The drivable Par 3

[Thomas Dai]

When the ODG's and hero's from the Golden Age etc laid out par-3's in the 180-210 yd range the clubs played by the better and elite male players were more likely akin to a Driver or a Brassie. These days the equivalent would be more likely 300+ yds.
atb

[Ken Moum]

When the ODG's and hero's from the Golden Age etc laid out par-3's in the 180-210 yd range the clubs played by the better and elite male players were more likely akin to a Driver or a Brassie. These days the equivalent would be more likely 300+ yds.
atb

Which was the point of my post re. the nine-hole courses I played in NW Minnesota.


The fifth at Pine Valley is a good example.

[Wade Whitehead]

Isn't every hole that's been mentioned on this thread actually a par 3.5...and isn't that what makes them different/fun?

I think most players love half par holes...and that most players don't know that they love half par holes.

WW

[Tim Martin]

Isn't every hole that's been mentioned on this thread actually a par 3.5...and isn't that what makes them different/fun?

I think most players love half par holes...and that most players don't know that they love half par holes.

WW

Wade-The half par holes that most profess to love are the 300ish yard par fours and the the 490ish par fives. I haven’t heard a lot of gushing about the 275 yard par threes and the 475 yard par fours. That may not be true on GCA but I think it’s closer to reality with the general golfing population.

[Anthony Gray]

Isn't every hole that's been mentioned on this thread actually a par 3.5...and isn't that what makes them different/fun?

I think most players love half par holes...and that most players don't know that they love half par holes.

WW

 Excellent point. These holes make the course more challenging and memorable.

[Sean_A]

Isn't every hole that's been mentioned on this thread actually a par 3.5...and isn't that what makes them different/fun?

I think most players love half par holes...and that most players don't know that they love half par holes.

WW

Wade-The half par holes that most profess to love are the 300ish yard par fours and the the 490ish par fives. I haven’t heard a lot of gushing about the 275 yard par threes and the 475 yard par fours. That may not be true on GCA but I think it’s closer to reality with the general golfing population.

I agree Tim. I think half par harder holes need something to set them apart to be accepted or loved. That's probably quite difficult for an archie to pull off.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

10th at Riviera as a par-3? Variable tee positions for variable ability amateurs, way back over 300 yds when the males we watch on TV play it?
atb

[Ronald Montesano]

Niall, we are not most golfers. We are epicurean golfers.


#4 at East Aurora Country Club (NY) If you can carry a ball 210 yards uphill (translates to 225 flat) with another club, then it is not a driver hole.


#12 at Tullymore from the tips. All carry.


Any par three at Ross Bridge in Alabama, from the tippy tips.

[Mark_Fine]

Isn’t it the length and quality of the hole most important vs the par it is arbitrarily given?  Forrest and I built a new hole at Berkeley CC in CA that is 265 yards from the tips. It plays a bit up hill to a well defended undulating green (quite similar we believe to what Hunter had before the routing was changed due to an added practice range).  We told the club they could call par whatever they wanted but we think the hole is fun to play regardless of what par they chose.  A two is really sometime to talk about on a 265 yard hole  so is a three 

[Thomas Dai]

A two is really sometime to talk about on a 265 yard hole  so is a three 

For some maybe. Unconvinced about a specific distance.
A two or three made by an elderly or very young short hitting playing could well be something to talk about when it’s been made from 65 yds let alone 265 yards. It’s the club that’s been used that matters relative to the distance the player usually hits that club and the length of the hole in question (weather, wind up/down hill matter as well).
Atb

[Jeff_Brauer]

A few points.....


The beauty of a really long par 3 is that you can control the proportional distance with multiple tees, so everyone has nearly the same challenge, whereas on a par 4 or 5 you know that a substantial number of golfers won't be playing a yardage in that you designed for.  That always suggested "concept" holes to me, since there is no strategy link from the tee shot.  One of the concepts I settled on (for a while) was that a long par 3 with small green was the best way to challenge long hitters to hit a great long iron or even fw wood.  For the others, I adapted most of CBM's concepts in one way or another.




Many years ago I consulted at Norfolk CC in Norfolk, NE (hometown of Johny Carson).  It had (has?) a long, dogleg par 3 that you couldn't hit without a driver with a giant fade. Perhaps they kept the hole because so many golfers said, "I got that shot!"


I went through a phase of doing long par 3 holes, born out of missing out on a ranking in Golf Digest when I was told that my course was downgraded for having all the par 3 holes the same length.  So, for a few years, my par 3 holes ranged from 130 yards to 260 yards, sort of a "say those are too much the same" to raters message.  I had been doing mostly mid length par 3 holes on purpose because average golfers seem to like them a lot and not like par 3 holes over 200 yards that they need a driver to reach.


Probably my favorite long par 3 own design is The Quarry at Giant's Ridge no. 4.  When I designed it (261 yards) I could drive it from the back tee......now I cannot, LOL, which alters my perspective.  It has the small green, originally shaped like the liberty bell as it was designed right after 9-11 (but the wide front and narrower back fits that type of hole, IMHO.  The front corners are now rounded a bit for easier mowing.  I did a few others in the same period, some with Biarritz or Redan greens, but for whatever reason, I didn't really like the way they came out as much as the one at the Quarry, perhaps because the site was better?




I went back to not worrying about rankings and making each par 3 fun for average golfers rather than some distance formula that the raters seemed to like.  Hey, I like mid length par 3's as an average golfer, and sometimes your inspiration is from your own experiences, not what some point system dictates.

