How Long Should Par 3's Be?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jordan Wall made a comment on a "crazy" 256 yd uphill par 3 in another thread.  It leads me to ask, "how long should a long par 3 be?"

I know many golfers hate long par 3's that require fw metals or even driver.

I know that many other golfers like variety.

I know that challenging the longest hitters to hit a long approach in regulation (not reaching par 5's in 2) is best accomplished with long par 3's these days, and to even get them to hit a 3 iron you need 240 yards of more.  For a fw metal, you need up to 260. 

But, why design for them.  From the tees you normally play, what's your longest appreciated par 3, given normal topo, wind, so that they play to these approximate yardages? 

200?
220?
240?
260?
280?
300?

What is the shortest par 3 you like?

90?
110?
130?
150?
170?

Do you prefer a wide variety - say:

130-150-170-190? (20 yard splits)
130-160-190-220? (30 yard splits)
130-170-210-250? (40 yard splits)
130-180-230-280? (50 yard splits)
120-180-240-300? (60 yard splits)


Or do you prefer all mid irons for a breather holes?

[Ted Kramer]

I don't usually like anything under 125 yards.
And think anything up to about 250 is fair game.

-Ted

[Michael]

I like a variety on the par 3's..

 A nice relaxer of say 160-180 between a couple of difficult holes, and a nice tester of 200+ when you have been lulled by a "short-ish" three shotter

[Andrew Hastie]

I like variety, the tough little 110 yard er. The brutally long 250yards is also OK, but I don't like when you get 4 times 200 yards that  seems always like it's into the wind.
A range of different shots is of course the key.
Variety is the spice of life!

Sorry to late!

[John Burzynski]

My home course / muni: http://sbpark.org/golf/erskine.htm

Par 3's of 204, 152, 220, 213, 184...all on a 6098 yard course.  The 200 yard + holes are killers, especially the 204 yarder from a raised tee to a raised green.  I almost jump for joy at bogey on that hole.

Problem is that with my game and many other golfers a 200+ yard hole is a 5 wood at the least, often a 3 wood for a 220 yard hole.  Accuracy stinks with a 3 wood, compared to an iron on a 150-175 yard par 3.

[Mike_Cirba]

Jeff

Depending on topography, I'd say anything up to 300 yards from the tips is fair game and variety with a capital V is best.

[Jerry Kluger]

Jeff: Fact is that most golfers do not enjoy a par 3 more than 200 yards, and even in that case, they really don't like it if there is a severe penalty for missing the green. Variety in par 3s is essential to me and short par 3s can be a great deal of fun - such as at Hidden Creek and French Creek.  At my home course the 4 par 3s can play around 170 yards from the member tees but the superintendent has now on the weekends put one tee marker at the forward location and one at the very back location to create variety and the members love it.  The championship tees are a whole different story but length should not be the only skill needed when a player is teeing it up - ball flight and shaping a shot should come into play for the best players.

[Kalen Braley]

The par 3's at Ballyneal do a pretty good job of this.  They just kept getting longer.  From the 2nd longest set of tees I hit in order #3 - 9 iron, #5 - 7 iron, # 11 - 6 iron, and # 15 - 5 wood!!

[Bill_McBride]

Just mix 'em up.  There's nothing more boring than all four par 3s being 7 irons.

I love very short par 3s with challenging greens.  #3 at Glenbrook on Lake Tahoe - 85 yards over a yawning bunker to a tiny green.  Lake Tahoe laps at the back of the green.  This is followed by #4, 227 yards slightly uphill to a back to front green.

That's nice variety.

Think Pebble Beach #7 and #17.

Or Cypress Point #15 and #16.

[Bill Brightly]

130-160-190-220? (30 yard splits) and I really like an extra long black tee on the long one

[Chris_Blakely]

Jeff,

I too like variety.  I would not worry to much about the length on some long par 3's. I have played some good down hill long par 3s like the 260 yard par 3 at the Jackal GC (Brighton, MI) that was a fun hole.  I liked the 250 ish yard Biarritz hole at Forsgate (flat terrain).  I like the 245 ish Redan hole at Angel's Crossing that is only slighly down hill.

