still don't understand what the real issue is here, maybe the OP can explain it?  Men use men's par, ladies use ladies' par.  Surely mature adults can figure it out?

The men are using the men’s par. 70. 
 

The problem is that one hole, 13. In a men’s tourney with mixed tees, some men are playing red and some are playing green. All par 70. 
 

BUT on the 13th hole, the guys playing red are playing 40 yards back of the guys playing green, at the same par. 
 

On the other 17 holes, the guys playing red are teeing up ahead, or at the same distance, of the guys playing green. Yet, on the one hole, the guys playing red are playing 40 yards back of the green guys. At the same par. 
 

The easy fix is to “create” a combo course of red/green. They are already the same distance on many of the holes. 2,4,5,7,10,15,16. Just tee 13 from the green tees also. 
 

 

[rogolf]

2 hours ago, Augster said:

The men are using the men’s par. 70. 
 

The problem is that one hole, 13. In a men’s tourney with mixed tees, some men are playing red and some are playing green. All par 70. 
 

BUT on the 13th hole, the guys playing red are playing 40 yards back of the guys playing green, at the same par. 
 

On the other 17 holes, the guys playing red are teeing up ahead, or at the same distance, of the guys playing green. Yet, on the one hole, the guys playing red are playing 40 yards back of the green guys. At the same par. 
 

The easy fix is to “create” a combo course of red/green. They are already the same distance on many of the holes. 2,4,5,7,10,15,16. Just tee 13 from the green tees also. 
 

 

As said earlier, surely mature adults (male or female) can figure this out amongst themselves?  It’s not a major issue. Get on with it. 

[Newby]

On 3/22/2023 at 2:02 PM, DaveLeeNC said:

A couple of the guys in my regular Friday Golf group are now in their mid-80's and are considering moving up a set of tees from what historically would have been called the "Senior Tees". These are the tees that would commonly be called the 'Ladies Tees' (Red Tees) and there is actually a reason to use this name in this case. 

 

The 13th hole from the Red Tees for the ladies is a par 5 at 369 yards. But for the men this tee is a par 4. So if you are playing the Red Tees on the 13th hole (as a man) you will be playing a 369 yard par 4. If you are playing the next set of tees back (Green) you will be (on this hole) playing a 331 yard par 4. 

 

I have verified this in the GHIN app by looking at hole-by-hole scoring where you can actually see the GHIN par assignments and hole lengths. This hole (for men from the Red Tees) is 369 yards and a par 4. This is pretty unusual, IMHO. Has anyone else seen this? I don't know if the guys that I play with understand this or not. It sure surprised me. FWIW, we often play Stableford so this will be a pretty tough hole for these guys (driver landing area is uphill). 

 

dave

 

ps. There is another hole that is par 5 for the ladies and par 4 for the men on this course (hole #2), but the tees "don't cross" like they do on hole #13. 

 

This simply shows that the arbitrary allocation of par is a nonsense.

[DaveLeeNC]

3 hours ago, Newby said:

This simply shows that the arbitrary allocation of par is a nonsense.

 

This is a simple tee position issue. Guys are simply not expecting any hole to play longer from the forward tees. It is not a par issue (also not the end of the world).

 

dave

[Pfish]

Do your 80 year olds generally reach the 13th hole in 2 from the green tees?  I’m thinking probably not on a regular basis or they wouldn’t be thinking of moving forward.  Therefore the 30 yards back would still make them expecting to have 3 shots to the green but maybe different clubs.  If they play a lot of golf maybe the extra length on that hole would bump their handicap up.  I don’t think it will make a difference in your games.

 

PS. I think all red markers should change color.  Red has a negative connotation in golf tees.  Or go to numbers.  1 for shortest, 2 for second shortest etc.  

[Pfish]

At our club there is also a group of about 24 older guys several in their 80s.  Some use the regular tee, some a rated combo tee.   However one of the tees in the combo is too long for several so they pick a different place for that one hole.  It’s not a perfect solution of course but works for this group. I don’t know what format they play but I don’t think it’s Stableford. 

 

Another thing looking at that score card and with all the talk about par 4s and 5s.  Those par 5s for women are way below the recommended distance which is 211-400 yards par 4 women and 251-470 men.  

[Newby]

37 minutes ago, Pfish said:

Another thing looking at that score card and with all the talk about par 4s and 5s.  Those par 5s for women are way below the recommended distance which is 211-400 yards par 4 women and 251-470 men.  

