A par five first hole

[Tom_Doak]

Tom,

 I am interested in better understanding your last sentence, "A par-5 opener needs to be pretty dull or there is the possibility of making six to start, which is no fun."


 Surely no one likes an initial bogey (and I've had my fair share) but the same can be said for any par-4. Why/how does making it par-5 make a difference whatsoever?
 
  As you noted, George Thomas did a few (most notably LACC and Riviera) and they are rather benign "gentle handshakes."

I used to think along the same lines, because George Thomas's book made a strong impression on me, and as I say, I have built quite a few par-5 openers on my courses and never thought anything of it.


But, as an architect I have a hard time designing a boring green on a short par-5, and I found that a sloppy third shot would lead to a lot of 6's and even a few 7's, and who likes that right out of the gate?  As a player whose goal was to break 80, keeping 6's off the scorecard was a key for me.  So I just did not enjoy playing those holes as much as I anticipated.


The holes mentioned like the 1st at Sunningdale or LACC are good openers, but not the sort of hole I'd be likely to build.  My favorite openers among my own courses are the short par-4 at Lost Dunes, and the medium par-4 at Old Macdonald,

[jeffwarne]

Think I got into the semantics of the statement.
Hard to see any low handicapper or pro feeling "behind" with a 4 on a par 5.
I mean if we called it a par 4 would we feel behind with a par after a 220 yard approach(and that's assuming a good drive)?
543-downhill, dogleg-I'll buy that a 5 might make a pro feel behind, but not a 4.(especially not on hole #1)

[Carl Johnson]

Think I got into the semantics of the statement.
Hard to see any low handicapper or pro feeling "behind" with a 4 on a par 5.
I mean if we called it a par 4 would we feel behind with a par after a 220 yard approach(and that's assuming a good drive)?
543-downhill, dogleg-I'll buy that a 5 might make a pro feel behind, but not a 4.(especially not on hole #1)

We're likely on the same page.  I have no idea how a pro would "actually feel", not being in that universe.  This is just my sense.  You could call this hole a par 4.  Then it would be tough par 4 and a birdie would be a great score.  Stated another way, these guys need to score where they can (thinking of medal play here), and a 3 on this hole would go along way.  Think of the Monday qualifying for one of the Quail Hollow championships, which we hosted for a while.  You have a zillion (not really) guys trying for two to four spots.  Here's a chance for them to make hay, or not.  What would be cool?


One wrinkle is this.  For these stud events we'll do groups off 1 and 10, so for half the field 1 would be the 10th hole.  Is that fair?  Is golf fair?


I could talk with a tour pro and get his opinion, or I could get stats from the stud golfer events we've had and see how it worked out (data is always good).  The likelihood of the former is probably greater than the latter, but both are somewhat remote.  For now, I'm just spouting off.

[V. Kmetz]

Feeling the regretful need to resurrect an animal I've beaten and sent to the glue factory.


GET RID OF THE HOLE PAR AND THE CONVERSATION GETS AWAY FROM THEORY/CONJECTURE AND THE GCA CAN JUST MAKE A LONG, MEDIUM, OR SHORT LENGTH OF HOLE...AND THAT HOLE CAN BE EXPERIENCED & JUDGED ON ITS MERITS, UNTO ITSELF AND IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE COURSE.


Doesn't this very conversation show how indy hole par is limiting in every aspect...and breeds that deference to the "pro medal game" that the great majority of golfers won't ever enjoy? Doesn't the conversation keep us pandering to pre-determined constructs and rejecting or affirming existing long first holes based on how we ought to think about playing it, rather than playing it?


How productively different the conversation could be if the subject read "A long first hole" or "A 500+ yd first hole."

[Tommy Williamsen]

Feeling the regretful need to resurrect an animal I've beaten and sent to the glue factory.


GET RID OF THE HOLE PAR AND THE CONVERSATION GETS AWAY FROM THEORY/CONJECTURE AND THE GCA CAN JUST MAKE A LONG, MEDIUM, OR SHORT LENGTH OF HOLE...AND THAT HOLE CAN BE EXPERIENCED & JUDGED ON ITS MERITS, UNTO ITSELF AND IN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE COURSE.


Doesn't this very conversation show how indy hole par is limiting in every aspect...and breeds that deference to the "pro medal game" that the great majority of golfers won't ever enjoy? Doesn't the conversation keep us pandering to pre-determined constructs and rejecting or affirming existing long first holes based on how we ought to think about playing it, rather than playing it?


How productively different the conversation could be if the subject read "A long first hole" or "A 500+ yd first hole."

I agree in some ways, but even if there was no par on the scorecard most of us would have a number in mind for every hole.

[V. Kmetz]

Sure TW...I've never said that the old paradigms wont act on a player...but not the "position worth" theoretically of a hole with an assigned number....people have debated the worth/rigor/fun 1st at Riviera, with so very little about the qualities of the hole (for 98% of players)

[Tommy Williamsen]

On the other hand, I do ignore the scorecard par once in a while. Number 11 (par 4) at Four Streams was a more difficult 4 than the par five first hole. If I made ten total on those holes I felt I was even par. If I made nine I felt one under.

[Brian Finn]

Carl,
"if you don't start with an "eagle" you're behind" ?
huh?
Is it a driveable par 5?

[size=78%]Jeff.  Not.  As a dogleg off the tee.  You (a pro or other stud) can mess up if you don't position off the tee.  Then maybe 220 downhill to a receptive green, but with really tough pin positions.  We only have two par fives (for tournament play) and both are pretty easy, but the threes and fours are difficult.  So, you need to score on the two par 5s (again, I'm talking the stud golfers).  So, I stand by my statement about starting with an eagle.  For the studs, birdie is easy if that's what you want, and might be the way to go (strategy).  Gets your attention right off the bat.[/size]

Carl,
Do you happen to know how many eagles were made on #1 during the stroke play portion of the 2018 US Mid-Am?  That might be a good indicator of just how "behind" better players get with birdie or par on the first.

[Mike_Trenham]

I am surprised no one has yet mentioned the opener at Colorado Golf Club. 


I thought it was a fun start and good way to quickly transport you to the lower part of the property.  Also followed by the short second hole it lets a person hitting good shots get off to a nice start.

[Mark Mammel]

Since the Monterey Peninsula has come up, how about the first on the Shore at MPCC


and the first at Spanish Bay?

And the Pacific. There's that.