great par 5's

[THuckaby2]

GREAT call by Brian re "Bluidy Burn", which is one fabulous golf hole.  Andrew, go to CB's web site - here's where you'll get pictures of it, which should jog your memory.  It's relatively short, reachable in two, but only with a VERY risky blind 2nd, going over a dune and clearing the burn.  The 2nd shot as a layup is fun and difficult also, many places to put it strategically...

Here's the site.  Enjoy.

TH

http://www.crudenbaygolfclub.co.uk/newviews.htm

[Mike_Cirba]

Matt,

You're absolutely correct about 8 at Ridgewood West.  The surrounding steeply sidehill terrain and greensite is so good that the better player should be encouraged to give it a go in two, because that's where the fun would begin once they missed.

However, I also think the 5th at Hartefeld provides adequate penalty.  The player going for it in two is trying to hit a seriously elevated target off a downhill lie, while trying to carry a nest of bunkers in the hillside.  Actually, fanning one out to the right is the "safe" play.  The guy who gets caught up down below in the bunker nest will have to scramble for par.

See hole at these links.

http://www.hartefeld.com/holes/hole5.html

http://www.hartefeld.com/yardage_book/yb5.html

Now...I don't want to hear any more talk that I'm a "basher" of any architect, including Fazio!  

[GeoffreyC]

Mike

Before Gil did his magic at Fenway to restore Tillinghast's original features, the third hole also had grass mounds where the sahara bunker complex now sits.  I always wondered about those mounds at Fenway because there was nothing else like them on the course or other Tillinghast courses I had played.

Therefore I ask if the 3rd at Ridgeway East (I have not yet played it but maybe next year) could be a "Lost Sahara" waiting to be restored?  Anyone out there have access to old aerials?  Not having seen them that would be my guess.  Fenway's were filled long ago probably to ease maintenance costs.  You saw the results of the restoration at Fenway (others who have not played it can look in the course profiles on this site for photos at Fenway or Gil's interview for his comments) .

[Mike_Cirba]

Geoffrey,

Interesting question.  On the overhead drawing of Ridgewood in Rick Wolffe's Tillie book, it appears the the HHA feature on 3 East was indeed a sandy stretch as conceived by Tillie.  

However, the first par five on the West (#4 I believe) also has a HHA complex that looks to be just mounds!

Today, both are mounds.

By the way, 3 at Fenway ROCKS!

[SPDB]

Matt/Mike

I am in total agreement with Mike here. The drive is certainly helped by the fact that the land falls naturally down toward the creek. However, even at the furthest reaches of the first fairway, you will still have 190 at least, steeply up hill over a tremendous complex of bunkers.

Simply fanning your shot out right, is not going for it in two, and it is not bailing out, if you were to catch the right fairway, your shot never even had a chance to get the green.

Note that you cannot see the putting surface from where you hit your second shot, which makes for a tricky strike. Moreover, even if your second shot finds the putting surface, the chances are you will be on the back side of the green, and be faced with put that will move quickly back in the direction from where you hit your shot. They typically have the pin up front, so putting is no easy picnic.

Penalty for courage is easy to find on this hole. This is a terrific par 5.

Also the 16th hole on this course (also a 3 shotter) has a terrific "skyline" green which I think everyone on this site can appreciate.

[Matt_Ward]

SPDB / Mike:

With all due respect gentlemen -- strong players have no problems with the 5th at Hartefeld. On the tee the agenda is simple -- take a wide stance and let it go!!!

I've played the whole no less than four time and never had more than a short iron into the green. The downhill fairway allows for mega yardage gains and if you swing a slight draw you can really max it out. The elevated shot is not an automatic but you've got plenty of space to get the ball on the dance floor.

For players who don't hit it big the problem is hitting a much longer club from the lie you both mentioned. This is a great example of a hole where the separation point between average hitters and long hitters is clearly apparent. The 4th at Bethpage Black does not permit such a situation to take lace as I just mentioned.

[mikep]

Matt,

With respect to #8 West at Ridgewood, I agree that trimming the trees on the left would put the driver back in the hands of the big hitters.  What is your view of the trees on the right just short of the green?  Perhaps if they were removed more of the better players would go for the green in two, especially since the green slopes severely right to left. But for those trees, it would be much better to miss right than left.

[SPDB]

Matt -
The absolute least amount of yardage you would have into this green is probably 175, and that is if you play the hill down to the flatter section abutting the creek. This 175 will probably play more like 185-190, due to how uphill the hole is.

