[RT]

Not sure with the greens remodeling at Oak Tree Men's Club if no. 3 has been reached?  Was such a small piece of mound green was originally placed upon, falling off three sides.

[Bob_Huntley]

I was wondering the same thing, Mark.  Four years ago I was reassured that the 603 yard, uphill, generally into the wind #15 at MPCC Dunes could not be reached in two, given one time I had played it and couldn't reach in THREE.  Today I'd be very surprised if it remains unsullied.  Hopefully Mr. Huntley will see this and inquire.....

Tom,

According to David Vivolo our Head Pro, the answer is no.

Bob

[Tim Leahy]

I don't recall ever hearing anyone hitting #4 at the Bayonet at Fort Ord in two, 635 par 5, usually into the wind. Hopefully they haven't changed it.

[Tom Huckaby]

Bob - thanks - my faith in the goodness of the world is restored.  

Tim - I could see a slugger reaching that hole at Bayonet in two.. it is generally into the wind, but it's also downhill a bit and pretty firm, with nothing in the way impeding a run-up.  Get a day with no wind, and well...I'd be surprised if reaching that one hasn't been done.  I too hope the hole wasn't changed though, as it was a good one....

TH

[Steve Kline]

Iwas told by a longtime PV member that John Smoltz has reached #15 in two.

I wouldn't think anyone will reach the long par 5 at Oakmont for this year's US Open when they have it playing all the way back at 667 or so. Shouldn't they have just made that hole's yardage 666?

A better question is how many won't get to the green on the 288 yard par 3?

[Andy Troeger]

Quick story to prove that distance is only a number.

The 16th at Pradera in CO is 635 yards or something like that, but it plays straight downhill and on the day I played it we had about a 30 mph wind at our backs. My drive went rolling down the mountain to a clip of 480 yards and I hit wedge over the green (barely) if you believe the yardages (which I have no reason not to).

Granted, the 375 yard hole up part of the same hill was a driver & 8-iron that did not get there  

[Ken Moum]

I just looked in the 2007 PGA Tour Media guide, and the lowest percentage of getting on in 2 last year was:

Pebble #14 -- 247 players, 8 attempts, none successful
TPC Sawgrass #9 -- 435 players, 25 attempts, none successful
Plantation Course #9 -- 112 players, 25 attempts, none successful
TPC Boston #7 -- 471 players, 33 attempts, one successful
TPC Sugarloaf # 10, 445 players, 86 attempts three successful

Conversely, at Riviera #1 -- 448 players, 291 attempts, 146 successful.

Other low attempts but not among the unhittable five:
Firestone #16 -- 7 attempts
Nemacolin #11 -- 22 attempts
Pebble, Sawgrass and Boston make up the rest of the top five.

Top in attempts:
Summerlin #3 -- 314/289
Mirasol #17 -- 425/371
Tucson Nat'l #10 -- 430/374
Tucson Nat'l #2 -- 430/369
Magnolia #10 -- 292/250

Ken

[Cliff Hamm]

I believe TPC Boston was Tiger Woods in the final round.  About 13 feet (?) and he eagled.

[Bill_Yates]

Would anyone agree with me that an unreachable par 5 is the only real par 5?

[Bob_Huntley]

There is no way Bobby Jones hit the 16th at Olympic in two from the current back tee.  I watched Evan (Big Cat) Williams try (hit it in the front bunker) and there is no way Jones was as long as Big Cat.

Joel,

Whatever you do, do not put money on your conviction, because you will surely lose.

Bob

[Chris Cupit]

Would anyone agree with me that an unreachable par 5 is the only real par 5?

No

[Kalen Braley]

Would anyone agree with me that an unreachable par 5 is the only real par 5?

No

Make that two nays...

Using that same logic, there would be lots of "fake" par 4s as well.

[Bill_Yates]

I will still argue that when par 5's or par 4's become reachable by a majority of the best players their par should be changed.  In fact, it has in the past.  

In 1911, every hole over 426 yards was deemed to be a Par 5.  In 1917, it was adjusted so that every hole over 446 yards was considered a par 5 and though I don't know the year of the change, today, holes longer than 471 yards are set as par 5's.

Given the history and logic of the past and the impact of the club, shaft and ball technology of today (incidently, shaft and ball technology prompted those previous changes), I think it's about time for another change.  And, apparently I'm not alone.

"While most members' clubs still adhere to these par ratings, professional golfers are now hitting the ball so far that many tournament venues boast par 4-s of up to 500 yards."
(World Atlas of Golf, Sixth Edition, 2002, page 19)

[Chris Cupit]

I will still argue that when par 5's or par 4's become reachable by a majority of the best players their par should be changed.  In fact, it has in the past.  

I think just because under certain circumstances the best of the best CAN reach a par 5, that alone isn't reason enough to change the par.  I think some of the best, most interesting and strategic par 5's are those that are usually reachable.

ANGC #13 and #15 of course but countless other examples.  When a hole is almost always reachable, you get the player thinking (usually enough to screw him up) right off the tee and thoughout the entire hole.  Other great reachable par 5's--#16 TPC, #18 Baltusrol, #18 Pebble (arguabley more interesting now that it is MORE reachable thanks to technology!).

About the only par 5's that are pretty much unreachable that seemed very interesting that I can think of are #17 at Baltusrol and #7 at PV.   Their interest was thanks to a Tillinghast/Crump? hells' half acre that put pressure on the drive so the player could carry the cross hazard.

