Are there any?

Cheers,
Brad

P.S.  If this has been covered in the past, I apologize, but I refuse to bother with the search function.

Ah! Taylor beat me to it! Nice... Hanse's new 4th at TPC Boston.

There's a hole at my home club, the second - 326 yards, designed by Donald Ross. It's a neat short par-four with a collection of bunkers in the direct line from tee to green. The fairway bends left to right into the green.

It's one of few holes on the course where there's some room to add length. And, of course, there's talk about extending the tee. However, I've argued, this particular hole has been improved with the ball traveling farther than ever.

Over the past five years and more, more low handicap players at the club attempt to drive the tiny green, with trouble all around, than ever before. The hole is much more exciting at 326 yards today than in 1929.

At, say, 350 yards, even low handicap players simply play 4-iron/sand wedge. The temptation to drive the green is gone. And the hole is far less interesting.

Sadly, I don't believe I have ever been authorized to shorten a hole at any club where we've consulted.

MacKenzie had a great quote about this.  He said that many courses had bad holes they had tried to fix over and over again without success, and suggested the best solution would just be to shorten them and get them over with quicker!

Bill,
That's disappointing.
Hitting that third shot from the top of the hill was a blast,as was hitting it partially blind and running up to see the result.

I understand why they did it though as the tee was located around the middle of the previous hole so you teed off after hitting your approach to the previous green.(at least we did in the early 90's)
With the longer ball now, guys were probably having to tee off prior to hitting their second shot on the previous hole.

and the punchbowl hole probably got a bit short as a par 5.

When they emerge they head up to the elevated 16th tee which is visible. I'm sure it's no more visible as a par 4

As a par five it was really cool to just reach the far left side of the slope and have it trickle downhill left to right.
The closer your wedge shot, the more it was visible, but had to be placed perfectly. If farther back, you could spin it, but it was blind. If you couldn't reach, you had a chice about what you wanted to do with your third.

I'm biased because I hate converted par 5's.
If it's the same slope and green a 4 iron is a crap shoot.(not that it needs to be fair, cause it doesn't)

The hole was plenty long as a par 5 when built.

No doubt the tee was pushed back over time to keep up with tech-which probably overwhelmed it in the ProV1 era after I left. (they also had to concerned with players behind hitting the tee with their tee shots on the previous hole)

GJ,
I'm glad to hear it went well.
The members DID hit off 15 tee midway on 14. In fact during qualifying for the Club Championship 3 members were penalized for doing just that!

If 15 was a par 4, it had to awfully long in the early days.
Is it a par 69 now or did they lengthen 12 (or another hole)to make it 70 again?

Brad,

Mike Clayton's remodel of Peninsula's South course is an interesting one because not only did he shorten several holes, but the course could be a potential tournament venue.  The first hole was shortenned from a 360 yard drive and pitch hole to a 325 yard drivable par 4 and the 12th hole (pictured below) was shotenned from a 395 yard par 4 with a extreme dogleg to a 320 yard drivable/drive pitch hole. Both are infinetly better holes despite the reduced length.

12th hole aerial during reconstruction mid 2006. New hole black line, old hole white line.


View from the new tee looking to new green construction (bunkers visible).  Old tee and old green are both our of screen to the left.

Jeff

You will have to come and see SH and the changes.  Just so you know, the two guys explaining the SH hole project have both seen the course/changes and both should serve as an inspiration to all on GCA for their "commitment to the classics".

Bill is the green chairman at Hackensack, and he is going through the full education process necessary for a succesful redo.  He is not "winging it" like so many do, and I am confident he will get his course right if allowed.

Dr. Childs was an inspiration to me for his passion and his drive to get one partiuclar place correct. It is very easy for us here to tell other places what to do and how to do it, it is another thing to live it with all the peculiar politics. I figured if both me and my green chariman had half of Childs passion and fight we would succeed.

#15 which you are familiar with had originally been a ~440 yard par 4.  Over the years it had been lengthened to ~520 yard par 5 to the punchbowl.  

Both Gil and George on their first visits commented that it was a shame it was a par 5.  Some members, as well as our original architect, wanted to lenghten the hole adding another 50 yards.  This was in spite of already having to walk back ~120 yards to play the hole and in spite of the fact that many members tee off on #15 before completing #14.

IMO, this was a fairly important aspect of the project, in that we did make a decision to "go Macdonald" yet we had very few Macdonald "template" holes.  We really needed to make an effort to get what remained correct.

I do think the punchbowl should be a 4.5 with the long iron or wood to the catchers mitt.  With our hole morphing into a par 5 it did get to the point where it was actually playing correctly for the long hitting 5% but not for the average member.  

The "new tee" is precisely where it had been 80 years ago and where the ladies tee (as a par 5) had been. The championship tee is on the front of the old tee pad and  it is a little elevated and is 495 yards.

The part of the project that worked in conjunction with this change was making #12 a par 5 so we could stay a par 70.   Gil found a greensite, closer to #13 that bought the ravine and creek into play and allowed for the hole to be a par 5.  this new #12 is midway between the mens and womens tees on #13.  There were a few trees in this area .  The walk from 12 green to 13 tee has been shortened by about 3-4 minutes.

This also allowed Gil and George to build a really neat offset double plateau green.  

The one problem I have with many of these "sympathetic" restorations is that so often I hear "if a bunker is 220 off the tee we will put it 260" etc etc etc.  But they make no note or have no concern with the actual landforms that are in play in these areas.  SH had very few fairway bunkers, so it was the landforms that are important, they must be kept relevant.  I think the length that has been added on SH over the years has basically maintained the integrity of the landforms.  I would suggest that it had been "luck",  at least prior to our project .

The most important "landform" on a punchbowl is the actual fall off and IMO that has to be about 190-240 from the shot played in.  We have succeeded in restoring that type of shot.
We did lose 70 yards on this swap.

Jeff

after 12 you used to cross a long bridge that ended at the women's tee.  You then walked back about 80 yards toward the left.  The new greensite is near the end of the bridge and is perhaps 40 yards from the mens 13th tee.

There were some trees in the area.  The bridge is now very much in the open, it looks fabulous and really accentuates the severity of the ravine that runs through that part of the property.