Elasticity and short par 4's

[Alex Miller]

Aren't the best short par 4's (we'll say <340 yds) ones that are designed to play that way? Are there any holes that have tees >400 yards that play as GREAT short par 4's from a shorter set of tees? (Off the top of my head I can only think of Kiawah Ocean's 3rd, but is it a great hole from the 400 yard tee?)

It seems to me that the short par 4's which work best have significantly more challenge in the approach shot and green surrounds than medium or long par 4's. A more demanding approach/recovery means that the golfer has a greater risk/reward descision in determining how close they should try to get the ball to the green off the tee. When played from a longer yardage to the same type of green site, I think the hole is simply penal as no strategy was used on either shot.

Elasticity in design is great to allow a variety of plays for the golfer, but at a certain point is it necessary? If a hole works at 400 yards can it work equally well at 300 yards, and vice versa?

[Cameron DeVries]

      From my point of view, I agree that most of the best short par fours would lose a lot of their luster if the tees were moved way back.  And it probably works the same way if a long hole is converted to a short one (e.g. the 14th at Torrey Pines South in the '08 Open).  

      I don't think most courses can be too elastic because at some point decisions have to be made in the design process to do potentially interesting or bold things and these features are often dictated by length of hole.  If every short par four was 100 yards wide, the interest that comes from having to execute a straight tee shot would be lost.  

      But, a hole like Riviera #10 is fantastic because it is wide, but requires real thought and execution.  If it was 430 yards and played to that green there would be problems.  If every hole was designed to play from a myriad of distances (eg back tees at 420, 370, and 290) you might have to make the green a more uniform size or shape and provide gentler undulations.  You could still end up with a great hole, but it wouldn't be the same hole and it certainly couldn't be a copy of Riviera's 10th.  

     In my opinion, I think many of the best holes (of any par) are better when they are played from their original or intended set of tees and have a relatively simple concept.  If someone tries to do too much and fit too many options or tees into a hole, it's hard to maintain the integrity of the design from all the different lines of play and yardages.  That being said, I would give a lot of credit to any designer who can build holes that maintain interest from a variety of lengths and angles without hurting the quality of the design.

[Doug Siebert]

If the greensite is interesting, does it matter where you play it from?  TOC's 17th would be a great hole from 340 or 540.  It might not make a good long par 3, but I could certainly see it as an all-world short 3 if it played at around the distance of the Postage Stamp or PB's 7th.  For that matter, TOC's 18th would make a great 120 yard par 3 or whatever it would be from Granny Clarke's Wynd (if the rightmost 2/3 of the green were mowed/pinned) and would work well as a par 5 also.  It may not be one of the stronger holes at TOC, but the Valley of Sin is going to make for some interesting strategy no matter where you take your first shot from.

Riveria's 10th wouldn't work too well as a long par 4, because the approach would be way too difficult.  But aside from situations like that, where the green is just too small, I should think those short 4s that are considered great because of their greensite would work as longer par 4s (assuming the terrain permitted it)

[Alex Miller]

If the greensite is interesting, does it matter where you play it from?  TOC's 17th would be a great hole from 340 or 540.  It might not make a good long par 3, but I could certainly see it as an all-world short 3 if it played at around the distance of the Postage Stamp or PB's 7th.  For that matter, TOC's 18th would make a great 120 yard par 3 or whatever it would be from Granny Clarke's Wynd (if the rightmost 2/3 of the green were mowed/pinned) and would work well as a par 5 also.  It may not be one of the stronger holes at TOC, but the Valley of Sin is going to make for some interesting strategy no matter where you take your first shot from.

Riveria's 10th wouldn't work too well as a long par 4, because the approach would be way too difficult.  But aside from situations like that, where the green is just too small, I should think those short 4s that are considered great because of their greensite would work as longer par 4s (assuming the terrain permitted it)

Well we all know no one is going to take the hotel out of play on the Road Hold. 

Those are two very good examples of a green that would work elastically as a short par 4 and longer hole and one that would only work with a shorter approach. Neither of these holes are ever set up at dramatically different yardages than the norm though, so I still wonder if my question has been answered.

One to throw out there which I've heard discussed as incredible from different tees is the 8th at Sand Hills. True?

[Bill_McBride]

Mike Davis has made recent U. S. Opens a little more interesting by moving up the tee on some mid size par 4's to play them as drive able par 4's.  Torrey Pines and Oakmont come to mind.  Has this worked?

[Doug Siebert]

Alex,

Are you talking about holes that could actually have this done to them?  While the examples I've given using TOC are obviously invalid for this, since there is no way the R&A is going to decide to play the 17th as a 150 yard par 3, no matter how interesting that might be, there are any number of great greensites at courses with lesser pedigrees where this could be done.

The question of why it isn't is probably because there generally isn't a practical way to make a hole significantly longer - you need a teebox first so it isn't something you can do on a lark.  If you build that teebox, then the hole typically is made longer on a permanent basis and we all know that once a hole is made longer it is almost never shortened again.  No one (except Mike Davis) wants to make a hole significantly shorter even for a day because it'll upset too many people.  It isn't too uncommon to see the tees on a hole moved up a set for everyone, but it is rare (outside of course maintenance issues) to see say a 440 yard hole played from 300 for a day.  I suspect if that was tried a lot of clubs would receive complaints from members who felt it was unfairly reducing their handicaps since the course rating/slope wouldn't be adjusted to reflect it.

[Josh Tarble]

I really like the idea of having a par 4 that can play 400+ and then in the 300 yard area.  I think this would be a bit difficult though, because part of the allure of the really good drive-able par 4s are extreme risk-reward scenarios.  They make you think.

Now, a 450 yard par 4 with an extreme green site, may be too penal to play at that length or could be too unguarded to really make a good player think...just bash a driver up there somewhere and then chip up. 

I'm not saying it is impossible to have a hole that works both ways, but I think it would be very difficult to get the balance right on either end, and I can't say I can think of any that do it well. 

TOC #17 would actually be a great example of a hole that would be great.  I would love to see that same green site set up as a driveable par 4.

[Tags:]

Tags: