Why aren't par 3s being made longer?

[James Boon]

Traditionally par 4s have been any hole between 250 and 475 yards long, and yet in recent years, due no doubt to the length some top players are hitting the ball, we have seen many par 4s pushed beyond the 475 threshold. I believe the R&A have stated that they don't want par 4s at an Open over 499 yards, but they have gone past the magic 500 yards in the US Open. At Congressional there were par 4s as long as 490, 494 and 523 yards long.

However, the par 3s measured 173, 193, 218 and 233. This seems a pretty good mix on lengths to be honest, but with the par 4s being pushed beyond their traditional limit, why don't we see more 260, 270 or 280 yard par 3, in the professional game at least? I recall the 8th at Oakmont a few years back played to about 280 yards, but that's the only example I can think of?

Anyone got any ideas?

Cheers,

James

[Mark Chaplin]

The 3rd at Sandwich has been stretched to 240yds and it plays into the prevailing wind so could be a monster, 6 is about 175 yards and has been extended slightly, 11 is 245yds but plays down wind so could be a medium iron during the Open. 16 is shorter and cannot be extended.

Surely a 260-280yd par 3 needs a large landing area and a green suitable to hold a long shot and this may affect the architecture.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Because stretching a par-3 from 225 yards to 275 yards is approximately the same as stretching a par-4 from 450 yards to 570 yards when you take in to account two shots as opposed to one and that most distance in the modern game is gained in the extra length of the drives...

They can make 225 yard par-3's difficult in other ways if they are still hitting 4 or 5-irons in...

[Michael Goldstein]

Why aren't par threes being made shorter?  That is one way of countering the power game.

[Ben Stephens]

Good point Michael, I played in a 9 hole comp last night in strong winds and most said the hardest hole was the shortest one!! 105 yards to the pin flag tucked close to the left bunker on a long narrow green where the wind blows right to left! I ended up with 5 and still had 1 over for the whole 9!!! The longer par 3 was playing easier!

Look forward to see how players fare on the 13th at Merion in the 2013 US Open. (Olympic have lengthened the 8th) Sandwich the 6th and 16th are quite short and if its windy can be very tricky.

The longest maximum distance in the UK is 255 yards - there is the 16th at Carnoustie which is a hard par but a easy bogey!

[James Boon]

Ally, Mark,

I think the answers you are giving are what I was expecting to some degree. Longer approach shots need larger targets, and its in the driving that a lot of the distance has been achieved.

However, I remember playing long par 3s, in the region of 230 and 240 yards and hitting a driver or a fairway wood to these holes. So to my mind the long par 3 often requires your maximum shot. Now with some pros that would mean 300 yard plus which would be pushing things a bit too far. But I'm just surprised that par 4s are pushed beyond the maximum, and yet in most cases par 3s seem to have stayed still for these top players. If us amateurs often have to hit 3 woods to long par 3s, and a decent pro can hit his 3 wood say 260 or 270 yards say, why not give them that challenge as well?

Michael, Ben,

I'm not advocating making the par 3s longer, and indeed agree with you that short par 3s can still be a real challenge, probably more fun, and there certainly should be more of them either for us mortals or the top pros.

Cheers,

James

[Ally Mcintosh]

However, I remember playing long par 3s, in the region of 230 and 240 yards and hitting a driver or a fairway wood to these holes. So to my mind the long par 3 often requires your maximum shot. Now with some pros that would mean 300 yard plus which would be pushing things a bit too far. But I'm just surprised that par 4s are pushed beyond the maximum, and yet in most cases par 3s seem to have stayed still for these top players. If us amateurs often have to hit 3 woods to long par 3s, and a decent pro can hit his 3 wood say 260 or 270 yards say, why not give them that challenge as well?

James, I suppose that's my point.

Par-4's aren't pushed beyond the maximum at 500 yards... They are being taken back to drive and mid-iron... For every Par-3 we have to hit a three-wood to, there is a par-4 we have to hit drive, 3-wood.... For the pro's this would usually mean 570 yards, not 500...