WHS Appendix F

Par 4

Women    200 to 420 yards

Men         240 to 490 yards  

Par 5

Women    370 to 600 yards

Men         450 to 710 yards
 

 

Edited March 24, 2023 by Newby

[Pfish]

Making those 358 and 369 par 5s for women even more out of kilter.  I must have been looking at old guidelines.  Then there are 422and 411 par 5s for men listed on the green tees. They just used the same par designations for everything.

[ThinkingPlus]

38 minutes ago, Pfish said:

At our club there is also a group of about 24 older guys several in their 80s.  Some use the regular tee, some a rated combo tee.   However one of the tees in the combo is too long for several so they pick a different place for that one hole.  It’s not a perfect solution of course but works for this group. I don’t know what format they play but I don’t think it’s Stableford. 

 

Another thing looking at that score card and with all the talk about par 4s and 5s.  Those par 5s for women are way below the recommended distance which is 211-400 yards par 4 women and 251-470 men.  

I believe it was mentioned that the hole plays uphill. There are situations where distance alone doesn't make a hole play like a par 4, but more like a par 5.

 

At one of our local CCs, the 16th hole is ~365 yards uphill all the way. The fairway is narrowish (30 yards) at the 150 location with trees either side of the fairway. Trees on the right partially block shots from fairway locations on the right. Large pond fronts the green from about 50 yards all the way to the green front.

 

There are very few women that can reach this green in regulation if played as a par 4. The carry on the 2nd shot is too much unless you are near scratch or better with a good drive in the fairway. So it is designated a par 5 because it plays as a 3 shot hole for the vast majority of women.

[Newby]

14 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

I believe it was mentioned that the hole plays uphill. There are situations where distance alone doesn't make a hole play like a par 4, but more like a par 5.

 

Par reflects the score a scratch player is expected to score on a given hole

and
may be allocated depending on the playing difficulty of the hole, including any
effective length correction factors, for example, elevation changes, forced layups,
and prevalent wind.

[ThinkingPlus]

1 minute ago, Newby said:

Par reflects the score a scratch player is expected to score on a given hole

and
may be allocated depending on the playing difficulty of the hole, including any
effective length correction factors, for example, elevation changes, forced layups,
and prevalent wind.

I agree, but when the WHS changes occurred a few year's ago, the USGA got a little more adamant about enforcing the distance vs. par designations.  Clubs had to plead their case, so to speak, in order to violate the recommendations.  

 

I would guess a scratch woman would average near 4.5 on the hole I described above. Without the big trees blocking approaches for poorly positioned tee shots, I would designate it a par 4.

[rogolf]

44 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

I agree, but when the WHS changes occurred a few year's ago, the USGA got a little more adamant about enforcing the distance vs. par designations.  Clubs had to plead their case, so to speak, in order to violate the recommendations.  

 

I would guess a scratch woman would average near 4.5 on the hole I described above. Without the big trees blocking approaches for poorly positioned tee shots, I would designate it a par 4.

I think the USGA got more adamant about correct par because of the inclusion of (CR-PAR) in the handicap calculations.  I know we had a couple of discussions with our provincial association about holes on our course.

[ThinkingPlus]

6 minutes ago, rogolf said:

I think the USGA got more adamant about correct par because of the inclusion of (CR-PAR) in the handicap calculations.  I know we had a couple of discussions with our provincial association about holes on our course.

Yes. I hear they are also going to force (strongly encourage?) hole-by-hole posting in 2024 for similar reasons (better handicap hole designations - more proper net DB).

[PoolPond]

This is nonsense.  There is no such thing as lady's tees and men's tees just different colored tees and distances. Whoever came up with that nonsense needs their head examined. The tee does not know if it's my grandma teeing it up, an LPGA pro or my dad. Therefore, the scorecard should indicate a yardage and a par for that hole for all who play from that particular tee. 

[ThinkingPlus]

5 minutes ago, PoolPond said:

This is nonsense.  There is no such thing as lady's tees and men's tees just different colored tees and distances. Whoever came up with that nonsense needs their head examined. The tee does not know if it's my grandma teeing it up, an LPGA pro or my dad. Therefore, the scorecard should indicate a yardage and a par for that hole for all who play from that particular tee. 

https://www.usga.org/contact-us/usga-contact-us.html

 

[rogolf]

5 minutes ago, PoolPond said:

This is nonsense.  There is no such thing as lady's tees and men's tees just different colored tees and distances. Whoever came up with that nonsense needs their head examined. The tee does not know if it's my grandma teeing it up, an LPGA pro or my dad. Therefore, the scorecard should indicate a yardage and a par for that hole for all who play from that particular tee. 

