Modern and/or old ?

The answer doesn't lie in citing a random hole or two, but rather, in the entire body of the architect's work.

And, if the answer is NO, several questions must be asked.

Why do par 5's seem to be the hardest holes to design with distinction ?

What about them dooms architects to mediocrity ?

IF an architect created a great par 5 ..... shouldn't he replicate it ?     ........ often ?

Thinking of Spyglass I was going to say RTJ.However I am having trouble remembering others.Don't know why he did two mundane back to back 5's at Shady Oaks on a course I otherwise like.

Tom Doak,

That makes sense.

Length equals difficulty in design from the perspective of duplication.

While intervening topography can be ignored on par 3's it must be utilized on par 5's.

Perhaps this is why some of the great par 5's are on the short side.

Wouldn't an out and back routing lend itself to the creation of superior par 5's, because it's easier to fit the larger piece into that configuration of a puzzle ?

Pat:

Please name ten great par-5 holes you could go about replicating easily from one site to another, and I'll be glad to use some of them.  Most of the really great par-5's I know of rely on some unusual undulations and/or great natural hazards for their quality.

Tom,

A tough proposition.  "Great" is a high bar, but given my limited travels I'd start with the following "pretty good" holes:

1. The 5th at Holston Hills - brilliant use of modest shaping in the fairway.

2. The 2nd at Talking Stick North (requires a boundary) - great example of how a green side bunker dictates play from 500 yards away.

3. The 9th at San Francisco Golf Club - the fairway bunkers complement each other so well.

4.  The 3rd at Shoal Creek - excellent use of bunkering to create a double-dogleg hole that can be played in a straight line by the stronger player.  

Mike

I think Flynn wrote about par 5's that they were very difficult to make interesting. That was a theme in his work as a large number of his courses had no more than two.

The problem with Par 5's is that true three-shot holes are boring - keep the ball in play off the tee; lay up; hit a short iron to the green.

The best par 5's are really par 4 and a halves that incorporate some element of risk and reward.  The 13th at ANGC is the classic example - but this hole relies on a natural feature, the creek, for a big part of its character.  Without the creek, it's really just a long par 4 because the penal element of going for the green in two is missing.  The shot is all reward and no risk. I don't think this sort of natural feature is that common.

The other problem with par 5's is that they disproportionately reward one element of golfing skill - power - whereas par 3's and 4's can call upon more diverse skills such as the ability to curve the ball and to control trajectory.  

RJ and Phil, would you consider the 15th at Harbour Town to be a great par 5?  It's a true three shotter for almost everybody.  The hole does not reward power, asks for carefully shaped shots, and to me does not really have distinguishing topographical characteristics that would make it unrepeatable.  The hallway-like feel of the hole might be a negative for some on this forum, as well as the reliance of the big tree to dissuade the golfer from trying for the green in two...

I would say no.   I think they are often over the least interesting terrain on a course-to use it up.

Please name ten great par-5 holes you could go about replicating easily from one site to another, and I'll be glad to use some of them.

I know some are listed above Tom, but you could add to the list -

Royal Melbourne West #2
Royal Melbourne East #17
The National (Moonah) #2
Royal Melbourne East #10
Metropolitan #8

All on relatively flat terrain. They are often based on double dogleg shapes, or a go-no go decision for the green in two. They also often possess diagonal hazards, sometimes in the second shot landing zone.

MM

Mike Policano,

I'm a big fan of the par 5's at Ridgewood.

From what I've seen, I also think AWT's body of work on Par 5's is good.

It's sunny and great for golf in the afternoon.
The mornings are a bit chilly, but that's about to change.

I agree with Pat.  The 7th at Pine Valley is a hole worthy of replicating.  The hole does not depend on topography at all.  Flynn was heavily influenced by Pine Valley and his work there had been replicated conceptually and in the case of the 17th at Boca Raton South very closely.  Bunkers, mounds, sandy waste areas and wind influenced play on the hole.  Here's Flynn's version (colorized by that 135 pound heavyweight researcher Craig Disher):



Flynn's 3rd (original 18th and scene of Sam Snead's demise in the 1939 Open) at Philadelphia Country Club is a remarkable hole with some of Flynn's best parkland bunkering.  There is a wonderful fall-off to the right of the green with a deep bunker.  The hole is played from an elevated tee.  The first 2/3 of the hole up to the cross-bunkers is flat then there is a rise to the green with the fairway canted left to right.  The green slopes slightly front to back.



There is one feature that I cannot believe is not conceptually copied and that is the general nature of the par 4 18th green at Merion.  The first half of the green slopes back to front and the back half slopes front to back.  This is a very interesting design and results in some very interesting situations and of course a wide scoring spectrum.  If I were building a golf course, I'd have at least one green per course with such a design.

Then there is the mighty 620 yard uphill 9th at Rolling Green with its canted fairway.  Too bad the bunkering isn't exposed as at Philadelphia Country Club and in the same scale:



The 583 yard 5th at Cascades uses some really nice elevation change, interrupted fairways set at offset angles.  It once had a stream across the front of the green but it was turfed over and directed through a conduit due to flooding.  In some ways it is reminiscent of the 4th at Merion.





Flynn's B-4 at TCC, Brookline is the 12th on the Composite course and the 8th on Primrose.  It plays as a par 5 for members and the hardest hole on the golf course in championship play as a par 4.  Steeply uphill with strategic trees on the left:




Flynn was a terrific designer of par 5 holes.  And par 4 and par 3 holes for that matter  

Great post, Wayne.  The photos and diagrams really bring the holes alive for me.  

Jim,

I am glad you appreciated the posting.  Nobody else seemed to take any note of it at all.  Ah well.  If you notice the bunker labeled E in the Flynn drawing of B-4 at The Country Club, you'll notice the ticking lines running back middle to front middle.  This indicates that the floor of the bunker had two levels separated by that ridge.  I've seen Flynn have undulated floors to his bunkers.  I think this is much more natural a look than flat bottom sand and grass faces or even flat bottoms with sand flashed up.  The undulations lead to iffy lies and I think this is a great feature.  Of course with sand pros today they're probably wiped out by now at most places.