PDA

View Full Version : Low Par (mid 60's or less) courses - easy or not?



jimandr
7th June 2005, 11:07 PM
This discussion was actually started in 'what did you shoot' when Ona posted a 1 over par score on a Par 66.

As with all questions of 'difficulty', it's a relative term.

It really depends on the reasons why the course hasn't got many par 5's or lots of par 3's.

In Sydney, Bardwell Valley is quite difficult, even though it is a Par 62. While many of the par 4's are short, they aren't easy, and most of the par 3's are genuinely difficult. Every hole is hard if you miss the green. Kiama is a Par 66, but a really good test of golf. All the holes are 'normal' length, it's just that there are 8 par 3's and 2 par 5's.

Sefton is an all par 3 course, but again, the greens are tiny and really hard to get up and down if you miss them. The Von Nida tour standard pro's had a tournament there about 10 years ago, and I think about 8 under was the winner over 36 holes.

goughy
8th June 2005, 05:11 AM
The key to this is the courses acr. When it comes to comps that should balance the quality of the course. Of course if it's acr is 8 strokes easier than its par then 1 over par might not seem so good.

But I'll pay anyone who can shoot 1 over par regardless of its acr.

I feel sorry for people who play courses with easier ratings, cause you don't think of what the course rating will be while you're playing. Next thing you know a good round dosen't rate so good when it comes to handicapping.

AndyP
8th June 2005, 08:07 AM
At Nambour GC (my home club) the par is 68, but the CCR is quite often 65.  Makes it an extra challenge to get that handicap down.  :roll:

We have 6 par 3's, and two par 5's.

The course is probably easy for the really good players, as it isn't overly long, so they are probably hitting "scoring" irons into the greens most of the time, and both par 5's can be reached in two.

The challenge for me is that a lot of the greens are elevated and small, and you play a lot of shots from a sloped lie.  I've never found it easy, and am only just now, after 3 years membership, starting to play better/smarter there.

Fishman Dan
8th June 2005, 08:21 AM
Still in Sydney - Barnwell Park (Five Dock) is a par 62/61? There's i think 2 par 4's on the back 9? And they are under 300m. And most of the par 3's are 80-120 metres. Sure, they squeezed in 18 holes, but there's a line somewhere.

Andrew
8th June 2005, 11:14 AM
Jim, good post.

A course of any par can be difficult in comparison to its par. Often a par of 70+ is seen to be a standard that a course must reach, whether the length of course warrants such a par, yet a par of less than 70 seems inferior to many.

Possibly the greatest piece of Golf Course Architecture in the South of London is Swinley Forest. It is a very private club designed by H.S.Colt with a par of 69. It is often said to be the greatest par 69 in the world, which sells it short, because it is a great course no matter what the par is.

I don’t believe the absence of par 5’s to be a problem, especially as equipment allows us to hit the ball further. The Gunnamatta course at St Andrew’s Beach only has 2 par 5’s, the 1st & the 17th with 15 holes in the middle without a par 5, and the course doesn’t lack anything because of that fact.

Even Royal Melbourne West, the greatest course in the country has par 5’s that I can even reach in 2. It could be suggested that it is a par 68/69, but that doesn’t detract from the greatness of those holes.

With good design, par 3’s can be a feature of a golf course & a leveler because everyone has to hit the ball from the same distance, unlike par 4’s & par 5’s where long hitters require shorter clubs into the greens. Green complexes at par 3’s often have far greater variation.

If we continue to hit the ball further year by year, courses will need more & more land in a time when less land is available. On top of that, merely lengthening par 5’s to make then genuine 3 shotters is unfair to the golfers who are unable to hit the ball reasonable distances because of age, disability or inability. This is only going to lengthen the time it takes to play a round of golf & none of us want that.

Jim is correct in his assessment of Kiama. It is a par 66 that plays to 66. In fact, I believe it once had a ACR of 67. New courses catering to the general public can learn a lot from Kiama. I’m sure the handicaps of members at Kiama travel well.

Don’t forget par is a manufactured number. Many of the ‘Golden Age’ architects would refer to 1 shot, 2 shot & 3 shot holes, often purposely designing 1 ½ or 2 ½ shot holes to make people make a decision on whether to go for the green or not.

A good course is a good course, no matter what the card says.

marcel
8th June 2005, 10:12 PM
Don’t forget par is a manufactured number. Many of the ‘Golden Age’ architects would refer to 1 shot, 2 shot & 3 shot holes,

Love the story of McKenzie and ???(another archie I think) halfway through playing a hole and talking to each other from opposite sides of the fairway about what a great 2 shotter this hole is. "By the way, how many have you had?? 6 came the reply. Oh, I've had 7"