Drivable par 4 - What's the ideal carry?

[John Connolly]

Consider this from the most commonly used tees that sees 70% of the play. There is trouble short and long, and a green that is narrow front to back. The hole doglegs left to right for a safe play left. What is an ideal carry to the green?

[Mark Pearce]

Carry to the green?  Surely from the most commonly used tees, most golfers are landing it short and running it on with a driver?

[John Connolly]

They cannot run it up as there is trouble short - say a bunker. This exercise is intended to gauge what this group believes would be the best carry yardage for the hole to achieve its goal of tension between the temptation of going for it on the fly vs playing safe to the angle of the dogleg. What yardage offers the peak tension?

[Ally Mcintosh]

Belfry 10 works quite well. Whatever yardage that is.

[Mike_Trenham]

Ideal is more about the design of the teeing ground.  I see a need for a long diagonal tee, with plenty of room behind it (say 75 yards).  To account for wind and the ever lengthening of the distance the ball is being carried by the next generation of equipment and golfers.

[Steve_Lovett]

Sounds like the play would be a low slinging cut that scoots its way up to or near the green. I'm not sure it's considered "drivable for the majority" if it's something like 270-290+ all carry with trouble long and short.

[Thomas Dai]

10th at Riviera?
Atb

[Wade Whitehead]

I'll bite.  240 carry.

I don't say that because most guys can carry it that far.  I say it because most THINK they can carry it that far.
My real answer to the question is more complicated than this, but I think you're just looking for a number here.

WW

[Pete Lavallee]

Impossible to make the carry with a 3 wood and 10 yards short of your driver carry. Why would you go for it if you knew for certain you couldn’t make the carry? You did say driveable and not fairway woodable!

[Jay Mickle]

Considering you say drivable for 70% of golfers, the average golf drive distance is about 215 yards so for that golfer to carry the front bunker the distance would have to be in the 190 range. This puts the hole in the longish par 3 catagory and well short of what are being built as drivable par 4s.

[Cal Carlisle]

I agree with Jay that making it driveable for 70% of the golfers is essentially going to make it a longer par 3 for a lot of guys. Elevation of the different tees (shorter tees at a higher elevation, longer tees at a less desirable angle, and much lower) can definitely change one's thought process. Number #10 at Shaker Country Club comes to mind.

[Jeff_Brauer]

John,


According to the distance study by Gene Parente, here are some figures to help you out:


Swing Speed    Carry   Carry %   Total
55                    74       63%       116
65                    120     78%       154
75                    148     82%       181
85                    186     88%       210
95                    218     91%       239
105                  247     90%       274
115                  273     91%       300
125                  294     95%       310


I think "most players" (i.e., average male) would be in the 85-95MPH swing speed carry, although that is fading fast according to many stats.  The nominal carry would be affected by wind, altitude, etc.  Not to mention tee design.  After figuring out what tees everyone might play at that course, you might want to consider whether to create a carry for the lowest average swing speed in that group, average or high swing speed, or with an elongated tee, provide an option, although you can never count on the tee placement guy to understand what you are thinking.


As you can see, generally, slower swing speeds produce shots with less carry and more roll, both because of spin, lack of height, and downward trajectory.  I think that the frontal bunker would have to be several yards short of the green to really make that shot work as I think you intend and/or, provide a really deep green.  The hole you describe is actually just pretty bad design, i.e., not workable for the players playing it.


As a few note, you probably have to ignore the USGA par guidelines.  In truth, senior male golfers have had shorter than regulation holes for years.  With the forward tee movement, many holes for the shortest tees really should be comfortable ignoring the USGA distance/par guidelines to get what you want design wise.

[jeffwarne]

There is no "ideal" carry length to a green on a driveable par 4(or par 3 for that matter).
It will be too long a carry for nearly all, and too short for some.
and those that can carry it, may not be able to stop it.

[Ken Moum]

There is no "ideal" carry length to a green on a driveable par 4(or par 3 for that matter).
It will be too long a carry for nearly all, and too short for some.
and those that can carry it, may not be able to stop it.

You nailed it.


A while back I played with a +5 handicap in one of our ABCD events.  He hit his 8 iron almost the same distance as my driver.


