[Philippe Binette]

Following Jeff Mingay quick answered question, here's what I think is tougher one...

what is the best course with a weak set of par 3's ? 

Can a course be great without a good set of par 3's ?

[Ally Mcintosh]

Can a course be great without a good set of par 3's ?

Probably not...

Can it be great where the par-3's are the weakest link?... Probably...

[Philippe Binette]

I'm thinking back of the courses I've seen and only Royal Liverpool is a course where I can't remember the par 3's... but are they good or not, I don't know.

[Ally Mcintosh]

This is a really difficult one...

You could argue Cruden Bay, depending on your take on 15 & 16... and overlooking the fact that 4 is magnificent...

Was thinking there must be a heathland track where the par-3s don't stand out... But can't place one...

I can think of plenty of modern "good" courses where the par-3s are too similar... But old, classics... It's hard...

[Phil McDade]

The Honourable Company? Its par 3s are generally held in less esteem than its par 4s and 5s.

[Gary Slatter]

very tough question Phillippe, Royal Liverpool as noted might be correct.

 What about Renaissance Club? 2 was OK,  9 and 12 and 17 ?  I only played in a monsoon but didn't think they were as good as next door.

[Ally Mcintosh]

very tough question Phillippe, Royal Liverpool as noted might be correct.

 What about Renaissance Club? 2 was OK,  9 and 12 and 17 ?  I only played in a monsoon but didn't think they were as good as next door.

13 is a great hole... Thought 9 was pretty wonderful too...

[Jeff_Brauer]

I always kind of thought Medinah fell in this category.  Not that the par 3's are weak so much as because they are all the same.

[Matt_Cohn]

Of the ones I've played, maybe Inverness? None are bad but they're all pretty standard.

http://www.invernessclub.com/html/course/tour/3.htm
http://www.invernessclub.com/html/course/tour/6.htm
http://www.invernessclub.com/html/course/tour/12.htm

[Steve Salmen]

Phil,

I must take exception regarding Muirfield's par 3s.

The regular scorecard lists lengths between 145 and 186 yds.  In reality, they can move makers so they play from 130 to 215 yards.  Two are uphill, one downhill, and one relatively flat.  All have room in front to run the ball up.  They are all well bunkered so poor shots can easily find sand.

If there is one thing they all seem to have in common, the greens tend to slope from back to front.

Ernie Els was nearly done in by 13 and 16 in 2002.  He made 5 in the final round on 16 and had a really good chance to do the same at 13 but for one of the finest bunker shots in championship history.

Steve

[Mark Pearce]

I don't think the par 3s at Hoylake are really weak.  4 is a good hole, with an interesting green, 7 is a decent hole and 11 is also a good hole.  The last par 3, 13 is admittedly rather bland.  Not a great set of par 3s by any means but not weak.

No set of par 3s including 13 at Muirfield is weak.  That's a great hole.  4 and 16 are rather similar (and, when played from the back 7 is as well) but aren't weak holes, just lacking a little variety.

Ganton?

[Sean_A]

I don't know if weak is the right word, but Sandwich's aren't terribly inspiring.  The same could be said of Birkdale's. 

Ciao

[Greg Tallman]

Not that they are bad holes but the threes and Muirfield Villlage fall well short of the remainder of the course in my opinion with 12 being the exception.

[Alex Miller]

I've never been there, but are 8 and 11 at TOC that great?

[Peter Pallotta]

Can a course be great without a good set of par 3's ?

Probably not...

Can it be great where the par-3's are the weakest link?... Probably...

Aren't these effectively the same thing, Ally?

I think you are suggesting that if the Par 3s on the course are "the weakest links", it doesn't necessarily mean that they are "weak" in a more objective sense, i.e. in and of themselves and/or compared to other Par 3s on other (all other) courses.

But does anyone actually experience a round of golf that way? If one notices an ebb and flow to the round, including an ebb in flow in the nature (and maybe even the quality) of the architecture on individual holes, does one then also go on to compare some of these individual holes with golf holes on other golf courses? 

This brings to mind the often discussed topic of breather/transition holes, and reminds me of the suppossed alternative to having these kind of gholes, i.e. the golf course with no weak holes, with 18 great holes.   That kind of course literally makes no sense to me -- I don't know how you get 18 holes of exactly the same quality such that, relatively speaking, not one hole is any weaker than any other.

What I'm trying to say is that, if you believe that a golf course where the Par 3s are the weakest links can "probably" still be great, then it is effectively saying that a course can have weak Par 3s and still be great.

Which I agree with (though I don't think you do)

Peter

[Mike Cirba]

Bethpage Black

The Old Course (despite Eden)

[Phil McDade]

Steve:

Merely because a player struggles on a particular hole (or holes) in a championship does not necessarily make the hole great.

I brought up Muirfield because in most golf books I've read, the par 3s there don't get nearly as much acclaim as the course's other holes, several of which are viewed as world-class. Which is more in line with Ally's #2 response - can a course be great where the par 3s are the weakest link? He suggests yes, and I'd probably agree with him. On the other hand, as others have noted, there seems to be a certain sameness to the par 3s at Muirfield, from books and pictures I've read/seen -- greens deeper than they are wide, tilted back-to-front, with traps on both sides. Three of them (4, 7, and 16) often play within a few yards of each other in championship play.