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Wasn't there a 260+ yard par 3 at Interlachen in the 1930 US Open? What would that equate to today?

[Adrian_Stiff]

I think the reason is even simpler. Long par 3 holes are unpopular. They are unpopular to Ams when we have to use woods and the pro's feel the same. Time after time you see 230 yard par 3 holes played shorter for tournaments.

[David Harshbarger]

The members play 1 par 3 at my club from 210.  That ain't no 6 iron for us.  I like it, even if it is a ball buster.

I'm with you James, move them back.

[Mark Chaplin]

I'm with Goldie on this one - so far this year I've played the Postage Stamp, 4th Deal, 6th Sandwich, 16th Paraparaumu Beach and 7th Royal Melbourne West all are fantastic holes and very modest in length yet I've managed to bogey all of them (some more than once!).

[James Boon]

The members play 1 par 3 at my club from 210.  That ain't no 6 iron for us.  I like it, even if it is a ball buster.

I'm with you James, move them back.

David,

I'm not necessarily advocating making par 3s 260 or 270 yards long, as I'd prefer to see them play more shorter ones. Its just with par 4s being pushed back to 500 plus (which I can't imagine being that popular Adrian?) it seems odd that the par 3s aren't pushed back as well? Perhaps not all the time, but maybe occasionally?

Cheers,

James

[Tom_Doak]

James:

They did play the 8th hole at Oakmont at almost 300 yards [270 tee, plus pin way back] for one round of the U.S. Open a couple of years ago.  It was pretty boring to watch, and I suspect Mike Davis got an earful from some of the players about it.

I suspect one reason you don't see more of this is that if there had been room to make a 300+ yard hole on the land in such a spot, the architect would have built a par-4 instead of a par-3!  That's another thing you never see -- a short par-4 converted to a long 3 for tournaments.  The only one I can think of was the old 2nd at The Country Club; I'm not sure if that is still a par-4 for members or not.

[Adrian_Stiff]

James there is a difference I think. I believe pro's accept 500 being a par 4 (I think 525 might be pushing it though) @500 you need to think that drives go 40 yards further now than they did as an average years ago, the 500 merely reflects the old 450. If a pro drives 320 yards (not uncommon) he has 180 (dare a say a 7 iron) in. In the 70s & 80s a pair of par 4 holes at 450 running in opposite directions was two woods to one of them. People often dont carry a 3 iron anymore.....20 years ago often the 2 iron got left out BEHOLD THEY ARE THE SAME CLUBS TODAY...the lofts of almost all irons in 2011 are the 1991 ones. A 1991 9 iron is todays wedge and a 2011 5 iron is the old 4.

[Jim Nugent]

Because stretching a par-3 from 225 yards to 275 yards is approximately the same as stretching a par-4 from 450 yards to 570 yards when you take in to account two shots as opposed to one and that most distance in the modern game is gained in the extra length of the drives...

They can make 225 yard par-3's difficult in other ways if they are still hitting 4 or 5-irons in...

I think many decades ago, some top courses had par 3s where scratch or better players had to hit 3-wood or even more.  16 at CPC might be one of them. 

To keep up with that today, some par 3s would have to be 260 yards and up.  Maybe even 300, depending on conditions.  Such holes are few and far between.

But as you point out, par 4s might have to be 570 yards, to require the same approach shots as they used to.  So it seems to me the real conclusion is that courses have gotten relatively shorter.  They are longer, but technology/hitting distances have increased faster.  Players have less club into all holes, whether par 3, par 4 or par 5. 

[PCCraig]

The only one I can think of was the old 2nd at The Country Club; I'm not sure if that is still a par-4 for members or not.

Tom:

It's a par-4 for normal member play, but it's played from a front tee as a par-3 when playing the composite course. It's an incredibly tough par 3, because the green is elevated, small, and for some reason its always the firmest spot on the entire property...heck, its hard to hit with a SW when playing as a par 4!

