[John Chilver-Stainer]

Adrian,

In the routing I always avoid it if possible, but sometimes under extreme restraints, usually ecological or topographical, or in the interests of  avoiding long transfers from Green to Tee it may make good sense.

I’ve done a few myself because of lack of space  - the players get used to them pretty quickly.

I played Machrihanish Dunes (I’ll make more comment on it in another thread) in September this year, where the 14th and 15th are successive Par 3’s and it didn’t bother me at all – particularly as I had just birdied the 13th and 14th and thought I was on my first 3 in a row !!!!!

[Tom_Doak]

Tom is best to answer how easy it was for him to put two short holes together and if he felt any negativity in doing it.
I quite like CP 15/16. Both 10/10 golf holes, perhaps the two best holes on the course.

I was indeed reluctant to have back-to-back par-3's at Pacific Dunes.  It was something I thought I'd never do.  However, the alternatives were either to walk around one of them, or to play #10 and then have a blind tee shot for #11 up over the hill where the green sits ... and clearly having great back-to-back 3's was better than either of those choices.  So, we just tried to make the two holes as different as we could.

We had to make the same decision on #12 and #13 at Rock Creek.  One hole is 140 yards and the other is 230, so they're clearly very different.  I haven't heard much question about this choice, but of course not many people have played the course, and it remains overlooked, so maybe the feature does hold it back some.  The alternative there was to have two holes out and back in place of #12, and then cut #17 out of the routing ... again, a clearly less suitable alternative.

[Sean_A]

I am not sure how I feel about six par 5s.  Good ones are hard to build and it seems it is the rare course which has three good par 5s.  I think the concept works at Berkshire Red very well because it is a distinguishing factor between two otherwise quite similar designs on quite similar land.  I can't say the concept thrills me.

Since I really only want two or three par 5s on a course I don't like the idea of back to back three-shotters.  I can't recall ever feeling this approach worked well.  Maybe one of the best is Worp's across the road, but I don't think 11 is all that wonderful.  I have a much less problem with back to back par 3s - perhaps because I think they are inherently easier to design and can cover/transition some awkward land very well.  I still am in awe of L.O. and O.L. at North Wales - terrific consecutive par 3s.  Thinking on it though, I am not sure I have personally come across another great combo like at N Wales. 

Ciao     

[Ian Andrew]

1. Nobody can design six great fives - four is already close to impossible

2. The total length will be short (if you care about that) - each three and five combined will cost you about 100 yards as compared to two par fours

3. There are not enough fours to really mix up the yardages

[Ulrich Mayring]

I need to get to Zermatt and play John's course, but have to gain a bit more mountaineering experience for that region

Anyway, I think very few average players have ever decried par 5s as little fun. Beginners are generally afraid of par 5s due to their length and good players seem to hate the second shot, often a boring layup. But for average players these are the holes where they can really shine. I love par 5s, because they afford me the chance to hit the green in regulation - something that most par 4s don't.

On the other hand I actually believe it is difficult to design six great par 3s. Four is doable, although on most courses with four, I'll find that at least two of them are very similar in that I use the same club. One thing to keep in mind: no matter how you design the green and how varied the surroundings are, if the player is hitting the same club then he will find it a similar hole. Par 3s are very difficult to vary, because you have only one shot to do so as an architect.

Ulrich

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()