"Top" Drivable Par-4's

[Mike Wagner]

Inglewood GC (Kenmore, WA) #3 - one of the vest I've seen.

[David_Elvins]

The LINKS list is a hodgepodge. 

There are 20 drivable par 4s in Australia better than the 10th at Merion, to take one example from the list. 

[Kevin Pallier]

David

I'd be keen to see those 20 for comparison.

[David_Elvins]

David

I'd be keen to see those 20 for comparison.

I would be surprised if you hadn't seen most of them yet. 

[Tom_Doak]

Best Driveable Par-4's in Australia
(that I can think of in 5 minutes)

Royal Melbourne West #3, #10
Royal Melbourne East #15 (before changes)
Commonwealth #1 (before changes)
Woodlands #3, #4
Victoria #15
Barnbougle Dunes #4, #12
St. Andrews Beach #2, #14
Kingston Heath #3
Royal Adelaide #3

[Chip Gaskins]

How about...

#8 at Colorado Golf Club
#5 at Tobacco Road
#7 Sand Hills
#14 Barton Creek - Creenshaw
#7 Olympic Club (NLE)

The question is how many of us have ever actually driven one of these greens and made the putt!?

Tom-

That's what I thought when I played #6 at Pacific Dunes.  I bet 8 out of 10 low handicap players try to drive it on #6 and bet 0 out of 10 do it.  We even debated could it be done at all.

[Matthew Petersen]

TPC Scottsdale's #17 is pretty good.

It makes you think no matter what option you choose. The pin placement matters a lot, because if the hole is back left then hitting driver is just insane. If the pin is anywhere else then it's a more typical risk/reward situation. You have a pot bunker in the middle of the fairway that you must carry if you're going for it--there's water left (but only troubling shots that get next to the green so it's no disincentive for lay-ups) and lots of room right, but also lots of tough lies and strange angles from that "safe" side.

If you want to lay up, it's not as simple as many such holes where you just knock a long iron out into the fairway. The fairway is very wide but with lots of potential angles and trouble on the edges, as well as the aforementioned center pot bunker.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I think it is the 8th at Sandhills. The old 7th at Olympic Lake was none to shabby either.

[Martin Toal]

Hey, what do I know, but I don't think The Belfry number 10 is a good hole, despite the Seve and Ryder Cup connections. Then again, I don't think there are many good holes on the course at all.

To be more contrary, I used to like the old 16th at Royal County Down too, which was driveable but also playable in a number of other ways, although that hole has now been changed quite a bit. It used to play at about 270 or so, but now is 330+ Still a good hole, clearly.

http://www.royalcountydown.org/championship-links-hole16.aspx

[Sean_A]

There are a few driveable par-4 holes that I think are great holes, but as a group, I think they are overrated.

They're popular, because everybody loves having a putt for eagle.  But in general, I don't think a single great shot [combined with a bit of luck] should save you two shots.  If you reach a par five in two, at least you've hit two pretty good shots.

I like that philosophy.  I'd never thought of it that way.  Other than the obvious exception that proves the rule (the hole in one or long hole-out), I agree with it.  The driveable par 4 should be replaced by another very reachable par 5.

Since when is a drivable par 4 about saving shots?  How bout variety of the round?  How bout a sly breather hole in a tough run?  How bout keeping yardage and costs down?  I bout using a dodgy piece of land for something other than a par 3?  I am thinking in completely different wavelengths than the idea of someone undeservedly "gaining" two shots.  This sounds like design for medal play.

Ciao

[Mark Pearce]

The best I have played is No14 at Ganton.  It's a much better hole than any of the 4 holes on the Links Magazine list that I have played.

[Kalen Braley]

Since when is a drivable par 4 about saving shots?  How bout variety of the round?  How bout a sly breather hole in a tough run?  How bout keeping yardage and costs down?  I bout using a dodgy piece of land for something other than a par 3?  I am thinking in completely different wavelengths than the idea of someone undeservedly "gaining" two shots.  This sounds like design for medal play.

Ciao

I didn't say it was about saving shots.  It's more the philsophy that aside from blind stinking luck (ie, the long hole out), eagles shouldn't be doled out for one great swing.  That's the stuff of birdies, not eagles in my view.  If eagles can be had with one great swing, what creates a birdie - zero great swings? 

Look, I'm all for fun.  But it dumbs down the game when either birdie or eagle are too accessible and if birdie can be had with one great swing, its seems reasonable for eagle to require two.

Shivas,

Is this to say you are also against Par 3s?  Because one great swing is all it takes to make eagle there as well.

So now that all par 3s and short par 4s are out, it sure makes the game alot tougher for us mid to high cappers..   

