[Forrest Richardson]

I am working on an additional nine for an existing nine that is about 2,500-yards, par-34.

Our first pass was another par-34, (or 35.) The length would be 5,500-yards in this case.

However. I am now studying an option for a very short new nine — 4, 4, 3, 3, 4, 4, 3, 3, 4 = 32. I like it better for a few reasons; the par-3s are interesting; it works; and it offers the owner a bit more land he can sell for large estate lots. While the real estate is not a driving factor, it certainly helps.

I know of very few par-66 courses. These "in-between" layouts are rare. What are some thoughts on this subject?

[Sean Leary]

GCAers will love it. Normal golfers will  be skeptical.
To them, it would be like playing 15 hole course.  Tough sell I would think....

[RJ_Daley]

What is the market area?  Can the lots be marketed for the retired crowd?  Make it nice for the seniors.  They are the biggest growing market of anything, not just golf.  A nice smooth par 66 for 70 year olds is not a bad day...

[cary lichtenstein]

Build the best holes possible and let the chips fall, you'll have a better course

[Jordan Wall]

My home course is a Par-67, which I play everyday I don't play somewhere else (so maybe 6 times a week).

I love it, and love all the short, risk reward par-4's.

I wouldn't have any issue with a Par 66, but that's just me.


Oh, yes, I know WA is not blessed with some of the best courses in the world but usually the Nile is pretty packed, weather permitting.

[Dick Kirkpatrick]

Forrest:
I have built a few of these "short" courses, and they are very popular with beginners and seniors. Business people like them as they can play them quickly after work. It is important to have lots of tee space (as usual on the 3's) and other design features included: redan, punch bowl et al. I usually try for one par 5 hole. Tlhe ones I have built have been from 4800 yards to 5400 yards par 64-66
I firmly believe if you build it nice-they will come.

[Joe Perches]

I am now studying an option for a very short new nine — 4, 4, 3, 3, 4, 4, 3, 3, 4 = 32.

Good luck.  It might be fun.  It also might provide a real opportunity to carry only 6 or 7 clubs if the 4 par 3's are 2 each of reasonably similar length.

9 minute/hole?  1:20 walking?

If there is to be a high expected number of rounds per day, perhaps there could be unhappy customers because the waits at each tee might be excessive.  I might choose to front-load the par 3's so the delays are less likely to cause a person to finish grumpy.

[Bill_McBride]

I am working on an additional nine for an existing nine that is about 2,500-yards, par-34.

Our first pass was another par-34, (or 35.) The length would be 5,500-yards in this case.

However. I am now studying an option for a very short new nine — 4, 4, 3, 3, 4, 4, 3, 3, 4 = 32. I like it better for a few reasons; the par-3s are interesting; it works; and it offers the owner a bit more land he can sell for large estate lots. While the real estate is not a driving factor, it certainly helps.

I know of very few par-66 courses. These "in-between" layouts are rare. What are some thoughts on this subject?

"..large estate lots."

Hmmm.  Is there a correlation between large estate lots and large cigars and 7000 yards?  If this were a closed community with a large senior population, might be great, but I would be concerned about the demographic looking for "large estate lots."

One of my favorite courses, Painswick, is par 67, 4800 yards, but what do I know?  

[Evan_Green]

Forrest

An interesting course with a similar par to the course you are referring to is a few year old real estate development in Dublin, CA called Dublin Ranch. Its a par 63 and measures 4,820 - designed by RTJ II.

It certainly fulfills a niche market of hitting full shots and not feeling like you've played a pitch and putt, but still getting around in 3 hours or so.

[Paul Jones]

Audubon Park Golf Club
New Orleans, LA
Par 62, 4,220-yard
Denis Griffiths Design

I have not played it yet, but everyone I talk too enjoyed it and it is always busy being accross the street from Tulane and Loyola Univ.

[tonyt]

Dirk said it.

If the course is good, and enjoyable to play, people will like it.

