Talk:Par (score)

Ostrich

A reliable source does not include a hotel website. It's clear the ostrich is just a joke term for an impossible, hypothetical shot that has no long term notability or importance in the game of golf. Unless you can convince me otherwise, the section should not be included. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 22:35, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

I put down a new source by the way it is a possible golf score no matter how impossible it may seem and therefore it should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Powerdraw (talk • contribs)

It's a purely hypothetical score that has only been thought of as a joke. A hole in one in a Par 5 is absurd enough, by saying one on a Par 6 is possible is lunacy. As an aside, the score is not listed on the PGA website. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 22:50, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Hypothetical yes, a score recognized as possible on a recognized type of hole by the USGA, yes —Preceding unsigned comment added by Powerdraw (talk • contribs) 23:05, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

But not the term ostrich. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 23:40, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Term for 6 under par

Any site revealing a term for 6 under par??

Ok dude this is just stupid these holes are not recognized by the R&A and USGA so it should not go on the artical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.29.74.66 (talk) 19:21, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Perfect par?

Has anyone played a game not only getting par but matching the par score for each hole? If so, how often has it been done? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.216.253.183 (talk) 03:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Par 8

Are any Par 8's planned anywhere?? (This question should not be confused with the question "Do any Par 8's currently exist??") The question was brought to my attention when I saw a vandal add in a term for 7 under par. Georgia guy (talk) 22:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

I have taken the initiative to "demote" the two ridiculous, hypothetical scores (ostrich and phoenix — who came up with those names anyway?) to a subsection entitled "Additional nominal scores". The condor is probably only just worthy of a proper mention as it has actually (apparently) been achieved, but these two ridiculous terms are not likely to ever be required in reality. And even if a par eight hole existed or is planned, I doubt there'll ever be an official term coined for scoring a hole-in-one on it! Tbmurray (talk) 22:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Similarly, I don't think yottabyte will ever be required in reality, but it is mentioned a lot. Georgia guy (talk) 22:37, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

In answer to your question, Georgia guy, there's an 1100 yard par-7 at Gunsan County Club in South Korea which will probably be a par-8 if women are ever allowed play on it. Quite likely it will be holed in one at some future date by robots, cyborgs, or bionic golfers, and the same may apply to even longer holes in the future, as well as to exotic varieties of golf (video games, crazy golf, extraterrestrial, etc), so I think it quite likely that many such allegedly 'ridiculous' terms may be used in the future, and I also think that our readers are entitled to have this information pointed out to them. But WP:Crystal seemingly means we're not allowed mention any such 'speculation' in the article, except by battling long and hard for it under WP:IAR, which I'm not prepared to do (though, for what little it's worth, I'd quite likely support anybody else who did). Tlhslobus (talk) 08:31, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Removed "Ostrich" and "Phoenix"

I have removed the section describing an "Ostrich" (5 under par) and a "Phoenix" (6 under par). On inspection of the solitary source for the Phoenix, I found no mention of the word. The Ostrich has never been scored and unlikely to ever be... very few par 6s actually exist and even if they did the odds of a golfer scoring a hole-in-one on it is next to impossible... even if it happened who says it'll be called an "ostrich"? Its a purely hypothetical term and frankly ridiculous. The Condor sounds ridiculous enough but on the basis it has (apparently) been scored 4 times in the history of golf(!) I guess we should leave it in. --TBM10 (talk) 20:36, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

What about "vulture"? Vulture (golf) redirects to this page, but it isn't mentioned anywhere in the article. Also, is there a "wombat" by any chance? I just came across a golf song [1] that mentions vultures and wombats, which is what made me curious.... — Lawrence King ^(talk) 22:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

The song doesn't imply that vulture is a golf score in this sequence. Georgia guy (talk) 23:25, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

