...etc have only steeled my thinking that:
1. the realms of the theoretical, in which many of these debates occur, crumble in the face of a particular raw site that you might design, contest design, or speculate about. For elite TV play, top am. play, 12 HC play...a 325 yard par 4 is a very different thing if played over a blind chasm with howling winds then if its cited in a gentle New England Valley. Same for the "270" elite tee par 3, that plays 225 for regular guys. Whether you're talking about a hole on an existing classic or a theoretical one you route for a contest, doesn't the site and companion holes dictate beyond any formula for one or for total? Would Riviera be as great if half of the par 4s was #10 in nature and distance and the other half like #18?, the par 3s all like #4? and all par 5s as like #17? It would add up to 6875 yards, and there seems to be enough bogeys made and birdies made and pars made on those four holes to yield the results we see currently on TV. Would that "formula" (310 x 5, 445 x 6, 225 x 4, 575 x 3, ) work if applied to anywhere those four holes are not available in number? I don't know; you tell me.
2. Since there seems to be such angst that a long-iron shot cannot be called for, by elites, on any approach that is NOT a par 3, it pivots me to saying, "what does challenge them, when I can't make several long par 3s?" To me, it is absolutely clear that it is the partial shot, the short blind pitch, the awkward thing off a down hill like over the corner of a bunker...that does it. I think why I am a acolyte of AGNC #3 as THE perfect hole is not in attempt to fawn over Mackenzie's most intact work there, but because it really is genius. Unless you bash it and get the absolute most perfect roll out onto the surface (happens, what, twice a Masters?), you are stuck with an awkward uphill pitch to that razor tilted boomerang. If the pin is back right and the position is good, you've got a chance - with quality nipped contact and judgement up over blind ground-- to have a short flat birdie chance. I like watching those shots, don't you? I like watching short little pitches over the Valley of Sin, don't you? When the pin is left, even the best can and have played hockey across that left wing. Even for those goons who can only get to within 70 yards of the green are going to have that extended choice, that's a thin, thin target from 15 feet below and 200 feet away.
3. Too much credit is given in these debates to the psychological concept of par. No matter if its larded with hazards, island greens, and internal OB, f it's a 490 yard "card" 5 it offers no challenge to elites ("Woods hits 8 iron into that hole!" they cry) but call it a par 4 and its better to tackle him, but untenable for John Q Golfer. Same goes for the course par...70, 71, 72, 73. It was about two months after I played first NLGA that I realized the par was 73 and recollecting that there's only three par 3s. If we switched up the par for the Road hole and #5 at TOC, would #5 now be the most superb example of half-par on the planet and would the Road Hole then become the easiest 5 on the planet? My solution? Get rid of hole Pars, every course is a 72 total, level fours and let's go on. The people will get it and vote with their feet if your course is genius.
3a. And how about the radical other tack with "par"...why don't we call this 540 yard hole over here a par 2? And this 115 yard hole here a Par 6? Would it change how it was played (except for Stableford)? As long as it winds up level fours = 72, I think you're OK. Wasn't Oakmont like a par 80 in its first iteration?
Just some initial thoughts and I'm not trying to wet blanket all discussion in these GCA-central areas. I just want to say that its the particulars that skin a cat, idealist formulas crumble, as is the emotionally-derived concept of par, and we don't have to hand wring about what elites do, 70 yard shots are as interesting for all classes as 240 yard shots. There should be a balance of both of course and there usually is in any well regarded design. I just think this all suggests the relative death of holes between 360-450 yards in our regard and reflects our forgetfulness that the right 405 yard hole in concert with its site, can thwart, reward and challenge every class of player.
Jus' sayin'..
cheers
vk