5, 8, 5

[Forrest Richardson]

Ryan — Explain more. What do you mean, "Never hitting a wood..."?

[Kalen Braley]

Ryan — Explain more. What do you mean, "Never hitting a wood..."?

Isn't variety of shots the real key here.

CPC 15 and 16 are both par 3s on the scorecard, but both play completely different.  In the case of the proposed routing by Forrest, isn't hitting middle iron on 15, hybrid or wood on 15, and short iron or wedge on 17 still some pretty good variety?

Isn't that more varied than 4 par 4s in a row where its driver on every tee, followed by a mid-iron/short-iton/wedge to the green?

Don't get me wrong, I haven't fully decided if this is a good idea, but it certainly seems that being unconventional and quirky is one of the main calling cards of the courses we claim as GCA'ers to treasure and enjoy.

[Tim Gavrich]

I feel like it would quicken the pace of a match right at the time when it's probably getting very nerve-wracking...I like the idea, given sufficient variety.

I was thumbing through a big book of NLE courses a while ago and I feel like I saw a profile of one in New York that Devereux Emmet had designed that started with three par 3s.  I could be wrong, though.

[Michael Blake]

I motion for a new golf course ranking category:

'Best Modern Course Pace of Place Routing'   

[Chris Tritabaugh]

Town & Country Club in St. Paul, MN goes 4, 3, 3, 5, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4--4, 3, 5, 4, 3, 5, 5, 5, 3 for 5-8-5. Only course I have ever heard of or played on which the last par 4 is #13! Or for that matter one par 4 on the back nine. Or for that matter 4 par 5's on the back nine.

[Lyne Morrison]

Thanks Forrest - I reckon the typical 15+ handicapper will enjoy this.

There is a good mix of length - and no doubt direction and challenge for all golfers in the final outcome - but perhaps one of the key elements here is that the majority of golfers will sense that they have been given an opportunity to score. I think this is what your wife may identify with (- and numerous other short hitters and high handicappers).

Given that length is such a hurdle for many high handicappers - the majority of the golf market - this arrangement should be viewed as a positive in that it involves more golfers in competitive play. 'Par 3' doesn't translate into straight forward. This is the more inclusive, reverse scenario of your par 6 concept - and lets face it - it is more appealing to write down 2, 3 or 4 as against 6,7 or 9.

On reflection I'm thinking I like it - it is innovative and cheeky and will keep blokes like Bill honest. Have fun working it through.

Cheers -- Lyne

[ed_getka]

Forrest,
   You provided yardages, but what else is going on with the holes? What effect will the prevailing wind have? What is going on at the green end that might affect club selection? Any forced carries? I can easily envision 3 par 3's in a row working as long as I don't step up on the tee, see the yardage and just automatically select the club that I hit that distance. Best of luck with the project.

[Forrest Richardson]

Ed — Greens, overall, will be vary large. So the club selection may vary considerably. Wind is not a bid factor, but the orientation of the 3s is E, NW, NE. Tees are also generous, so I think the club will have loads of flexibility. The question from here — regardless of the opinion of the GCA crowd — is whether the own will buy off!   

[ed_getka]

Forrest,
  Wind is not a big factor and big greens and big tees simply give a different possible yardage, but that still translates to choosing the club that hits the ball that far. What on the ground is going to give me pause to think about club selection?

[Forrest Richardson]

Ed — Sorry, I re-read your post.

15: The green horseshoes around an old quarry pond. The pond is about 4,000 sf and sits in the counter of a "U" with the shot played toward the bottom of the "U". The green is banked at front and not very deep, except on either of the sides of the "U".

16: A Redan-ish green with a knoll to the right. These tees are somewhat elevated. I think "redan" when I look at it.

17: A huge green with the center portion raised and drop-offs to lower "greens" at both sides. There are deep bunkers planned at pinch points around the large green. The effective yardage is 80 to 145.

All of the holes here are generous for run-ups. I suppose a few do not lend themselves, but most do. So there are several ways to play approaches, including at the par-3s. Our plan (keep in mind that we are still in design) is to inject great movement in the greens, but since they are expansive it may not seem to dramatic until you putt a few.

[ed_getka]

Forrest,
   Thanks for the details. It sounds like you have enough variety to keep it interesting.

[rjsimper]

Ryan — Explain more. What do you mean, "Never hitting a wood..."?

Forrest-
In the context of why is 3 par 3s different flow-wise than 3 par 4s, to me is partly an issue of being presented with 3 consecutive tees with irons hit off them...perhaps the middle hole in your sequence would be a wood for most golfers, but you've also noted an elevated tee.  As was mentioned earlier, I think a really long hole might be appropriate here.  You've mentioned elevated tee + redan-ish green.  Is there any reason why this hole can't be 240 from the tips?  I am a big fan (architecturally, not scoring-wise) of the accessible, open, 3 wood par 3.