[Billsteele]

I will not believe this is the real Dr. Gray until I see definitive proof. For me, that is the Good Dentist dressed head to toe in orange (including plus fours and a Hogan cap) looking like a human Dreamsicle.

[Mike Hendren]

The 12th at Ross' Cherokee CC in Knoxville plays 240 yards, made all the more difficult by train tracks hard right and a stream hard left.  It was a driver back in the day. 


Bogey

[Niall C]

The 12th at Ross' Cherokee CC in Knoxville plays 240 yards, made all the more difficult by train tracks hard right and a stream hard left.  It was a driver back in the day. 


Bogey

A driver back in the day ?! What is it now, a driver and a nine iron ? 

Niall

[Mike Hendren]

The 12th at Ross' Cherokee CC in Knoxville plays 240 yards, made all the more difficult by train tracks hard right and a stream hard left.  It was a driver back in the day. 


Bogey

A driver back in the day ?! What is it now, a driver and a nine iron ? 

Niall

Niall, only if I nut the driver and don't hit the 9-iron fat. 


Bogey

[Gib_Papazian]

I'm a bit surprised nobody has mentioned #3 at Mauna Kea - it is a similar mirror image (bailout on the right side) of Cypress #16.

It is has been a few years, but my recollection the original back tee location is now a wedding gazebo - although a newer back tee, hanging on the edge of a cliff -  was added at some point, stretching the hole to 270 yards over the inlet.

It might be phony legend, but the old Head Pro told me that in 1964 - when the Rockefellers staged an exhibition match with the "Big 3" to open this R.T. Jones Sr. course - Gary Player could not reach the green with his driver from the blue markers, so they were moved up for the match and the original tee was never used again.

Even with a healthy back, the 35 year-old version of me could not get across the inlet into the wind from the back markers, but even moving up I needed a full-blast Orlimar 3-wood to reach terra firma.

For ladies and seniors, that bail-out to the right gets plenty of play; I was playing a money match last time on a windy day and chickened out to win the hole with a bogey.

I think #15 at Mauna Lani is shorter, something like 195 over the rocks - but neither of these holes can be played with a putter!

Extra points for anybody who actually found Francis Brown's "Love Pond" - apres golf.   


Mauna Kea: https://www.google.com/maps/search/mauna+kea+resort/@20.0103742,-155.8248465,335m/data=!3m1!1e3 

P.S. For those doubters, this is, in fact, the *real* Anthony Gray . . . we spoke over the weekend and there is no faking that West Virginia rap.

[Tom_Doak]

10th at Riviera as a par-3? Variable tee positions for variable ability amateurs, way back over 300 yds when the males we watch on TV play it?

Length aside, it's almost impossible to drive it onto that green because of the angle, so I don't see how you could say that's a par-3.


That, to me, is one of the problems of the drivable par-3 . . . you have to build a target that people think is reasonable to hit from 250-300 yards, and that takes most of the interest out of the hole for the elite golfer.  You could certainly call the 18th at North Berwick a par-3 from that perspective, though it would take away a birdie opportunity for me at the finish.


By contrast, the long par 4 [4.5] is easier to sell, because it doesn't require a wooden club approach for the best players anymore, and so it can have a more interesting green complex without being declared Unfair.

[Peter Pallotta]

One of my most favourite greens (and surrounds) on any Open rota course is the postage stamp 8th at Carnoustie. There it sits in all its marvellous contours surrounded by punishing bunkers at the end of a very wee little Par 3 that manages to challenge the world's best even with wedges in hand but that a 70+ year old Gene Sarazen could ace with a long iron. To borrow from another thread, in one sense a golf hole that 'can only be played in one way' -- but what a terrific one it is. Would it be any less terrific if that green sat at the end of a 270-310 yard short Par 4 or (dare I say) one heck of a difficult drivable Par 3? Oh, what marvellous golf that would be, full of exhilaration and challenge and fun -- and where I'd happily take a '4' and run to the next tee every day of the week!!

[Garland Bayley]

1

The real Anthony Gray now tallying his mentions of Cruden Bay.

[Garland Bayley]

I will not believe this is the real Dr. Gray until I see definitive proof. For me, that is the Good Dentist dressed head to toe in orange (including plus fours and a Hogan cap) looking like a human Dreamsicle.

His first PM to me proposed a GRUDGE match. That should be proof enough.

[Garland Bayley]

...
You don't see more "driver par 3" holes because most golfers hate them.  The old 2nd hole at The Renaissance Club was often a driver -- Ian Woosnam had to hit driver when he played it, and he did not like the idea of hitting driver on a par-3!
...

Medal play and par sucks, don't they!

10th at Riviera as a par-3? Variable tee positions for variable ability amateurs, way back over 300 yds when the males we watch on TV play it?

Length aside, it's almost impossible to drive it onto that green because of the angle, so I don't see how you could say that's a par-3.


That, to me, is one of the problems of the drivable par-3 . . . you have to build a target that people think is reasonable to hit from 250-300 yards, and that takes most of the interest out of the hole for the elite golfer.  You could certainly call the 18th at North Berwick a par-3 from that perspective, though it would take away a birdie opportunity for me at the finish.


By contrast, the long par 4 [4.5] is easier to sell, because it doesn't require a wooden club approach for the best players anymore, and so it can have a more interesting green complex without being declared Unfair.

We can see why Tom builds a par 3.5 holes that get the par 4 designation, whereas C&C build par 3.5 holes that get the par 3 designation, e.g. Bandon Trails 12.