The handicap system recognizes that men and women have different capabilities and rates the golf courses for both men and women.  Golf clubs are responsible for the printing of their own cards - they usually do what suits the players at that course.  An alternative is to keep score on a napkin?

[larrybud]

24 minutes ago, PoolPond said:

This is nonsense.  There is no such thing as lady's tees and men's tees just different colored tees and distances. Whoever came up with that nonsense needs their head examined. The tee does not know if it's my grandma teeing it up, an LPGA pro or my dad. Therefore, the scorecard should indicate a yardage and a par for that hole for all who play from that particular tee. 

 

Yes, there is a difference. Men and women have different standards for setting the course rating and slope. I did an analysis of all tees in the US in my course database (different thread from last year) and a significant percentage are ONLY rated for men, and ONLY rated for women. By definition, they are "women's tees". 

Found the post, from May of 2022:
 

I have an accurate database of ~14000 courses. Of the front tee box, 8400 are rated for both men and women, while 5600 are "women only".  So, 40%.

 

Just for S&G, of the back most tee box, ~2000 are rated for both men and women, while ~12000 are "men only".

[PoolPond]

1 hour ago, rogolf said:

The handicap system recognizes that men and women have different capabilities and rates the golf courses for both men and women.  Golf clubs are responsible for the printing of their own cards - they usually do what suits the players at that course.  An alternative is to keep score on a napkin?

 

1 hour ago, larrybud said:

 

Yes, there is a difference. Men and women have different standards for setting the course rating and slope. I did an analysis of all tees in the US in my course database (different thread from last year) and a significant percentage are ONLY rated for men, and ONLY rated for women. By definition, they are "women's tees". 

Found the post, from May of 2022:
 

I have an accurate database of ~14000 courses. Of the front tee box, 8400 are rated for both men and women, while 5600 are "women only".  So, 40%.

 

Just for S&G, of the back most tee box, ~2000 are rated for both men and women, while ~12000 are "men only".

But, we know this is all nonsense right?   "handicap system recognizes that men and women have different capabilities"   They do??? OK, then what is the capability different between me, a 5 handicap male, and Rose Zhang or Rachel Heck? What does GHIN tell me about our differences. And, I am not talking about at the pro level, yet strictly at the amateur level where handicaps are utilized.  This is the dumbest thing I've read all day, even if the GHIN says otherwise. I mean, herb is on the Schedule 1 list but we all know that is also nonsense and not true what they say about it. So, just because something is "official" doesn't mean it's correct or true.   There is NO difference between men and women when it comes to golf. Because, as many men who can beat women on the course, there are just as many women who can beat men on the course. It's golfing ability and not gender. The handicap system could not be more wrong about this. We have several women in our club who can beat 99% of all the male golfers. The club next door has at least 15 women who can beat 99% of the male golfers. What does the handicap system have to say about that? It should be different colored tees with different lengths and end there. There should never be a discrepancy between male and female golfers because there are simply way too many female golfers that can kick the arse of most male players who are not touring pros. 

[ThinkingPlus]

8 minutes ago, PoolPond said:

 

But, we know this is all nonsense right?   "handicap system recognizes that men and women have different capabilities"   They do??? OK, then what is the capability different between me, a 5 handicap male, and Rose Zhang or Rachel Heck? What does GHIN tell me about our differences. And, I am not talking about at the pro level, yet strictly at the amateur level where handicaps are utilized.  This is the dumbest thing I've read all day, even if the GHIN says otherwise. I mean, herb is on the Schedule 1 list but we all know that is also nonsense and not true what they say about it. So, just because something is "official" doesn't mean it's correct or true.   There is NO difference between men and women when it comes to golf. Because, as many men who can beat women on the course, there are just as many women who can beat men on the course. It's golfing ability and not gender. The handicap system could not be more wrong about this. We have several women in our club who can beat 99% of all the male golfers. The club next door has at least 15 women who can beat 99% of the male golfers. What does the handicap system have to say about that? It should be different colored tees with different lengths and end there. There should never be a discrepancy between male and female golfers because there are simply way too many female golfers that can kick the arse of most male players who are not touring pros. 

