Are par 3's the dumb blondes of Golf Course Architecture?

[Ryan Farrow]

Hope nobody took too much offense to the title..... but seriously


I have finally got to reading the actual words that are in Shackelford's book on Cypress Point and MacKenzie is quoted time and time again as saying one shoters are defined by their beauty. Is this really the most important aspect of a par 3 hole? Lets face it, their are only so many ways to create a strategic par 3.

It would be interesting to note what are peoples favorite par 3 holes and why. For me it would be #4 at Riviera, which has some beautiful bunkering but the strategy and options gives it its soul, or brain. I couldn't imagine a better par 3 but I have never been to Cypress Point.

Some quotes from the man:

"The one shot holes at Cypress Point are excellent, but they owe their reputation almost as much to the amazingly spectacular and beautiful character of the surroundings as to any intrinsic merits of their construction."

on #15

"It is not by any means ideal, as there are not a sufficient number of alternative shots necessary to play it.......The hole owes it reputation almost entirely to the beauty of the green and its surroundings."

[Bob_Huntley]

Ryan,

The third and seventh holes at Cypress are pedestrian at best, the fifteenth and sixteenth are sublime, the difference is surely the beauty of their surrounds.

Bob

[Jeff_Brauer]

Hmm,

The way the 15th green at CP used to twist around, I would have figured it played a little different every day.

As to strategy, Ross wrote that they could be a bit tougher tests of precision, since the ball was on the tee, and in fact, many par 3's are just that - straightforward shots to well protected greens.

I think CBMac had the better idea for par 3's - use them for "concept shots" like the Redan, Eden, Biaritz, and of course, his short was similar to Ross' idea on precision.  A concept shot makes the hole interesting in option of tee shot related strategy.

[Ryan Farrow]

Jeff,

 I agree and remember reading about the precision thing, was it just Ross who preached this? But I don't see the concept hole as a legitimate answer, maybe it was for CB and Raynor but can modern architects get away with it today? Should a priority be set with good looking par 3's, especially in the routing process?

[Jeff_Brauer]

Ryan,

There is the theory that par 3's are inherently more attractive because you can take in the entire hole in one eyeful. It does seem that CP 16 was destined to be a 3, although Raynor (and engineer by trade, and thus aesthetically challenged anyway!) had it as a 4 at one time, perhaps to avoid consecutive par 3's or 4 short to mid length par 4's to finish.

Just as often, though, they are stuck in as connectors because they are always the easiest holes to fit in in a pinch.

[Jordan Wall]

Ryan,

There is always a place in the world for dumb blondes...

Which, of course means, that par threes are what they are and the world is all the better for that cute little cheerleader on the field.

Good night man.

[Jim Nugent]

Don't forget that these dumb blonds are, as a group, the toughest holes against par for the world's best players.  

[Michael Dugger]

By their nature, one shot holes ask for, well, one shot.

This greatly reduces strategic options of the golf hole itself, there simply isn't "as much to do" as with a two or three shotter.

That isn't to say a creatively contoured green cannot force the player to think, it does, and that is why we clammor about redans et al.

But surely sometimes the par 3 is nothing more than a nice shot over some gunk with nice scenery in the background.

I'm fine with that.

[ed_getka]

Bob,
   For one not given to overstatement, I am surprised to hear you call #7 at Cypress "pedestrian at best". A four or five iron to a green setting on a bit of a diagonal to you, with a deep bunker guarding the right flank. A shot past the pin is no bargain to 2 putt. How exactly is that pedestrian?

Ryan,
   Take a trip down to Australia and play the courses I did and I can assure you that finding a dumb blonde par 3 is a tall order. The word that comes to mind re: par 3's Down Under is daunting.

[Rick Shefchik]

I have to echo Ed on #7 at CPC. It was one of the main revelations of my recent round there. While not quite the do-or-die experience that #16 is, #7 has no bailout; a poorly-struck shot (it was every bit of a 5-iron for me) is going to leave you with an extremely difficult recovery, whether you're left, right or short.

It's also a great-looking hole, built into a sandy, pine-topped hillside the likes of which I haven't seen on another course. And looks never hurt.

[Brent Hutto]

The seventh was my favorite short hole at Cypress Point. Since I couldn't at the time effect the direct carry on the sixteenth it became basically a very short Par 4 (albeit a breathtaking one) for me. The fifteenth is gorgeous but a fairly straightforward proposition.

But for a lefty slicer the seventh is very challenging upon missing the green the second shot, especially to a hole on the back tier, is all-world. Like Rick, I thought it beautifully situated and if not followed by those two back-nine Par 3's it would be thought of as a marvel of the course.