[Andrew Summerell]

We often discuss how (in some cases) par should be irrelevant. In the real world, we are stuck with par 3, 4 & 5 being standard for holes, with course lengthening holes to accommodate those pars.

I’m not a big believer in the importance of par, but this was a thought that came to mind the other day.

If par had become commonplace pre–1850, when equipment didn’t allow the golfer to hit the ball as far & many of the ‘long’ holes would have been 4 shot holes to the average golfer, would par 6 holes have become standard as well ?

In other words, would we have courses trying to accommodate par 6 holes with greater length ?

If par had not become commonplace until 1995, would we only be left with par 3 & par 4 holes ?

[Forrest Richardson]

Andrew — We are in the midst of our first-ever par-6. It will be a par-6 for women / forward tees at about 520-yards. We did this because we felt the elevated tee was the best place to play the hole...as opposed to lower the forward tees to make it play as a par-5.

I am all for 6s, 7s and even 8s. Who's counting!?

[David Stamm]

I know this has been said before, but maybe par means nothing anyway. How would players play a hole if there was not any par value attached to the hole. I would imagine alot more smartly. Afterall, isn't the total for the round in medal play what's most important?

[Forrest Richardson]

Match play is the secret — par and totals matter not.

[David Stamm]

I would tend to agree Forrest. I prefer match play.

[Tom_Doak]

Andrew:

That's probably true.  But the real question is, would it have been a good thing for more par-6 holes to be built?

A par-6 today [for men, not the hole Forrest is describing] has to be viewed as little more than a gimmick, designed mostly to get attention.

In the old days there were a few.  Mr. Darwin's description of the two long holes at Blackheath in England is quite memorable ... I'll have to look it up for you when I get to the office.

[Andrew Summerell]

Andrew:

That's probably true.  But the real question is, would it have been a good thing for more par-6 holes to be built?

 

It probably wouldn't be a good thing, but we wouldn't know, because we would know nothing else.

The same as if par became commonplace in the late 1990's, we may not have par 5's.

How would golf have developed if par was never invented ?

[Tom_Doak]

Sean:  It is one of my favorite passages in the book (I have many favorites) so I will record it in full:

"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, and the round ends with two holes of a somewhat milder character, but neither of them in the least easy."

I believe these two holes were around 700 yards and 550 yards, respectively.  The point is that not many people enjoyed them, and that, not par, is what killed them.

Still, I would have loved to have a chance to don the red coat and play at Blackheath before it was abandoned for less populated ground.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()