As for the shorter par 3, I enjoy the short drop shot par 3 that make club selection difficult.  Poccono Manor's around 90 yard par 3 is a lot of fun.  There are a bunch of shortish par 3's in Ohio that I enjoy (Green Valley GC has a 114 yard drop shot hole that is well done).  I believe the Harbor Club has a 120 ish yard uphill par 3 that is a blast.

The courses that I end up not liking the par 3's more times than not have then all in the same yardage range 170 to 185 on all 4 to 5.

Chris

[Dan Moore]

I like long par 3's and think every course should have one.  Think the 12th at Skokie or 10th at Lawsonia for great examples.  For me a 250-260 driver 230-240 is a good maximum length. 

I also like the par 3's to have variety in requiring different clubs on each and confronting the wind from various directions.  

[Garland Bayley]

Tilly wrote that they should be within the range of the players irons.

[Bill Shamleffer]

Normandie Golf Course in St. Louis:

#3 -   209 (about 1 club less down hill)
#5 -   170 (about 1.5 club less down hill)
#12 - 136 (about 1.5 club less down hill)
#16 - 190 (about 1/2 club less down hill)
#18 - 250

I like these holes, and I like this variety of par-3 lengths.  If a course is to have a par-3 of 240 or more, it helps to have 5 par-3s.

[John Mayhugh]

I agree with others that variety is important.  Par 3s are some of my favorite holes and I think one of the big distinctions between pedestrian and great routings. 

Very long can be OK, but I think 230 for a 9 handicap (depending on hazards) is about as long as you should go.  Really short can be fun too, but the green complex has to be pretty special if you try to get below 110 yards. 

Just don't make them all the same length.  The variety at Ballyneal is a good example.  I thought Oakmont's were good (two mid-range, two long), and Pasatiempo's are a lot of fun. 

[Tom Yost]

I like a mix of shorts.

One short short, two medium shorts and one long short.

For the long short,  230 is probably the longest I want to encounter, dependent on conditions of course.  That's a well struck 3-wood or choke-down driver for me. 205-215 (5-wood) is probably more comfortable. (I don't play the back tees...)

The 15th at We-Ko-Pa Saguaro was fun - 233 from the 2nd tee, but downhill.

I dislike the shorter courses that add to their overall length by having four long par 3's.

[Jason McNamara]

Tilly wrote that they should be within the range of the players irons.

Assuming golfers still carry 1-irons, not a bad rule of thumb.

[Brad Tufts]

I think 240 should be the general max, down to 100.

I like the general idea of 30-yd splits....130-160-190-220.

My home course has 190 (#3), 235 (#7), 130 (#8) and 140 (#13).  Not a bad variety, but we miss a par 3 that challenges the 6-7-8 irons, and we skip the long irons and go right to the hybrids/fw metals.

President's, a little muni in Quincy, MA has 6 par 3s with a good variety due to terrain.  #2 is about 105, #4 is very downhill 175, #7 is downhill 135, #10 is downhill 150, #13 is straight uphill 190, #18 is 130 slight uphill.  You end up with something like SW, 7i, PW, 9i, 4i, and PW.  Almost all different clubs.

I think for max length, the upper reaches like 250 and 260 are a bit much for "enjoyability" as there are few players who can reach that distance with some semblance of control (even low 'cappers).  I can remember two C&C holes at Talking Stick and Bandon Trails that were in this distance ballpark, but they had ample surrounds and large greens to assist, and they both were good holes.  I'm not a fan of hitting Driver on a par 3, but if that is how an architect completes the player's "total game challenge" then so be it.

I am a big fan of the short par 3 surrounded by trouble.  Everyone can reach, but a 3 isn't a cinch.  I like the idea of a small green where if you hit it, you are rewarded with a shortish birdie putt.  Too many times you see this type of hole with a big green (to spread around ball marks?) and it doesn't look congruent to the tee shot.

I play this quirky little course way up north in Maine that has a tiny par 3 of about 110 surrounded by wetlands and overhanging trees.  The green has two quadrants and is shaped like an upside-down L.  The hole is borderline goofy, but I love the tight target that rewards you with a short putt if you can hit it.

[Dan Kelly]

Jeff

Depending on topography, I'd say anything up to 300 yards from the tips is fair game and variety with a capital V is best.

I'm with Mike. Variety with a capital V.

As I said on some other thread recently, I love the idea of driveable par-3s -- so long as the failure to drive them is not met with Certain Death.

