[Tommy Williamsen]

We have discussed this previously, but it is worth discussing again. This week both holes are averaging about 4.7 strokes. I always thought that five, when it was a par four, was the best hole on the course and a very exacting second shot. Is the course really better with the new configuration?

[Keith Williams]

Tommy,


Thanks for asking this.  I have to be honest, I had no idea these had been swapped and had to do a double take after watching on tv; I was always of the understanding that hole 5, as a par 4, was considered one of the best holes on the course.  Was there a specific reason this was done?


-Keith

[mike_beene]

They both have always felt like 5s to me. When were these holes added? I don’t think they are original.

[Matthew Rose]

This is just completely an educated guess. but based on the terrain, perhaps it was easier to add length to #5 than it was to #4.

[Brett Meyer]

I was skeptical going in but yes, I think it's better. The 4th green is better suited as a green for a long par 4 than the fifth. It's more open in front and has less severity at its sides. I didn't think much of it as a par 5, but I think it's a great long par 4.

Also, I think that with the lengthening, 5 has become a better hole from tee to green. The drive used to be fairly simple; easy carry over the junk on the corner to a wide fairway. The bunkers ~80 yards short of the green weren't an issue unless you were a really short hitter or hit a very bad drive. Now they're in play for everyone except long hitters who've hit good drives.

The drive is much better. The junk on the corner of the dogleg comes into play for almost everyone off the tee and you either have to bomb it, hit something very straight, or hit a slight fade around trees that encroach from the right. It turned what I thought was an uninteresting drive into one of the best on the course.

The only issue is that there's now a bit of a walk back to the 5th tee. But I think it's worth it. Both holes have become better.

[Sean_A]

From my PoV they are the same as previously. I won’t walk back to either new tee so there is no difference. The par designation is card engineering.

From memory, there were bunkers and waste areas when I last played 2. No issues of hard packed sand from the bunkers.

Ciao

[Ronald Montesano]

LIKE button for Rose and Meyer contributions. Saved me the keystrokes.


#RIP the original World Golf Hall of Fame (where #5 tee now resides)

[JLahrman]

Tommy,


Thanks for asking this.  I have to be honest, I had no idea these had been swapped and had to do a double take after watching on tv; I was always of the understanding that hole 5, as a par 4, was considered one of the best holes on the course.  Was there a specific reason this was done?

-Keith

This video touches on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7a3QgjgQ1g


I was disappointed when this switch happened for the 2014 US Open, but watching the tournament this year I like it.


I played in the 1993 North and South Junior Amateur. News flash: I didn't win. I was marginally good enough to play in the event. But I got four rounds on #2 for an insanely low price even at that time!


I hit four perfect drives on #5, and had maybe a 4 to 6 iron in each time. I couldn't come close to hitting the green even with well struck approaches.


It's been fun to see the pros trying to hit the green with longer irons this year. That green is so hard to hold with those clubs, and if they miss just a little left they can wind up doing what Scheffler and Schauffele did on Friday (and McIlroy was fortunate to make par) after the whole group missed left.

[Tommy Williamsen]

Before the change, I would average the same scores on four and five. I have not played it since the change, but I have a feeling I'd score the same as before.

[Peter Sayegh]

Four is a brute for average players.
Those who have played the fifth more than twice, it aint that hard.

[Mike Nuzzo]

if they both averaged 4.7 for the us open they are the same value golf hole for the best players

[Tim_Weiman]

Four is a brute for average players.
Those who have played the fifth more than twice, it aint that hard.

Is was a mistake converting it to a Par 5.

[Tommy Williamsen]

So, did they do it because four was a pushover par five, and they made five a par five, so par would not be 69?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()