[George Pazin]

Seems like most tend to view a good par 5 simply in terms of risk/reward in going for it in 2.

I think the essential characteristic of a good par 5 is a difficult choice on the second shot - i.e. making the layup possibly undesirable for some reason makes the decision whether or not to go that much tougher.

Otherwise, the decision to me is simply all too clear, dictated primarily by distance.

[PThomas]

one that really makes me think about my 2nd shot, even if it is a layup shot

[Phil Benedict]

I agree with Paul about the second shot.  A good example is the first hole at Pine Needles.  It's only about 500-yards but plays a little longer because the tee shot is uphill and frequently into the wind in the springtime, which is when I've played the course.  There is a gathering bunker about 100-yards from the green that you want to avoid at all cost.  Really makes you think about where to hit your lay-up.

Approach shot is challenging because the target is pretty small.

All-in-all one of my favorite shortish par 5's.

[JLahrman]

To me it's one that makes you think about your tee shot, not your second.  Because I'm such a wildass off the tee, I often hit an iron off of a par 5 that I don't plan to try to hit in two.  I'll just hit 3-iron-6-iron-9-iron or something like that.  However, I'm long enough that I can get it up around the green in two on most par 5s.  So when I'm on the tee of a par 5, I think about the both the tee shot and the second shot in terms of hitting a driver off the tee.  What happens if I miss the drive left or right?  If I hit a good drive, how comfortable do I feel with the second shot?  I typically like the par 5s that I wind up sometimes hitting driver sometimes hitting 3- or 4-iron off the tee.

[Dan Herrmann]

Having enough fairwidth width to allow for complex strategies concerning angle of play.

Speed slots, not always apparent, to truly reward a successful risky shot.

A green large enough to have some strategic hole locations.

[Bill_McBride]

Having enough fairwidth width to allow for complex strategies concerning angle of play.

Speed slots, not always apparent, to truly reward a successful risky shot.

A green large enough to have some strategic hole locations.

.....and a green with severe contours and slope so that placing the layup on one side of the fairway or another is important, based on the day's pin position.

#3 Pacific Dunes is a good example, particularly with the bunkers in the left lay up area.

[Carl Rogers]

Having enough fairwidth width to allow for complex strategies concerning angle of play.

Speed slots, not always apparent, to truly reward a successful risky shot.

A green large enough to have some strategic hole locations.

I would add bailout areas.  Holes that accomodate multiple recovery shots from multiple directions.  Green complexes that create confounding miscellaneous little shots that no one can ever practice.

Vary the tee locations from a pure position 3 shot hole to gambling go for it hole the next day.

[Sean_A]

Seems like most tend to view a good par 5 simply in terms of risk/reward in going for it in 2.

I think the essential characteristic of a good par 5 is a difficult choice on the second shot - i.e. making the layup possibly undesirable for some reason makes the decision whether or not to go that much tougher.

Otherwise, the decision to me is simply all too clear, dictated primarily by distance.

It seems to me that what makes a good par 5 are the same things which make good par 3s and 4s.  I have been saying this for yonks, par don't matter.  Its the golf that matters. 

Ciao

[BVince]

Even though the go for it/risk reward option makes for a good choice, I have also played some great long par 5s.  If it is going to be unreachable (except for the longest of tour pros) I think it must keep your interest the entire hole. 

A long par 5 could have great risk on a lay-up the closer you get to the green, therefore, making the player decide if it is worth hitting a percise 3 wood to leave a short approach or hitting a 6-7 iron to a wide area but leaving a longer shot into the green. 

[Mike Nuzzo]

The 2nd shot is usually the one most lacking on par 5s - so I agree.
And also having the tees relatively close together can be a good indicator - assuming the hole is good - this would make it better.

[David Stamm]

To me, great par 5's come in two distinct categories. The first, a hole that truly is a 3 shot hole yet requires thoughtfulness on all three shots. It could be reached in two by the very longest hitters, but it's usually best to approach the target with a more precise club and play for birdie that way. The 13th at Rustic, the 13th at Pasatiempo, the 5th at CPC, the 14th at LACC North are some examples that come to mind.

The second is the clear risk/reward factor. The hole is reachable in two, but it must be executed flawlessly. 9 at Pasatiempo, 6 at CPC, 6 at Pebble, 10 at MPCC Shore are examples that come to mind.

[Wayne_Freedman]

In two words...

Choices
Consequences

[Peter Pallotta]

George -

well, it'd better be pretty (which it probably won't be if it has two sets of fairway bunkers). And I'd prefer that only the long hitter can reach in two; if we both played it well, it'd be interesting to find out what approach proved better.

Peter

[Tim Gerrish]

A hole that has options on tee shot, second and approach, might be reachable for tee shot is placed in correct position and of course looks sharp.

and isn't the same as one of the other par 5's on the course nor have similar play and visuals as one of the other holes (4s and 3s included).

If you are playing the right tee and hit the right shot the green might be reachable from more than one location with it being the players decision to choose which location best fits their game.

[Mark_F]

I think the essential characteristic of a good par 5 is a difficult choice on the second shot - i.e. making the layup possibly undesirable for some reason makes the decision whether or not to go that much tougher.

You would generally agree with this, but that would then negate an excellent par five like 6 at Carnoustie, which has such a great and nerve-wracking tee shot.

I also like large doses of quirk on par fives - far too often they are simply two-shot holes for better players, and everything that little bit different and unsettling all the better, whilst for average players there's more interest than merely hitting to position.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()