[PThomas]

the designer you have hired to build your course has found that his ideal routing starts or ends - take your pick - with a  par 3

do you go along with it, or make him start or finish with a par 4 or 5?

[Wayne Wiggins, Jr.]

I like the par 3 finish, a la Congressional (Blue) and Pasatiempo.  Not sure I could really get started with a par 3, especially a long one.  

[Tom Huckaby]

My first thought on this was the same as Wayne's; that is, finisher is fine, but opener would be weird.

But then thinking about it more... wouldn't an opening par 3 be PERFECT for pace of play issues?  That is, you really can't hit until the group ahead is done with the hole.. that stretches things out straight from the start... quite a help on busy days....

So now I have nothing against it.  If it works, then let's do it.

It would require some getting used to though, at least here in the US.

TH

[J Sadowsky]

I like the par 3 finish, a la Congressional (Blue) and Pasatiempo.  Not sure I could really get started with a par 3, especially a long one.  

Congressional no longer finished with a par-3, it finished with what used to be 17.  What used to be 18 is now #10 going the other way across the lake.

I like par-3 finishers though.  The first round of golf I ever played was Ocala Palms, a shotgun start.  For me, that meant 18 was a shortish par 3.  I hit (for a first time player) a good 6 iron to get to the (back of) green, and then two putted across a ridge downhill for par.  That more than anything else wanted me to keep playing - I went off at Ocala Golf Club later that day!

Opening with a par 3 is another story - a tough par 3 can be brutal to a bad shot, and an easy one seems almost like a waste (and still can be brutal with a miss).  I like a hole I can hit driver, and even if I screw up, I'm still okayish to open a hole.  You can challenge me on #2 if you want.

[Sam Morrow]

I would prefer to close with a par 3. Tillinghast's Oak Hills in San Antonio closes with a par 3. But Tillinghast's San Antonio Country Club opens with a short downhill par 3.

[Jeff_Mingay]

There are a few modern courses which end par-3 - Hanse's Boston Golf Club comes to mind. But have there been any built in the recent past which start par-3?

[J Sadowsky]

Someone mentioned in the other thread a Ballestros course that opens with an island 3.

[JESII]

there was a mention in the last day or so (possibly on the playing through thread) about Seve building a course that starts with a 3...his reasoning was what you guys have said...once that group is off the green, pace of play should be fine...It sounded to me like you might have to add a minute or two between intervals though.

The Homestead finishes with a nice 3.

In a tournament at Stonewall North last year #9 was the alternate tee and I started there in the first round...didn't love it, but made a par...

[Tom Huckaby]

JES - look at it this way, on a crowded course with zero defined intervals - that is, a group hits once the group in front is out of range - wouldn't a par three opener be an automatic improvement?  It will always take longer to play a par three than to just get out of range.... a forced gap will then occur...

Oh well, it seems like it would work to me.  Thus I like the idea.  Man I hate bad scores on opening holes, but I hate slow play a LOT LOT more.

TH

[Jim Thompson]

But then thinking about it more... wouldn't an opening par 3 be PERFECT for pace of play issues?  That is, you really can't hit until the group ahead is done with the hole.. that stretches things out straight from the start... quite a help on busy days....

So now I have nothing against it.  If it works, then let's do it.

It would require some getting used to though, at least here in the US.

TH

You got it!  The key to the pace of play issues in America is really two fold, the first being management must embrace proper spacing and second, we need to change and get used to a lot of things that really are good for the game.

I can't remember how long ago it ws that I wrote up how nobody really plays slow.  The real issue is that players wait slow.  When you wait for your playing partner to do his entire routine before you start yours, your waiting makes play slow.  More over, when you stand in the fairway and wait for a group ahead to do somwething it seems even slower.  The opening par 3 removes at least one of the potential 6-10 dreaded waits from a round, by moving it to the beginning.  I'd much rather wait to get started than hit a tee shot on an opening par 5 and then wait to go for it or worse, have to wait for one of my playing partners to go for the green.

There are some that fall in the first hole handshake school.  Why can't a smooth 6-8 iron be a nice start to a round.  Isn't that more welcoming than the potential for your first iron shot to be out of the rough or a fairway bunker?  Isn't an easy iron shot the objective on the tee of that friendly par 4+.  Also, if the first is to be a par 5, shouldn't it be a real 5 and not a 4.5 that bogs down pace.  Oh wait, I forgot, most Americans think they should have a shot at a 3 on a 5 par... yet another thing we need to change.

Cheers!

JT

[Tom Huckaby]

Cool - works for me Jim - my post to JES crossed with yours.

I really think this would work...

So how come it has so rarely - if ever - been done here in the US?

TH

[JESII]

I don't think it cannot work, but you said it yourself..."It will always take longer to play a par three than to just get out of range..."[/i]

I think the Seve course mentioned 9 minute intervals...while that might usually be enough time, I'd recommend adding a minute or two just to be sure that the 12:33 tee time is not waiting until 12:53...capice?

