Since we seem to have strayed from the real topic, let me see if I can get us back on the topic here.
Very rarely is a par 3 1/2 par 3 seen, the one at Oakmont is the only one that comes to mind in tournament golf
John,
Sorry, I'm late to this discussion and haven't posted much at all lately.
You refer to 8 at Oakmont, but wasn't 17 a very similar hole? It was a few yards longer and was called a par 4, but there was barely a player in the field who didn't shoot at the green from the tee. Every single one of them felt they needed to make 3 to keep up with the field. For them, 3 became par, not birdie. The real prize was a 2.
On one hand, it proves your point that the USGA called it a par 4, rather than par 3. But on the other, we're no better, because we've bought into it -- got "mixed up with yardages and pars," to use your words. If the exact same hole *was* called a par 3 -- or if they started calling 540-yard holes par 4s -- would it be more likely to change the players' calculation, or ours?
Now, par 2-1/2 or 5-1/2, that really would be revolutionary ... or would it just be an easy par 3 and a hard par 5? OK, now I'm just messing with you.
But even though the yardages were nearly the same for each hole at Oakmont, the holes were very different. The green on 8 was very open and not terribly penal, but the green on 17 was fairly heavily bunkered, surrounded by 5-6 inch rough and very penal for those who went for the green and missed. That, to me, is the main difference between a 3 1/2 par 3 and a 3 1/2 par 4. The long par 3 should likely have a very open design to readily accept the long shots, but the short par 4 should be less open (but not so closed off as to prevent people from going for it) and moderately more penal to errant shots.
I don't know how the calculation would change is a 540 yard hole was a par 4, but it may prevent people from playing the kind of golf that Zach Johnson did at Augusta when he didn't even make effort to hit at the green on any of the par 5's during the week. Now of course he won, so its harder to critisize him like we do Mickelson leaving out the driver at the Open, but the concept is the same.
And I would love to see a 2 1/2 hole. I get the feeling that #7 at Pebble would qualify as one of those if the wind was dead calm, but that is rare. The 17th at Tobacco Road I think is something of a 2 1/2, it requires nothing more than a gap wedge because of the tee elevation and such, so its a fairly easy birdie. But those type holes are very rare. But I'd love an 80-120 yard hole with a funnel type green (where the green works good shots in real close to the pin). That would be fun.