Most intimidating par 3's?

[Jud_T]

Haven't played it, but shouldn't the Postage Stamp be included in this discussion?

[Michael Ryan]

Jud,

I have followed this thread with interest and found it interesting that there seems to be a battle between "intimidating" and "difficult".  The ask was "most intimidating" and I would say that the Postage Stamp might be the shortest intimidating par 3 I have ever seen....

Mike

[David Cronheim]

Ok - perhaps it's just because some have not posted pictures, but I have never seen a more intimidating looking par 3 without water or OB than the Pulpit at CC of Buffalo. Incredible.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jud,

I have followed this thread with interest and found it interesting that there seems to be a battle between "intimidating" and "difficult".  The ask was "most intimidating" and I would say that the Postage Stamp might be the shortest intimidating par 3 I have ever seen....

Michael,

Add Shinnecock's # 11 to the list of intimidating par 3's

[Chris_Hufnagel]

Jud,

I have followed this thread with interest and found it interesting that there seems to be a battle between "intimidating" and "difficult".  The ask was "most intimidating" and I would say that the Postage Stamp might be the shortest intimidating par 3 I have ever seen....

Mike

I am not sure if this is completely relevant, but I do think there is something to the length of the holes and intimidation...

When I play a short, and intimidating, par 3 - the act of missing the green and the subsequent frustration is all the more enhanced because I started the hole with a short iron in my hand and with that comes a higher expectation on myself to perform better.

When I play a long, and intimidating, par 3 – the act of hitting the green and subsequent jubilation is enhanced because I had lower expectations going into the shot.

I think there is also something to what the second shot on a intimidating par 3 maybe if you miss the green - while the first shot on some might be very intimidating, the recovery is less so.  On some, the first shot may be the easiest of the bunch - i.e. #2 Kingsley

[George Pazin]

Most intimidating I've played is Wolf Creek (NV) #8. Over 210 from the tees we played - 248 from the tips, which we were told are never open except for tournaments - the green looks like a speck and it's surrounded by trouble. You do see a little bailout room right, but not until you get up near the green, you can't see it from the tee. Looks like a hit and hope to the extreme, plays only slightly easier.

[Jeff Taylor]

Jud,

I have followed this thread with interest and found it interesting that there seems to be a battle between "intimidating" and "difficult".  The ask was "most intimidating" and I would say that the Postage Stamp might be the shortest intimidating par 3 I have ever seen....

Michael,

Add Shinnecock's # 11 to the list of intimidating par 3's

[Michael Ryan]

Chris Hufnagel,

Regarding the last point of your post-How is the first shot intimidating if the recovery shot isn't?  Isn't the penalty of a miss what makes the hole intimidating?  Either a miss that results in a penalty of stroke (hazard) or stroke and distance (ob) or the miss that results in a difficult recovery shot (to use a visual already in this thread, missing long and left at Shinnecock that presents one of the trickiest shots in golf?)

As I previously backed the suggestion of #5 at Pine Valley as the most intimidating par 3 in golf, it was due to the penalty of a miss which I will say is more in the forefront of your mind due to the length of the hole.  Another post suggested the Postage Stamp and while a shorter par 3 isn't what normally intimidates a golfer, I backed the suggestion that it's one of the few shorter holes that I would say is "intimidating".  Severe bunkers on the right and a hill of gorse on the left can make for a very difficult recovery shot.  The 13th at Pine Tree has also been suggested as a shorter par 3 that still has "intimidation" factored in.  A poor tee shot will almost exclusivly lead to a bunker shot recovery to a very small target. 

Again, I keep going back to the original topic and how I think there is a difference between intimidating and difficult.

[Tim Martin]

12 at Wannamoisett -Although listed on the card at 210 this hole likely plays all of 225 up hill to a back to front sloping green and fronted by as large a greenside bunker as I can recall anywhere. Not only is the bunker large but it is deep. Make a par here and the ball becomes a trophy!

[Chris_Hufnagel]

Chris Hufnagel,
Again, I keep going back to the original topic and how I think there is a difference between intimidating and difficult.

