[TEPaul]

PeteL made an observation about the quality of the second shots on the par 5s at just opened Rustic Canyon by Hanse/Shackelford/Wagner.

I never thought about par 5s exactly like that but it seems to be a very interesting and probably a very true statement. The second shot and the quality of it (either in options or interesting and tempting demands that do tempt) is probably the "linchpin" of the par 5 hole!

I've been quickly filtering some well known par 5s through my mind and it seems that almost all the very good ones have second shots that are really good, really good options, maybe really demanding but all very thought provoking.

Just as a good example--the shorter "go/no go" par 5 like ANGC's famous #13! The tee shot is pretty straight forward in choice and demand--you need to hit it hard and hit it to a known spot and then--"Boom", the essence of the hole begins--What to do? Go or not on the second shot--the essence of the hole!

Do you think the second shot is the linchpin of par 5s? And maybe even a good place to look at the quality of most par 5s and what it is about those second shots that makes the hole so good?

How about Rustic's neat #13? The basic idea is to get into the proper postion for the 3rd shot payoff and because that particular positon is anything but obvious the second shot placement is central on that enormous fairway fronting the green. So the second shot is the "linchpin" of the hole.

[brad_miller]

Tom, maybe #14 at PV is a good example, for others, a true 3 shotter for all mortals with a second shot to a narrowing fairway and narrowing tree corridor, 3rd shot angle, lie and distance are all important, to far right is rough and poor angle with difficult lie and to far left isn't ideal either.

#17 at Priaire Dunes also fits the bill, the green is so difficult that you really have to think from where you want to play your 3rd shot, lots of choices depending on wind, a pin location, maybe one of the hardest short shots into a par 5 in golf. (can be reached in 2 downwind-NE) Normally plays into wind making this uphill 500 yarder play much longer.

[Don_Mahaffey]

Both of the back 9 par 5s at Barona are very good par 5s because they force the player to make choices. I'm not sure there is any huge advantage going left or right on either hole, but it sure feels like there should be! What makes those two so good in my book is the hazard is right in the middle of the approach and the player has to pick a line instead of the usual case where the design forces one.

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I don't think you can label any of the required shots as the linchpin shot, they are all interrelated and important.

The reason it's difficult to find interesting strategic par 5's is that all three shot elements/values must be present, and that is sometimes a difficult task.

One must hit a good tee shot to be in the position to execute a good second shot, setting up the third shot.

Ridgewood in NJ has a good set of Par 5's that should be studied.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

I would agree the 2nd shot is very important, but isn't the tee shot equally important - for example the tee shot at the 13th ANGC. And the great set of par-5s at Sand Hills the tee shot is what stands out in my mind. If you have both an interesting tee shot and interesting 2nd then you realy have an excellent par-5. Here is a somewhat fuzzy aerial of the 14th at The Golf Club:



The tee is in the upper right hand corner -- 618 yds from the back and 575 from the regular tees. Most choose to play safely to the left of the ominous bunker, but for the longer hitters the carry must be 240 to 250 yards over the bunker to the right hand fairway.

The safe drive sets up a very awkward and longish second the should be played as close to the pond as possible to set up the third shot, but because of the odd angle, the narrowness and the friendly hillside that forms the right side - most play out away from the water to the rightside using the slope. If you succcessfully drove down the rightside you have a straight foward angle and can hit a medium iron fairly close to the pond.

If your second is hit to the safe rightside you have a very awkward third across a bunker and the narrowest part of the green (which can't be seen in this photo due to the trees, you can barely make out the lefthand greenside bunker) that slopes away from you, and very possibly you will have to deal with trees (forcing a low trajectory). The second which hugged the pond sets up an open approach with green angled toward you into its greatest depth, the green sloping slightly from right to left. A true three shotter, rare because it has three linchpins.

[Tom MacWood (Guest)]

I'm not sure what I did there, but whatever it was it is probably illegal. Try this:

http://www.mapquest.com/maps/print.adp?mapdata=IU7%2bzZp2wKVMa6bNyJ2A%2blLcJSXG9H%2bkPl8S0X%2fFSU2ErlEDzArILG%2fJ0uAsGsccmfxA6fPGkZLfG%2fqmlbBqZ21%2fpt0trZBv3EI
Uiz8OaJnJmJx%2faUmdJhidPnAZ%2bjl7GgAj29Z0vUtIaGlzPa49OnfVB2K8C%2bFUzoeuDz0kbNHLv
k0zIJ4kTAE9b3ufXoeWx%2bFkHgu7opPjhB%2fiyvWJIKxlmdKODK8mPnZ21LAlP1w1GcJc0XpBdlwKL
cQlWfWvtbtp1rygK%2bAY6%2fiQ8GUCNpRea5hitQF0Izgqw7%2btsoc%3d

[Jim_Kennedy]

TEPaul,
I may be wrong but I believe that a par five of quality must have a second shot that is as equally demanding, or more so, than the tee ball and this second shot must also be as equally demanding, or more so, than the approach shot if the hole is to be considered good to great.

[redanman]

The limiting factor of a great par 5 is the ability of those involved to create  (Or even harder to find ) a topography which makes for a simultaneously interesting and challenging/rewarding second and/or  third shot.

Whether or not this is the lynchpin?  It is not the linchpin.  
-definition #1: a pin which keeps the wheel from falling off
-definition #2:  A cohesive element


I think the lynchpin is broader than just the "second shot".  We may not always get to position "A", and we should not be denied a great par 5 if we fail to do that.

[TEPaul]

Shivas:

It's interesting how you describe your feeling about a great par 5. I think you do a great job of describing how the spectrum of options weigh on a golfer's decision making and even exactly why (you gave some very detailed examples)!

I like your description of a "phantom green" too for the layup shot. And you're correct that many if not most of the things you described as indicative of quality do exist on ANGC's #13! That's doubtless why it's been for so long on most everyone's short list of one of the world's great shortish "go/no go" par 5s!

The "go" option on ANGC's #13 is an exciting and complex one with many nuances even if pulled off, but it's extremely well balanced by the nuances of the "layup" option too which can be too much of a downhil- lie short iron across a creek to a complex green! A great balance between the spectrum of available options for the second shot indicating that no matter what choice the player makes he still has to think and execute very well--or he will find himself in some sort of subsequent trouble!

In other words, the temptation of going in two may concern the player but the second shot layup is clearly not an automatic bargain either which just may induce the player to go in two a bit more. An excellent combination of how the spectrum of options interrelate in a player's decision making really effectively.

But I would disagree with you that all par 5s have to have a "go" option in two to be good par 5s! You did mention PVGC's #15 earlier as a great par 5. Some people don't think so as the ability to reach the green in two does not exist (maybe five players at most have ever reached this green in two!) and it was very specifically designed as a true three shot par 5. Both of PVGC's par 5s were designed never to be reached in two!!

Nevertheless, the second shot on #15 PVGC is central to playing the hole well and if it's not done well can truly complicate the 3rd shot and also make par very hard to make! That was always the purpose and intent of this hole but ironically this was the one hole that Crump was not comfortable with before he died! But of course although he planned it as it is he never did see it built!

[TEPaul]

Shivas:

Yes, sorry, I did get you confused with Brad. Let me see if the "modify" function can fix that.

It did!!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()