Let us now praise dinky par 3s at major championships

[BCrosby]

The 13th should not be changed. It played wonderfully in the Open. There are lots of places to tuck pins (and Davis used them). The green contours, particularly at the edges of the green, are dramatic. On TV the green looks much flatter than it is.

An interesting factoid is that Merion is the only USO venue I know of that did not have a par 3 with a "1" handle. Does anyone know of another?

Bob

 

[Josh Tarble]

This is a bit of a thread jack - but what are the opinions of the other par 3s?  I have heard significant rumblings about all the 3s.  Especially #3.  I for one thought it was great to see those guys have to hit driver and struggle for par.  Sure it may have been a bit much, but it seems like a fairly large green.

I also heard Johnny Miller ( ) mention that he thought all of them played too similarly.  I didn't understand where this was coming from and liked the variety of shots they required.  All in all, I thought the four par 3s were a great set for a US Open.

[Brent Hutto]

I have played a couple of courses over the years whose Par 3's were the equivalent of Merion's, scaled to my game. Every four or five holes I'd be faced with yet another 180-ish yard shot to a green that was either raise, bunkered or heavily contoured. If I'm playing well I'll sneak in a par somewhere and avoid any doubles. If I'm playing badly I'll play the whole set 8-10 over par. But either way, it's just bang a 3-wood, bang a 3-wood, bang a 3-wood every few holes.

It does downgrade a course in my estimation. I'm less inclined to downgrade a major-championship venue based on "monotony" than I am a course I'm playing for fun. So I'll give Merion a pass this week. But mixing up the lengths and types of shots on Par 3's a pretty simple way for a course to add to the fun factor in my book.

[Dale_McCallon]

Kind of mixed emotions on the hole.  I have no issue with the length, but the green itself seems kind of ho-hum on tv.  Compared to the wild nature of some of the greens, it just seemed like anywhere on the green was an easy two putt. 

I read somewhere that Arnold Palmer called it one of the great short holes in the world, so I guess I expected there to be some "wow" factor.  Of course, as it turned out, it was one of the determining holes on the course.

[Phil McDade]

Phil,
The things that make PB #7 and the postage Stamp great and difficult, Merion just doesn't have. PB has elevation change and a bit of wind. The postage stamp has wind.     Fact of the matter these guys are too good with a straight up wedge to make it too difficult. To me there was plenty of danger lurking, they just don't miss too often. Only defense is messing with their heads on a shot like that   

Pebble Beach #7 is sited on a great piece of land, and it was routing genius to stick a little par 3 there -- so yes, I'd concede that superior land lends itself to superior architecture. That's been the case for 200-some years of golf architecture. The Postage Stamp is not great because of wind -- most Open Championship sites are subject to strong winds, and not every par 3 on the rota courses is great. It's the architecture of the Postage Stamp -- a deep but narrow green, with deep pot bunkers encircling it, and that nasty mound left -- that makes it great.

Besides, google an aerial of Merion East. The club presumably owns the small parcel of land to the right of the stream that runs alongside the 13th. Wouldn't a green sited on the right side of the creek, hard against it, forcing the golfer to see the creek all the way from tee to green, create a par 3 of more substance, risk and doubt for the golfer? They'd have to cut down the big tree there, but as others have mentioned, maybe it ought to go anyway.

[John Foley]

Whats great about 13 was (compared to the other 220+ par 3's and with the brutal finish starting on #4) knowing if you didn't birdie it you were loosing ground - that had to be a knife to Mickleson yesterday.

Not to thread-jack but how great was it watching these guys hit Driver on #3!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Whats great about 13 was (compared to the other 220+ par 3's and with the brutal finish starting on #4) knowing if you didn't birdie it you were loosing ground - that had to be a knife to Mickleson yesterday.

Not to thread-jack but how great was it watching these guys hit Driver on #3!

John,

I think it's really BAD for golf.

It sets a terrible precedent, re emphasizing length

[Josh Tarble]

Phil,
I agree with you that Merion #13 pales in comparison to PB #7, but what hole doesn't?  But I think if you put the Postage Stamp in same conditions as Merion, it's not quite as fearsome as it is with significant winds and really firm greens. 

Sure, #13 could be better, but for what it is currently, I think it's an excellent hole. 

[Phil McDade]

Josh:

The thread was about praising dinky par 3s at majors, and there are several that I can think of right off the bat. But folks seems to think that because #13 is different than Merion East's other par 3s, and fits within the contium of easy/hard/easy/hard that is MEast's routing (which, it does), then that somehow makes it a great hole. I just don't see anything there that lends it to terms like greatness or brilliant.