[Steve Salmen]

Phil,

I do not believe the par 3s are the weakest link at Muirfield.  IMO, if any holes are less than phenomenal, it would be the two par 5s, and that is with the normal tees they use.  They are roughly the same distance and are tee to green roughly the same direction.  They are well guarded by traps for the tee shot, second (if necessary) and approach. 

With only three exceptions, every green at Muirfield is guarded left and right by at least one bunker.

This is how the card list's the par 3s:
#4 182
#7 147
#13 156
#16 186

In my experience (roughly 20 rounds), the tees do not move much on #16 or #7.  #7, however can be moved back to 165 or up to about 125.  However, there's a back tee frequently used on #4 that's 210 or 215.  #13 can play between 130 and 175.  Depending on what the committee determines, there can be great variance in distance or very little.  Options are available.

Regarding Mr. Els, he put himself in trouble.  However, the holes were not so difficult that he shot himself out of the tournament, nor were they so easy that nothing short of a great shot kept him in it.  13 and 15 were also pivotal for Faldo in 92.  He 3 putted 13 and made a fabulous up and down from behind 16.

Steve

[John Cornish]

The Old Course (despite Eden)

8 on the Od course is not particularly strong unless the flag is on the shelf at the back of the green, where it's easy to hit too bold a shot and leave a very tricky up and down from over the back. The hole is made much stronger from the back winter tee measuring around 190 yards than the regular Medal tee which measures around 165.

11 on the Old is one of the best par 3's I've played anywhere. Depending on the wind, it could be an 8 iron or punchiy 3 iron. The two bunkers provide challenge and frustration in equal measure. The green slopes severely from back to front eaving cross-green putts to be difficult to judge, especailly when the greens are running quickly. The slope can be used effectively if a skilled player needs to get to the front right bunker. Over the back is a 4, minimum (the tee shot invariably finishes on a downslope 20 feet below the back of the green.

In a strong l-r wind, plenty of players play their second shot from either Shell Bunker in front of the 7th green, or fairly close to the 8th tee.

In my view, it’s one of the great mid length par 3’s in the world.

[Matthew Petersen]

Phil,

I do not believe the par 3s are the weakest link at Muirfield.  IMO, if any holes are less than phenomenal, it would be the two par 5s, and that is with the normal tees they use.  They are roughly the same distance and are tee to green roughly the same direction.  They are well guarded by traps for the tee shot, second (if necessary) and approach. 

With only three exceptions, every green at Muirfield is guarded left and right by at least one bunker.

This is how the card list's the par 3s:
#4 182
#7 147
#13 156
#16 186

In my experience (roughly 20 rounds), the tees do not move much on #16 or #7.  #7, however can be moved back to 165 or up to about 125.  However, there's a back tee frequently used on #4 that's 210 or 215.  #13 can play between 130 and 175.  Depending on what the committee determines, there can be great variance in distance or very little.  Options are available.

Regarding Mr. Els, he put himself in trouble.  However, the holes were not so difficult that he shot himself out of the tournament, nor were they so easy that nothing short of a great shot kept him in it.  13 and 15 were also pivotal for Faldo in 92.  He 3 putted 13 and made a fabulous up and down from behind 16.

Steve

Steve,

I think the "Muirfield" Phil was referring to was Muirfield Village in Ohio. #12 there is considered a good hole but, though I have watched the tournament for years and "played" the course in numerous computer simulations I cannot recall any of the other par 3s. On the card they are listed as:

4: 200
8: 185
16 : 215

[Phil McDade]

Um, no, it was a reference to the Honourable Company course at Muirifield, Scotland.

Its par 3s, I stiil maintain, do not hold the stature of the course's par 4s and 5s, from my readings. Three of them, when the Open Championship has been played in recent years at Muirfield, have played at similar lengths.

To me, they certainly lack the diversity and drama of, to choose another championship course, Augusta National.

[Jaeger Kovich]

Bethpage Black

The Old Course (despite Eden)

Absolutely

Par 3's at Kiawah are definitely the weakest part of the course.

[Adam Clayman]

I'll throw Pebble Beach under the bus. The new fifth is NOT an improvement from the old hole. So that leaves 7 and 17 as the only two worthy of debating whether they are great. While I like the 12th better than most, and roll my eyes at those who are disappointed by the 17th, the course could be the best with the weakest par 3's in many people's eyes.

[Chip Gaskins]

All MacRaynor courses are pretty much out....

So how about Pebble Beach or Crystal Downs?

[Tim Nugent]

Phil, don't bash Muirfield's 3's based on what you read/saw in a book.  I had no problem w/them, #13 is sandwiched in a narrow slot, made even skinnier by the treacherous flanking bunkers, don't miss left of #7, it's quite a ways down that slope - or go in the bunkers on the right, because the slope on the left is waiting. #16's  and #7 are pretty good sized greens in both directions while #13 and #4 are narrow (sorry for the numbering - I started on the back). And that little revetted pot on the left of #4 caught me with the ball all the way against the rear wall - had to play it on my knees from above and  almost did a header in.  I guess you could say #4 brought me to my knees
The only weakness might be that #4 and #13 both play in the same direction (east). 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()