[Ronald Montesano]

Jim Engh has a monstrous lizard lurking at Tullymore in Michigan...the 12th reaches 257 yards and was a full-blooded driver for me two years ago (I've since gained thirty yards off the tee, thanks to steroid injections and little chocolate donuts.)  The 17th at Whistling Straits' Straits course also took driver from the tips for me.  If given the option of moving up or hitting driver to the par three, I'll opt for the latter.

[Brian Joines]

I forgot about the 12th at Tullymore. I liked the hole but i think it could be lengthened 30 or 40 yards and turned into a great short par 4. With the green shaped as it is,(and partially blind), it would still be a fun hole. Not sure which version would be better!

Any other long par 3's that could be lengthened into a good short par 4?

[Matthew Rose]

If they're fair, they're quite fun. I find that hitting the green on a really long, tough par-3 and making par is one of the most satisfying things you can do on a golf course.

[Sean_A]

Despite it's breathtaking beauty and unbelievable sense of place, the 16th at Cypress Point would not be a great hole if that water was simply a still lake.

I think what a great long, long hole needs is some really interesting land forms that can either be used to help a running shot if the correct line is chosen, or propel the ball further from the target if the correct line is missed.

Mike

I am not sure about this.  Other than the stunning beauty of the 16th, isn't the fact that there is an alternative way to earn par other than the long carry a major reason for the brilliance of this hole?  Do any contours help the player near the green or is it straight up choice between layup and long carry? 

I do think there is a place for the straight forward long par 3 without too much happening to cause alarm.  These days, the 230-240 length par 3 causes concern just deciding which club to hit especially if going long isn't a clever option and/or coming up too short leaves some sort of nasty tester like a blind chip.  In the old days it was a no brainer driver. 

One of the holes I have a lot of fondness for is the 235 yard 18th at Grosse Ile.  Many is the time folks would gather around this green drinking beers to see matches finish (heres another shout for par 3 finishers on resort courses).  There is nothing particularly special about the hole, but it takes some playing to earn a 3.  Oh, and I had my one and only proper (are you reading this AwsHuckster?) hole in one there many moons ago with you guessed it - a driver.   If anyone knows the hole, do you ask the same question I do?  Why didn't Ross use the drop off left moreso to protect against the guy trying to overreach from the tee?

Ciao

[Rich Goodale]

The key to this issue is designing holes of 250-300 yards (250-350 yards in truly fast and firm environments) which have a lot of interest for the strategist in the last 50-100 yards to and including the green).  I would call them all "par" 4s and give the hackers a chance for a "birdie" but confound the elite players who have a chance for a 2 but also  think that a 3 on such a hole is their god-given right.

One of my in-laws is an ex-Euro tour pro who is easily the most talented golfer I have even played with (and I've played competitively with two guys who were talented enough to make the 36-hole cut at Majors) and one of the most thoughtful (regardless of handicap).  His favorite course these days is Western Gailes and I asked him why at a family party over the holidays, and his response was, in effect:

"I play the course mostly with my friends, off the yellow tees, and there are so many greens I could drive that tempt me to try, but far too many times that I do try I find myself pin-high but absolutely f**ked and strruggling for par, particularly when the greens are fast.  It makes me think, and often  try to manufacture tee shots with irons just to put it in position A, even though the back of my brain is telling me to go for it.  When I do, my freinds are already at positon A having played their driver or 3-wood and I have to hit a great shot to stay in the game, since I'm giving massive numbers of srokes."

I think that to him, courses like Western Gailes or Dornoch or TOC or Cypress from the front tees are like playing the 10th at Riviera almost every hole in a quasi-Groundhog Day sort of moment.

What a moment that would be.....

Rich

[Jeff_Mingay]

I'm a fan of 240 + yards par-3s... particularly when they're part of a good mix of short holes. (Such a hole puts a longer club in the hands of better players, for one.) 

Stanley Thompson was too. He was notorious for including a 240 + yards par-3 hole in many of his designs; and, this was during the pre-World War II era. I don't think many golfers had expectation of reaching the green from this distance, back then, simply because the hole was labelled "par-3".

It's just a golf hole. Play it.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jeff,

If ST and Raynor did them at 240 in the old days, that does argue for about 270 now, I think.

I like a good mix of short holes, although Matt and TD would probably say its formula. On one recent remodel, I had par 3's of 130 and 270 two holes apart.  At the very least, I doubt golfers will have trouble remembering which was which in the bar after the round.