What is the total yardage of the course?  If we're talking about a 6200 yard course from the tips, that's a much different story than if we're around 7000.  If we're talking about a 7000 yard course, someone playing the tips is likely hitting a couple of short irons and a long iron.

My personal opinion is that the longer of the 3 holes should be a 3.5 par type.  I don't necessarily have an issue with 3 par 3s in concept, but more that I'd like to see some serious differentiation in shot variety...moreso than 9 iron, 4 iron, 9 iron.  7 iron, 3 wood, PW seems much more appealing to me.

The difference in 3 consecutive par 3s versus 3 par 4s is that the expectation on a regulation golf course is that you hit a Driver or other wood from the majority of the tees.  One could argue that the expectation is just an unchallenged tradition, but there's already a name for a course that the expectation is to hit irons off tees....it's an executive course


Either way, if/when this comes to fruition, please post photos!

[Bill_McBride]

Thanks Forrest - I reckon the typical 15+ handicapper will enjoy this.

There is a good mix of length - and no doubt direction and challenge for all golfers in the final outcome - but perhaps one of the key elements here is that the majority of golfers will sense that they have been given an opportunity to score. I think this is what your wife may identify with (- and numerous other short hitters and high handicappers).

Given that length is such a hurdle for many high handicappers - the majority of the golf market - this arrangement should be viewed as a positive in that it involves more golfers in competitive play. 'Par 3' doesn't translate into straight forward. This is the more inclusive, reverse scenario of your par 6 concept - and lets face it - it is more appealing to write down 2, 3 or 4 as against 6,7 or 9.

On reflection I'm thinking I like it - it is innovative and cheeky and will keep blokes like Bill honest. Have fun working it through.

Cheers -- Lyne

Honest and 3 down!

[James Bennett]

Beat me to it Bill, but you are not completely right here - there are 4 (perhaps 5) par 3's involved withing that fort, and 3 of them are in a row. 

There is the short #5 up and over, the long #6 within and then the downhill #7 leaving the fort. 
Followed by Sean Arble 'death wish' a (#8) and b (#9)  par 5's away and back,
Then another #11 up and over par 3. 
#12 as a short 4 inside the fort pales (I loved that hole).
I think #13 leaving the fort is a long downhill 3.

That said, having Painswick as an example of routing 3 par 3's in a row is probably not going to hold much water for Forrest.

James B

All true except #11 is a 245 yard par 4 followed by #12, a 250 yard par 3.   

I think you got one off in the numbering, as #10 is the up and over followed by short par 4 #11 and long par 3 #12.

The three consecutive par 3s are #5, 6 and 7.
[/quote]

Quite right Bill - my error.  I keep imagining the 8th is the 9th - it should be as the course turns back on itself after the 8th (of course this was the sight of the original clubhouse when Painswick was 9 holes only, so the course isn't really and was never meant to be an out and back 9 plus 9).

James B

[Bruce Leland]

I am looking forward to spending more time in / around the burial site. They are all over Europe, especially Sweden. We plan on having goats graze the area around the burial site itself.

I have a planned goat ladder, such as the one my friend Bob Cage has at his sculpture farm in North Carloina. The goats cross over the golfers enroute from 13 to 14.

Forrest, not exactly the 15th at Wigwam Blue but let me know if you need some help with that goat crossing!

[paul cowley]

Rich — Since the goat bridge is one of my favorite ideas, I am posting it again. Hey look, the smiley is looking up at them...


 

I'm not sure there is anything I can add to this remarkable thread.....so I won't.

[Forrest Richardson]

I knew the goat ladder would wake up Paul.

Ryan — Thanks for the clarification. While we may be able to expand 15 or 16, I am not sure the idea to hit a non-iron would be at the top of my list. I think the idea is to have a series of 3s where there is differentiation and some fun.

To me, the routing at this point transcends whether the choice is a wood or iron — the bigger concept is that we will be placing three holes in a row where the course says, "Golfer...place your ball here, and only here between these two markers, and execute your approach to the green." [I believe I borrowed that quote, or similar, from Desmond Muirhead.]

[paul cowley]

You're right Richardson......that ladder really got my goat! hahahahahahaha.

I'm serious....its a remarkably light weighted looking structure....almost as elegant as a suspension bridge, but in reverse.


I love it [but not as much as I love you].

And the three par threes don't matter as much as a hoot or a coot to me, if they work, go for them......but then again, the two best holes I may have ever designed are a 260 par 4, followed by a 265 par 3....I still giggle when I think of them...so I don't know how much weight you might want to subscribe to my opinion.