[Jim Franklin]

I spoke to an Oakmont member the other day and he said the USGA wanted to lengthen #8 to 290 yards. Any thoughts on a 290 yard par 3? Oakmont has resisted to date.

[JohnV]

If there was a 260 yard up hill par 3 in the 1920s why not 290 today?

Also, wasn't there a 270 yard par 3 at one of the courses where Bobby Jones won the US Open?

[igrowgrass]

The hole play downs hill, you don't want to carry it all the way onto the green, so all though the yardage may say 290 on a plaque, the distance would be about 240-255.  That isn't that unfair for ask those guys to hit two and three irons.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Given that in the distant past many 'par 3s' were only reachable with a wooden club I should not object to seeing a 300+ par 3 for a Major provided you could bump and run it on.  At the Walker Cup in 1999 at Nairn the 15th was a 306-yard par 4.  Some of the better GB and I players (Luke Donald and Paul Casey) took on the challenge and drove this green.  There was OOB lurking to one side and big drop-offs if you fell off the green.  But there was nothing untoward on the direct route, so it was a fair shot and there was a very practical shorter opt out for those who did not have the length.  It could have been called a par 3.

[Forrest Richardson]

My mentor, Arthur Jack Snyder, re-built No. 8's green in 1952-53 so it would better accept a running downhill shot on fast ground conditions. He tells me that professional Lew Worsham often said that the green was "nearly impossible to hold" due to its length and the fact that a wooden club was almost always the weapon of choice. Both men agreed — and so, too, the members — that the hole was best as a very long par-3 requiring exceptional skill to bound a ball onto the green, or even greater skill to fly a ball into the surface and hold it. The work to the green was mainly to raise the right and right/back portions, giving the well-executed shot a chance to hang on. Worsham said he could only hold a ball 25% of the time on the green prior to the 1952-53 remodel.

290-yards seems fine. It may bring back the very long iron or the wooden weapon.

[TEPaul]

The thing about #8 Oakmont is it definitely is designed to run a ball onto that green but the bunkering on that hole before the green does require a player to gauge the distance correctly he needs to fly the ball to carry that bunker scheme to land the ball on the approach fairway in. If the hole is stretched to 290 yards, golfers are probably going to have to carry the ball a minimum of 250+ just to carry those bunkers that guard the approach fairway to the green. I'm not sure there're a lot of players anywhere who actually carry their 2-3 irons 250 yards in the air!

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Tom,

Why use an iron?  There are woods from 1 to 11 in some manufacturers' catalogues.

[Forrest Richardson]

Tom,

I don't think the proposed 290-yard length would be "for most players"...do you?!

[Mike Nuzzo]

Seems like a good idea - for the pros.
I like the hump just in front of the green that can divert a low ball into the bunker if played a little too aggressively.  At least that's the way it looked... Could someone confirm if it's presence is significant for a running ball?
It is quite a hole for the flattest parcel on the property.
Cheers

[nandoal]

I actually played Oakmont last week Monday, #8 is a beast.  I think it said on the plaque that it was 265.  I hit driver in the bunker left, pin high.  They are doing major bunker work on this whole as well as a few others on the front.  

[Matt_Ward]

Jim:

The 8th could / should be lengthened to some degree since the nature of what world class professional hit today is far from what the "original intent" was by the Fownes. I'm referring to the type of club used to cover that sort of distance with today's clubs & balls. 245 yards today is not as intimidating as it once was for the world's premier players.

I don't know if 290 yards is the answer but having the hole at 260 or thereabouts should not be asking too much.

Personally, although the 8th is indeed a tough hole the more vexing, in my mind, is the diabolical 16th at 233 yards. This hole surrenders NOTHING. Usually, the high command of the USGA always seem to place the pin just over the right bunker on the final day and frankly it's near impossible to come anywhere near the pin when it's firmed up to Open levels. I can still vividly recall Larry Nelson draining his 60 foot bomb on the Monday-delayed final round in the '83 US Open to edge out Tom Watson!

You can roll a ball onto the 8th but the 16th doesn't provide that same avenue of choice.

[Jim Franklin]

Matt -

I will agree with you 100% that 16 is much more vexing than #8. I don't have an issue with lengthening #8, after all, they certainly have room to throw another tee 30 yards back. I am just curious as to when we will have the first 300 yard par 3 and this may in fact be that hole.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()