[Jeff_Mingay]

Jeff,

I agree. If ST and Raynor and others were designing 240 par-3s (driver), then yes, the back tee on a modern-day hole intended to play similarly will probably have to be at least 270.

Speaking of variety, Thompson consistently did an incredible job with his par-3 holes. So many of his courses feature 140, 175, 190, 205, 240. (Many courses, too, featuring five one-shot holes.)

[Charlie Goerges]

Here is Jeff Brauer's long par 3 4th at the Quarry at Giants Ridge. 269 from the back tee.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Still one of my pesonal favorite holes I have designed......

It has a small green that narrows to the back (shaped like the Liberty Bell shortly after 9-11) but is completely open and flat in front.   At 269 from the tips, the theory is that many good players can probably hit a "controlled" driver for accuracy. For slightly shorter hitters, going for it is hard, but laying up just short and chipping provides the bail out option.

[Rich Goodale]

Hi Jeff

That hole looks just so...well...gosh......I can't even bring myself to say the word on this family-friendly forum.....that I think that any red-blooded male would ashamed to do anything but bring out the big stick and go for the target.  You only go around once in life anyway, don't you?

Rich

[TEPaul]

Andrew Brown:

I'm of the opinion that in a "shot value" sort of way the very long par 3 went out of style for some reason. There was a time, certainly in America and certainly from a few of the old Philadelphia architects where really long par 3s in a "shot value" sort of way were fairly common and seemingly sort of prized.

And what do I mean by a "shot value" sort of way? I mean original designs of which the concept required that even very good players would likely need to use a driver to reach the putting surface!!

They were holes back in the teens and early 1920s that were 230-250 very much near the outside limit of many good players' drivers. Today that might translate to 280-300!

So why did this once popular and prized type of par 3 and concept go out of popularity? I think it probably has something to do with the fact the idea of GIR seems to be a lot more important to good players today than it once was. A lot more important!! 

I'm also aware since I know quite a few of them that many very good players feel there is something sort of odd about being required to use a driver on a par 3 tee. It makes many of them feel vaguely uncomfortable! For some reason they seem to feel that club (a driver) should be reserved for par 4 and par 5 holes.

[David Stamm]

Participants in this years KP will see a very good, long par 3. The 247 yd 15th at Soule Park. The 17th at Sherwood is also a very good test.

[TEPaul]

Perhaps one of the earliest very long par 3s in this country was Pine Valley's #5, arguably still one of the most famous par 3s in the world. As designed it was about 230 but due to the uphill nature of the hole the effective distance was probably about 255.

It should also be noted that the concept and idea was Harry Colt's of England. George Crump, Pine Valley's primary architect, apparently could not quite visualize a hole that long in that particular position (not the least reason being his #6 tee, which early on was the 8th tee at that time was already in position at that time right behind where the 5th green would come to be). It is certainly known, however, that Crump very quickly came to completely love #5 and that driver tee shot.

There is something of an unanswered question about #5, at least to me, and that is that the green early on may've had quite a bit more green section at the front than it does now!

[Tom Huckaby]

I like the long par 3 which tops out at say 250 (if downhillish), but more likely 235 is a better yardage.  Anything more than 250 is pushing it so I say call it a par 4.  I guarantee you that the same hole with the longer par will garner better reviews.  What moderately talented mid capper doesn't want the opportunity to putt for eagle?  Plus, I have always really liked the idea of a long par 3 to help balance out a few short par 4s.  In general, we don't have enough holes in the 225-300 yard range - regardless of the par assignment.

Ciao

Sean - some GCAers (including me) will be playing what would seem to be the dream course for this concept, on Saturday. 

These are real hole lengths, from the white tees:

1 - 299
2 - 245
6 - 267
9 - 294
10 - 256
11 - 260
14 - 251
15 - 277
16 - 229
17 - 230

Too much of a good thing?

BTW - name the course.  Shouldn't be too tough for those familiar with where I live....

TH

[Sean_A]

I like the long par 3 which tops out at say 250 (if downhillish), but more likely 235 is a better yardage.  Anything more than 250 is pushing it so I say call it a par 4.  I guarantee you that the same hole with the longer par will garner better reviews.  What moderately talented mid capper doesn't want the opportunity to putt for eagle?  Plus, I have always really liked the idea of a long par 3 to help balance out a few short par 4s.  In general, we don't have enough holes in the 225-300 yard range - regardless of the par assignment.