[Tom Huckaby]

JES:

Yes, capice.

I am just stuck in a world where "intervals" are advisory at best.

But if I am making the tee times, wow 9 minutes does seem a bit quick.

Which then begs the next question... or might answer my other one....

Might course operators not do this simply because they think they CAN'T cram more golfers on the course?

I've played way too many courses with 7 minute intervals....

TH

[Jim Thompson]

Because most Americans don't want to play golf.  They want to play chase the ball.  They to score better than they play. they want the value of their homes to go up at above average rates regardless of their savings rate, etc...  Let's face it, we're emotionally fragile on this side of the pond!  We have become a group of center of the fairway, hit over the bunker to the center of the green 2 putt golf gluttons.

I just got back from Florida and at the airport got to listen to a self proclaimed scratch player tell me all the reasons that Angels wasn't a good course because, "the first time he played it he only shot 78" and, this is classic, "the second time we were out the pins were in different spots and none of the holes played the same."  I think the coasts get it more then the middle of the country also.  The coasts have more old styles to sample that have survived the midwest desire to fix.  I wonder if that has to do with season lengths etc..

Cheers!

JT

[Tim Pitner]

I really like the idea of the par 3 start at Lytham and echo the thoughts regarding the pace of play benefits to starting with a par 3.  Never start with a par 5 that is even conceivably reachable in two.  

[Jim Thompson]

TH,

How many times have you played a course with 7/8/9 minute intervals with a starter time every hour to hour and a half?  Why can't we just admit that ten minutes is th3e best we can do for "regular play"?  Simple,  operators like to think they have more capacity than they do.  Mostly, so they feel like they can meet NGF numbers.  10 minutes is it.  I'm suire you remember my old talk about what to do at your beloved St. Theresa... Same story.  Get real folks.

JT

[Tom Huckaby]

Jim - so sad, but so very well said.  I concur that way too many golfers here have these attitudes and would thus look at an opening par three as a negative, for many reasons... not ever considering the pace of play benefits.

Oh well...

And Tim - heck yeah - if it works at Lytham, why can't it here?

Oh, Jim tells us why not.  But hope does spring eternal for our US golfers.

[Tom Huckaby]

TH,

How many times have you played a course with 7/8/9 minute intervals with a starter time every hour to hour and a half?  Why can't we just admit that ten minutes is th3e best we can do for "regular play"?  Simple,  operators like to think they have more capacity than they do.  Mostly, so they feel like they can meet NGF numbers.  10 minutes is it.  I'm suire you remember my old talk about what to do at your beloved St. Theresa... Same story.  Get real folks.

JT

My beloved Santa Teresa is the worst offender - they don't even bother having starter times - they just figure that people won't care it their 9:30 tee time actually means a 10:00 balls in the air!

I swear, that's how it goes.

Sad....

TH

[PThomas]

and re the argument that opening with a par 3 is too difficult...how is that any different - and it may be easier - that a brutal par 4 to begin with??

[Sam Morrow]

and re the argument that opening with a par 3 is too difficult...how is that any different - and it may be easier - that a brutal par 4 to begin with??

I don't see any difference, either way you will be playing some par 3's during a round, why should it matter if it's the first hole, the last, or anyone in between.

[Adam Clayman]

Paul, Here in Ogallala, at Corey's West Wind, both nines start with par 3's. The first hole has OB on the right, and believe me, it is rather intimidating. The tenth has OB on both sides, is more exposed to the wind, and, is twice as intimidating. Both holes play at relatively the same yardage (175 from back tee)

My feelings are the later the archie can have the first par three the better. I'm getting sick of the predictable third hole par 3.

At Pacific Grove, which starts with back to back Par 3's, the locals get er done in about 6-7 minutes. While the touristas can take upwards of 20 minutes to play the opener at 150 yards.

[David Stamm]

I haven't played it, but Garden City ends with a par 3 and I hear it's none the worse for it. Of course, I don't need to bring up my affinity for Pasa.


I personally have no problem with a par 3 finisher. If the land dictates that that is what is required to get the most of the land features, by all means.

[Jason Connor]

Harbour Trees, an early 70s Pete Dye Course ends with a par 3.

Essentially it's near a reservoir and they only gave very little water frontage for golf use. The 5th is a par 3 over an inlet. And I suppose they wanted the 18th to use both the lake and be the home hole. My guess it that's what Mr. Dye had to do to make it work given the restrictions of routing the course through homes.

[Ray Richard]

Pleasant Valley in Mass. was a PGA Tour stop that hosted the Carling Open and some other tour events during the mid 1960’s and 1970’s. The first hole was a short par 3 of approx. 165 yds. After watching some of the big boys warm up on the range with monstrous tee shots (Weiskopf, Martin Roesink etc.), it wasn’t a very exciting start to the round watching them hit half 8 irons.

[John Kavanaugh]

Just move the clubhouse and the problem is solved.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()