As I stated elsewhere, I believe that 6700 yards are plenty. I could be wrong, easily.

With the obvious caveat that not all 6700 yard golf course are created equal, just how many of you gentlemen routinely (say, more often than not) shoot par or better from 6700 +/- yards?  

Yes or no.

Mike

Maybe you should say shoot the course rating at that length, rather than par.  That'll take the, not created equal, out of the mix.

The answer - not me.  I have a 6 index and have never shot the course rating at 6700 yards.  

Including your index/whatever would be appreciated as well.  

Thanks.

I don't.

And I'd bet that very few of the 0-9 handicappers recently tested by Golf Magazine whose averaged drives carried 219 yards do either.

For the most part, these 7,400 yard courses are exercises in clever marketing.  They appeal to the ego (since few players care to note the severly elevated tees, or that the prevailing winds are often helping).

You can charge a lot of money to play those 7,400 yard resort/high end courses.

Peter

No. 3.2 index

I hit the ball about 250 with my driver, 270 if I really hit it great.  When I was playing a lot (in 2002 and 2003), I got my handicap down to +0.6.  I found that 6800 yards was the longest at which I could possibly shoot par (or the course rating, for that matter).

I played Bulle Rock from the blue tees (6843 yards), and found it to my liking.  I then played the front nine again, from the black tees (3646 yards, 7375 for the 18), and found myself very much overmatched.

On #9:  from the blue tees (418 yards, but with a dogleg), I hit a great drive, and had a sand wedge in.  From the black tees (478 yards), I hit a mediocre drive, and had a 4-iron in.

Now I have two kids, and a 3.3 index that is that low only because I haven't been able to play enough rounds to get it any higher.

Last year I played in a pro-am on the Cleveland Golf Tour (now, and again, the New England Pro Tour) at Atkinson CC in Atkinson, NH.  

These guys are a step below the Nationwide Tour, but the top 10 or 20 players are good.  the 2005 PGA Tour rookie of the year (Sean O'Hair) was 2nd on the 2004 Cleveland Golf Tour money list.

At any rate, these guys crack it 280 or 290 off the tee, and their tee shots make that distinctive "pock" sound that I have never been able to generate.

The Atkinson course maxes out at 6,550 yards:

http://www.atkinsonresort.com/golf.htm

The winner last year shot -8 for 54 holes; here is the final leader board:

http://nepgt.bluegolf.com/bluegolf/nepgt5/event/nepgt51/contest/1/leaderboard.htm

The winner in 2004 shot -7 for 54 holes (and Sean O'Hair finished second):

http://nepgt.bluegolf.com/bluegolf/nepgt4/event/nepgt41/contest/1/leaderboard.htm

Now Atkinson is a notoriously "tricky" course; very tight, and hilly on the back.  The design is credit to Phil Wogan, but I read in an interview that he only laid out the front 9.  After he did, the owner/developer said, "hell, I can do that", and laid out the craziest back 9 I have ever played.

But still, it is 6550 yards, and it did not get torn to pieces by some extremely good professionals.

Tony,

That is one of my favorite posts. Does anyone know of anything close to this situation.

From 6700 yards I have been as low as a 4.0, but currently a solid 6.5 index. From 7000+ I jump to at least 10+ and struggle to break 80. The problem is 425+ yard par 4's and 200+ yard par 3's. I can handle a 550+ par 5, but the long 3's & 4's are tough due to my length. I'm glad to see I'm not alone.

Detroit GC, 36 holes Ross, has a mediocre championship layout that's 7,000 yards and a fantastic member's course that's 6,000 yards. Same basic difference prevails at Oak Hill in Rochester, though their West Course is longer.

I think 6,700 yards is ideal. I'm an 11.5 and have a chance to play to my handicap on such a layout --obviously depending upon difficulty, but usually find that beyond that, it's getting a bit long. Of course you have to make allowances for elevation, temperature and so on, but 6,700 yards is a good baseline. I know way too many golfers think a course needs to be 7,000 yards, yet these are usually the same people who are clueless hwne it comes to architecture.

No.

My index is about a 5.

No.  But whether or not we can shoot par has nothing to do with whether 6700 yards is "plenty."

I sometimes play a little pitch and putt nearby which may be less than 1000 yards for 18 holes.   I am sure I will never come close to shooting par, and would be lucky to shoot Bogey.  By your reasoning, our courses are 5000-6000 yards too long.

I'm confused why any course ever has to play more than 6700 yards for a given individual.
There are more than one set of tees at all the courses I've ever played.
No reason you can't mix a few back and forward tees.
the only exception would be a tournament where the tees are fixed.
I'm not sure a course should be criticized (other than for driving up upkeep costs) for building in elasticity for better players , future equipment,and fast conditions-
Doesn't mean you have to play back there, or that the tees should even be routinely open.

I agree totally with Tom Doak's comments totally about Club pros and top amateurs being able to play well at acourse that measures 6700 yards-and I believe most,if not all should play there-However 7000+ yard tees could be available,closed most of the time,only played with permission, and not detract from such courses.

I would also say the word par is being mentioned far too much for me in this discussion.
If you take 40 yards off a 6740 yard par 72 and make it a par 70 is it a better test?
I know  I enjoyed my eagle 3 at #5 at NGLA yesterday far more than I will enjoy a birdie 3 there in the future when/if they change the par. (particularly if they decide to move the tee FORWARD,bastardizing the architecture of the fairway bunkers)