[BVince]

I am sure some will scoff at the idea, but do you ever think there will be a day when we see a par 6.  Maybe on a well respected new course?

Would the idea be disruptive to the traditions of golf?
Would the idea be legendary and ground breaking?
Would a par 6 slow down play too much to be considered?
What would the length window be for such a hole?
What strategy would be desired?  The good to great player be able to reach it in 3?  Whould each layup shot have to pose a particular challenge to keep the hole interesting the entire way?

Thinking about this subject, you must realize that there are some holes that could be just a few yards off to playing like a par 6 for the majority of the golfing population.  The long par 5 16th at Firestone (625yds) and the 17th at Baltusrol (650 yds) are monsterous and very challenging holes.  In fact, if us mere mortals of the game play these holes, they feel at least like a 5.5 par.  So do you think it may/could/will happen?

[Jimmy Muratt]

There is a par 6 at Meadows Farms Golf Course in Fredericksburg, VA.  The hole is 841 yards long.  Below is a link to their site and it details some various strategies in playing the hole.

http://www.meadowsfarms.com/golf/playing12.htm

[Kalen Braley]

Several already exist.

The 18th at Lake Chabot in Oakland, CA.  I doubt they would play it as a 6 if a top tournament came thru though.  The flat bellies could easily reach it in 3.

[Michael]

Good point about multi hazards to keep interest up on a 650- 700 yard par 6..

 But really..given the state of most weekend golfers a hole that long would be like the retreat from Moscow..littered with bags and water bottles...

[Eric Smith]

Just outside of Knoxville on Lake Tellico, The ninth hole at Kahite is an 808 yard par 6.

http://tvpoa.net/golf.shtml

In my opinion, having only played this particular par 6, it was a marketing gimmick.  Driver, 3 wood, 3 wood, plus whatever else you have?

or for me: 3 wood, 3 wood, 3 wood, 3 wood, 3 wood, ..x

I'm having a tough time on the course these days!

[Tom Huckaby]

Several already exist.

The 18th at Lake Chabot in Oakland, CA.  I doubt they would play it as a 6 if a top tournament came thru though.  The flat bellies could easily reach it in 3.

Three?
Hell I got to the front edge in two once.  That's a par 6 in card name only.

Interestingly, I have also played the one at Meadows Farms... wacky fun course that is.  That hole is definitely a par 6.  Oh I believe it could be reached in three, but it would take three massive blows.

TH

[Brad Tufts]

Ha...Maplewood Casino in Bethlehem, NH has a par 6, and it was supposedly designed by Donald Ross!

However, DJR meant likely meant it as a fiver, as it's only 590 yards... 

[John Moore II]

The only thing about a par 6 is that for it to play that way, at least by USGA definition, for good players anymore, it would have to be 1200 yards long. I mean, if we want Tiger or Phil or any of the really good players to take 3 full shots into a green now, the hole would have to be 800 yards. I mean, 300 yard drive, 275 3 wood, 225 shot left into the green. So if you want the 275 shot twice that moves the yardage up to 1075 yards. Not to mention, how to you make the hole have 4 interesting shots? Very hard. I'd like to see a par 6 pulled off well, its just not likely to happen.

[Tom_Doak]

Bryon:

I would love to build a par-6 hole someday, if I could find a situation on a property that made sense, AND if I was sure I had a client who wouldn't turn it into a promotional gimmick. 

I believe that pretty much every par-6 hole you've ever heard of (such as those named above) was done for promotional purposes.  However, there is a limited history of such holes on much older courses.  The original seven-hole course at Blackheath in England had two holes which would have been par-6's in the day ... one of them might even have been a par-7.  Bernard Darwin's description of them was both intriguing and not all positive:

"After the third we are confronted with the two long holes, and the piling up of our score begins.  It is now some time since I played them, and they are, besides, too long to describe in detail.  I have a vision of reaching, after several shots on the flat, a deep hollow on the left, and spending some further time in hacking the ball along its hard and inhospitable turf, finally to emerge on to the flat again and reach the green in a score verging upon double figures.  The fifth hole may be described as the same, only not quite so much so ..."

