A 1933 debate : enlarging the cup or not ?

[Sébastien Dhaussy]

Digging in the past, I've found an interesting article on cup length.

In 1933, one top player suggest that the cups on putting greens be enlarged from 4¼ in. to 8 in.

Reason: "A crack player and one just average are playing. The average player puts his ball on the green, say, 20 or 25 feet from the cup. The expert is closer, say, 12 to 15 feet. But each will take two putts and halve the hole. If the cups were bigger, the average player still would take his two putts . . . but the expert . . . would knock his in every time. There would be the thrill. . . . The payoff in golf is to get that second shot close to the cup."

A heated debate followed and two weeks after, the notion of enlarging the cup had reached the status of an experiment with some courses installing 8-in. cups or 6-in. cup.

I will post the article after some of you have identified the player who makes this suggestion  

[AndrewB]

Sounds like Ben Hogan, but I believe that's a bit early for him to be considered a "top player".

[Dan Kelly]

Didn't they give this idea a try at Augusta, a couple of years later?

[Bob_Huntley]

Gene Sarazen. No I was not there.

Bob

[Sébastien Dhaussy]

Yes, Bob, Gene Sarazen.

Here is the article from Time magazine :
Monday, Feb. 6, 1933
Eight-Inch Cups


Golfers, perpetually exasperated at themselves, are never satisfied with their equipment. Four years ago they all took up steel shafts. Three years ago they squabbled about sand-wedges. Two years ago they were troubled by the balloon ball. Three weeks ago a new subject for contention arose when Gene Sarazen, British and U. S. Open champion, ill of influenza in a Santa Monica hospital, took it upon himself to suggest that the cups on putting greens be enlarged from 4¼ in. to 8 in. Reason: "A crack player and one just average are playing. The average player puts his ball on the green, say, 20 or 25 feet from the cup. The expert is closer, say, 12 to 15 feet. But each will take two putts and halve the hole. If the cups were bigger, the average player still would take his two putts . . . but the expert . . . would knock his in every time. There would be the thrill. . . . The payoff in golf is to get that second shot close to the cup."

By last week, the notion of enlarging the cup had reached the status of an experiment, seemed a potential crusade. At Pinehurst, N. C. a group of golfers which included William C. Fownes Jr., onetime (1910) amateur champion and onetime (1926-27) president of the U. S. Golf Association, had tried 8-in. cups on a sand green. They thought it made putting too easy. The Pinehurst golfers then tried a 6-in. cup, planned a tournament to see if the members liked it. Eight-inch cups were installed at the Cavalier Country Club, Virginia Beach; Riviera Golf Course, Miami; Palmaceia Course, near Tampa, Fla. Here the second annual Gasparilla 72-hole medal play for a guaranteed net $1,300 purse will be held next week in which experts who like the idea of the new cup will have a chance to try it. One entrant will be Wild Bill Mehlhorn, famed professional who last year gave up golf to teach bridge because his bad putting prevented him from winning prizes.

By last week most golf authorities had been heard from on the subject of the new cups. Leo Diegel, Al Espinosa, John Dawson, John De Forest, playing in West Coast tournaments, liked the idea. U. S. G. A. officials thought Sarazen might have suggested it to keep his name in print.

Most indignant comment came from England, where all U. S. golf innovations are disgusting to golfers who abide by the regulations of the staid St. Andrews club. Said Sandy Herd: "Farcical!" Charles Whitcombe: "Absurd!" James Braid: "The walls would crumble!" Harry Vardon: "The very idea makes me angry!"

Quietest but most crushing squelch came from the greatest golfer of them all. In Hollywood, whither he went to make some movies after the gala opening of his Augusta National Course (TIME, Jan. 23), Robert Tyre Jones II said with the finality of an old poker player discussing wild deuces: "It might make an interesting game, but it would not be golf."

[Robert Mercer Deruntz]

One of the main people whom Sarazen was whining about was Paul Runyon.  Sarazen witnessed a couple of unbelievable putting rounds and was frustrated.  The winner of one of the enlarged cup tournaments was Runyon by a runaway margin.  I remember Paul Runyon using this in his short game presentations when helping out Carl Welty at the La Costa Golf School many years ago.  Nobody knows more about Runyon than Carl, who is now at PGA West with the Jim Mclean Golf School.

[Doug Siebert]

Seems you could get the same effect by shrinking the cup to 2", so that the player who gets it within 15' has the advantage of being able to two putt pretty easily, while the less skilled approach at 30' is much more likely to be three putted.

[James Bennett]

So, why do we have a 4 and a quarter inch hole in the first place?  I think I know.  Do you?  My answer is in the next post.

James B

[James Bennett]

Well, when I was at St Andrews this year, I noted in the magazine there (I think, or was it the museum next door?) a historical reference that they have found very old (1800's?) 4 and a quarter inch diameter water pipes under the 18th fairway (I think).

So, I assume the 4 and a qurter inch hole came from the local water pipe being used as the inaugral cup liner.  Brilliant.

Now, if only St Andrews had used 6 inch water pipes, I would be worrying about yipping 5 foot putts today rather than 3 foot putts

James B

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Dr. Alister MacKenzie, a guy noted for building a decent golf course or two publicly reprimanded Sarazen for his views of enlarging the cup in an article entitled, "Vadelism." It's pretty hilarious stuff because it just continued on the with the bad blood between the two after Sarazen more or less torpedoed MacKenzie's Troon's Portland course after he failed to qualify for the British Open.

Now here's the kicker:

George C. Thomas had explored the possibilities of enlarging the cup as well as 1/2 strokes for putts!

[Patrick_Mucci]

With the trend toward faster, blander putting surfaces and the seeming emphasis on putting, along with length's ability to avoid or obsolete architecture, maybe it's an alternative that should be considered.

[Doug Siebert]

I think its a happy accident that we arrived at a 4 1/4" hole, that is just about the perfect size, given that there is just enough room to allow a ball to go in the hole when the flag is in, but its also possible for the flag to deflect the ball out of the hole.

Why is that good?  Well, since a golfer can, on two shots that appear pretty much identical, have the ball go in one time and stay out the next, one is not always 100% sure whether it is better to leave the flag in (ignore Pelz's pronouncements, which don't account for variables like slope, wind and lean of the flagstick)  Its a perfect example of the frustration and ultimate futility of the game of golf!

[Doug Bolls]

From what I remember, it happened at Royal Musselburgh.  At least they claim to have cut a hole that size, and it became the standard.  I am sure there is more to it than that.
Doug

[TEPaul]

Sebastien:

The theory regarding particularly why an 8" cup would work better is quite similar to George Thomas' theory on the benefits of half-stroke for putts. You should read Thomas's theory. At first most think Thomas must not have liked putting but the effect of half strokes for putts would have a very interesting influence on architectural requirements which would go directly to greater cost effectiveness, in Thomas' opinion. The man was a true "out-of-the-box" thinker.

[BCrosby]

It was (and is) a silly idea.

A bigger hole will only move back the distance where the difference between good and bad putters begins to show up.

In other words, everyone will start making a much higher percentage of 6 to 7 foot putts, but the ratio between those made by good putters and those made by bad putters will remain the same.

Gross scores for everyone will come down, but bad putters will be as disadvantged vs. good putters as they ever were. Instead of complaining about the three foot putts I missed, I will be complaining about the seven foot putts I missed.

Gene Sarazen seems to have been a real pain. He didn't think ANGC was very good, for example. Maybe he had a thing about MacKenzie. I read somewhere that later in life he became unbearably pompous and was disliked by a number of people in the golf world.

Bob