Cliff, perhaps I should have use "illusion" rather than thrill. For "thrilling" would be to be able pull off something amazing. I fail to see why you would be thrilled to be rewarded by gravity rather than skill. Following your logic, we should just tell golfers that every hole is 100 yds longer than it actually is, then they could shoot a good score and amaze themselves that they played just like the pros - driver/wedge on all those (wink-wink) "long holes".
Joe Jemsik gained fame by hitting a "500 yard" drive decades ago. It was off the roof of a Chicago skyscraper!
Look at it from a match play vantage point. Would this be a good hole? Remember - par no longer matters. Will you get an advantage over your opponent because you are more skilled? Or because you challenged a strategic element? No, there is no skill or strategy required in the hole described. And don't confuse the issue with the holes you posted. They do not exemplify what Adrain described. Plus, if Adrian had mentioned that the tee shot would be blind, I would have advised him to purchase as much Liability Insurance as he could afford.
Adrian, just ask yourself, "is this the best it could be?". Unless you have it to spare, you're eating up a lot of real estate relative to the actual playing distance. And all the unused fairway would need to be maintained long after you are gone. You're using a par 5 to create a short par 4.
Sounds like you'ld get more bang for the buck with a risk-reward driveable 4 followed by a demanding short 3. It's been my experience that, when routing on strong downslopes, greens will appear unnatural unless they are placed at an angle to the gradient. Otherwise they just look like a wedge of cheese.