What constitutes a short par 3 for you ?

[Sean_A]

Sean,

Your comments are right on my estimated schedule!

But it seems there are two groups with a nearly universal dislike of the long par 3.  Understand multiple tees, with IMHO, it sort of depends on what kind of course it is.  For a golf factory type, or even a resort or play every day country club, where pace of play is pretty important and a certain type of challenging design isn't for most players, a group of shorter par 3 holes makes sense to me.

You know, that whole form follows function thing.  I get the argument (and design urge) to sometimes do something really different just to do it, but in the end, does it serve the course the best?  A case by case basis, methinks.

Jeff

I like well designed short and very short par 3s more than long ones, but I like variety most of all. I have no issue being asked to hit driver on a par 3 as long as I can say no and opt for another shot and the archie doesn't overplay that card.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

More fascinating insights from Brooks K via Tom D above.
Seems like the most most 'off the top of the head' memorable par-3's are pretty short ..... 12th at ANGC, Postage Stamp at Troon, 17th at TPC, 7th at Pebble Beach, 10th at Pine Valley, 7th at Barnbougle. Maybe a shame the original wee 7th/16th at ANGC isn't still with us?
As to notable longer one's, proper longer one's, well there's the 16th at Carnoustie, the 5th at Pine Valley although even the once feared Calamity at Royal Portrush isn't long these days.
atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

Sean,

Your comments are right on my estimated schedule!

But it seems there are two groups with a nearly universal dislike of the long par 3.  Understand multiple tees, with IMHO, it sort of depends on what kind of course it is.  For a golf factory type, or even a resort or play every day country club, where pace of play is pretty important and a certain type of challenging design isn't for most players, a group of shorter par 3 holes makes sense to me.

You know, that whole form follows function thing.  I get the argument (and design urge) to sometimes do something really different just to do it, but in the end, does it serve the course the best?  A case by case basis, methinks.

Jeff

I like well designed short and very short par 3s more than long ones, but I like variety most of all. I have no issue being asked to hit driver on a par 3 as long as I can say no and opt for another shot and the archie doesn't overplay that card.

Ciao

Sean, I agree, although it just seems to be fact that average golfers don't want to hit a driver, and of course, many cant, even with multiple tees, based on "average" but not the shortest hitters typically using that tee.


That said, one of my own personal favorite long par 3 designs is at the Quarry at Giant's Ridge - at 261 yards, downhill from the tee, open front green, and tiny, originally shaped with a flat front, a la the liberty bell shape.  It was fun blasting a driver from that back tee.  At least when I could reach it.  Now, I typically come up 20 yards short, LOL.  So, part of my philosophy is thinking about seniors, etc.  (of course, their tee on the hole is 180, or about a full driver.


What is memorable about the short par 3 holes you mentioned is the do or die effects. IMHO.


Thomas Dai,


The long par 3 holes you mention, 16th at Carnoustie, the 5th at Pine Valley strike me as almost unplayable by someone of my skill level.  I didn't enjoy playing them, so if enjoyment is the prime design criteria (and for most courses, shouldn't it be?) I wouldn't include versions of those holes, esp. PV 5.  At least in my Quarry example, the fw in front of the green is even wider than the green itself, so coming up short is no penalty, as I think it should be.


But, if asked to design a tournament course, sure why not.  Except, Keopka wouldn't approve, LOL>