Michael, sometimes I think we are saying the same thing and sometimes I think we are not...

On a pure technical or mechanical basis, the tee shot on #2 at the Kingsley (or perhaps a lot of similar short holes) is fairly straightforward.  A +/-140 shot to the middle of the green - what makes it intimidating is the danger that virtually encircles the green - it isn't necessarily difficult, but intimidating.  To me, this is very similar to what happens each year at #17 Sawgrass - if you give a tour player a wedge or 9 iron to a green that size from 135 yards in a normal situation (i.e. not an island) they probably hit the green 98 out of 100 times - but you put a player in that situation with the penalty of the hazard plus the idea of hitting three from the drop area - the game changes.

As for #2 Kingsley, if you miss the green, the shot becomes both technically difficult and intimidating - a bunker shot to a skinny target, a pitch from 20 feet below the surface of the green, or perhaps worse a shot from the native that is below the green.  These shots are both difficult (ie, stance, angle to target, etc,) and intimidating because you know the next shot, and next shot, and subsequent shots could be from a similar or worse situation.

So, I agree there is a difference between intimidating and difficult, but there are also shots that can be both at the same time.

[Bill Seitz]

As for #2 Kingsley, if you miss the green, the shot becomes both technically difficult and intimidating - a bunker shot to a skinny target, a pitch from 20 feet below the surface of the green, or perhaps worse a shot from the native that is below the green.  These shots are both difficult (ie, stance, angle to target, etc,) and intimidating because you know the next shot, and next shot, and subsequent shots could be from a similar or worse situation.

So, I agree there is a difference between intimidating and difficult, but there are also shots that can be both at the same time.

Chris, sometimes when you hit the green, the shot becomes technically difficult and intimidating.  We weren't in the same group at the time, but in one of our rounds last weekend, I hit the exact shot I intended, dead center, back of the green to a front pin.  It's the safe shot.  I proceeded to putt the ball at the hole, at which point it turned dead left, and headed down into the swale, a good 15 yards from the putting surface.  The second hole at Kingsley doesn't stop being intimidating after the tee shot.  I'm not done being intimidated by the second hole (my favorite hole on the course) until the ball is resting safely at the bottom of the cup.  

[Peter Ferlicca]

I personally don't know why Sean Leary didn't mention this hole yet, but #15 at Aldarra up in the Northwest is honestly one of the hardest par 3's I have ever played.  Not only is it over 230 yards from the tips, which is just ridiculous, it is even stupid hard from the 215 tees.  The green is on a raised plateau, with short grass all around the front and the right that repels any shot just short to roll back down the hill.  If you blast it long, you will most likely get a big kick forward and go into the hazard.  I always tell people you need your Tiger Woods HIGH 3 iron here to have any chance at holding the green.  If you put it in that big bunker in the front, you are still 15 yards short of the green so it is an akward distance to hit a high bunker shot.  You will take your bogey here and move on.

[Patrick_Mucci]

12 at Wannamoisett -Although listed on the card at 210 this hole likely plays all of 225 up hill to a back to front sloping green and fronted by as large a greenside bunker as I can recall anywhere. Not only is the bunker large but it is deep. Make a par here and the ball becomes a trophy!

Tim,

I don't find that hole intimidating.

Long, slightly uphill, challenging..... Yes, but intimidating..... Not to me.

For a hole to be intimidating, doesn't there have to be a real possibility that the golfer will encounter a dire situation should he not plan and/or execute properly ?

Does the potential for a bogey really instill fear in any golfer ?

[Mark Pearce]

Much as I hate having to agree with Pat Mucci, I do.  Just because a hole might be a very hard par doesn't make it intimidating.  It's the fear of a really big number that makes a hole scary and not all of the holes being mentioned here has that.  13 at Muirfield, for instance.  Difficult par, certainly.  Pull a tough lie in a bunker and a hard bogey, perhaps.  But you really shouldn't make more than 5. 