User 72.53.107.54 has now supplied a source for both "Ostrich" and "Phoenix", albeit one that is not self-evidently reliable. Despite claims that they are impossible, "Ostriches" and "Phoenixes" may well be possible in the future, either in the perhaps distant future on low-gravity and/or low atmosphere places like Mars or the Moon (where at least one golf stroke has already been hit - by Apollo 17 astronaut Alan Shepard, if I remember right), or in the near future here on Earth if somebody decides to create doglegged or horseshoe-shaped par 6s or par 7s, if only because offering prizes for Ostriches and Phoenixes might be thought of as potentially useful publicity for a club's "Unique Selling Point" (USP in economist's jargon) - after all a desire for publicity is presumably the main reason for creating par 6s and par 7s in the first place. The problem is that the source given for the alleged names seems unreliable (for instance it describes condors as unrealistic, even though 4 have already occurred). However, if somebody can find a reliable source for those names being in current use in golf video games, then I think we should include them in a separate "Golf video game score names" and/or a "hypothetical future score names" subsection, which would have to state that those names have no official standing. Meanwhile after a bit more thought I may well soon decide to mention the Moon and Alan Shepard, backed by a citation, and, if so, thanks to those who caused me to think about it. Also the source given for the Phoenix mentions a current Par 7 hole in a named club in Japan, which seems to be worth mentioning (as so far we've only mentioned Par 6s) if it can be authenticated, or if the current source is accepted as reliable for that purpose (or perhaps if it can be mentioned as 'the existence of a par 7 at ... has been reported'). Tlhslobus (talk) 22:10, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Looking back through the edit history, it turns out the Japanese par 7 has 100% reliable sources, but at least so far I can't say the same for Ostrich and Phoenix (and our only current source for that seems based on English Wikipedia and so may well just be getting the names from our own deleted text and/or the above comments justifying its deletion).Tlhslobus (talk) 23:04, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

The following site (http://www.doubleeagleclub.org/index.php?suffix=scoring_terms) mentions "ostrich", but it too appears to be quoting our own dleted text back at us.Tlhslobus (talk) 23:16, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

I suppose I should perhaps mention that besides horseshoe holes and lunar, martian, and video game golf, plenty of other exotic varieties can be imagined to lead to exotic kinds of scores, such as golf played on comets and asteroids, and/or by robots or bionic humans, and so on.Tlhslobus (talk) 23:29, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

As for lunar golf, it turns out Alan Shepard hit 2 golf balls on the Moon during the Apollo 14 mission, though discussion elsewhere suggests that his spacesuit and hitting them one-handed meant that they didn't go the reported "miles and miles" and didn't beat the terrestrial distance record.Tlhslobus (talk) 23:56, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Crazy Golf presumably also offers limitless potential for exotic under par scoring. Good night and Merry Christmas to everyone. Tlhslobus (talk) 00:15, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi fellow Wikipedians I added the following information duly verified and referenced to the article, but the page was immediately reverted. Can't understand why, but these mods are really hot!!! Anyway I put it here for your information.

Archaeopteryx

An archaeopteryx referring to the prehistoric bird-like creature, means scoring 15 or more over par. This was first recorded by Tommy Armour at the Shawnee Open in 1927. He shot a 23 on the par-5 17th hole at the Shawnee Open, just one week after capturing the U.S. Open championship.Barmispain (talk) 16:55, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Par (score). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.golfdigest.com/majors/masters/index.ssf?/majors/masters/gw20040402albatross.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:14, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Ostrich

I have started a discussion at WT:GOLF#Ostrich about this term. Nigej (talk) 10:41, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

"Double eagle"

As this hideous term apparently isn't going away, there must be a source somewhere that at least notes that it's incorrect. It's embarrassing to have it said that Americans call an albatross a "double eagle". We most certainly do not. This is not an issue of British vs. American English; it's an issue of correct vs. incorrect. A double eagle would be a hole-in-one on a par 5. (Amusingly, the same people who call an albatross a "double eagle" call an actual double eagle a "triple eagle", which would require completing a par 5 in negative one strokes. You just can't make this stuff up!) Joefromrandb (talk) 00:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Is this a reliable source??

https://golf.swingbyswing.com/tour/mid-am-champ-takes-on-pebble-beachs-par-8/

(If not, please explain why. For clarification, this article is talking about a Par 8 hole.) Georgia guy (talk) 00:27, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Probably a reliable source but the content is surely not relevant here. One man playing three holes in an informal way for a bit of fun as a "par 8", is just trivia. Nigej (talk) 05:56, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Should we change this article's name?

The lede focuses on Par, but the rest of the article talks generally about all of the golf scores. Thanks, Thatoneweirdwikier Say hi 14:24, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Suggestion Changes

I don't like how this article specifically makes references to competitive golf under "hole scores" as these terms can be used in putt putt or other golf games like croquet. I think it should be subdivided into a a seperate section for competitive golf history, putt putt, and other games with the history of lowest scores ever made if ever made. The section i am referring to specifically is the condor section under the hole scores header which makes specific reference to competitive golf. You also need to read the whole section in order to understand what the scores mean. I think there should be a chart, then possibly the history section - 9/27/2020

"Ostrich (golf)" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Ostrich (golf) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 19#Ostrich (golf) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. J947 † ^edits 22:59, 19 July 2022 (UTC)