So there IS a good historical precedent for it.  More to the point, since there are hardly any par-5 holes left in the world which a Tour pro can't reach in two, I think a par-6 is now fair game.

[SL_Solow]

Many years ago I played a couse in Watervliet Michigan that ended in a par 6 of well over 600 yards.  This was in the time of persimmon woods and balata balls si it was a real stretch.  Not a particularly interesting hole, in retrospect my guess is the "designer" needed the length to get back to the clubhouse.

[John Moore II]

Tom--My only thought is how would you be able to make each of the 4 shots interesting? A triple dogleg?

[CJ Carder]

I believe that pretty much every par-6 hole you've ever heard of (such as those named above) was done for promotional purposes.

There is a par 6 at Farmstead in the Myrtle Beach area... it boasts that it starts in North Carolina and ends in South Carolina (or vice versa, can't remember which).  Definitely a marketing gimmick.

[Kalen Braley]

Tom--My only thought is how would you be able to make each of the 4 shots interesting? A triple dogleg?

JKM,

I'm not sure if you've been there, but something that could work is Pacific Dunes #12 and 13.  It would play at about 900 yards and into a summer wind, it would be a par 7 for mere mortals.  With the dune behind #12 and the one by the green on 13, I'm sure that would be a wickedly cool hole.   

[Mike_Cirba]

There is one of 750 at Mountain Manor in the Poconos, 90 degree dogleg right after a blind uphill drive with a green fronted by a large pond.

Classic design at its best!

[Peter Pallotta]

"After the third we are confronted with the two long holes, and the piling up of our score begins.  It is now some time since I played them, and they are, besides, too long to describe in detail. "

Tom D - I'm not sure times have changed all that much. Which is to say, I think I'd describe any Par 6 much like Darwin does, except that I can't write as good....

Of course, being the contrarian that you are, that'd be the very reason you WOULD create a Par 6   

Peter

[Wade Whitehead]

Ashley Plantation, a course here in Virginia, has a par 6.  The "novelty" backfires before, during, and after you play it.

WW

[Tom_Doak]

Kenneth:

You are not demanding that all par-5's be 800+ yards, so I don't think the par-6 needs to be 1200.  It would be a par-6 for regular golfers, not for the pros.

As for making a hole that would be cool, all you need to have is a big natural feature (like a range of dunes, or Hell's Half Acre) that, if you can't carry it with a big second shot, you are not going to be in range on your third shot after laying up short ... sort of like the 7th hole at Pine Valley if it were 150 yards longer.  The whole point would be to require the player to make a long second shot carry OFF THE FAIRWAY, something which good players never have to do anymore.

[Michael]

I don't really see the attraction for a 800 yard par 6. A well thought out 590 par 5 yes.

[Peter Pallotta]

Byron - this doesn't really answer your questions, but here goes:

Most players I know who generally score in the 80s or worse don't talk about a lack of skill as much as they talk about a lack of consistency, i.e. a lack of consistency in scoring and shot making from one round to another, from one hole to another, and even (the worse they are) from one shot to another. It seems to me that a true Par 6 would call on those players to string together 4 good shots in a row, and with any mistake along that value chain compounding that number exponentially. To be honest, I think it would be, for me, too rigorous a test. (A long par 3 is also a rigorous test, but at least it's over quicker).  Combine that with the fact that a Par 6 would probably have even more fairway bunkers than usual (and thus to my eyes be not so attractive) and it's not something I look forward to...

Peter 

[Tom_Doak]

Peter:

I am thinking differently about it than you.

I am thinking that a good par-6 would require two VERY GOOD shots on the first two in order to enable a player to get home in three ... and if the second shot didn't clear the hazard it would be tough to get home in four ...

If you weren't a good player, though, you would be content to hit two good shots to get yourself reasonably close to the main hazard, and then it would be important to hit a good third shot off the fairway to carry the hazard and leave a relatively easy fourth shot home.

All of which seems like an improvement on the current standard of long par-5 holes, where the good player gets away with two lay-ups and a wedge, and the average player struggles to get over the cross-hazard in two and it winds up being a tough bogey for him.

