Does anyone think that #13 is a good example of the "driveable" par four?
AFAIK, not one player in the Cup matches attempted it, and that's in match play!!
As a short hitter, I love the idea of a hole that encourages the bombers to go for it, especially if it has a green complex that means a hole-hi miss is going to require an extraordinary shot to make three.
But a miss at 13 is almost certainly a penalty stroke, and so the hole doesn't encourage anyone to have a go. Adding to that is its length, ~350 from the back tees, and no chance to run one up.
Conversely one of my favorite PGA Tour holes is #15 at TPC River Highlands, It has no fronting hazard, and it's short enough (under 300 yards) that everyone on tour has a chance to chase a ball up.
But the green is narrow, with water on one side and a difficult up-and-down on the other.
And, unlike Valhalla, the layup isn't a cut-and-dried decision. As a consequence, you see players put their hand on three, or even four clubs before they decide what to hit from the tee. The whole deal is a delicious little architectural head game.
A significant number of players have a go, despite it being stroke play.
Why build a driveable par four with an island green? Imagine the fun in the Ryder Cup if everyone who got to that hole with the honor had to assume his opponent was going to knock it on the green?
Ken