[Garland Bayley]

Are they simply putting slogs?

In my reading, there has been a couple of times I have run across the fact that there were golden age architects that considered eliminating six greens from 18 hole courses, because the game was becoming too much of a putting contest.

Does this mean there really is no such thing as a long slog, because it is truly as golf was meant to be. After all, the Burn hole at TOC used to be a three shot hole.

[ward peyronnin]

Because I have never seen one personally that was worth a crap.
Probobly the ones at PV and Augusta are worth the time.

[David_Tepper]

Garland -

Likely because too few par-3 or executive courses are either well-designed and/or well maintained.

The nine hole par-3 course  at the Olympic Club (which is both) seems to be busier than ever. The Fleming Nine at Harding Park also gets plenty of play.

DT

[Garland Bayley]

Garland -

Likely because too few par-3 or executive courses are either well-designed and/or well maintained.

The nine hole par-3 course  at the Olympic Club (which is both) seems to be busier than ever. The Fleming Nine at Harding Park also gets plenty of play.

DT

Perhaps the reason they are in short supply, are not well-designed, and are not well maintained, is because so few people want to play a putting slog. But, yet you see all kinds of golfers wanting to play back tees on "championship courses". Perhaps that means "long slog" is a misnomer.

[Brent Hutto]

Par 3 or Executive type courses are the same as real golf courses in terms of how long it takes me to get there and back and the fact that I have to be suitably dressed/sunscreened/equipped/whatever if I'm going to play golf. So if I'm going to put my stuff in the car, bring a change of clothes (if a work day) and drive 30 minutes and 20 miles each way to get there I want to play a nice course.

Very, very few Executive courses or Par 3 ones in my experience are even in the ballpark of "nice". Most are very cramped for space and feeling claustrophobic is one of the two unforgivable things in my estimation for a golf course (the other being muddy ground conditions). If there were an Executive course consisting of all the holes from my club's main 18 except with each hole 100 yards shorter that might be a blast to play. Maybe something like Par 60 or 61 at 4,400 yards or similar. But instead they tend to be squeezed down into about 1/5 the acreage of a full course and every swing you make during the round has opportunities for lost balls or busted windows or busted heads within easy range of a poor shot.

[George Pazin]

I used to, great place to learn, imho.

The ones I played have all closed and are now real estate developments.

[Terry Lavin]

I went to Bandon for opening week of the new Preserve course, but didn't play it.

[Garland Bayley]

I used to, great place to learn, imho.

The ones I played have all closed and are now real estate developments.

People figured if they wanted to do that much putting, they could go to a putt-putt course?

[Garland Bayley]

I went to Bandon for opening week of the new Preserve course, but didn't play it.

Shhhhhhhh! Don't let Gray Grieve know that, or you'll have an enemy for life!

[Mac Plumart]

I'm confused on what you mean by "slog."

It seems that you equate it to distance.  If so, I disagree.  A slog to me equates to playing a course with no interest.  Therefore, every shot is boring, repetative, and/or basic.  This monotonous round of golf becomes a slog, not because of the total distance of the course...but because it lacks intrigue and interest.

[Garland Bayley]

... every shot is boring, repetative, and/or basic.  ...

Exactly! 2/3 of your shot in a par round at a par 3 can be putts that could just as well have been done on an interesting putting green.
Boring, repetitive, and basic.

[Mac Plumart]

 

You've lost me, GJ.

Oh well, it ain't the first time...and won't be the last. 

Moving on.

[Greg Chambers]

I grew up playing two courses--one was a par three course, the other was an executive nine-holer.  According to your premise, I should have just learned the game on a putt-putt course?  I certainly wouldn't have taken up the game if that were the case.  I still play an executive course, with my wife, because it's an easy way to get in a quick nine after work and she enjoys it because she gets to hit more iron shots.  According to your premise, we should just go hit up Golf N Stuff down the street?  I don't understand the point of this thread, it makes no sense.

[Garland Bayley]

I grew up playing two courses--one was a par three course, the other was an executive nine-holer.  According to your premise, I should have just learned the game on a putt-putt course?  I certainly wouldn't have taken up the game if that were the case.  I still play an executive course, with my wife, because it's an easy way to get in a quick nine after work and she enjoys it because she gets to hit more iron shots.  According to your premise, we should just go hit up Golf N Stuff down the street?  I don't understand the point of this thread, it makes no sense.

