Are Uphill Par 5's "good architecure?"

[Phil Benedict]

I happened to be watching the Czech Open this weekend and heard one of the announcers say that the par 5's were uphill, which he described as good architecture.  Should there be a bias to have par 5's play uphill?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Phil,

Part of the issue lies with site constraints.

Uphill par 5's play longer, hence, with limited land/yardage, you're probably better off.

# 18 at NGLA comes to mind.

Piping Rock's 18th is only slightly uphill as are the 17th and 18th at Baltusrol.

[Phil Benedict]

I suppose the fewer you have the easier it is to have the par 5's play uphill.  Augusta has uphill (8 and 13) and downhill (2 and 15) 5's.  Pebble has 2 par 5's that play uphill (6 and 14), which is interesting because I think they are the only holes on the course that pay mostly uphill.

[archie_struthers]

 

There are some great uphill par fives ...it allows you to combat lenght with guile as an architect ....and as noted asaves some yardage and acreage if used correctly

[Ted Cahill]

One uphill par 5 i'm not a fan of is #16 at Bandon Trails.  I just find this hole to be a chore.  Youre asked to hit a straight second shot (to one of the more narrow fairways on the property) off of a hanging lie that produces side spin into a strong wind that exagerates that spin.  The third shot is to a green you cant see, with similar difficulties that the second shot required.  The green complex is excellent, but by the time I've staggered to it, I need to rally my morale to enjoy it.  I don't know what else CC could have done with that hole considering the property.  Regardless, knowing Mike Kaisers restlessness (thank god for that) I encourage him to have CC make some improvements to BT when they come out to build the par 3 course.

[Carl Rogers]

I suppose the fewer you have the easier it is to have the par 5's play uphill.  Augusta has uphill (8 and 13) and downhill (2 and 15) 5's.  Pebble has 2 par 5's that play uphill (6 and 14), which is interesting because I think they are the only holes on the course that pay mostly uphill.

I thought the 11th going away from the Ocean was pretty sharply up hill???

[Phil_the_Author]

4th hole on Bethpage Black. Considered by many to be Tilly's best par-5 and considered among the best holes in the world... All uphill to two different plateaus...

[Jud_T]

#1 at Kingsley. A bracing slap in the face to start the morning.

[MikeJones]

Phil,

Part of the issue lies with site constraints.

Uphill par 5's play longer, hence, with limited land/yardage, you're probably better off.

Good lord, Mucci nailed it   At least as far as tournament venues are concerned it's quite tricky to make a 3 shotter these days or at the last a 2 1/2 where there's a bit of uncertainty about whether to go for it in two or not. Angling the holes into the prevailing wind might work too but then again you end up punishing the lesser golfer who might find the par 5's the toughest holes to start with.

[BCrosby]

The 8th at ANGC and the 15th at PVGC are two pretty good ones.

Bob

[Kevin Lynch]

Uphill / Downhill - doesn't really matter, but I certainly enjoy elevation change on any hole.  Whether it be the additional challenges in considering distances (effective length), altering shot trajectories, visual obscuring of landing areas, or simply aesthetic enjoyment, elevation change is one of my favorite features.

But I guess the answer to the initial question is similar to the thread on "eye candy."  The answer is:

"It depends - what else does the design offer besides elevation change."

[JC Jones]

#8 at Crystal Downs is the best par 5 I have encountered and it is uphill.  I don't think the very fact that they are uphill or downhill makes them "good architecture."  I think how they fit within the land, the routing, etc. make them "good architecture."  Being uphill or downhill does not necessarily matter.

[Phil Benedict]

#8 at Crystal Downs is the best par 5 I have encountered and it is uphill.  I don't think the very fact that they are uphill or downhill makes them "good architecture."  I think how they fit within the land, the routing, etc. make them "good architecture."  Being uphill or downhill does not necessarily matter.

The point the announcer seemed to be making is that routing the course in order to have the par 5's play uphill to the extent possible is "good architecture," as opposed to a judgment on the quality of any particular hole.  I assume what he means is that uphill holes play longer, making them ideal for par 5's.  This doesn't really address the question of whether the uphill 8th at ANGC is superior to the downhill 2nd.

[Ben Sims]

JC mentions #8 at Crystal Downs, and frankly I'm surprised it took 11 responses for it to be mentioned.  I think it's one of the best par 5's I've seen anywhere.  Certainly one of my top three or so.  Thinking of #8 at Crystal reminds me of Mac Plumart's course design thread and how he broke it down.  He mentioned finding a green site and working back from there in a matter of speaking.  Jeff Brauer then says this,

"No seriously folks, I really think the "find natural green sites" is kind of a myth."