[David Davis]

Mark,

You are right about #13 at Muirfield if you define intimidating as you have, no argument on that. However on many of these holes there is "almost" always a safe miss (bail out option) even if you can't see it immediately. I've never once stood on the tee trying to think of all the possible ways I could make worse than 3, let alone 5 or more on a par 3. Perhaps I just don't think in those terms. I just figure out the shot I'm capable of (or think I'm capable of), which sometimes might be a mistake in and of itself, commit and go for that.

If the par 3 gets up to something like 225 - 240 yds I know I have one realistic option to get there. My hybrid (that is if the wind is not against). More than that is a 3 wood. I've only ever hit driver once on a par 3 which I already mentioned. I guess in my view if a par 3 is requiring me to hit driver (not based on wind) then there is a decent change I'm on the wrong tees because odds are the par 4's will be 500 yds long and the par 5's all over 600. Of course there are exceptions (and a bit of sarcasm in that statement too), I only know one, you guys have mention several but it sounds like in a lot of cases you are talking about the pro tees that you may not of played yourself. (?)

In any case, seems to be a lot of intimidating par 3's out there.

[Dan Boerger]

Let me tell you how to play that difficult #8 at Aronimink (picture in reply #51). See those two trees behind the green? Aim between them NO matter where the stupid pin is.

For me, #5 at PV is the most intimidating par 3 I've faced.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jamie & Garland,

Regarding # 5 and # 14 at PV and to par 3 holes with drop zones in general.

Isn't one of the factors behind the introduction of a drop zone a sign, signal or message that you, the golfer, probably aren't capable of executing the required shot, since you failed on your first attempt  ?  And that you're not capable of executing the required shot without holding up play ?

And isn't your use of the drop zone a concession on your part that the shot is indeed too difficult for you and that  you're going to opt for an easier shot, one with a higher likelihood of success, rather than retee and try again ?

I have to confess, that the last time I played PV I had a good round going until I left the tee on # 14.
With a wind in our face I hit a 4-iron a little heavy and into the pond.
Rather than use the drop zone I reteed and pulled it slightly left, where it hit a tree on the left bank and kicked back into the water.
On my next attempt I fanned it into the water on the right.  My last attempt found the putting surface, but, my good round was over.

On # 5 I hit a 2-iron short of the green, chipped with a 6-iron and ran it up about 5 feet and made the putt.

For those not aware of it, PV has softened the 2nd and 5th greens, so they're not as difficult as in the past.

[JSlonis]

Jamie & Garland,

Regarding # 5 and # 14 at PV and to par 3 holes with drop zones in general.

Isn't one of the factors behind the introduction of a drop zone a sign, signal or message that you, the golfer, probably aren't capable of executing the required shot, since you failed on your first attempt  ?  And that you're not capable of executing the required shot without holding up play ?

And isn't your use of the drop zone a concession on your part that the shot is indeed too difficult for you and that  you're going to opt for an easier shot, one with a higher likelihood of success, rather than retee and try again ?

I have to confess, that the last time I played PV I had a good round going until I left the tee on # 14.
With a wind in our face I hit a 4-iron a little heavy and into the pond.
Rather than use the drop zone I reteed and pulled it slightly left, where it hit a tree on the left bank and kicked back into the water.
On my next attempt I fanned it into the water on the right.  My last attempt found the putting surface, but, my good round was over.
 
On # 5 I hit a 2-iron short of the green, chipped with a 6-iron and ran it up about 5 feet and made the p.

For those not aware of it, PV has softened the 2nd and 5th greens, so they're not as difficult as in the past.

Pat,

What are you...Anti Drop Zone? Why would you do that to yourself?  

I don't think the use of the drop zone is admitting the shot on #14 is "too" difficult, its just admitting that a sand wedge is a helluva lot easier to hit on that green than a 4 iron. You and I always point out on this site that the point of the game is to shoot the lowest score. If a course provides a drop zone, its usually prudent to use it.

[Chip Gaskins]

For those not aware of it, PV has softened the 2nd and 5th greens, so they're not as difficult as in the past.

Pat-

They could make the 5th a punchbowl green with the pin in the bottom and it would still be difficult.

