[paul cowley]

I'm beginning to think that par should be lowered for the longer and lower handicap players and rise as one moves forward on the tees.
I'm suggesting to an owner who is ready to build a new course that we design it accordingly;

 Par 68 or 69 from the back, with the length around 7200 yds.
Some of the par threes will probaly be 330 yds+.....a few 550 yd+ par fours and maybe a par five.

 The next on the card would play from the same tees but par would adjust to 71 or 72.

 Eventually there will be a set of forward tees that might end up at a par of 74.

....do you think anyone is ready for a 7200 yd, par 68?...

[A_Clay_Man]

Paul, As I see it, (and said so for awhile now) this is a marvelous solution. It plainly bifurcates the issue du jour, by changing the absolute value of par, not it's significance as an integer.

Why not be the first archie to build the 400 yard par 3? Might as well go down in history as something??

[paul cowley]

...great Adam, consider it done....and BTW which tees would you play from?

[A_Clay_Man]

Which way is the wind? and what's the reading on the thumpmeter?

It was after playing Beverly's 2nd that I thought 400 yards would be close to an equivalent challenge. Era to era. Uping the stakes a bit, due to increases in knowledge and conditioning, of course.

[Bill Shotzbarger]

I believe a lower par than usual is the way to go when battling technology. It's no coincidence that the Pros score much higher on the older courses that are par 70. And I'm not just talking about the Baltusrols and Bethpages that are set up ridiculously hard for majors; I think the classic style courses on tour like Harbour Town (although its par 71, it's <7,000 yards) seem to challenge the players the most.

I've heard from a member of Merion that they are thinking of playing it as a par 69 for the Open when, not if, they get it. I'm not sure whether they would play 2 or 4 as a par 4, or maybe even 10 as a par 3 (?).

[Bill_McBride]

There was a thread a few weeks ago about the way many holes in the UK are just the opposite.  The medal tee will be 485 par 5, the yellow (visitor/member) tee might be 470 par 4!  Obviously the shorter hole is a lot tougher vs par.  I like your idea better, Paul!

[paul cowley]

oh, and Adam...the idea of going down in history intrigues me less than staying up in real time but, I [we], agree that par is a silly thing ......if confronted with a 365 yd hole...does calling it a par three or four make any difference to you?.... or  how you play it?

[A_Clay_Man]

Exactly Paul. Bravo!

And the best part, The classic courses need not feel as obsolete, since their original challenge will still be challenging for the majority.

[paul cowley]

Adam...seems no one wants to break the 70 barrier, maybe Merion will be the first.
 And its such an easy and inexspensive solution.....

[Jim Nugent]

I believe a lower par than usual is the way to go when battling technology. It's no coincidence that the Pros score much higher on the older courses that are par 70. And I'm not just talking about the Baltusrols and Bethpages that are set up ridiculously hard for majors; I think the classic style courses on tour like Harbour Town (although its par 71, it's <7,000 yards) seem to challenge the players the most.
 

I don't think par is an issue in the total score.  Pro's don't score higher on the same course if it's par 70 as opposed to par 72.  They just don't score as much under par.

Usually you turn a par 72 course in a par 70 by shortening a few par 5's into par 4's.  With no other changes, the players should score slightly better: they are playing the same holes from shorter tees.  Of course usually the course gets set up harder as well.  That is why the scoring goes up.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()