[BCrosby]

Max Behr says that par was first "invented" the night before the Open in 1870. No other details are provided.

I was unaware that the concept of "par" had an identifiable birth date.

Was Behr right about that?

Bob

 

[Phil_the_Author]

Bob, when and where did Max state this?

[Bill Gayne]

John Paul Newport had a nice article in the WSJ concerning par recently. Contained in the article is the following paragraph:

"Historically, par is a relatively recent addition to the game's vocabulary. In the really olden days, players didn't even bother keeping cumulative scores. Golf was a game played against an opponent on a hole-by-hole basis. Match play, as it's now called, only required keeping a record of holes lost, won or tied. But toward the middle of the 1800s, it became necessary to establish a basis of comparison so that golfers from different courses could compete against one another using handicaps. Originally what we now think of as par golf was called bogey golf, the bogey score being what the flawless but theoretical Bogey Man (based on a character in a popular British song of the period) would always shoot to beat you."

Link to the entire article.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118194857797537281.html?mod=j20-sports.htm_3

[Rich Goodale]

I think that Newport is being economique avec le verite.  In the first 1/2 of the 19th century, hardlly anybody travellled to play golf, as trains (and even the concept of sport) were in their infancy.  Whatever matches were played were played by pros or aristos, who didn't have handicaps.  My guess is that handicaps didn't come into existence unitl the turn of the next century, and not in vogue until well into that century (~1920?).

It is not for nothing that when they decided to have an Open Championship in 1860 they played it at stroke play and off scratch.

That golf in the UK is, was or ever has been mostly a match-play game is a figment of somebody's imgination, probably Max Behr's.....

[Jon Wiggett]

Richard,

I recall that most of my casual play when a junior against other people was generally matchplay. I think that most comps have being strokeplay since the turn of the 19th/20th C but matchplay is still a significant part of the average golfers life. I also have trouble seeing where you draw the conclusion that it is not?

[Rich Goodale]

Jon

In the 30 or so years I have been playing golf in Scotland, Match Play has been the game of choice for casual games, but stroke play has been the pre-eminent competitive form, largely because that was and is how one establishes a standard of play, or handicap.

In many if not most of the great matches of the olden days, reports will more often say, Willie lost to Archie 74 to 72,  than Archie beat Willie 2 and 1.

I think that the wrtiers of the Golden Age overstated the importance of match play, possibly because they were not skilled enough in stroke play vis a vis the leaing players of the game.  Check out CB Macdonald's reports of his games at St. andrews.  He played with Old Tom Morris from time to time, but got regularly thumped, if I remember corectly.

Of course, I could be wrong....

[BCrosby]

Guys -

I don't think Behr was suggesting anything deeply metaphysical here. Or, at a more mundane level, even anything about the history of competitive golf.

My guess is that par was "invented on the eve of the 1870 Open Championship" as an aid to keeping track of the scoring.

But that's just a guess. I'd like to know if Behr is right. Presumably it's one of those things that could be checked.

Bob

[Jon Wiggett]

Richard,

yes I believe your right. But even 74-72 is still playing against someone else i.e matchplay in its purest form. If you think about what we now call matchplay it is infact dependant on having handicaps which are in turn dependant on PAR. I would suggest that most early games were played by players playing against each other and par was first thought of to gage players who didn't play each other on a regular basis and who were of different playing standards.

[Adam Clayman]

Knowing Behr's penchant for the game mind, if one reads the above fact about the eve before with a sarcastic ear, perhaps he was making one of those mean little jokes, inorder to belittle par?

 Rihc's timeframe would then seem correct.

 Bob, When did Max write that?  

[Peter Pallotta]

Gents
I don't know the relevance of the following. I post it because it seemed to me at least tangentially related to some of the issues raised, and just in case it meant something to someone else. It's from a series of articles by Horace Hutchinson called "Fifty Years of Golf", written in the 1910s and looking back from there. Here's a snippet:

“In the year 1875, I having arrived on May sixteenth at the advanced age of sixteen, was admitted as a member of the Royal North Devon Golf Club, and in the autumn of that year committed the blazing indiscretion of winning the scratch medal which carried with it the Captaincy of the club...I became a "scratch player" from that time forth.  In those days, before handicaps were fixed, golfing society was divided into two classes -- those who were scratch, and those who were not -- and there was no idea of such a thing as a penalty or plus handicap. Some of the so-called "scratch" players of the day were exceedingly scratchy ones, and only supported their dignity at a considerable expense: there was one in particular of whom it was said that it cost him three hundred a year to be a scratch player -- that is to say, to play all and sundry amateurs on level terms.”

[BCrosby]

 Bob, When did Max write that?  

1930.

[Tim_Cronin]

Par arrived about a hundred years ago, co-existing with bogey golf for a while, until everyone used par as a standard rather than a superlative. I think the USGA recognized it around 1911, but some Chicago courses listed par in 1909.