Interlachen No. 17 is a great example of a wonderful long par-3.

And for a really nice shorty: your own short par-3 at Fortune Bay. (I'm not remembering the number; early in the back side.)

(Your long par-3 at the Quarry -- the one with the Liberty Bell [?} green -- is a good long one, for  that matter.)

[John Foley]

Jeff,

Thanks for the topic - one that love to expound on.

As for length, it all has to do w/ recovery options. If it's a hybrid / 3W and there is room at the green to mis, then strech it out. 220-230 would work. You need have to have some elasticty as that length everytime you play might get old.

For a mid-HDCP'er (12) putting a Driver in my hands for a par 3 just seems wrong. Not that in certain conditions (cold into a stiff wind) it's unacceptable, but as a normal everyday play, I would not like it.

3rd hole @ Morgan Hill is slightly downhill to a sideways Biaritz-like green w/ a TON of chipping are'a around. Perfect example of a well thought out long par 3.

As for the spread, I like more than 4. 5 is very good and 6 (if it flows) is great. And I LOVE the short par 3. By short it's got to be 120 or less and I'll take 2 please. I'd even like it as short as say 85 yards?? Could you design one that short for a 6400-6500 yard tee box and still have it effective at 6900-7100?

My perfect course would be:

100
120
155
180
220

I can not stand a course where the par 3's are similar and your hitting basically the same club into each green,

More than any other hole though, they've got to have charchter around the greens.

[Tom_Doak]

Jeff:

In general, I think people (raters especially) pay too much attention to par-3 holes, simply because they are easier to quantify than the other holes and it's impossible to get yourself "out of position" -- whereas if you are asked to comment on the par-4's, the odds are that you hit two bad drives and didn't get a good sense of those holes.

I do agree that variety is the most important criterion for a good set of par-3's, but I think it's very possible to have two par-3 holes that are both 175 yards and yet play very different.

As to the actual lengths, I've mentioned before that any time I have proposed to build a par-3 shorter than 150 yards from the back, or longer than 225, I've had the client question why.  (Richard Sattler, the client at Barnbougle, has since been an exception to that statement -- but Richard doesn't play golf.)  Ideally, I would have a hole under 150 and a hole over 225 on each course I did, just because it seems to make people uncomfortable.

[BVince]

Tom, I bet you could design all 7-iron par 3 holes on a course and make them interesting enough that you would hear very little complaints regarding lack of variety.

I like some variance in distance.  I would rather have 4 interesting par 3 holes in the 165-195 range than 4 booring 140yd, 160yd, 190yd, and 230yd par 3s.

[Tom_Doak]

No, Bryon, my point was that even if I did design four completely different holes that all played the same length, there are plenty of raters who would chastise me because I got the scorecard "wrong".

There are way too many golfers (not just raters) who judge a course by the scorecard.  Interesting that none of them live in Scotland.

[Tom Huckaby]

No, Bryon, my point was that even if I did design four completely different holes that all played the same length, there are plenty of raters who would chastise me because I got the scorecard "wrong".

There are way too many golfers (not just raters) who judge a course by the scorecard.  Interesting that none of them live in Scotland.

"None" is a pretty definitive word, Tom.  Change that to "very very few" and you're likely correct.  But come on, there have to be some who like their distances over there also.  They have plenty of American ex-pats.

 

[Michael]

Jeff:

In general, I think people (raters especially) pay too much attention to par-3 holes, simply because they are easier to quantify than the other holes and it's impossible to get yourself "out of position" -- whereas if you are asked to comment on the par-4's, the odds are that you hit two bad drives and didn't get a good sense of those holes.

I do agree that variety is the most important criterion for a good set of par-3's, but I think it's very possible to have two par-3 holes that are both 175 yards and yet play very different.

As to the actual lengths, I've mentioned before that any time I have proposed to build a par-3 shorter than 150 yards from the back, or longer than 225, I've had the client question why.  (Richard Sattler, the client at Barnbougle, has since been an exception to that statement -- but Richard doesn't play golf.)  Ideally, I would have a hole under 150 and a hole over 225 on each course I did, just because it seems to make people uncomfortable.

 Tom..

 Does wind direction/duration play more into your thoughts for a par 3 then other holes when designing?

Michael