Recently, my golfing buddy and I took advantage of an invitation to play an area course infamous for being very difficult. It lived up to its reputation, and as we were having a goodbye beer in the clubhouse after the round, what we were really doing was whining about how poorly we played.

We didn’t play all the way back, but we decided to play the regular tees to experience the famous layout. This quickly changed into playing the senior tees so we could actually finish!

Our mutual complaining was about how the course intimidated us and threw us off what limited games we had. We barely broke 100, or didn’t — by the end, scorekeeping gave way to just finishing.

As this conversation led to consideration of a third beer, my mind entered into a different, and at least for me, unusual thought process. The course featured elevated greens, meaning second shots were a case of forced carry. A realistic analysis identified 13 holes we couldn’t reach in regulation. At a listed par of 72, this made our par 85 given two putts per green. Now, I realize there can be one-putt situations, just as there can be three-putts or more. However, “two putts” is the standard for course design. The par of 85 is generous given that a couple of the second shots were reachable but called for a skill set we visited but only rarely; 85 it was.

Then, I thought back to our home course where we scored in the (occasional) high 70’s to low, 80’s. That course is a par 70, and we can reach every green. So after shooting, say, 82, our bar conversation would feature some good shots and, sure, some misses. But the conversation would be in no way as negative as our “tough track” experience.

But wait, we would be relatively comfortable at 82, which is 12 over at home. I just established par on the “too hard” course at par 85, and adding the 12 over we normally shoot, the realistic par is 97 — and that’s arguably what we just shot.

Nothing changed except our understanding of how we played. And in that process, the rounds took on a different, and frankly more positive, appearance. We played normally! It’s just that the particular version of “normal” needed deeper understanding than just numbers.

Golf course architects know they get two putts, be it par 3, 4, or 5 holes. They give us one, two, or three approach shots, so our two putts equal par. If you’re standing over that shot to the green knowing you have no chance of executing, the game can become quite unfriendly. This doesn’t happen to professionals or elite amateurs. Unfortunately, it’s a way of life for the rest of us, and we can react in basically one of two ways.

Recognize the real par: Accept the difference from the scorecard and enjoy the round.

Make the playing environment more conducive to having two putts for the par shown on the card: This is not as easy as you might think. #7 is a 430-yard par 4 slightly uphill into the green. Your 190-200 yard best drive leaves a carry of 200-plus yards, so you move to a forward tee. It’s now a 380-yard hole, 50 yards closer. Your second shot off the same drive is 180-190 yards. Not happening! And that’s where the complications exist. A forward tee needs to be established in terms of the second shot. I just depicted a 50-yard closer tee (time and money expended), and it was basically a waste.

We all know golf is a very difficult game. If we want to implement fixes honoring the philosophy of two putts as used by golf architects, we should be prepared for complex situations!