Are the posters on this site just learning the game? Other than Kalen Braley that is?

My point is that the posters on this site are in general not frequenting par 3s because they would find them "boring, repetative, and/or basic".

[Greg Chambers]

There's a place in the game for par threes and executive courses.  I still play par threes and have a blast.  Again, what's your point?  That a par three course is a "putting slog"?  So what.

[Garland Bayley]

There's a place in the game for par threes and executive courses.  I still play par threes and have a blast.  Again, what's your point?  That a par three course is a "putting slog"?  So what.

Of course there is a place in the game for par threes and executive courses.
Enjoy your par 3s and executive courses.

[Greg Chambers]

I will, thanks.  Just as much as I enjoy every other course I play.

Enjoy your thread.

[Matthew Rose]

Yes, I play them often.

They are affordable when a full 18 sometimes is not. I will walk and carry my clubs. I can take my wife who is a novice player. I have a young son and another on the way who I hope will both take interest in the game in the future and I see these as the perfect entry point for them.

The Hyland Hills complex nearby has two par-3 courses in addition to the 18 and the 9.

Nothing on the entire property has much architectural merit, but it is a wonderful facility in terms of choice and variety for juniors and casual players who don't wish to shell out 50 bucks to play the 18.

[Pat Burke]

In the year before I first qualified for the tour, I played and practiced a couple of times a week
at Rancho Duarte GC, a 9 hole executive course.
Usually in good shape, the course had 4 par fours.  One I really couldn't drive, the other three
I could reach with tee shots.  There was a decent variety of shots.
Every tues there was a skins game, with a number of pros and good amateurs.
Had a blast there, and the course helped me develop my short game on my way to
playing professional golf

[Grant Saunders]

Oddly enough, a long hitter is possibly going to find more challenge at a par 3 course as they will use longer clubs into greens than at a normal layout. For a player who can drive the ball 300 yards, any hole 450 yards or less is only going to require a 150 yard iron shot at most. Put them on a course with a bunch of par 3s with a number of them in the 150 - 200 yard range and that player  is now using longer irons than the 450 yard par 4.

[Brent Hutto]

From the tees long hitters play, our club's main eighteen has Par 3's of approximately 175, 160, 210 and 180 yards. Two play uphill and one plays across a pond to the green. That's plenty of length for anyone but the very, very elite players.

And that set of tees is considerably less than 7,000 yards total for the Par 72 course.

I think the main appeal of Executive and Par 3 courses is probably the greens fee. But I live in an area with decent real golf courses as cheap as $15-$25 per round and very, very nice ones for under $40. That probably explains why there's only one decent Par 3 course and no executive courses around here. They'd have to charge $12-$15 per round to be competitive.

[Sean_A]

In my experience par 3/executive courses in Michigan are generally poor substitutes.  I do play one "executive" course (under 500 yards) in the UK by the name of Painswick at least once a year.  It is much more thrilling and original than the vast majority of "proper" courses, but it still doesn't get me overly excited to play it more often.  I haven't played another par 3 course in the UK which has enticed me back for another game.  

Ciao

[Jason Thurman]

It's not because they're a "putting slog." By that definition, mini golf should be miserable. Yet, I tend to prefer it to most executive courses.

I don't play executive courses more often because they're lame.

[Mac Plumart]

You've lost me, GJ.

Oh well, it ain't the first time...and won't be the last. 

Moving on.

Now I get where this is coming from.

http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,53752.0.html


By the way, Richard Choi has some pretty darn good posts on the linked thread.

[Duncan Cheslett]

There is a rather good 9 hole par 3 course a couple of miles from my home. It measures 1500 yards and has holes ranging from 110 to 249 yards long.

I play it most weeks on my own for several reasons;

1. It costs only £7.50

2.It takes me less than an hour, even playing two balls.

3. It's a great way of practicing my medium/short game.

4. It's the perfect way to warm up before a competeition at my club.

As for being a putting slog, often I don't bother putting out at all. That's not why I'm there.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()