However, your comment about how there is "plenty of space to keep the ball on the dance floor" is somewhat belied by the picture Mike enclosed which shows how narrow the green is. The picture does not show the pitch from back to front, which further frustrates.

[Matt_Ward]

I concede that the 5th at Hartefeld is a good par-5 -- just not great as the topic states.

mikep:

The 8th at Ridgewood needs to make players "think" at the tee instead of opting for the pro-forma three shot hole which has many of them hitting irons off the tee an then another iron to have a 125-140 yard third shot.

Once you make the big hitters rip it at the tee you bring into play a whole host of elements -- what happen sif they snipe it left off the tee? It's either partially dead or even OB.

What happens if they hit the tee shot perfectly and now must swing a long second that uses the natural terrain perfectly without rolling too far left and finding the deep green side bunker on the left? Great par-5's require options on all the shots -- the 8th at Ridgewood doesn't stand up to the level of greatness. In my mind, it's good but nothing more until the lumber starts to come down. Is Ridgewood prepared to go further than what's been done to date???

[Greg Stebbins]

Couldn't agree more with everyone on 8west at Rigewood.  I know I've been ready to pull the chainsaw out that hold for a long time.  I think one of the world best par 5's is "lurking in the woods."  Keep up the debate, it can only help.

By the way, significant tree removal has begun at Ridgewood around the greens.  The motivation for this project was to increase sunlight on the greens which have been problematic in recent years.  From an architectual standpoint, the results are fantastic!  The skyline green look has been restored on 4 center and some vistas have been cleared to reveal spectacular views of the course.  

Hopefully, the great results will lead to more tree removal.. especially on 8 west!

[abiggadike]

TH - Thanks for the Cruden Bay link... now I remember #6.  We played through a group on that hole which may be why I had forgotten.   There are some great pictures of the whole course at that URL as well...

Regarding 8 West at Ridgewood:

I agree that the trees need to come back a bit, but I was surprised at how many pros at the Sr. PGA _were_ hitting drivers - they just hit hooks around the corner.  And Jim Thorpe went for it in two on Sunday and ended up in the left trees chipping out...  
I'm not disputing the comments about the hole, just pointing out some things that I noticed.

Regarding 3 East and 4 West at Ridgewood:

In discussing Tillinghast's admiration of PV #7 and HHA, Gil Hanse wrote: "Tillinghast built replicas of this hole on nearly all of his courses, sometimes using a combination of sand and mounds, and at Ridgewood using only mounds." --hope that helps answer the question.

Also, Mike Cirba's remarks about the green complex on 3 East sure are right, it's one hell of a green.

[mikep]

Geoffrey and Mike,

With respect to  #3 East and #4 West at Ridgewood, it may be that the drawing depicted in the Wolffe book on Tillinghast was meant to be grass mounds in an area of rough.

There are arial pictures from the 1935 Ryder Cup which show that it was grass at that time and the course was built in 1928.  In addition, Gil Hanse's Master Plan seems to support that it was meant to be grass.

[GeoffreyC]

I just looked at the overhead drawing of  RIdgewood in "The Course Beautiful" and those drawings sure look like multiple small bunkers were intended but I certainly would believe a 1935 aerial.  Gil is also one of those guys who does the research Tom Paul talks about so that's good enough for me!

The overhead drawings certainly depict two really fine par 5's utilizing sahara-like cross hazards.  This is about the only repetitive feature I can recall from Tillinghast. At one time I thought his 5 pars were weak but the more I look at his body of work the more really superb ones I come across. Funny that they all seem to utilize a sahara like bunker complex or cross hazard (4 at bethpage) while his 3's and 4's seemingly have no repetition.

[Will E]

#18 at Tullymoore is worthy of a mention.
Like my favorite par 5; #11 at TPC, Jim Engh has made great use of trees on this hole.
Did I miss that nobody has mentioned #15 at Seminole? What a tee shot if the wind is in your face!

[Tom Doak]

Probably 80% of the holes listed above are short par-5's, under 520 yards.  Yet modern architects rarely build their par-5's this short.

One of the main things I learned at Pacific Dunes was to keep the fives short.  The third hole, all of 499 yards, is probably the best par five I've built so far.

[Paul Richards]

Tom:

Excellent point.   Short par fives, that are reachable by us
mortal golfers, though with risk involved, are often the most
fun.

IMHO, the best fives are the ones that are reachable with
two excellent shots, or are never reachable at all (Pine
Valley #7).