That really confused me.  #8 at Crystal Downs is the perfect example of why finding premier green sites and working from them is of great importance to create/find natural and challenging greens.  No other location would have gotten the routing back to the clubhouse AND have been as exciting for a 2nd or 3rd shot for a par 5.  

---BREAK BREAK---

With all of that said, I think saying as a general rule that an uphill version of a certain type of hole is "good architecture" is folly.  Not to say that one isn't harder to do--and good to great par 5's seem to be the hardest to pull off.  But I think a great downhill par 5 is possibly even harder, due to he hole having to be longer to be of necessary length AND hold the golfers attention for all those yards.  

I also think the opposite can be said of par 3's.  It seems that anyone can build a downhill par three.  But the truly great uphill par 3's are tougher to find, and more than likely were designed by an ODG.

 

[JC Jones]

JC mentions #8 at Crystal Downs, and frankly I'm surprised it took 11 responses for it to be mentioned.  I think it's one of the best par 5's I've seen anywhere.  Certainly one of my top three or so.  

Ben,

The answer is quite simple.  Nobody is as brilliant as I am.

Thinking of #8 at Crystal reminds me of Mac Plumart's course design thread and how he broke it down.  He mentioned finding a green site and working back from there in a matter of speaking.  Jeff Brauer then says this,

"No seriously folks, I really think the "find natural green sites" is kind of a myth."

That really confused me.  #8 at Crystal Downs is the perfect example of why finding premier green sites and working from them is of great importance to create/find natural and challenging greens.  No other location would have gotten the routing back to the clubhouse AND have been as exciting for a 2nd or 3rd shot for a par 5. 

I was also confused by Jeff Brauer's quote.  I would think part of a good routing is finding green sites and other cool features and working around them (TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE).

[Anthony Gray]

  17 at Diamante is a unique uphill par 5.May have the most elevation change on the approach shot as any.

  Anthony

[Kyle Harris]

4th hole on Bethpage Black. Considered by many to be Tilly's best par-5 and considered among the best holes in the world... All uphill to two different plateaus...

ALL uphill?

Even from the tee?

[jeffwarne]

I suppose the fewer you have the easier it is to have the par 5's play uphill.  Augusta has uphill (8 and 13) and downhill (2 and 15) 5's.  Pebble has 2 par 5's that play uphill (6 and 14), which is interesting because I think they are the only holes on the course that pay mostly uphill.

13 at ANGC is uphill?
That was the first hole on our "jump the fence course" growing up.
Don't remember it being uphill

[Bill Gayne]

I think it's the eleventh at Tralee that seems to go uphill at a 45 degree angle. As I recall it leads to the twelth which is a pretty good hole. People seem to love or hate (every caddie I've ever asked) the back nine a Tralee. They named the eleventh "Palmer's Peak."

[Peter Pallotta]

Ben, JC - I haven't seen nearly the number of course you gents have, but after I'd played CD I said to someone that the 8th was one of the very few Par 5s I've ever even liked, let along really liked.  In fact, it was may be the first great golf hole I've ever played. I've thought a bit over the months why this narrowish uphill Par 5 is so good, and I think it's because (a) playing uphill makes the 2nd shot much more interesting and engaging and challenging, and b) it has a green and green surrounds that would be at home on a short Par 3, so even after two really well struck shots (for me) I was still left with a scary 3rd, even though I had a PW in my hands.

Peter

[Dan Herrmann]

I once asked Gil Hanse to pick a favorite hole at French Creek.  He chose #6, a long uphill par 5 with some beautiful movement.  Here's a look from the green back down toward the fairway: 



I'd also throw Rolling Green #9 into the discussion.  It's quite a hole.

[Steve Lang]

  always have enjoyed this little 3-shot uphiller at Black Mesa, 16th hole

[Matt_Cohn]

Seems like one consequence of uphill par 5's is that stopping a long second shot on the green becomes much more difficult, simply because the second shot is generally going pretty low anyway.

[Wayne_Kozun]

13 at ANGC is uphill?
That was the first hole on our "jump the fence course" growing up.
Don't remember it being uphill

I agree - I have never been there but how can it be uphill if the green is just above creek level - does ANGC manage to get creeks to flow uphill?

[Sean_A]

Sure, uphill par 5s can be great architecture, but the danger as always, is not to create a slog hole.  Generally speaking, I think uphill architecture has the potential to create consistently better architecture than downhill.  However, some of the absolute worst holes (along with true drop shot 3s) are uphill.

Ciao