[Pete Lavallee]

Hole #1 at Riviera is 503 yards from a very elevated tee. Hole #2 is listed at 471 yards. Captain Thomas intended both to be par 5's. The second has been a par 4 for the Pros for as long as I can remember. Watching the early action yesterday #2 was playing much tougher than #1. I am a little puzzled as to why #1 is still considered a par 5? Pros are hitting 7-5 iron in and many par 4's are now over 500 yards for Touring Professionals. Why the insistence on labeling it a par 5 when everyone in the field easily reaches it in 2 shots?

[Alex Miller]

Because it's really a 2 hole par 9 and they don't want the front 9 to not have a par 5.


Plus eagles are cool and fans want to see eagles!

[Mike Schott]

Isn't it because the narrow green doesn't easily accept longer irons?

[Tom_Doak]

What difference does it make?  It's still the same hole on the ground.


I suspect they call it a par 5, because the majority of the membership cannot hit the green in two shots.

[Duncan Cheslett]

I suspect they call it a par 5, because the majority of the membership cannot hit the green in two shots.

By that criterion, any hole over 450 yards from the back tees would be a par 5.

[Pete Lavallee]

Hole #2 is now officially listed as a par 4 at 470 yards, which I doubt many members can't reach in two either?

Watching play yesterday both Adam Scott and Justin Rose stuck their second shots inside of 10 feet. Shouldn't a par 5 at least require a long iron or wood to reach in two? I realize the definition of a par 5 has blurred since the Pro V1 came out but still this is sort of ridiculous. With the elevation of the tee shot the hole effectively plays around 470 yards; 3 wood (can't hit driver or you'll go in the ditch) then 7 iron. I would think the Club would welcome a score that is 4 shots higher at the end of the tournament. What am I missing???

[David Wuthrich]

I agree with Alex and Tom.

[V. Kmetz]

.... I am a little puzzled as to why #1 is still considered a par 5? Pros are hitting 7-5 iron in and many par 4's are now over 500 yards for Touring Professionals. Why the insistence on labeling it a par 5 when everyone in the field easily reaches it in 2 shots?

PL, the primary answer is that you're presuming a "label" ought to be granted on the basis of the 1% of rounds played by touring professionals, 140 of the best 300 players in the world. For the other 99% and as pertains Riviera's greatness as an architectural venue, the "label" of Par 5 makes traditional sense.


The bigger reason for me, with regards to this "incongruity" you sense, is that it is yet another place where the individual hole par has become anachronistic, and is dampening potentially refreshing architectural answer to what the paradigms of good sport are. If #s 1 & 2 HAD NO "Par," we could just let the field (pro or am) sort it out themselves...we all know what we want, and what we are capable of at the end of the day and we know an excellent standard of play is a 72 (for the pros, lower)... I think we can sort it out as to what a good, plain, or poor score is on this 503 hole as well as that 103 yard hole... and a 303 yard hole (like #10) without one of three "par" numbers (3, 4 & 5) to tell or direct us to do. Especially true when 90% of the 99% are playing matches, and not medal/stroke competitions (not that this matters so much to the overall thesis)...


cheers
vk

[Pete Lavallee]

Tell Mike Davis par doesn't matter!

I completely agree that it should remain a par 5 for the members. But a par 5 is like pornography, you know one when you see it; this Sir is not a par 5 for those players this weekend! Trust me, every Tour Pro who walks away with a 5 there this weekend will feel like he has given a shot up to the field; shouldn't the official par reflect this? What's wrong with calling Riviera a par 70 for Professionals?

[jeffwarne]

I suspect they call it a par 5, because the majority of the membership cannot hit the green in two shots.

By that criterion, any hole over 450 yards from the back tees would be a par 5.

Because the moment they call it a par 4 they have build 7 more sets of tees so everyome regardless of ability, physical condition, skill, age, handicap, or sex (both at birth and later) should have the ability to hit the green in regulation.
ick....

[John Kavanaugh]

Don't forget that every member wants their guests to have the thrill of teeing off in front of the dining room windows. It would be a shame to rob that from anyone. Also the second hole is so damn hard that having a start of two difficult par 4's would rob the course of some of its charm.

[Peter Pallotta]

...Also the second hole is so damn hard that having a start of two difficult par 4's would rob the course of some of its charm.

This strikes me as a very good answer, and the only one that addresses Pete's actual question. Most of you seemed to ignore the fact that it was Pete asking the question and not some newbie who needed the benefit of a gca primer/education...

[Tim Leahy]

When I played the course back in the 80's a member pointed out a nonexistent tee on #2 that was about 75 yds behind the tee that made it a true par 5. Could they still bring this tee back for the pros? I seem to remember talk of doing this for the PGA there. Also the member showed me an elevated tee on #5 that was almost in a backyard that lengthened the hole.

[MCirba]

Easy Peasy.


Because it requires a greater than wedge approach for the pros and isn't drivable.


JAKAB also is spot on.

