A weakness of Golden Age architects is . . .

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

I really like Frank Hannigan and have the utmost respect for him, but, I have to disagree with him regarding AWT's par 5's, based on the ones I've been exposed to.

Ridgewood, Quaker Ridge, Fenway, WFW, WFE, Shackamaxon, Somerset Hills, Baltimore, Baltusrol Upper, Baltusrol Lower, Alpine, Forest Hills, Suburban, Bethpage Black, Old Oaks, North Shore, Sunningdale, Delwood, Brook Hollow and Philadelphia Cricket are the limit of my exposure.  I accompanied my dad when he played Shawnee with Fred Waring, but, can't remember much.

As group, I wouldn't categorize those par 5's as weak. 

Some were better than others, but, as a whole, it's a pretty decent body of work, one I wouldn't view as coming up on the short end of quality.

Ridgewood seems to embody what J Urbina described.
As a set, they're pretty impressive and remain relevant, without much in the way of amendments over the years.

[Tom_Doak]

Tom Doak,

I really like Frank Hannigan and have the utmost respect for him, but, I have to disagree with him regarding AWT's par 5's, based on the ones I've been exposed to.

Ridgewood, Quaker Ridge, Fenway, WFW, WFE, Shackamaxon, Somerset Hills, Baltimore, Baltusrol Upper, Baltusrol Lower, Alpine, Forest Hills, Suburban, Bethpage Black, Old Oaks, North Shore, Sunningdale, Delwood, Brook Hollow and Philadelphia Cricket are the limit of my exposure.  I accompanied my dad when he played Shawnee with Fred Waring, but, can't remember much.

As group, I wouldn't categorize those par 5's as weak. 

Some were better than others, but, as a whole, it's a pretty decent body of work, one I wouldn't view as coming up on the short end of quality.

Ridgewood seems to embody what J Urbina described.
As a set, they're pretty impressive and remain relevant, without much in the way of amendments over the years.

Patrick:

I really like Frank Hannigan, too.  He is no more politically correct than I am, and he's seen a lot over the years.

I've seen a dozen of the courses you mentioned.  [I didn't count North Shore, because it's been pretty much proven that Tillinghast had nothing to do with its design.] 

I've only seen Ridgewood once, but I would say that Ridgewood and Bethpage have the best sets of par-5 holes that Tillinghast designed.  The other ten courses, not so much. 

I think Mr. Hannigan was unduly influenced in his assessment by the fact that so many of those Tillie par-5's were converted to par-4's by the USGA for championships -- #9 and #16 at Winged Foot West, or #1 and #7 at Baltusrol Lower.  But, do you really think #6 or #9 at Somerset Hills is one of the best holes on the course?  Or any of the par-5's at Fenway, other than perhaps #3?  Or any of the par-5 holes at Philadelphia Cricket, for which my mind is drawing a complete blank right now?

[Patrick_Mucci]

[
Patrick:

I really like Frank Hannigan, too.  He is no more politically correct than I am, and he's seen a lot over the years.

I've seen a dozen of the courses you mentioned.  [I didn't count North Shore, because it's been pretty much proven that Tillinghast had nothing to do with its design.] 

I've only seen Ridgewood once, but I would say that Ridgewood and Bethpage have the best sets of par-5 holes that Tillinghast designed.  The other ten courses, not so much. 

I think Mr. Hannigan was unduly influenced in his assessment by the fact that so many of those Tillie par-5's were converted to par-4's by the USGA for championships -- #9 and #16 at Winged Foot West, or #1 and #7 at Baltusrol Lower.

I'd agree that Frank may have been unduly influenced by how the best golfers in the world play those par 5's, necessitating their reduction in par.
But, if viewed from outside the world of the PGA Tour Pro, they still present an interesting challenge to amateur golfers.
Both starting holes at Baltusrol are fairly benign.
But, as you know, AWT often didn't incorporate ranges in his designs..
Many of his designs had NO ranges, thus, the opening hole was his concession to the "warm up"
Quaker Ridge and Baltusrol are three examples.
And, I think the nines used to be reversed at Somerset Hills where # 10 was # 1.
So, I'm willing to factor his intended benevolence into consideration on opening par 5's. 

But, do you really think #6 or #9 at Somerset Hills is one of the best holes on the course? 

I concede # 6 at Somerset Hills is weak...... by today's standards.
But, I wonder how it was perceived on opening day.
# 9 is another matter.  I think it's a terrific hole for the membership and their guests.......... not PGA Tour Pros

Or any of the par-5's at Fenway, other than perhaps #3?

I think # 3 is a terrific par 5.
Remember, Fenway only has two par 5's, # 3 and # 18, and # 18 isn't bad at all.

I think you have to view the par 5's in the context of the ability of those that play them every day, and not the PGA Tour Pros.
As we know, you either have to extend the tees or change the par in order to make those holes relevant with respect to protecting par against the PGA Tour caliber golfer.

So, as you stated, perhaps that's where Frank was coming from in his assessment, resistance to par for the best golfers in the world. 

Or any of the par-5 holes at Philadelphia Cricket, for which my mind is drawing a complete blank right now?

You're not alone, I'm also drawing a complete blank

[Tom_Doak]

Both starting holes at Baltusrol are fairly benign.
But, as you know, AWT often didn't incorporate ranges in his designs..
Many of his designs had NO ranges, thus, the opening hole was his concession to the "warm up"
Quaker Ridge and Baltusrol are three examples.
And, I think the nines used to be reversed at Somerset Hills where # 10 was # 1.
So, I'm willing to factor his intended benevolence into consideration on opening par 5's.

Pat:

I agree that Tillinghast deliberately designed some "weak" par-5 holes early in the round at some courses.

Somerset Hills isn't one of them, though.  It was designed with the Redan as hole #2.  Ten or fifteen years ago, they tried switching the nines for a couple of years, for some reason, and then switched them back.  And, anyway, #10 was a medium-length par-4 in Tillinghast's design, with the green down in the right side of the fairway, near the creek.  The club moved the green and changed the hole to a par-5 in the 1960's, when some people thought that having no par-5 holes on the back nine was a weakness.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom,

Originally, wasn't the Redan # 11 and the current 9th the 18th ?