[George Blunt]

With the advent of modern technology and myopic golf unions, traditional golf courses are being destroyed, their integrity ruined; all in the name of protecting par from the modern professional.I say, who cares about par?Why should a great course be altered to protect it from a meaningless number written on a competitors scorecard for one competition held (probably) once every five years. (Masters excepted)  This is not to decry change.  My objection is to change for the sake of par alone.  Take the recent US Open and Australian Open.  Two great courses brutalised in order to make par a number worth shooting for. Look at what what we got:professionals being made to look stupid via absurd pin positionsunrealistic rough"par 4's" that only 10% or so of the field could reach in twobeautific smiles from the golf administrators who set a "stern" test of golfWhat did we want to see:professionals at their peak playing shots on a realistic golf courseSo my solution, get rid of par for professional golfers and simply add up the shots.  The one with the smallest number wins and golf unions throughout the world can concentrate on leaving great courses alone!GB

[Ran Morrissett]

Where will the quest for par end? Carnoustie now features 480 yard plus par fours.  We  saw how absurd the 480 yard 5th at Pinehurst became in the US Open. Certainly, the Good Doctor Alister MacKenzie hated the "pencil and scorecard" mentality that was developing back in the 1920s. What would he think now??George, you will have to come play the mythical Carthage Club in North Carolina when it opens in 2004 - there will be no par there (see write-up). Another great, great club, Swinley Forest outside of London, got by until 1990 when the secretary Ian Pearce made the concession to include  par on the scorecard. Just like architecture has come full circle, so has "pars" use. Let's be done with it!

[JohnV]

Par will remain important as long as the USGA and R&A can sucker players into thinking that if it says 4 on the card, they have to get there in 2 shots.  In the end 280 wins the tournament, not Even par or -4 or -8.The only way to get rid of the "scorecard and pencil mentality" is to make all tournaments Match Play.

[DT]

Peter Allis said it well today - par exists solely so to give people some idea of who is winning. It is a yardstick of relative positioning and that is it.

[A_Clay_Man]

Back to top

Is there ever a really new idea?

[A_Clay_Man]

Bill-The yardstick need not go anywhere. It's Par's value that can move easier than a d-4.

The change of mindset is not without precedence.

When was it that bogie, was no longer considered, the way par is today? 100 years ago?

[ChasLawler]

Assuming that the handicap process is integral to the game of golf….
Wouldn't handicapping become a problem without "par"? Specifically when a player only plays...say 15 holes, and under USGA rules, should submit a total round score incorporating what he should have scored (according to his handicap) on those last 3 holes.

But then I suppose the USGA could alter the rules, so that if someone plays 15 holes,  they enter a score for 15 holes. That could get “complicated” though.

Another problem might be the “double max” and “triple max”. If a player picks up on a certain hole, how does that player know what score to take for handicapping purposes?

[JohnV]

I know when I'm working in a scoring area for a tournament, I don't look at par.  I add by eliminating all the 4s, 3-5 pairs, 2-6 pairs etc and seeing what I have left over and then adjusting from 36 a side.  I was taught that by the guy who does many of the scoreboards for the USGA.

Score vs par is really only of any use to the TV people who can tell you that Tiger is -5 after 9 and Ernie is -4 after 12 which probably makes more sense to the viewer at home than other methods.

[Marc Haring]

I have the same sentiments. I find it strange that par is given so much credence.

I had a long discussion with a Pro when we were deciding on the stroke index’s for a new nine holes. When we got to a long par 3 over water (below, green on left) he insisted it be stroke index 2. But why I asked. Because it is a tough par 3 he replied.

Now I can understand that if you are talking stapleford comps, but the stroke index system is set up for matchplay. I argued par was irrelevant but he just wouldn’t accept it. He even suggested that he would be ok giving a stroke on a long par 4 hole but would object if the same hole was a par 5.

Maybe going back to the old system where every hole was a par 4 and you’d be talking about level 4’s. In those days they accepted that the long holes were the tough ones that you’d try to maintain your score on, while the short ones gave you an opportunity to get one or two back. At least that way you can keep tab of how you are doing without thinking so much in terms of 1,2 or 3 shotters.

[James Edwards]

Mr Haring,

Are they the tees aswell?  If so, devilish striping to misdirect the player!  Love it Mark!

[Marc Haring]

Yes James, but I do personally favour the 50 yard slice on this hole.

[James Edwards]

See, now thats where you are going wrong Mark, the hole clearly sets up for an Edwards (out of control) Hook!!!

Looks nice though my friend although a tad tough!

[A_Clay_Man]

Just getting into Geoff's book, I want to believe, but I guess I am precluded.

What will bring back the shotmaker? Changing the distance the ball goes? or demanding that if the player wants to make "par" (or better) he/she had better put the right move on the ball?

The par 3 is an quickly becoming the only place that players  can "screw-up" without having a reasonable chance to recover on the scorecard.

As for giving strokes on Par 3's by making it #2 hndcp hole, I'm agin'

[Marc Haring]

Yes James but I guess that is the point. Think in terms of every hole being a par 4 and it miraculously becomes a doddle. A little fade with the driver into the front right area, a delicate chip on and you’re looking at a birdie.

Still, as is illustrated below, anything left of the green is a goner, the hole is 220 off the back into the prevailing wind and we can usually get this green the texture and speed of lino.

Perhaps the Pro was right, it should be stroke index 2.

[James Edwards]

I agree, with your point..

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()