[Eric LeFante]

I think it should be a par 4 for pros and a par 70. I saw some guys hitting 8 iron in for their second shots.


I'm interested to see if the USGA plays the 1st as a par 4 or 5 for the US Amateur this year.



In my opinion, no matter how much risk a player takes on with the drive or how well executed the shot is, a player should never have less than a 3-4 iron into the green for a second shot on a par 5. Particularly for tour courses since so few par 4s test the players long irons game nowadays. It's just not a par 5 when a lot of players have a mid/short iron in for a second shot[size=78%]. [/size]

[Matt Kardash]

Pete is asking why it isn't a par 4 for the pros, not the every day golfer. I don't think it is a big deal to call a hole a par 4 for the tournament since they are hitting 7 irons into the green.

[Kevin Stark]

Threads like this remind me of when I played Old Mac with my dad for the first time. We were playing #4 into the winter wind. My dad looked over at me wondering why it was listed as a par 4. I looked back at him and postulated that Mr. Doak probably intended it to play as a par 5 into the winter wind and as a par 4 with the summer wind.


Low score wins no matter what "par" is.

[Matthew Rose]

When I played the course back in the 80's a member pointed out a nonexistent tee on #2 that was about 75 yds behind the tee that made it a true par 5. Could they still bring this tee back for the pros? I seem to remember talk of doing this for the PGA there. Also the member showed me an elevated tee on #5 that was almost in a backyard that lengthened the hole.

My copy of 100 Greatest Courses And Then Some has #2 listed as a 530 yard par five. I believe this book was first published around 1983-84. But I don't ever remember it being one, certainly not in the years since the '83 PGA.


Abandoned tee, perhaps?

[Matthew Essig]

When I played the course back in the 80's a member pointed out a nonexistent tee on #2 that was about 75 yds behind the tee that made it a true par 5. Could they still bring this tee back for the pros? I seem to remember talk of doing this for the PGA there. Also the member showed me an elevated tee on #5 that was almost in a backyard that lengthened the hole.

My copy of 100 Greatest Courses And Then Some has #2 listed as a 530 yard par five. I believe this book was first published around 1983-84. But I don't ever remember it being one, certainly not in the years since the '83 PGA.


Abandoned tee, perhaps?

Probably used as a tee way back on 12?

[Greg Chambers]

I think it should be a par 4 for pros and a par 70. I saw some guys hitting 8 iron in for their second shots.


I'm interested to see if the USGA plays the 1st as a par 4 or 5 for the US Amateur this year.



In my opinion, no matter how much risk a player takes on with the drive or how well executed the shot is, a player should never have less than a 3-4 iron into the green for a second shot on a par 5. Particularly for tour courses since so few par 4s test the players long irons game nowadays. It's just not a par 5 when a lot of players have a mid/short iron in for a second shot[size=78%]. [/size]

Why would it matter what par is during a match play event?

[Eric LeFante]

I think it should be a par 4 for pros and a par 70. I saw some guys hitting 8 iron in for their second shots.


I'm interested to see if the USGA plays the 1st as a par 4 or 5 for the US Amateur this year.



In my opinion, no matter how much risk a player takes on with the drive or how well executed the shot is, a player should never have less than a 3-4 iron into the green for a second shot on a par 5. Particularly for tour courses since so few par 4s test the players long irons game nowadays. It's just not a par 5 when a lot of players have a mid/short iron in for a second shot[size=78%]. [/size]

Why would it matter what par is during a match play event?

It really doesn't matter but the USGA has turned par 5s into par 4s in match play events, just like stroke play events. For the US Amateur Four Ball at Winged Foot East holes 2 and 8 are par 5s for members and were par 4s for the championship.


Based on the link below, it looks like Riviera will be par 70 for the US Amaetur so I'm guessing 1 will be a par 4 for the championship.


http://www.usga.org/championships/2017/2017-u-s--amateur-fast-facts.html


For some reason I had trouble with this link in Chrome but it worked in Firefox

[Duncan Cheslett]

The par of a hole is completely irrelevant in matchplay games.


The par of a hole is also completely irrelevant in medal or strokeplay competitions, when all that matters is the final tally of shots taken. (less handicap if appropriate.) All that the concept of par gives us is a running indication of how each member of the field in a pro tournament is doing in relation to others while out on the course.


Where the par of each hole is of relevance is in Stableford or bogey competitions, which form a large part of club play here in the UK at least.

I am unaware of Riviera members' predilection or otherwise for Stableford competitions, but that is hardly of concern when the pro tour comes to town.


 
So I would say that it really doesn't matter what par you give #1 at Riviera...

[John Kavanaugh]

If you had lived your life as a person who loves golf and the 11th, 13th and 15th at ANGC had all been ball buster par 4's would April hold the same special place in your heart?

[JESII]

No it would not...good call!

[Mike Wagner]

If you had lived your life as a person who loves golf and the 11th, 13th and 15th at ANGC had all been ball buster par 4's would April hold the same special place in your heart?

Discussion over.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()