[David Davis]

Two friends of mine are playing the European Tour Challenge Tour and this week it's at Penati Resort in Slovakia. Unfortunately, according to these guys they are playing the Nicklaus Course which has a 717 meter par 6 claimed to be the longest hole in Europe.


I've seen a video of it and it looks a right boring slog of a hole. I wanted to look here on GCA to see if there were threads about par 6's. I've never played one myself and I find it hard to believe I'm missing anything. Has anyone played one they would consider good or even great? Or perhaps even one that actually worked decently?

[Rees Milikin]

Can you get there in 3 is the question of whether or not it is a good hole?

[Tom_Doak]

I have only seen one par-6 hole for men [and two others that were par-6's for women].  It was not an interesting hole.  When I've seen others advertised or written about, it always seems that they were included to draw attention to the course, more than for their intrinsic merit.

However, I'm not one to dismiss the type altogether.  I'd love to build a good par-6 someday, if I find a good reason to do it.  The idea that a hole would reward multiple solid shots with a fairway wood is appealing ... though a bit less so now that the modern version of the club is so easy to hit, and now that the gap between scratch and 15-handicap players has grown so wide.  A 600-yard par-5 is already to the point that the world's best can get home in two, while the average player will struggle to get home in three.

There is historical precedent -- Bernard Darwin's description of the old Royal Blackheath course near London includes one hole that clearly sounds like a par 6 in those days.  But I think it was better suited to those conditions and to a ball that only flew 180-200 yards.

[Adam Lawrence]

I have only seen one par-6 hole for men [and two others that were par-6's for women].  It was not an interesting hole.  When I've seen others advertised or written about, it always seems that they were included to draw attention to the course, more than for their intrinsic merit.

I'm quite certain that's why the hole at Penati exists. It isn't a good hole at all, though it could be ok as a five from a forward tee.


In theory, of course, the more strokes needed to reach the green, the more there is the opportunity for strategic challenges to be set. If you imagine MacKenzie's Lido hole, but with a full extra shot in it, you could have literally a dozen different potential routes. But it would take up so much land, and the problem of elasticity that Tom highlights would be so huge, what's the point?

[Matthew Petersen]

The only one I have played (on a now-defunct course in the Denver area) was a boring longer than average par 5, and they called it a par 6. It was clearly just being done to cover extra ground--the hole was maybe 710 yards. Not especially hard to reach in three shots, or at least get close to, so it was the easiest hole on the course if you were a decent player. And probably impossible for newer players who have a hard time playing long shots without benefit of a tee.

In general, I think there's pretty wide agreement here that the hardest shot to make interesting is the layup on a par 5. The primary means of doing so (bold features like a Hell's Half Acre bunker, for example) are probably too extreme to put on a 4-shot hole.

[Brad Tufts]

I've played one at Ross's Maplewood Casino course in Northern NH. 


I think it's only 590 though, so a relic of 1900-1920 distances.


I think I remember there being a par-6 on that course in VA with the hole set in a baseball field.  Stone Meadow?

[MCirba]

There used to be a 750 yard Par 6 at Mountain Manor in the Poconos on what was known as the "Silver Course".

Sadly, during it's heyday during the golf boom the resort had 36 holes played in 9 hole configurations, the Blue, Yellow, Orange, and Silver.   All were serviceable mountain resort golf with better views than architecture, as they were all designed and built by the family who owned the resort.   The resort went out of business around 2010 and the courses are now all overgrown.

The hole in question was a 70-degree dogleg right with a starkly uphill tee shot requiring well over 200 yards to reach the corner.   The hole proceeded from there through some nice golf terrain between woods and the final shot from about 150 yards needed to carry a fronting pond, evidently required to prevent players from going for the green in 3.   

[Thomas Dai]

I don't believe there should be such a thing as a category of par termed "par-5" for younger male pro's, male senior pro's maybe different. Everything under 300 yds should for younger male pro's be a par-3 and anything over that a par-4. Then perhaps scoring may correlate a bit more closely to the reality of an average Joe's hcp.
Atb

[Andy Stamm]

There is historical precedent -- Bernard Darwin's description of the old Royal Blackheath course near London includes one hole that clearly sounds like a par 6 in those days.  But I think it was better suited to those conditions and to a ball that only flew 180-200 yards.