[Martin Toal]

The 4th at RCD can be a pretty tough proposition, especially when played from the medal tee at 215 or championship tee even further back. I have seen good players miss the green then criss cross the green missing it a couple of times more with successive chipping attempts.

http://www.royalcountydown.org/championship-links-hole4.aspx

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

What are you...Anti Drop Zone? Why would you do that to yourself?  

I think it was my refusal to admit that I couldn't hit that shot at that particular time.
It certainly was frustrating as I had been striking the ball rather well.

I don't think the use of the drop zone is admitting the shot on #14 is "too" difficult, its just admitting that a sand wedge is a helluva lot easier to hit on that green than a 4 iron.

That's certainly true, but I also think there's an element of surrender involved, or at least the feeling that their chances of hitting a successful shot on the second attempt are not good.

You and I always point out on this site that the point of the game is to shoot the lowest score. If a course provides a drop zone, its usually prudent to use it.

Yes and no.

Equitable stroke control  serves as a scoring safety net, thus, it really doesn't make much of a difference, one stroke at the most.

[Patrick_Mucci]

For those not aware of it, PV has softened the 2nd and 5th greens, so they're not as difficult as in the past.

Pat-

They could make the 5th a punchbowl green with the pin in the bottom and it would still be difficult.

Chip,

I never said that it wasn't a difficult hole.

It's a very difficult hole.

I just find # 14 more intimidating.

[Tim Martin]

Jamie & Garland,

Regarding # 5 and # 14 at PV and to par 3 holes with drop zones in general.

Isn't one of the factors behind the introduction of a drop zone a sign, signal or message that you, the golfer, probably aren't capable of executing the required shot, since you failed on your first attempt  ?  And that you're not capable of executing the required shot without holding up play ?

And isn't your use of the drop zone a concession on your part that the shot is indeed too difficult for you and that  you're going to opt for an easier shot, one with a higher likelihood of success, rather than retee and try again ?

I have to confess, that the last time I played PV I had a good round going until I left the tee on # 14.
With a wind in our face I hit a 4-iron a little heavy and into the pond.
Rather than use the drop zone I reteed and pulled it slightly left, where it hit a tree on the left bank and kicked back into the water.
On my next attempt I fanned it into the water on the right.  My last attempt found the putting surface, but, my good round was over.

On # 5 I hit a 2-iron short of the green, chipped with a 6-iron and ran it up about 5 feet and made the putt.

For those not aware of it, PV has softened the 2nd and 5th greens, so they're not as difficult as in the past.

So when the biggest studs in golf find the water at 17 at the Players and play from the drop zone is that a concession that they are not capable of executing the shot? Do you have a lot of examples to share where it makes sense to retee instead of using the drop zone? Your example above on # 14 at PV seems ego driven and I can`t imagine you would follow that course of action if you had to post a medal score. ESC certainly helped you out and if the round was that good up until that point I don`t see how a double was a card wrecker.

[Sinclair Eaddy]

The 3rd at Myopia Hunt Club, 253 yards. A green doesn't get any smaller on a long par 3.

[Patrick_Mucci]

So when the biggest studs in golf find the water at 17 at the Players and play from the drop zone is that a concession that they are not capable of executing the shot?

that's one of the dumbest questions I've ever been asked on this site.

If you don't know the answer Ran should pull your access privileges

Do you have a lot of examples to share where it makes sense to retee instead of using the drop zone?

Sure.

One would be whether or not you want to try to meet the challenge presented by the shot or if you want to concede and accept the easier default shot.   Do you want to continue to test yourself or like a wimp, accept defeat ?

Your example above on # 14 at PV seems ego driven and I can`t imagine you would follow that course of action if you had to post a medal score.

Another incredibly dumb example.  Duh,
There is NO ESC when engaged in a medal play tournament
I didn't know that trying to rise to a particular challenge within my ability was an issue of ego.

In addition, did I really come to Pine Valley to hit sand wedges from drop zones or to hit the shots that Crump crafted?

ESC certainly helped you out and if the round was that good up until that point I don`t see how a double was a card wrecker.
Because it wasn't a double, it was a 9.
ESC is an artificial adjustment/cap that doesn't reflect your true score on a hole.