David,
I appreciate the photos you dug up on this. However, I would respectfully like to point out according to that Sports Illustrated photo Jones hit 3-iron. I hit 2-iron from the new tee but the pin was all the way at the back of the green, had the pin been where the photo indicates I would have hit a 3 as well. Additionally, what you can't see in those images is a tee of similar length (I would say about 230-240) that is on the same line as the original tee box but about even with the 8th green (it would be below and to the left of the lower left corner of the photos you have provided). That would also be about a 3-iron. I don't know how many days they will use each tee box because I am not Mike Davis but I imagine they will move it around a fair amount. When they inevitably tuck that pin behind the left bunker there is no way they can use that back left tee. When they put the pin on the front of the green, sure. I still think it's the third most difficult par-3 on the course from all the way back though.
Thanks for your thoughtful response, Brian. I think perhaps though you are mistaken about two of your main assumptions: the distance of the original holes, and the equivalent clubs.
1.
The Distance of 9th Hole. In 1930 the ninth hole was listed at 170 yards, and Merion had a tendency to
overstate the actual yardages (due at least in part to a faulty measuring methodology/philosophy.). At best the tee toward the right side of the 8th green could be stretched to around 175-180 yards. (This is judging not only by the photographs, but also architectural renderings.) Whatever the exact yardage it was a far cry shorter than the 230-240 yards you estimate.
2.
Comparing Old Clubs with New. As for club selection, I understand the logic behind equating your modern 3 iron and the "No. 3 iron" hit by Bobby Jones, but the two not any more equivalent than you and I are equivalent in golfing ability. This was the dawn of numbered and matched sets, and the "No. 3" designation meant that it was meant to approximate the third shortest iron in a set appropriate for most golfers, whereas today's three iron is generally the longest iron in a standard set,
if it is included at all. Jones was a traditionalist and didn't carry a matched set, and for him the "No. 3 Iron" was probably the fourth shortest Iron in his set. Ralph Livingston III, listed the following clubs as used by Jones in 1926-1930:
"The Irons were; A Driving Mashie, a No. 1-Iron, a No. 2-Iron (38 1/4′ long, 24 degrees loft), a Mashie Iron, a No. 4-Iron (36 3/8′ long, 31 degrees loft), and a Mashie (36 1/4′ long, 35 degrees loft), a Spade Mashie (36 1/4′, 39 degrees loft), Mashie Niblick (34 1/4′, 42 degrees loft), and a Niblick (35 1/4′, 50 degrees loft).
. . .
The 2- Iron at 24 degrees would match a modern 4-Iron.
Mashie Irons are usually about 27 degrees and it would match to a 5-Iron.
The 4-Iron at 31 degrees matches to a 6-Iron.
The Mashie at 36 degrees is between the 7 and 8-Iron.
The Spade Mashie at 39 degrees is like a weak 8-Iron.
The Mashie Niblick at 42 degrees matches well to a modern 9-Iron, except for the short shaft.
The Niblick at 50 degrees falls about half way between a PW and SW."http://www.golfclubatlas.com/feature-interview/feature-interview-with-ralph-livingston/[Jones may also have sometimes carried a funky looking concave sand club that looked a bit like a soup ladle.]
So according to Ralph, Jones' "No. 3 Iron" or "Mashie Iron" would be about the equivalent of a 27 degrees, which in 2004 he thought to be about a five iron. That'd be a pretty weak five iron by the standards of today's pros, wouldn't it? I am hardly the expert as compared to Ralph, but I own and have played dozens of clubs from that era (even once at Merion) and I'd generally agree with his conversions. With the constant creep toward less loft per club number, I'd say it is closer to a modern six iron. From an easier angle.