The first at Prestwick as laid out by Old Tom in 1851 was 578 yards. 1851 was the transition from the feathery to the guttie. This predates par and bogey, but I think it certainly was intended to be the equivalent of a par 6.

[Peter Pallotta]

Tom: build one, perhaps, but please don't plan to ask Mr. Average to hit the green with much more than a 7 or an 8 iron, which means that you'll have about 450 yards to work with, and with the additional proviso that you not make Mr. Average try to hit a 3 wood off the turf.

I myself, of course, am this Mr. Average: average height, average weight, average skill set, average distance off the tee. (On the other hand, I did hit a good 3 wood off the turf on the 8th at Crystal Downs once; but I got lucky, and it was Crystal Downs.)  I think you can legitimately ask that, from the blue tees, I be able to hit a drive around 250 yards on occasion, and occasionally hit it straight; so if you leave me a 5-wood or 2 hybrid for my 2nd shot, Mr. Average would be okay with that.

That said, however, it is already sounding to this Mr. Average like a potentially bland and boring hole, unless the land lends itself (as per the aforementioned 8th hole at CD) to the creation of a rare and genuinely special charmer. Otherwise, all you will have done is to force Mr. Average to come in not with a wedge (as he might on mid length Par 5s) but with a 7 or an 8 iron instead. Since you know of my general ambivalence about most Par 5s, you won't be surprised that I feel a yawn coming on.

Peter
Edit: also, what Doug says below

[Doug Siebert]

I can't imagine there is or ever will be a good par 6. Out of all the true three shot par 5s (for whatever golfer, so maybe a 500 yarder for a short hitting senior or a 750 yarder for DJ) what percentage are great? Pretty small IMHO, it is hard to make a lay up interesting (challenging sure, but it is almost impossible to make a layup challenging for a scratch golfer without making things just awful for the 100 shooter)

Now you have to find a way to make TWO layups interesting. Good luck with that. The only thing a par 6 would accomplish is let the rest of know what it is like to be a short hitter who has to play a long par 5 as a par 6 every day.

[Ronald Montesano]

1912 US Open at Country Club of Buffalo
Only time a hole was designated as a par six in US Open competition.


Hole no longer exists in its entirety, as Veteran's Administration Hospital and parking were built on a portion of the club's land.


Very possible that the hole existed for the 1926 USGA Public Links championship. That course, now Grover Cleveland, was also the only course to host both the Open and Public Links championships of the USA.


There is a map of the original course in the clubhouse. If I get back over there, I'll get a photo.

[David_Elvins]

Tom Doak,

The 18th at Pacific Dunes was a really good par 6 last time i played it.

[Pat Burke]

I would think if the land was suitable for a good par six, you'd likely be
Bypassing 2 maybe 3 good pAr threes/fours

[Thomas Dai]

I would think if the land was suitable for a good par six, you'd likely be
Bypassing 2 maybe 3 good pAr threes/fours

Nice one Pat.
Atb

[Tim Leahy]

I have always loved the 18th at Lake Chabot in the Oakland hills.

[Ross Harmon]

Tom Doak,

The 18th at Pacific Dunes was a really good par 6 last time i played it.

  I've played "that hole" too!

[Garland Bayley]

I play with golfers all the time that play par 6's and more. They enjoy the game, they enjoy the shots, and I don't hear them complaining about the slog. With a fun and challenging game like golf, who cares what par is? Only when they approach 90 do they begin to complain, but only about the energy it takes to make so many swings.


Are there any good such holes for these players. I would say yes, as long as there are interesting features along the way, and no impossible ones like stinking pond carries.


I think like Thomas. They should not be lengthening courses, but dropping par for skilled players. Just make whatever the length course interesting for as many as possible.

[Ron Csigo]

Apple Mountain in Belvidere, NJ has a par 6.  It's a huge dogleg left hole, all downhill.


NJ Golf Monthly Magazine rated it "one of the 18 most perfect holes in NJ."  Would love to know what the other 17 holes that were listed.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()