[TEPaul]

Tom Doak:

I agree with you that PD's #3 is an excellent par 5 despite or probably because of it's length. However, I can remember your initial concern when a long hitting Australian or two hit it in two very much downwind (and par 5 #12 also) with something like an 8 iron. No matter, it's an excellent hole and would not play this way with no wind or a reverse wind.

There is another factor involved here that makes a hole like #3 even more interesting, in my opinion. And that's the existence of hole #4, a par 4, next in the routing and routed in the opposite direction, which while long for a par 4 may be about 45yds shorter than #3! That very same long hitting Australian admitted that even with a good drive on #4 he would have had to hit his very best 1 iron to even get home in two.

Since on an open, high, ocean and wind exposed site like PD, architecturally the wind must always be considered to be a factor, this is a combination which not only highlights the strategy of #3 but it also highlights the relativity of par itself about as well as two holes can in a routing progression!

Unfortunately, too many golfers, particularly American golfers, view a golf hole and its par in a certain vacuum. These two holes and their respective pars skew that particular view of a hole and its par about as well as two holes can!

If a good golfer, therefore, has in his mind where he stands at anytime to par (and most do) he is forced to attack #3 for a basically automatic birdie simply to prepare himself for a likely bogie on #4 and in that way the strategy of #3 changes dramatically!

When an architect can build a good and interesting hole strategically and otherwise more power to him. But when he can acheive the rare hole that somehow both challenges and confuses a good golfer as to what exactly he should do relative to par or birdie then double more power to him.

Coore and Crenshaw did this beautifully on a single hole, in my opinion, with the design of #17 Easthampton and you did it beautifully with the combination of #3 and #4 at PD! #3 PD is a good hole anyway, but #4 makes it even better, and in the process you did a real good number on the mindless, standardized, single hole vacuum mentality of par itself!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mike p,

I believe the trees to the front right of # 8 were planted for safety reasons relating to play from the 2nd tee, and to protect those on the 2nd tee from shots to the green from
# 8.

Tom Doak,

The par 5 yardages at Ridgewood are:
# 4 west   597
# 8 west   569
# 3 east    567
# 2 center 563
# 4 center 530

TEPaul,

I believe you had told me that C & C didn't do the routing at
Easthampton.  Do you know who is creditied with the routing ?

Matt, Greg, SPDB, Mikep,

Ridgewood may have one of the better sets of par 5's anywhere.  In addition to removing the trees on the left border of # 8, the rough lines also need to be changed.

Geoffry C,

Returning the apparent Sahara feature to # 3 east and # 4 west would be spectacular, though I don't think it's on the horizon.  Perhaps Gil Hanse can tell us his thoughts on this subject.

[TEPaul]

Pat:

Apparently the basic Easthampton routing was done by a member of the Bistrian (sp?) family of Easthampton who owned the land for many years and were the ones who hired Coore and Crenshaw to do the course. The permitting etc process is so complex, difficult and time consuming in Easthampton that it was decided to go with the routing that the family member had done quite few years before. Actually, more credit to C&C for pulling the course together as well as they did with an "inherited" routing.

#17 is unique because the hole is about a 485yd sharp dogleg right and off a good drive you can be within a medium to long iron from the green but the green looks so raised and narrow that the good player is unsure exactly what to do next. It was basically designed to get right between the good player's ears and as such it definitely needs to be a short par 5 not a long par 4!! It's a brilliant use of the psychology of par against the good player!

[Solario]

I like the 5th and 18th holes at Kapalua's Plantation Course.

[JMD]

The 9th of the composite course (11th for the members) at The Country Club belongs on this list.  

[John D. Bernhardt]

Tom Doak and Tom, I love the 3rd at Pacific Dunes. Funny, into the wind it was a full 3 shot hole. Great drive good 3 wood and 4 iron, 3 iron and 5 wood for 3rd shots. It played 600 to 700 yards. Additionally the green is very difficult to hold in a strong wind. It also is a great green. And in the grand spirit that score is not all that it is about. I hit 12 in 2 every time with a 5 wood down to a 6 iron. Wind makes distance almost a nonissue. Tom can you address the short par 5's in a less windy environment. I agree most of the really memorable ones are shorter.

[Paul_Turner]

I don't really miss par 5s when there are fewer than the usual quota of 4, unlike par 3s. (Rye and Swinley Forest)

The obvious choice for a links set is Muirfield.  Walton Heath Old has 3 excellent par 5s at 13,14,16 although I thought the 8th was a little plain.

Brancaster's 8th might be the best anywhere.