P.S.  I take it you hated the 15th hole at Rock Creek then too?  Thats easily one of the coolest short and driveable par 4 I've ever played.

[Sean_A]

Since when is a drivable par 4 about saving shots?  How bout variety of the round?  How bout a sly breather hole in a tough run?  How bout keeping yardage and costs down?  I bout using a dodgy piece of land for something other than a par 3?  I am thinking in completely different wavelengths than the idea of someone undeservedly "gaining" two shots.  This sounds like design for medal play.

Ciao

I didn't say it was about saving shots.  It's more the philsophy that aside from blind stinking luck (ie, the long hole out), eagles shouldn't be doled out for one great swing.  That's the stuff of birdies, not eagles in my view.  If eagles can be had with one great swing, what creates a birdie - zero great swings? 

Look, I'm all for fun.  But it dumbs down the game when either birdie or eagle are too accessible and if birdie can be had with one great swing, its seems reasonable for eagle to require two.

Dave

I place no such value on an eagle - that is medal play thinking.  I am far more interested in varied design for fun regardless of any notion of protecting a par value.  If one swing doesn't merit an eagle then there shouldn't be reachable par 4s - no?  Why should two good shots deserve an eagle on a par 5?  To me, on a well designed fun course it will all come out in the wash.  Its just as easy to step up to a par 4 which is really a par 5 on this type of course and thats ok too.  But remember, this is coming from a guy who as times goes on is getting less and less interested in a standard course which is "ideal" for so called championships.  

Ciao

[George Freeman]

Isn't the point of golf to get the ball in the hole in the fewest amount of strokes, irrespective of how you do it? 

I agree with Sean on this one; too much posturing around "par."  Give me a fun, interesting par 68 or par 74 course with three par 5s in a row over a boring vanilla "Championship" course any day...

[Keith Buntrock]

Twin Warriors in New Mexico
Hole 11, 349 yds on the scorecard but 320 as the crow flies down hill.



Only par 4 I think I ever hit it on the green from the tee and made the putt for eagle.

[Mac Plumart]

The 18th at Inverness is the best I have ever played.

[George Freeman]

The 18th at Inverness is the best I have ever played.

Mac,

Isn't the 18th at Inverness in the 370-390 yd range??

[Mac Plumart]

306 from the blues.  I am guesing 320ish from the tips.  Which is drivable for big hitters.  But with those bunkers right next to the green, the green slanted so crazily, I am not sure you want to try to drive it.

[Eric Smith]

The 18th at Inverness is the best I have ever played.

Mac,

Isn't the 18th at Inverness in the 370-390 yd range??

George,

He's sorta like Tom Kite...old Mac is sneaky long.

[Dónal Ó Ceallaigh]

The 18th at Inverness is the best I have ever played.

Mac,

Isn't the 18th at Inverness in the 370-390 yd range??

George,

He's sorta like Tom Kite...old Mac is sneaky long.

Good shoulder turn Mac !!

[Matthew Petersen]

Keith,

Until you mentioned having knocked one on and made the putt, I had completely forgotten the only hole on which I managed that feat!

#6 at Wailea's gold course. It's a decent hole--I only played it once so i can;t comment too much. The green has a lot of slope and I think there were a number of options for layups off the tee.

The best part was they used to play the senior skins game there and I could watch and point out how I took fewer shots on the hole than the likes of Nicklaus, Palmer, Player, etc--even if they made birdie!

[JESII]

The 18th at Inverness is the best I have ever played.

Mac,

Isn't the 18th at Inverness in the 370-390 yd range??

George,

He's sorta like Tom Kite...old Mac is sneaky long.

Mac,

If you're a 12 from that position you're the guy I want in a partners game...can you putt at all?

[Mac Plumart]

Eric nails me again.

Jim...my short game is the best part of my game...I can putt usually.

Remember, I am just recovering from double hip replacements and haven't been playing a long time.  I play stupid golf and hit the inappropriate shot...try a high arcing pitch rather than a bump and run into a domed green.  I'll get it soon enough...simply happy to be playing with limited pain now.

And yes, I do ok on match play tournaments.  I'll sneak in a number of pars and then BLOW up with a quad here or there due to my stupidness which ruins my total score but only looses one hole in match play.  Best score thus far 81...hopefully breaking 80 this summer!!!

[JESII]

You won't spend much time in the 70's with that move...just get used to giving strokes as opposed to getting them.

[Eric Smith]

Mac,

If you're a 12 from that position you're the guy I want in a partners game...can you putt at all?

Oh yeah, he's a helluva putter too. 



Mac has the prettiest swing and tempo of any of my friends, save for my golf professional brother in law.  Plus - he's only played the game 2 1/2 years which is remarkable.  He's tenacious to boot, so he won't be a 12 ever again after this season.