[Kevin Pallier]

As written on the USGA web-site

"The first measure of course difficulty was par. The word par is derived from stocks; i.e., "a stock may be above or below its normal or par figure." British golf writer A.H. Doleman in 1870 asked Davie Strath and Jamie Anderson, two professionals, what score would be required to win The Belt at the then 12-hole course at Prestwick. Their response was that perfect play should produce a score of 49. Mr. Doleman called this par for Prestwick and when Young Tom Morris scored two strokes over par for three rounds (36 holes) to win The Belt, the term stuck."

Interesting -in most records of the Open I see score and winning margin but not v Par. The USGA has listed records v Par since 1912 !!

[Tony_Muldoon]

From http://www.scottishgolfhistory.net/bogey_par.htm

Bogey
"Bogey" was the first stroke system, developed in England at the end of the 19th Century.  The full history is given in Robert Browning's History of Golf 1955.
In 1890 Mr Hugh Rotherham Secretary of the Coventry Golf Club conceived the idea of standardising the number of shots at each hole that a good golfer should take, which he called the 'ground score.'  Dr Browne, Secretary of the Great Yarmouth Club, adopted the idea, and, with the assent of the club's golfers, this style of competition was introduced there for use in match play.  During one competition Mr CA Wellman (possibly Major Charles Wellman) exclaimed to Dr Browne that, "This player of yours is a regular Bogey man". This was probably a reference to the eponymous subject of an Edwardian music hall song "Hush! Hush! Hush! Here Comes the Bogey Man", which was popular at that time. So at Yarmouth and elsewhere the ground score became known as the Bogey score.
A 'bogle' was a Scottish goblin as far back as the 16th Century and a Bogey-man was a widely used term for a goblin or devil.  Golfers of the time considered they were playing a Mister Bogey when measuring themselves against the bogey score.
In 1892, Colonel Seely-Vidal, the Hon Secretary of the United Services Club at Gosport, also worked out the 'Bogey' for his course. The United Club was a services club and all the members had a military rank. They could not measure themselves against a 'Mister' Bogey or have him as a member, so 'he' was given the honorary rank of Colonel.  Thus the term 'Colonel Bogey' was born.  Bogey competitions are still played at many clubs.
Later Bogey was used as the term of one above Par (See history of Par below).
Par
Par is derived from the stock exchange term that a stock may be above or below its normal or 'par' figure.  In 1870, Mr AH Doleman, a golf writer, asked the golf professionals David Strath and James Anderson, what score would win 'The Belt', then the winning trophy for 'The Open', at Prestwick, where it was first held annually from 1861 to 1870.  Strath and Anderson said that perfect play should produce a score of 49 for Prestwick's twelve holes. Mr Doleman called this Par for Prestwick and subsequently Young Tom Morris won with a score of two strokes 'over Par' for the three rounds of 36 holes.
Although the first noted use of the word "Par" in golf was in Britain and predates that of Bogey, today's rating system does not and the Par standard was not further developed until later.  It was the American Women's golf association, who, from 1893, began to develop a national handicapping system for women. It was largely in place by the end of the Century.  The Men's association, founded in 1894, followed suit a few year's later.



And of course you’ll want to check this out.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RLgKOamoME

[TEPaul]

Tony:

Good post. I think it was the English Women's Golf Union that developed that interclub handicapping system in 1893 not the America Women's Golf Association. There never has been an American Women's Golf Association that I'm aware of.

Although it may've preceded it here and there Stroke Play golf competition probably evolved from the British Open begun in 1860. It may've also been a necessary form of play as the Open probably mostly involved professionals who didn't have much time to devote to tourmaments (they had to get back to their jobs).

The British Amateur Championship began in 1885.

Young Tom Morris won the Open for the third time in 1870 thereby retiring the Championship Belt in perpetuity. No Open was held in 1871 apparently due to Morris's retiring of the Belt. It was reestablished in 1872 with the prize being the Claret Jug which endures to this day.

Those early championships (as today) were played "at scratch" (whatever it was that "scratch" was based on which may've been nothing more than no handicapping).

Max Behr seemed to have as many opinions on the Rules of Golf as he did about golf course architecture. Behr also wrote extensively about the Rules of Golf. If he mentioned that par was invented in 1870 he probably found some written mention of that in his travels to St Andrews or Prestwick.

The R&A of St Andrews also did not finalize their position as Rules interpreters in a global sense until around 1899. It was at this point that the first R&A "Rules Committee" was functional in a global sense.

In my opinion, the idea of "bogey" and later "par" was more a function of evolving handicap systems.

[BCrosby]

Kevin/Tony -

Thanks. I think that nails it.

I thought "par" had been around since the beginning of the game. Apparently not.

Once again, Behr was right.

Bob

[Rich Goodale]

Bob

That Behr might have been right vis a vis "par" can be atrributed to the laws of probability and random chance, or even the old saw that even a blind pig finds an acorn from time to time......

Vis a vis "handicaps" I found the following interesting quote in a history of Carnoustie, whilst researching my latest book, "Experience Carnoustie Golf Links" (shameless plug acknowledged):

"...21st January 1863 brought the first mention at Carnoustie of handicap allowances.  The rudimnetary handicapping method use in the county (Angus) until late in the (19th) centuryhad first been noted at Montrose on 25th September 1847...........The silver medal.......was played for and carreid off by John Paul (possibly TE Paul's grandfather, but not yet confirmed), he going the whole 17 holes at 104 strokes.  The other two prizes were awarded according to the average number of strokes (i.e. relative to their past performances)."