Many will make comment and judgement (even if they loved it) on it not being the full quid, but they are more likely to return to a good and enjoyable par 66 course than a poor quality par 70-72.

Not saying the slightly longer option of yours is poor, just that what people say and think is often different to what they do. Build for what they'll do, not what they'll say. It is the "do" that provides revenue and viability.

[Adam Clayman]

The expected green fee is a factor.

 If it's not a value, the length will be the least of worries.

If it's short, fun and reasonably priced, I'd say it's a capital idea.

[Brian Phillips]

My home club is 65 and it has produced more touring pros than any other course in Norway.....

Small greens produce players with great short games..

I don't think I have ever played a round over 4 hours.  That is good for greenfees and busy members..

Brian

[ForkaB]

Amen to Brian's Stateemnt

My home club is 67, but you have to be very good to break 70 and extremely good to break par.  Same reason as Brian--small tricky greens require great short games.

The flip side is that just about anybody can play the course and most average players (15-20 HCP) can break 80 and even shoot 75 on a good day.

A win-win situation.  Sell it and go for it, Forrest.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

There's a fun par 66 course in south London, Coombe Wood.  http://www.coombewoodgolf.com/
I used to play there a lot with the Concert Golfing Society.  At little over 5,000 yards from the very back it was hardly long, but there were a good number of really enjoyable holes.  The only downside was that there were rather too many short par 3s on the back nine.  

[Forrest Richardson]

Thanks for the feedback.

As for Dublin Ranch, RTJ-2...yes...but let us give credit to Don Knott who was in charge of that work!

One of the reasons I asked about this is the in-between factor. I have plenty of reference to par-60s — 62s..and the 68+ crowd. When you fall in that mid-range it has little company.

All this is O.K.  I appreciate the references. And, I will soon look for B. Phillips on the tour!!  

[Steve Lang]

 

Doesn't it all come down to course rating & slope?

I've played Par72 courses that were rated for 68..  what will slope be?

[Forrest Richardson]

Steve — Because of the short-ish length of par-4s, I will guess that the rating at 66 might be in the 64-65 range.

[Adam Clayman]

Do regional associations set minimums to their participants ratings/slope/par?

[Greg Tallman]

While perhaps yielding better golf it could reduce the land value for the owner. The masses don't "understand" a par 66 layout... Likely be labled with the dreaded "executive course" title.

A good marketing team could sell it with a somewhat targeted apporach. Female angle... 3 hour rounds... Family/Kid friendly... and if the qulaity was good enough a few "purists" would likely come.

At the end of the day I don't see an inferior 5500 yard par 70 providing the marketing alternatives as a qulaity par 66 COULD.

[Forrest Richardson]

Adam — The worst policy is the USGA's involving a 3,000-yard threshold for a course to be rated so members can have transient handicaps.

I.E., if 18-holes are less than 3,000 yards the USGA will rate it, but handicaps cannot be used against other clubs!

What this does is to exclude short courses...because of length.

The course at question here will be largely retired members. "Estate Lots" was used to describe 1/2 acre lots in small clusters. Lot will go for $300,000 to $500,000. It is a wooded area; tall pines.

[George Pazin]

If nothing else, it'll help out the Project 54 Swedes.

I would think the toughest thing about a project like this is convincing the owner that it will yield a superior course that people will flock to play. I'd guess that if it doesn't succeed wildly, the architect would be blamed, no matter what actually caused the result.

For all those playing sub 70 par courses, how many have been built in the last 25 years? Anyone know? I'd guess - and it's purely a flat out guess - that the majority of sub 70 pars are pretty old and have a well developed following.

If you lacked a conscience, you could take the approach of the little 9 holer down the street from me and simply lie. Only course I've played where I was over the green on a slightly uphill par 5 hitting 3 iron, 5 iron.

Think of the positive publicity when every rater comes back describing how he drove 6 par 4s over 350....

 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()