It may feel like I'm hijacking the thread at this later point, but the conversation went to an area that causes me to cast this focus.
You could say that about most long par-3 holes. holes of 210 - 275 yards
You could say it about the 8th at Oakmont, too, except somehow it gets some street cred for being EVEN LONGER than the rest of them. That's the dullest green at Oakmont, with 16 in second place.
It's hard to build a great long par-3, hole of 210 -275 yards if you don't have a coastline like Cypress Point's. If the green isn't big and receptive, good players hate it, and everyone else is just making four anyway (or 5, 6, 7x - what percentage of all players actually hole out on this green?). Yesterday on Instagram someone said that 16 at Streamsong (Blue) was one of their favorite holes on the course, and I responded that he was maybe the first person who had ever nominated it as a favorite. Just guessing he made 2 there.
If this post, by a leading GCA of the last 25 years, who has as many courses on anybody's World Top 300 as you could expect, doesn't show the desultory and limiting effect of individual hole par on design, nothing will.
Looking at my cross-outs and insertions by comparison, doesn't TD's analysis really become...
"Except on a coastline subject to coastline elements, it's hard to build a satisfying hole of 210 - 275 yards, that has a flattish/tepid green."
?
I'm not trying to punish Tom's input with "gotcha" parsing, but where does that stop; where isn't that true? 280 yards? 300 yards?... or the other way.... 200 yards? 180 yards? 100 yards?
TD's, among others in history, is long on the voluminous record that interesting greens make for interesting holes and interesting, amusing, memorable courses. Why wouldn't that hold true for a 78 yard hole or a 278 yard hole or a 378 yard hole or 478 yard hole...and what is the thing that prevents the great designers past and present to remembering, locating and delivering that... because the hole says "3" on the card, and therefore a different set of criteria thus holds sway?
Individual hole par, especially in this steroidal tech era, has become a tired, inured limitation on the brilliance of the current design community to respond to the challenges and continue design innovations. Removing it will not be a panacea for all design problems, or their solutions, but I believe it would breath new life into the various details that go into making course(s) of 18 memorable holes. Isn't that the point.