Ken M:

#10 and #13 had about the same number of birdies -- but #10 also had 12 double bogeys and 3 "others," compared to 1 and none for #13. That implies a measure of risk with 10 absent in toto from 13 (can a hole be truly great if there is absolutely no risk of a double bogey, as is the case of the 13 at MEast?). And 10 provides multiple options for how to attack it -- which 13 does not. It's a hole merely of execution, and not terribly difficult execution at that.

[Thomas Dai]

Balance and variety are good in par-3's. Four (or five or even six) similar length ones is not good balance and there is limited variety even if they aligned to different points of the compass. A monster length one combined with a tiny short one somewhere else within the 18-holes provides some balance, especially if they point in opposite directions, a good example being the 230 par-3 3rd and 135 yd par-3 8th at Royal Aberdeen.

All the best

[Wade Whitehead]

The way to get under a professional's skin is to require him to hit partial shots.  Listen when they shoot 63; they'll always say "I had perfect yardages all day."

The 13th required a partial shot.  A full wedge was too much for much of the field.

The 3rd also required a partial shot for those who hit driver (and many who hit less).

Pros hit the ball offline more often when they can't take a full swing.  I liked both holes because many players couldn't put the "driving range" move on the ball.

WW

[Josh Tarble]

Josh:

The thread was about praising dinky par 3s at majors, and there are several that I can think of right off the bat.

I mean this only as a question... in the past 20 years, what other major championship courses have had par 3s less than 150 yards?  Less than 125 yard?  I think maybe '98 at Olympic is as close as a US Open has had other than Pebble and I'm not too familiar with the Britsh Open Rota courses to recall.

To me, the combination of the shortness of shot and the placement in the routing - and the severe penalty for missing makes #13 a great hole. 

[Phil McDade]

Josh:

Two others that come to mind are the 9th at Lytham, which can certainly play under 150 and is a target shot surrounded by bunkers and OOB hard by the corner of the hole. Whistling Straits has a nifty short par 3 -- the 12th -- that hangs on the lake and has a tiny portion of the green reserved for Sunday pins.

Re. this comment: " and the severe penalty for missing makes #13 a great hole..."

What, specifically, is the severe penalty for missing? No one (OK, one golfer, in four rounds, meaning hundreds of times) double bogeyed the hole all week. Augusta's 12th, Pebble Beach's 7th, Troon's Postage Stamp, the 9th at Lytham, the 12th at WStraits -- those all have severe penalties for missing. I can't see  where it lies at the 13th at Merion East.

[Josh Tarble]

Phil,
That's fine if you want to argue the penalty for missing wasn't severe enough...I believe it was, just nobody hit them.  I think that was maybe a product of pin placement, lack of wind and receptive greens.

Maybe only one person doubled #13, but in the 2010 US Open, only 5 people doubled #7 at PB (and that was with incredibly firm greens and wind) and 0! doubled #13 at WS in 2010 - so I think you're argument that the penalty isn't severe enough just doesn't work with the pros - they just don't hit it into trouble without outside influence.

Part of the greatness of the short holes lie in messing with golfers' mental state...they are just too good with wedges to think otherwise.

[Matthew Petersen]

Josh:

Two others that come to mind are the 9th at Lytham, which can certainly play under 150 and is a target shot surrounded by bunkers and OOB hard by the corner of the hole. Whistling Straits has a nifty short par 3 -- the 12th -- that hangs on the lake and has a tiny portion of the green reserved for Sunday pins.

Re. this comment: " and the severe penalty for missing makes #13 a great hole..."

What, specifically, is the severe penalty for missing? No one (OK, one golfer, in four rounds, meaning hundreds of times) double bogeyed the hole all week. Augusta's 12th, Pebble Beach's 7th, Troon's Postage Stamp, the 9th at Lytham, the 12th at WStraits -- those all have severe penalties for missing. I can't see  where it lies at the 13th at Merion East.

A severe penalty doesn't have to be a double bogey. A 4 on a hole where the golfer expects to make 2, or 3 at the worst, is pretty severe.

Players who hit their tee shot in a bunker only got up and down 24% of the time for the week. Players who missed the green in the rough only made par 40% of the time. These are the best players in the world, and yet missing the green even on this short hole where a miss might still be quite close to the hole, meant about a two-thirds chance of making bogey. meanwhile, hitting the green left you a 31% chance for the week of making birdie. That's a pretty great 2-shot swing.

To me, it seems preferable to some of the beastly par 3s where so many people were making bogey or worse that a 4 didn't feel back-breaking.