[TEPaul]

Whenever the concept of par (or bogey) began in golf is probably not as important as an analysis of what the perception of it over time has done to golf.

One really important example of that analysis of par, in my opinion, is the general expectation (contained in the definition of par in golf) that a golfer once reaching a green should take two putts.  

There's little question that the concept and perception of "par" whether as a base-line off which to construct a handicap system or as a general concept of excellence, it has created a general gross score mentality in golf be it on any hole or for a round.

It's another really good example of how the two formats of golf can probably never really co-exist completely seamlessly.

For a number of decades the USGA's Rules of Golf contained separate sections to handle various aspects of match play and stroke play golf.  Today they are melded together.

[BCrosby]

TEP -

Behr and Joshua Crane both were very interested in rules issues. Crane published long articles in GI on the OB rule and the stymie (which he defended). Behr responded in a (remarkably polite) letter to Crane on his OB article. MacK responded to Crane in a letter on the stymie rule. (Mack agreed with Crane.)

It makes sense that Behr and Crane would be intersted in rules questions. At the end of the day both were deeply interested in how golf ought to be played. (They had dramatically different visions of that, but they shared a serious concern about it.)

The two things that have the biggest impact on the nature of the game are (a) architecture/maintenance (they are hard to separate) and (b) rules.

So their interest in both issues makes a lot of sense.

Bob

[TEPaul]

"Bob
That Behr might have been right vis a vis "par" can be atrributed to the laws of probability and random chance, or even the old saw that even a blind pig finds an acorn from time to time......"

Richard:

It really is interesting that you are constantly so negative about Max Behr, what he said and wrote and proposed. One logical explanation has to be that you are intimidated by his brilliance.  

The most logical explanation of why Behr may've said that about "par" being invented in 1870 is because he probably read it when at one of those clubs.

One of the general concepts that the likes of Behr, or even Macdonald opposed in golf was the whole idea of more and greater "standardizations" in golf, golf Rules or golf course architecture.

What Behr was apparently trying to protect was the part Nature played in the concept of the game or sport. Macdonald, on the other hand, did not seem to believe in standardizations within I&B because he grew up in golf at a time when things like that basically didn't exist.

Furthermore, Richard the Obtuse----blind squirrels find acorns. Blind pigs find truffles.

[BCrosby]

The thing about inventing par is that there was/is a perfectly good way to keep score based on "4"s". You see old articles where people used how many over or under "4's" they were at a given point in a round.

My guess is that the advantage of using different "pars" for different holes in competitions is that you get a more accurate read of where you stand versus other players during a round. Scoring based only on "4's" can distort that.

Bob

[TEPaul]

Bob:

Regarding your post #18, as you know, I think the basic philosophical differences between Crane and Behr was that one (Crane) was essentially trying to remove or minimize as much as possible luck and randomness extant in golf due to natural circumstances for the sole purpose of more effectively isolating human skill for comparative reasons.

To the likes of Behr to even attempt to do such a thing in golf such as mathematizing these kinds of comparisons of holes or courses or golfers (par) was to attack and minimize Nature's part in golf. Apparently Behr seemed sort of uncomfortable with the entire idea of translating "penalty" into "strokes".

It may seem trite or off the subject (of par) but the dynamic of the old traditionalists in golf and its Rules simply believed in the old fashioned principle of protecting the sanctity of the lie at all costs. This principle (that the golfer not touch his ball) seemed to evolve in the middle era (about 1750-1850) for some reason.

Eventually it sort of clashed with the idea of "equity" which was an attempt to assign some equitable penalty to the handling of the ball in various circumstances in the currency of golf----eg strokes.

This kind of thing apparently was difficult to do in Behr's opinion, although the emergence of stroke play made it so much more necessary than in match play.

The whole idea of how to do this sort of evolved a "principle" that Richard Tuft's lists in his book of 1960----

"The penalty must not be less than the advantage which the player could derive from a particular Rule violation." (intentional or otherwise).

[Rich Goodale]

Bob

Right you are re: 4's.  That's the way Donald Ross and other "scratch" players did it c. 1900 at Dornoch.

TEP

On my side of the tracks the pigs forage for acorns like crows looking for road-kill, on yours they daintily check for the bouquet of the truffles and then softly french kiss them onto their lips.  To each his or her own.....

Rich

[TEPaul]

"TEP
On my side of the tracks the pigs forage for acorns like crows looking for road-kill, on yours they daintily check for the bouquet of the truffles and then softly french kiss them onto their lips.  To each his or her own....."

I'll buy that one Richard, as it seems to prove why our American pigs have always been so much more sophisticated than your pigs over there.

[Rich Goodale]

Yes, Tom, but it also proves why there are truffles actually found in Europe and your poofter pigs can only find acorns in America.

I think there is a very good GCA analogy there, but I'm not going there until I am convinced you are taking your medications......

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()