[paul cowley]

....having heard TomP lamenting about Tillie waxing eloquently about the the three shot par five and its demise in the modern era, I wanted to annouce a new design that would not only preserve the intent of the original stategy, but provide a heretofore untried strategic hole design....I have been waiting ten years for the proper time and site and I think I have found it outside the revolutionary war town of Newark [pronounced 'new' 'ark' ] Delaware....although the course itself is two miles outside of town just over the border in Maryland.

 The hole in its simplest, shortest and purist form as a par five would consist of a green at least 480 yards from the tee, that is guarded on the front and sides by hazards....the green would slope steeply front to back with non of the putting surface less than a two and a half percent slope...behind the green would be fairway about forty yards deep.

 There is also a variant form of the above as a par four [which I refer to as a 180 degree dogleg], that has the landing area beyond the green in which one would hit their  second shot back to the green as the prefered play strategy.......pace of play can be an issue, so this design does not work well with courses that play alot of rounds.
...it does work well where space is an issue.
 I think only the par five hole strategy will be used in Maryland.

[Bill_McBride]

I've played a par 3 with the same strategy: the Redan at North Berwick!

[Dan Herrmann]

Paul,
Laura and I had dinner at Grotto Pizza in Newark, DE yesterday and drove across that 1/5 mile section of route 896 that crosses from DE into MD (for .2 miles) and then into PA.

So - when will we be invited to see this superhole?  

[TEPaul]

Paul:

Aha--very interesting indeed. I think I know just where you mean. Excellent idea---risky but excellent. I love that type of "out of the box" experimentation.

That sort of idea reminds me of the 17th hole at Coore and Crenshaw's Easthampton CC. It looks nothing like this but the pyschological effect on a player trying to figure out how to approach it is probably similar.

I'll never forget first looking at that 17th hole at Easthampton. It was before the course was finished and there was no card yet. The hole was about 485 yards and a sharp dogleg right so even a good player was going to be pretty far out to approach the green in two. The hole is a pretty big scale thing from tee to green but when I walked to the corner here was this skinny narrow little green propped up high off in the corner at the end of the hole. At first to me it looked like a big giant (the hole tee to green) with a shrunken little head (the green). At first I thought it had to be a par 4 because it was 485 yds and I thought it was weird looking and sort of too much. But when I asked Bill Coore about it he said it was a par 5 and then I understood exactly what they were up to with that hole. He said the idea behind it was to  make the good player struggle pyschologically on the second shot when he was clearly well within range of that green but to actually hit something that skinny and narrow and propped up in two was clearly a problem---it was possible but it sure looked hard to do. If you missed it you had a pretty hard up and down because the green was so skinny and narrow and propped up. I never played it but in theory it was  an excellent idea----bascially a short "go/no go" par 5 that the player was well within range of to make a birdie or even eagle but the decison to try to hit that green or lay-up somewhere around it in two was really in balance---eg just tough decision-making on the second shot perhaps somewhat akin to ANGC's great #13.

Your idea seems like the same basic psychological tension for players within range in two. Obviously the aggressive way to play this hole is to hit into the fairway in back and chip or putt back up the green. If that seems like too much maybe you could just add another option of having a narrow little like right to left (or left to right) caroming run-on option where a player could land the ball short of the green and let it filter onto the front to back sloping green but to do so he'd have to hit a long and extremely accurate second shot.

Years ago when this site first came online I proposed a concept sort of like this but my idea was basically a cross between a long par 3 and short par 4. The green was completely bunkered or almost bermed in front and somewhat on the sides and the green slope strongly front to back and there was a lot of fairway behind and to the sides of the green. I called the hole the "Play-back" hole and I got the idea from one of the holes at Longue Vue G.C. in Pittsburgh because as I was walking to the next hole I looked back at the green and it seemed like the best way to approach it was from behind the green  

[paul cowley]

 Tom...I'm glad you agree...the hole I described was in its simplest form, all variety of hazards could be incorporated for interest, as well as the existing terrain,etc......but the key ways to play the hole would be;
 Drive and play past the green to set up a relatively safe third shot,
 Drive and attempt to hold the green in two while risking the surrounding hazards or,
 Drive and layup the second shot so the third shot could be played with a lofted club that would better hold the back sloping green.

...the design intent here is to create three shot strategies for par fives that do not rely on length alone.

 Now the playback par four is similar but with key differences, especially in the length from tee to green, which should be in the 265 to 280 yard range while still including a front layup fairway and a fairway beyond the green........

[paul cowley]

Dan....I would guess the site must be close to where you describe....I'm still discovering my way around the area.

....I will ask the owner to put your name at the top of the list of invites, sometime in 2007 would be my guess.
  p :)ul

[TEPaul]

Paul:

Would I be right in thinking this idea may be on what could, at this point, be considered the 4th?

Maybe a fourth option would be too much but if not think about this. On either side of the front of the green could be a quite narrow opening the ball could be run onto the green and around and past the fronting bunkers. The bunker on that side would have its face raised appropriately so that contour could be carried out some into the approach to filter the ball around and onto the green. If the shot was not accurate enough it would find either the front bunker (with the green running away) or the side bunker and from the side bunker the sand shot back onto the green would be complicated by the fact the raised face would make the ball run away from the shot some and of course down the green due to the front to back slope you mentioned.

There are a few Willie Park greens at Glen Ridge in NJ that have rather generous openings to them but the real interesting thing about them is there are a number of interesting things that can happen to the ball depending on which side of the front the ball is run onto.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()