[BVince]

JKM: I was brainstorming that it is possible to make a par 6 between 720-760 yards as an avg. length.  Granted there are a lot of factors that could alter that length (wind, slope, firmness, etc).  I am not thinking about the PGA tour guys too much, it would be easy to alter the hole for tour standards using different tee boxes or adding a championship tee for desired length.

Tom:  Say you have two 1 handicappers.  Guy 1 averages about 280 on his drive, guy 2 averages about 260 on his drive.  How do you make the hole a resonable challenge for both players without giving too big an advantage to the longer hitter?  Is that possible?

Peter:  One of the problems I was thinking about is the too taxing part for the higher handicap player.  It could potentially discourage that player and really slow down play depending on the hazards/challenges.  I think you would need clear "bailout" areas as for the weaker player while having perfectly placed bunkers/hazards to challenge the strong.

[John Moore II]

Tom--My only thought is how would you be able to make each of the 4 shots interesting? A triple dogleg?

JKM,

I'm not sure if you've been there, but something that could work is Pacific Dunes #12 and 13.  It would play at about 900 yards and into a summer wind, it would be a par 7 for mere mortals.  With the dune behind #12 and the one by the green on 13, I'm sure that would be a wickedly cool hole.   

I have not been to Pacific Dunes. However, I would certainly like to make it out there.

Kenneth:

You are not demanding that all par-5's be 800+ yards, so I don't think the par-6 needs to be 1200.  It would be a par-6 for regular golfers, not for the pros.

As for making a hole that would be cool, all you need to have is a big natural feature (like a range of dunes, or Hell's Half Acre) that, if you can't carry it with a big second shot, you are not going to be in range on your third shot after laying up short ... sort of like the 7th hole at Pine Valley if it were 150 yards longer.  The whole point would be to require the player to make a long second shot carry OFF THE FAIRWAY, something which good players never have to do anymore.

In no way do I think a par 5 should be 800 yards. But based on USGA length standards, a par 6 is any hole over 690 yards (250 yd drive, and 2 220 yard fairway shots). To make a Tour player hit Driver-3wood-3wood to a par 5 hole it would have to be 800+ yards long. And a par 6 for those guys would be, again, in the range of 1000 yards. I think those yardages are stupid, and I would really hate to see a course with a par 5 that was that long. For the normal player, a 725 yard hole, on mostly flat land, would be more than an adequate challenge at par 6.

[Jason McNamara]

Tom--My only thought is how would you be able to make each of the 4 shots interesting? A triple dogleg?

The one at Meadows Farms (which has several novelty holes, btw) is a dogleg around to the R, iirc.  I played it with a couple 20-something hcps, and for most the hole is just a slog, though a scratch player hitting three very good shots could conceivably have a putt for eagle.  But I don't remember it giving any breaks at all to the higher hcp player.

A much better gimmicky hole at MF is the baseball hole, made to look like a baseball diamond and playing only 130 yds or so.  http://www.meadowsfarms.com/golf/w8.htm

I had forgotten about the one at Lake Chabot, which I think only reinforces the idea that it's as not much of a par 6.

[Tom_Doak]

Kenneth and Bryon:

Okay, I'll play your length game, just this once.

Let's say the hole is 725 yards, and my nasty cross hazard is from 450 yards to 525 from the tee (200 out from the green on the near side, 275 on the far side).

The only way to reach the green in three would be to carry 525 yards in two.  If you can't do that (the 260-yard hitter), you might as well just play the hole patiently as a four-shotter, although you don't want to screw up your drive or second shot and get into the rough to make your third harder, and you obviously don't want to top your third shot.

The 280-yard hitter CAN make it over the hazard in two, and onto the green in three, but he's got to hit two excellent shots back to back to succeed, and if he tries the second shot and doesn't pull it off, he's at a disadvantage, with a longer fourth shot.

Of course, in all such examples, the hole will work better for some players than others.  For the 320-yard driver, the hole described above is no problem ... but if we make it hard for HIM (or her?)  to get across in two, then everybody else had better be playing a different tee.

[John Moore II]

Tom--I like that concept, I was merely saying that without hazards such as you describe, a hole would have to be very long from the back tees in order to challenge the players who SHOULD be playing from back there.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()