Why aren't par 3s being made longer?

[Michael Wharton-Palmer]

I think the main reason is that at the end of events, and looking at players stats over the course of a year, par threes are not the holes atht are being destroyed relative to par.
If a player plays the par threes in even for the week he is generally happy, so there really is not the need to increase the "relative" par of a course by increasing the lengths of par threes.
In other words they are hard enough already

[Jeff_Brauer]

Right after the Oakmont Open TD mentions, I did build a 285 yard par 3.  In the last few years, I had built a few in the 260-270 range.

Believe it or not, the most common complaints I heard from better players was that this length was "between clubs" and they didn't have a shot for that length par 3.

[Pete Lavallee]

Believe it or not, the most common complaints I heard from better players was that this length was "between clubs" and they didn't have a shot for that length par 3.

Let me guess, they couldn't get there with a 3 wood and it's against their religion to bunt a driver on a par 3?

[Matthew Petersen]

Believe it or not, the most common complaints I heard from better players was that this length was "between clubs" and they didn't have a shot for that length par 3.

Let me guess, they couldn't get there with a 3 wood and it's against their religion to bunt a driver on a par 3?

No one knows how to bunt a driver anymore. How do you bunt a weightless Cadillac?

[michael damico]

Believe it or not, the most common complaints I heard from better players was that this length was "between clubs" and they didn't have a shot for that length par 3.

Let me guess, they couldn't get there with a 3 wood and it's against their religion to bunt a driver on a par 3?

Mr. Brauer,

these are American golfers/clients? or European? It seems there is a (and gone into discussion on here about) pussification of the American golfer; bomb and gauge, the lack of shotmaking, complaints of lies and playing conditions. Jeez, just the other day I was supposed to meet up with a superintendent to golf with him (I was called back to work), but he called it off anyways, saying it was "too windy" - come on now!

Well, I guess it's just the quintessential country clubber that would complain that a hole doesn't play to his liking...meaning that it demands a shot that isn't in his bag, thus deeming it unfair or poor architecture...right?


Pete....I like the weightless Caddy reference. I don't know how these people even hit these clubs. I think my Taylor Made 340 ( I even forget the model) is huge, then I see these new clubs.

[Jamie Van Gisbergen]

I have wondered this as well. I have also wondered why Par 5's aren't longer as well. You are correct, no one bats an eye when they see a 500+ yard par 4, but they crap a brick when they see a 260 par 3, or a 700 yard par 5, which I've only seen 2 of in my life.

They are just tough holes to build. Its very difficult to make an interesting 300 (or 275 or even 250) yard par 3. I mean, the green necessarily has to be huge, the approach has to be reasonably flat and even the green has to be somewhat flat. Otherwise the hole can get out of hand.

As far as why aren't holes built as over par Half Pars, they're boring. A 275 yard par 3 or a 525 yard par 4 can't be built with too many features or they get incredibly difficult. It's why 4 at Pebble is better than 2 at Pebble. On that same note, you don't ever see a 2.5 par 3 which would be really cool.