Designing an unreachable par 5.

[JMEvensky]

Assuming normal run, a level site and no hazards at the landing zone, what length would the hole have to be before it were unreachable in two for everyone ?

Niall

Assuming no hazards fronting the green,I'll open the bidding at 700 yards.

[Garland Bayley]

I guess I don't understand the reason for this thread. If people want to hit extra shots with diminished purpose, why don't they just go to a driving range? Why saddle other golfers with the expense of it all?

[Will MacEwen]

Meadow Gardens in Pitt Meadows BC has a closing par 5 where you drive to a peninsula, than a second shot to an island, folowed by an approach to another island.  I imagine some guys run in up the throat of the peninsula, but it narrows as I recall.

This one may not be unreachable, but if you are willing to go crazy with islands I guess it can be done.

The hole is #18 at this link:

http://www.meadowgardens.com/golf/course/layout/

I can't recall.  The aerial makes it look that way, but I can't imagine it is that simple.

Just looked at the aerial. Wow, some interesting features on that course! I think the play for that hole looks like down the adjacent fairway, yes?

[Peter Ferlicca]

I am thinking of something similiar to #16 at Olympic but a little longer and a little more curve to the left. 

You would want a hole in the 600 to 650 range that constantly is turning to the left or the right, with tall trees on the inside of the dogleg.  If a Bubba were to hit a bombing 350 yard rope hook or big cut, he would still have to hit a mege cut or hook over 300 yards to reach the green still.  Put a large bunker fronting the green, and folks I think you have designed an unreacheable par 5.

[Pete_Pittock]

I guess I don't understand the reason for this thread. If people want to hit extra shots with diminished purpose, why don't they just go to a driving range? Why saddle other golfers with the expense of it all?

Garland,
I believe this is a golf architecture discussion site, but with all the OT topics I might be wrong. I was at Emerald Valley twice this month and nobody has reached #13 from the new tees. It is relatively easy to build an unreachable par five by sheer length. I wondered, through the use of hazards, doglegs with trees, etc , how short the hole could be and still be unreachable in two for the longest hitter, but still reachable for the boegyh player in regulation. I thought this was a worthwhile exercise. Why isn't it?

[Sean Leary]

Hi Pete,

I think the sort of hole you are talking about is more realistic here in the NW because the ball doesn't go that far. 3 at my home course might fit the description. It can only be reached in 2 by the longest of players under not normal wind and playing conditions. It has been reached a couple of times, but normally even the longest players don't ever try.

[Alex Miller]

Does unreachable mean getting on the putting surface? Has anyone ever been on Oakmont's 12th in 2?

[Garland Bayley]

I guess I don't understand the reason for this thread. If people want to hit extra shots with diminished purpose, why don't they just go to a driving range? Why saddle other golfers with the expense of it all?

Garland,
I believe this is a golf architecture discussion site, but with all the OT topics I might be wrong. I was at Emerald Valley twice this month and nobody has reached #13 from the new tees. It is relatively easy to build an unreachable par five by sheer length. I wondered, through the use of hazards, doglegs with trees, etc , how short the hole could be and still be unreachable in two for the longest hitter, but still reachable for the boegyh player in regulation. I thought this was a worthwhile exercise. Why isn't it?

See what Vernon Macan has to say about it above.
On other threads I have put forth the theory that the core of golf is the two shot hole. 1st shot position for the best approach. 2nd shot try to use that good position to score. A three shot hole just throws in an indifferent extra shot into the playing of the hole. I was preaching this to Alex and JKM long before I read that Macan was in entire agreement with me.

[Grant Saunders]

Not really adding anything to the actual topic, but I just found a magazine with some stats on Bubba:

He says he plays 3-4 main different types of shot with the driver.

 His "normal" shot carries 300 metres (330 yards)

His safety shot for hitting the fairway (he calls it a "dink" cut) carries 265 metres (290 yards) and then rolls a further 35-40 yards.

He also plays a "high bomb" which he uses when he wants to hit it harder and go further which carries more than 300 metres (330 yards)

During his rookie year he averaged 320 metres (352 yards) of carry.

Seems to me it would be would be madness to try and build a course with Bubba in mind.

Why not celebrate long hitting for the skill that it is and the athleticism that it requires. Why must we always talk of punishing the big hitter?

They don’t make Usain bolt run 110 metres and only have everyone else run 100 just because he is so much faster.

[Garland Bayley]

...
Why not celebrate long hitting for the skill that it is and the athleticism that it requires. Why must we always talk of punishing the big hitter?
...

Because he is a big hitter! Actually, I believe the idea is to challenge (not punish) the talented (in many cases big hitters) and let the untalented get around in a reasonable fashion. The big hitter has to decide if he has the carry to meet the challenge.

[Garland Bayley]

...
They don’t make Usain bolt run 110 metres and only have everyone else run 100 just because he is so much faster.

I suggest you take two weeks off from golf, and then give it up altogether for track and field. It seems that is where your proclivities lie.

[Tom Kelly]

Everybody is talking about Bubba.......what about this guy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cq_HzDKoRiQ&feature=related