News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


MCirba

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #25 on: February 09, 2024, 05:47:59 PM »
#16 (229yds) & #17 (230yds) at Lincoln Park in San Francisco could go on such a list. Both play downhill, but bouncing the ball on is not easy given how soft the turf usually is.

#17 is the well photographed hole that looks back (east) on the Golden Gate Bridge.     

I almost forgot #12, which is 192yds but very much uphill.

The 9-hole Fleming course at Harding Park has couple 200+ yard par-3's as well.


And the two at Lincoln Park are excellent holes.
"Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent" - Calvin Coolidge

https://cobbscreek.org/

V. Kmetz

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #26 on: February 09, 2024, 09:49:18 PM »
I don’t care what the par is or if they are in the pro game. I am all in favour of holes between 215ish and 270ish. It’s a seriously under used yardage range.

Ciao


++ Been saying this for years...
  • What in God's name does the assigned conception of "par" matter to the "tackle" of a golf hole?
  • The negative effect of blind and/or the meaning of impossible start to dissolve when you strip off an assigned par
  • 210 -270 is the least exploited yardage for fun(?), interest/different strategies...
  • and for the great mass of players for whom anything over 200 is a two-shot hole, this range of yardage brings the tantalizing joy of drivable and/or ace-deuce into range.
"The tee shot must first be hit straight and long between a vast bunker on the left which whispers 'slice' in the player's ear, and a wilderness on the right which induces a hurried hook." -

Daryl "Turboe" Boe

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #27 on: February 10, 2024, 12:11:46 AM »

On the other hand, I grew up in northern Minnesota playing nearly all my golf on nine-hole courses built after WWI, and every single one of them has a par three that required a driver or brassie at the time.  Same thing in SD where I lived for 23 years.



Where in SD did you live? and play?


I grew up in SD I too lived there for about 23 years.  The first 18 in a little town near Huron and the last 5 mostly out in the Black Hills/Rapid City going to SD School of Mines.


Thats a pretty small sub-group of GCA!
Instagram: @thequestfor3000

"Time spent playing golf is not deducted from ones lifespan."

"We sleep safely in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."

Ken Moum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #28 on: February 10, 2024, 01:49:22 AM »

On the other hand, I grew up in northern Minnesota playing nearly all my golf on nine-hole courses built after WWI, and every single one of them has a par three that required a driver or brassie at the time.  Same thing in SD where I lived for 23 years.



Where in SD did you live? and play?


I grew up in SD I too lived there for about 23 years.  The first 18 in a little town near Huron and the last 5 mostly out in the Black Hills/Rapid City going to SD School of Mines.


Thats a pretty small sub-group of GCA!


I moved to Pierre in 1975 to work for Game, Fish and Parks as an Info. Officer. Left in 98.


Been going to the northern hills for the summer since 2016.
Over time, the guy in the ideal position derives an advantage, and delivering him further  advantage is not worth making the rest of the players suffer at the expense of fun, variety, and ultimately cost -- Jeff Warne, 12-08-2010

Mark Pearce

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #29 on: February 10, 2024, 06:01:20 AM »
Ken,


Golspie 17 is a beast (and 16 as you know is no picnic) as is Brora 18.


But the hole that I have played that best supports your thesis is Crail Balcomie 13. On our first play, the wind was pretty benign and it still was a hefty, intimidating carry. Last year, we played it into a strong wind. We were matched up with a young strong player who crushed a driver (while letting out a discus thrower yell) and it just made the front of the green. One of the great shots I have witnessed.


I doubt that anyone now would design such a hole.


Ira
Interesting.  Of all the holes listed here that I know, so far, I think Balcomie 13 is the "easiest", in that I'm standing on the tee hoping for 3 but expecting 4 and I'm very disappointed to make worse than a 4.  The trick is to make sure you get up there.  5 at Anstruther, for instance, requires a precise lay up and a precise wedge to make 4, let alone 3!
In June I will be riding the first three stages of this year's Tour de France route for charity.  630km (394 miles) in three days, with 7800m (25,600 feet) of climbing for the William Wates Memorial Trust (https://rideleloop.org/the-charity/) which supports underprivileged young people.

Stewart Abramson

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #30 on: February 10, 2024, 08:20:37 AM »
The opening hole at Winterield in Dunbar is a brute 240 yarder. Straight into the wind my one visit there.


P1010124 -
Winterfield GC #1 240 yard par 3

Simon Barrington

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #31 on: February 10, 2024, 10:02:51 AM »
"1) Four short holes, all of a different type.
One of these four should be a very short one (about 120 yards); a second should be a little longer, so as usually to make the difference between a mashie and an iron; a third should generally call for a long cleek shot, or just a little more than that; and the fourth should represent a good full drive."