Ciao

Sean - some GCAers (including me) will be playing what would seem to be the dream course for this concept, on Saturday. 

These are real hole lengths, from the white tees:

1 - 299
2 - 245
6 - 267
9 - 294
10 - 256
11 - 260
14 - 251
15 - 277
16 - 229
17 - 230

Too much of a good thing?

BTW - name the course.  Shouldn't be too tough for those familiar with where I live....

TH

Huckabilly

That is quite a Painswickian card and I whole heartily approve.  I assume its the place at which you are the current club champion?

Speaking of Painswick, I would suggest that their card may have a better balance in regards to the 225-300 range holes.  There are even two par 5s and two par 3s not too much over 100 yards. 

3. 285
4. 295
11. 246
12 250
16. 299

I honestly thought there were a few more in the 225-300 range. 

I especially like that #11 is a par 4 and #12 is a par 3.  Just to give you an idea of how quirky this card is: 4831 total yards with a par of 67, but par could easily be 61.  Man, I don't often plead for better conditions, but in the case of Painswick, if they just made the course reasonably well conditioned (especially in winter), this place would be a world beater and I would without a shadow of a doubt join. 

Ciao

[PCCraig]

I think the only way it works is if the hole has a MONSTER big green.

[Tom Huckaby]

Sean - it is CA's answer to Painswick. I have called it exactly that.  However, I am no longer club champion anywhere, and this is not the course where I was such in 2004 and 2007. 

I won't reveal it yet in case others want to name it.

In any case my post here wasn't to support this course as anything balanced... it just struck me as you asked for holes between 225 and 300 and how many this course provides!

TH

[Kalen Braley]

Huck,

Can I tell em, can I tell em, can I tell em??   

[Tom Huckaby]

Huck,

Can I tell em, can I tell em, can I tell em??   

\

Oh please do.  As I said, this ought to be pretty easy for anyone familiar with the Bay Area.  I just do find it pretty cool Sean called it Painswickian as I have indeed always caleld it a US version of such.

[Jed Peters]

Since I was invited to play in that group, I will also refrain from giving out the name of said course.

[Tom Huckaby]

It's Lincoln Park.

You guys are way too polite.

 

[Kalen Braley]

It's Lincoln Park.

You guys are way too polite.

 

Tom,

With so many short par 4s, you should be a cinch to shoot what 68, worst case scenario?   

[Tom Huckaby]

It's Lincoln Park.

You guys are way too polite.

 

Tom,

With so many short par 4s, you should be a cinch to shoot what 68, worst case scenario?   

You obviously underestimate the course and overestimate my game.

Not that I will be grinding out a score, but if I did... anything under 78 is great for me there.  Crappy conditions and countless side-hill lies do not bring out the best in me.

TH

[Bill_McBride]

I like the long par 3 which tops out at say 250 (if downhillish), but more likely 235 is a better yardage.  Anything more than 250 is pushing it so I say call it a par 4.  I guarantee you that the same hole with the longer par will garner better reviews.  What moderately talented mid capper doesn't want the opportunity to putt for eagle?  Plus, I have always really liked the idea of a long par 3 to help balance out a few short par 4s.  In general, we don't have enough holes in the 225-300 yard range - regardless of the par assignment.

Ciao

Sean - some GCAers (including me) will be playing what would seem to be the dream course for this concept, on Saturday. 

These are real hole lengths, from the white tees:

1 - 299
2 - 245
6 - 267
9 - 294
10 - 256
11 - 260
14 - 251
15 - 277
16 - 229
17 - 230

Too much of a good thing?

BTW - name the course.  Shouldn't be too tough for those familiar with where I live....

TH

Huckabilly

That is quite a Painswickian card and I whole heartily approve.  I assume its the place at which you are the current club champion?

Speaking of Painswick, I would suggest that their card may have a better balance in regards to the 225-300 range holes.  There are even two par 5s and two par 3s not too much over 100 yards. 

3. 285
4. 295
11. 246
12 250
16. 299

I honestly thought there were a few more in the 225-300 range. 

I especially like that #11 is a par 4 and #12 is a par 3.  Just to give you an idea of how quirky this card is: 4831 total yards with a par of 67, but par could easily be 61.  Man, I don't often plead for better conditions, but in the case of Painswick, if they just made the course reasonably well conditioned (especially in winter), this place would be a world beater and I would without a shadow of a doubt join. 

Ciao

You have come a long way in appreciating the karma of Painswick, grasshopper.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()