FWIW, I have long believed that since nearly every old course I have played featured a par three that required the better players of the day to hit driver or brassie, serious courses of today ought to as well. I'm looking forward to seeing #11 at LACC played at full length.

[Thomas Dai]

For the shorter hitter whether through age, physical limitation etc an awful lot of par-3’s, maybe the majority, require a Driver and then some which ain’t so much fun especially if there are forced carries and time consuming looking for lost balls involved.
Let’s not discourage such players from playing golf particularly as they put money into the game.
Atb

[Adam Lawrence]

In a 1917 letter to Ralph Reville, editor of 'Canadian Golfer', Harry Colt wrote:

"I personally try always to avoid giving a compulsory carry off the tee of more than about 120 yards. Unless however one has much longer carries on a course than this, driving is a very tame business for a good player. So what I do in many cases is to make two or three sets of tees, and have always teeing boxes on each set. Players can settle before starting, what tees are to be used. For competitions of course the extra boxes are removed. At some holes it is unnecessary as there is a good diagonal hazard with probably a compensation (for the man who bites off the biggest carry) in playing the 2nd shot.

[Tom_Doak]

FWIW, I have long believed that since nearly every old course I have played featured a par three that required the better players of the day to hit driver or brassie, serious courses of today ought to as well. I'm looking forward to seeing #11 at LACC played at full length.

Me, too.  But don't be shocked when somebody hits 4-iron or 5-iron from 290 to land it just short of the green and bounce on.  Hardly anyone will need driver there, with how far they hit the ball and the downhill grade.

[Matt Schoolfield]

My answer is 215, fairly easily reachable.


The point of the question is that it ought to be drivable, but then why is it a par 4 and not 3? There must be something about the hole that makes it more than a par 3… a reason to bail out. Wind? OB? There must be a reason why someone ought to lay up beyond a mere bunker.


The way the question is laid out, it sounds like a fairly boring, penal half-par par 3, and not an exciting, drivable par 4.


To me a good drivable par 4 has little to do with the forced carry, and more to do with forced shot shapes.

[Jon Sweet]

Sounds like the play would be a low slinging cut that scoots its way up to or near the green. I'm not sure it's considered "drivable for the majority" if it's something like 270-290+ all carry with trouble long and short.

Average carry number for men is somewhere in the neighborhood of 220 or so with a drive, as much as 230.  Almost nobody hits it as far as they think they do, especially in the air.  If it is me, I would say a cover number of 230 or 240 max from members tees.  250 to 260 from tips.

[V. Kmetz]

For me, most every conversation about half par/drivable/reachable comes down to the elimination of hole par... conceptually it opens everything up...then the golf hole can just be whatever it is and the in-situ features and architects placement can just speak for itself.... all sorts of yardages, between 225 to 290, can return without having to carry the subjectiveness fairness of their "par" against a variety of abilities...and we can have a whole new bloom of interesting, fun, bedeviling holes.  It would also work well in restoring the everyday 440 - 490 holes, which many white tee players don't face anymore.


Slap a 70 - 72 par on the end of the card, otherwise, just list the yardages....every stroke player will figure it out, match players don't need par at all.


But to answer the OP/Q... if the green/cup is intended to be near/drivable for the largest contingent of male players...and still a fair ask, I'd say about 210-220 for a required carry...perhaps allowing the ball to go a further 30-60 yards.

[archie_struthers]

 


You know question had me a little twisted at first but lets take it on. Don't think you need to worry about anyone other than a really good player on this one. Who cares if the average golfer only carries it 190-210 or even 240. They aren't going to be putting for eagles on par fours and shouldn't expect to.


For me the minimum distance is about 300 yards. That's what a lot of the kids and tour pro's can carry it these days. Some more but they tend to be freaks , and we always had them in golf. So for the designer the key is to make it a real risk reward if you go for it. To me that means you have to hit it accurately and far, so the green (target) has to be let's say interesting .


The 12th at Pine Valley (of course ) is a wonderful example of a simple yet challenging reachable par four. You have to control your distance and flight it just right to hold the green. Don't hit it long either .  No water , no OB but lots of challenge. Also if you miss the green left or long going for it you just might feel a little silly when you make a big number.