Par 5's that are so long that they are almost never reachable result often in a MORE conservative play off the tee (why risk driver if your best drive can't get you on in two anyway?) and then a (usually) boring layup to whatever wedge distance the player is looking for.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

The trouble is our obsession with par as an end in itself, rather than simply a way of comparing different players' scores when they are on different parts of the course during a medal round.  Also, 3-under par is easier to grapple with than a score of 213 after 3 rounds.  Par is relevant when playing a points game such as Stableford.  In match play it is irrelevant.  In the sense that Bogey reflected the chances of a good player playing a hole in 3,4,5 or 6 it was quite a good yardstick.  It allowed anomalies such as a 420-yard bogey 5 and a 450-yard bogey 4 to be on the same card.  Didn't the par-4 11th at Augusta often measure longer than the par-5 13th?  Saunton certaily used to start 478 yards par 4, followed by 476 yards par 5.  It wouldn't look so dotty if they were bogey 4 and bogey 5.

[Chris Cupit]

On a personal note, I was dissapointed that my home course, The Honors Course, lengthened the second hole a couple of years ago.

The old #2 was 524.  The drive was semi-blind over a hill and despite a visible bunker on the right, you had to hit the ball 20 yards left of that spot or end up in the rough on the right.

Second shot was either a 7 iron lay up as far left as possible to give yourself a good angle coming down the green or an attempt from 230 or so to go for the narrow green angling away from you.

Over time as technology shortened the hole, I understand it needed a little length to keep the second shot in the 230 range.  But, I liked the idea of a shortish Par 5 that gives you a chance to make an early birdie that you need on this difficult course.  Of course, going for it and messing up the round with an early double is also a possibility.  Beileve me, even early in the round, these thoughts could race through your head (and isn't that a goal of the architect--to get you thinking )

"We" have moved the new back tee to 570.  Now it is unreachable by everyone except the longest hitters (yes we "designed" the hole for the NCAAs that come every so often!!) and a VERY BORING hole.  For a good player who CAN hit it 290-300 it is now unreachable.  The play for that guy is a 3-wood, 5 iron and a wedge.

NO THINKING, NO STRATEGY no debate--just hit these three shots

I can't think of a better example of a reachable par 5 that is now a blah hole.

I  would have reccomended pushing the tee back to 540--another 16 yards or so.  The more it is reachable by a very good drive from the best 30% versus just the elite 5% I think you put even more pressure on all the good players as they now feel that anything less than a birdie and they have "lost" a stroke (or 1/2 a stroke) to the field.

Lastly, the new tee is elevated so much, you lose some of the blindness that I thought was pretty neat

[Doug Wright]

I came across this old thread and thought I'd pull it up FYI with the discussion about Pine Valley #7's no longer being "unreachable.".

[Kalen Braley]

I've always wondered about the following hole and how reachable it would be.  Its the 16th hole at MeadowWood golf course in Liberty Lake, WA.  From the tips it plays 600 yards and the last 125 yards are straight up the hill...roughly 50-60 feet of elevation gain....and it usually plays into the prevailing wind.  In my dozens of rounds there, from the white tees, most often it would take 4 shots to get home and I was never closer than 125 yards away for my 3rd shot. 

I'd love to see a long baller take a crack at this green in 2 from the way backs....

[Keith Buntrock]

Under the right conditions, every par 5 is reachable in theory. There are a few holes that come to mind though that are not typically reached in 2.

Number 13 at Purgatory is 741 yards from the tips... but we played it at 615 I believe. With a right to left cross wind, one of my college teammates tried the driver-driver combination and was a few steps off the front of the green. Hes one of the longer hitters in the field. So for us that day, I do not believe it was reachable.

I can't imagine anyone at Firestone getting on 16, although this thread confirms it had been reached. I recently played it as a replica hole and getting a ball to fly the water and stop on that green is impressive. And that hole is at least 600 yards.

Number 8 at Magnolia in Disney is just too long really to be reached by 99.9 percent of the golfing population.

Number 1 at Greywalls is IMO one of the hardest par 5s without any sand or water by the green to hit in 2. Hitting that green with a sand wedge is not easy. Let alone trying to chase a long iron/fairway wood on to the green.

[Ben Sims]

#11 at Haggin Oaks in Sacramento.  It's 600+ from the tips.  Slight dogleg left.  What makes it unreachable is the half acre of trees directly in front of the green.  I can't think of an angle from a drive in the 350 range would have to the green.  Unless you know someone that has a 250 yard rope hook that goes forty feet in the air at the 230 point. 

I like the hole.  Not for the trees, but for what they force you to do.  Which is either play out to the right and long or play short and in the middle on your second.  Anybody played this one?

[Mike Wagner]

Erin Hills #18 fits the bill.  I'll Let you know i anyone does it this summer....617 from the back and new bunkers.  The green is tough to hold from 100 yards, let alone from a quarter mile...

[Pete_Pittock]

Resurrecting this for two reasons. First, the 13th at Emerald Valley in Creswell, Oregon might be one. They added a new tee in recent years which I think is even further back than 610. Tightish tree lined dogleg right with a small elevated green.
http://www.evgolfresort.com/images/holes/13.jpg.
Are there other new additions, or holes that need to be scratched off the list.


 Then I was wondering what is the minimum length for a hole to be unreachable in two for anyone but playable for most, and how would you design it? I'll set that up as a ne threaqdha\

[Tom ORourke]

The 4th at Merion was reached in the last US AM by Eduardo Molinari during the stroke play portion. I happened to be following him but did not see where the tee was. I would think the 16th at Pine Tree might be tough to get to at 667 from the back. There are some Pine Tree guys here who might know if that has been done from the tips. I almost got home in two there once. My third shot was only a 4 iron.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()