We now know who to blame...James Braid "Advanced Golf" (1908) p.245


That's EXACTLY the reference I hoped someone would provide in this thread.


“You know what I call a drivable Par 4?….
....a Par 3” - Pete Dye

Ken Moum

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #32 on: February 10, 2024, 10:46:32 AM »
"1) Four short holes, all of a different type.
One of these four should be a very short one (about 120 yards); a second should be a little longer, so as usually to make the difference between a mashie and an iron; a third should generally call for a long cleek shot, or just a little more than that; and the fourth should represent a good full drive."

We now know who to blame...James Braid "Advanced Golf" (1908) p.245


That's EXACTLY the reference I hoped someone would provide in this thread.


“You know what I call a drivable Par 4?….
....a Par 3” - Pete Dye


Perfect. 


I play at Red Mountain Ranch CC in the winter, which is a "Dye Design" although it's said to be mostly Perry's work. 


The 15th is plays between 130 from the forward tees to 208 from the tips, anf drives golfers bananas. There are four areas where a cup can be cut and only one of them is accessible with anything other than an extraordinary shot.  OTOH, a decent layup usually results in a not-too-difficult four.


Several of the guys I play with hate it, but I love the mindf_ck aspect of it.
Over time, the guy in the ideal position derives an advantage, and delivering him further  advantage is not worth making the rest of the players suffer at the expense of fun, variety, and ultimately cost -- Jeff Warne, 12-08-2010

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #33 on: February 19, 2024, 03:33:39 AM »
I don’t care what the par is or if they are in the pro game. I am all in favour of holes between 215ish and 270ish. It’s a a seriously under used yardage range.

Ciao


A great point.  For a short hitter like me, holes in the 320-375 range are soul crushing.  They're supposedly two-shot holes, but end up being driver, five wood, wedge. (FWIW, my average drives are about 170, and my longest fairway club sometimes gets over 150 with carry and roll)


Under 300 gives me a chance to have a "scoring shot" if I play smart. Holes like 12 at Muir of Ord or 17 at Tain, are 200-yard par threes on the card, but since they have a burn (or two) to carry, they present an interesting challenge, and can catch out players who are much, much longer than me.

It’s a shame so many golfers dislike this yardage range because of the par designation. On the other hand, they are great opportunities for archies to showcase their skills. It would be great to bring back bogey score to slowly erode the concept of par as the expectation for handicap players.

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #34 on: February 20, 2024, 08:44:22 PM »
I guess the Scots would just love CPC 16.

My understanding is that it is common for C&C to build their half par 3.5s as long par 3s as opposed to short par 4s. Personal experience has me only familiar with their hole at Bandon Trails.

"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Tony_Muldoon

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #35 on: February 21, 2024, 03:40:19 AM »
I don’t care what the par is or if they are in the pro game. I am all in favour of holes between 215ish and 270ish. It’s a seriously under used yardage range.

Ciao


The Annesley Links have 5 holes between 264 and 282.  I loved it and after I regretted reaching for my driver each time.  My short game has improved since, but I want to see how I fare with a full wedge shot in.
The pro said many seniors play them Driver, putter (to an often raised green).
You should go there! ;)

https://course.bluegolf.com/bluegolf/course/course/annesleylinksroyalco/detailedscorecard.htm

Let's make GCA grate again!

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #36 on: February 21, 2024, 04:27:55 AM »
I don’t care what the par is or if they are in the pro game. I am all in favour of holes between 215ish and 270ish. It’s a seriously under used yardage range.
Ciao
The Annesley Links have 5 holes between 264 and 282.  I loved it and after I regretted reaching for my driver each time.  My short game has improved since, but I want to see how I fare with a full wedge shot in.
The pro said many seniors play them Driver, putter (to an often raised green).
You should go there! ;)
https://course.bluegolf.com/bluegolf/course/course/annesleylinksroyalco/detailedscorecard.htm
Terrific course the Annesley. Nothing like as appreciated as it should be. Plenty of challenge and fun combined. Courses don’t have to have length to have challenge and fun.
Atb

Sean_A

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The Scottish tolerance for "impossible" par threes.
« Reply #37 on: February 21, 2024, 04:52:39 AM »
I don’t care what the par is or if they are in the pro game. I am all in favour of holes between 215ish and 270ish. It’s a seriously under used yardage range.

Ciao


The Annesley Links have 5 holes between 264 and 282.  I loved it and after I regretted reaching for my driver each time.  My short game has improved since, but I want to see how I fare with a full wedge shot in.
The pro said many seniors play them Driver, putter (to an often raised green).
You should go there! ;)

https://course.bluegolf.com/bluegolf/course/course/annesleylinksroyalco/detailedscorecard.htm

I really should go this year 😎.

Ciao
New plays planned for 2024: Nothing