[Ken Moum]

The members play 1 par 3 at my club from 210.  That ain't no 6 iron for us.  I like it, even if it is a ball buster.

I'm with you James, move them back.

David,

I'm not necessarily advocating making par 3s 260 or 270 yards long, as I'd prefer to see them play more shorter ones. Its just with par 4s being pushed back to 500 plus (which I can't imagine being that popular Adrian?) it seems odd that the par 3s aren't pushed back as well? Perhaps not all the time, but maybe occasionally?

Cheers,

James

I for one would advocate for a par threes of close to 300 yards for the PGA Tour.  There are plenty of "old" courses that have par threes of 225 to 250 and that would have called for a brassie or driver even for elite players of the era.  So why not ask them to a similar club into a par three today?

This question is just another angle on the question of HARD half-par holes.  Everyone seems to love holes that play a half shot under par because of the effect tehy have on a player's thinking and strategy.  Whyinhell can't we also have holes designed to play a half shot OVER par?

The only conclusion I can come to is the good players are bunch of wimps and whiners.

Ken

[Niall C]

I think the reason is even simpler. Long par 3 holes are unpopular. They are unpopular to Ams when we have to use woods and the pro's feel the same. Time after time you see 230 yard par 3 holes played shorter for tournaments.

Adrian

Are you sure about that statement about amateurs ? I can only speak for myself but even when I was younger I relished having a go at the green with a big stick. At Moray there are two holes that more often than not require a fairway wood depending on the wind. They are so much more fun than the 7 or 8 iron for the other par 3. Also, I say that as someone who isn't particularly good on the long game.

Now if every hole was the same then there might be an issue but 200 ish yards is within range for most amateurs I would have thought.

Niall

[Jim Hoak]

Anyone can make a hole harder by just making it longer.  If that were a measure of excellence, I could be the best designer in America.  But it's genius to make a short hole difficult and fun at the same time.

[Niall C]

Jim

I think it was a given in this discussion that the green complex fit the length of the hole so whatever the length, the design requires skill.

Niall

[Anthony Gray]

  To be honest why not shorter.Aren't the most exciting par 3s in tournament golf the short ones. Sawgrass 17  PB 7  and the Postage Stamp.

  Anthony

[David Kelly]

Once the R&A and USGA start moving back the par 3s to the 250-300 range the players will start complaining that the greens are "too severe" for a shot of that length so they will then move to flatten out the greens.  After the tournament is over the members will then be left with a less interesting hole.

[Stan Dodd]

It would be hard to find 4 more challenging and fun Par 3's than Royal Dornoch and none is over 180.
Make the miss severe with recovery options for an interesting hole.

[James Boon]

Thanks everyone for your responses.

Okay, so most of us on here would certainly like to see more short par 3s. That seems to be for certain. I dont necessarily think that making par 3s over 250 would make them more challenging (as Stan points out the four at Dornoch are tough enough as they are), its just that most tournament course set ups have raised the precedent of going beyond the traditional par/ length scenario so thats where my question was coming from.

So from the discussion regarding lengthening par 3s in the way that par 4s have been, so far it appears that historically, top players would have needed to hit fairway woods and occasionally drivers into par 3s, but now in order to do that the holes would need to be in the region of almost 300 yards? A lot of courses dont have the room to stretch the existing par 3s to that length and if we did a, us architect geeks would complain that eventually the greens get flattened out and b, the top pros complain enough as it is   so lengthening par 3s would only increase this.

However to some extent most courses don't have the room to stretch their par 4s to 500 plus, but they seem to manage it by borrowing land from adjacent courses (such as the ridiculous walk back to the back tee on 18 at Congressional). Having said that, its still surprising more newer courses dont at least sneek par 3s over the traditional limit to be at say 260 or so yards?

In the end, by starting an innocent question about architecture and course set up, it seems all I've done is again bring up the debate of reigning in the ball distances...  

Cheers,

James

[Matthew Rose]

Victoria Golf Club changed the par-4 first hole to a long par-3 the last time the Aussie Open was played there. It's about 260 yards.