Rose would probably be giving you 3 a side and still takin your lunch money. 

[PoolPond]

32 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Rose would probably be giving you 3 a side and still takin your lunch money. 

Of course she would, that's exactly my point and why this is so ridiculous!  So, according to GHIN we may play the same hole from the same tees, yet she would be playing the hole as a par 5 and I'd be playing it as a par 4 only because I am a man and she's a woman. Makes total sense right? 

[ThinkingPlus]

37 minutes ago, PoolPond said:

Of course she would, that's exactly my point and why this is so ridiculous!  So, according to GHIN we may play the same hole from the same tees, yet she would be playing the hole as a par 5 and I'd be playing it as a par 4 only because I am a man and she's a woman. Makes total sense right? 

Doesn't matter really. Her 4 will still beat your 5. Par is irrelevant in match play. Same in stroke play.  Low score wins regardless of par.

[DaveLeeNC]

21 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Doesn't matter really. Her 4 will still beat your 5. Par is irrelevant in match play. Same in stroke play.  Low score wins regardless of par.

 

If the competition is handicapped then you do have to make par adjustments as par is part of the Course Handicap calculation. If you have a scratch competition with differing tees, well, that is interesting. 

 

dave

[ThinkingPlus]

6 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

 

If the competition is handicapped then you do have to make par adjustments as par is part of the Course Handicap calculation. If you have a scratch competition with differing tees, well, that is interesting. 

 

dave

Do you adjust individual hole par (how does that work) or just to determine course handicap?

[DaveLeeNC]

17 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Do you adjust individual hole par (how does that work) or just to determine course handicap?

I have never been involved in a match play scenario where par was different between two competitors. A quick read of Handicap Rule 6.2 seems to imply that you just make an additional 'par difference' adjustment to one of the player's CH and then 'all is normal' (low net wins - par be damned). 

 

dave

[ThinkingPlus]

2 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

I have never been involved in a match play scenario where par was different between two competitors. A quick read of Handicap Rule 6.2 seems to imply that you just make an additional 'par difference' adjustment to one of the player's CH and then 'all is normal' (low net wins - par be damned). 

 

dave

That's what I thought.  The tricky part with men playing women in a handicap match competition is how you allocate strokes (which holes). I presume whoever receives strokes gets them on their handicap holes, but you could make a case that each player gets their full strokes on their respective handicap holes.

 

Stroke play, once CHs have been computed, should be low score wins no matter the relation to par.

[DaveLeeNC]

22 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

That's what I thought.  The tricky part with men playing women in a handicap match competition is how you allocate strokes (which holes). I presume whoever receives strokes gets them on their handicap holes, but you could make a case that each player gets their full strokes on their respective handicap holes.

 

Stroke play, once CHs have been computed, should be low score wins no matter the relation to par.

 

Just to be clear to all, even in handicapped stroke play you still have a make a par difference adjustment (if there is a difference) to one of the CH's. Stableford, BTW, requires no adjustment. 

 

dave

Edited March 24, 2023 by DaveLeeNC

[ThinkingPlus]

18 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

 

Just to be clear to all, even in handicapped stroke play you still have a make a par difference adjustment (if there is a difference) to one of the CH's. Stableford, BTW, requires no adjustment. 

 

dave

Compute CH for each player using CR-Par calcs (per normal WHS process). Then compensate the woman's CH using the difference in CRs for the tee being played (rounded). Each player's CH can then be used to allocate strokes for the comp. Am I missing anything?

[Augster]

13 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Compute CH for each player using CR-Par calcs (per normal WHS process). Then compensate the woman's CH using the difference in CRs for the tee being played (rounded). Each player's CH can then be used to allocate strokes for the comp. Am I missing anything?

Spot on. The difference in “par” is taken into account before anyone tees it up. 
 

Once on the course, score is score plus/minus any shots. 

[DaveLeeNC]

42 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Compute CH for each player using CR-Par calcs (per normal WHS process). Then compensate the woman's CH using the difference in CRs for the tee being played (rounded). Each player's CH can then be used to allocate strokes for the comp. Am I missing anything?

 

The additional adjustment is for the difference in par  (not CR) between the two sets of tees with differing pars (where one CH has received a different par adjustment than the other CH from different tees). 

 

dave