[SL_Solow]

Pat;  I have heard the same thing and I suppose it is true in certain circumstances.  I also understand your point about target golf but I think it is overstated.  at the end of a par 4 or par 5 the player is usually left with an iron to a green.  He then is faced with the same "target golf" shot as the tee ball on a par 3 and depending on the green complex and intervening terrain, he will have one or more options.  Thus while the options presente off the tee and in intervening shots on 4's and 5's are removed, the final shot on those holes present the same challlenges as par 3's.  On the 3's, every player is given the same test for the approach and perhaps that is worth testing.

As for using par 5's as transitions, I think Friar's Head is a great example.  Rather than having one nine located largely in the dune lands and the other on the potato field, C&C routed both nines to begin and end in the dunes.  To get down to the potato fields 2 and 11 became par 5's.  Similar devices were used to transition back up into the dunes.  There are many solutions to the routing problem which are only limited by the terrain and the imagination of the architect.  I suppose if he is willing to crank up the bulldozer, even the terrain is less of a limiting factor.

[Bill Brightly]

I can't prove this, but my theory is that par 3 holes were critical to CB Macdonald, so much so that he scouted the site for the best place to place his par threes and then routed the rest of the course. (And and therefore he passed on this importance to Raynor, and Raynor to Banks.) I say this because their Short, Redan, Eden and Biarritz holes were almost always placed in a very dramatic piece of the property, such as the great views behind the Redan and Short at NGLA, the Short and Eden at Sleepy Hollow, etc. So I think they located these hole sites first and then finished the routing.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I've been told, by some well respected architects, authors and historians, that par 3's often serve, primarily, as connectors.

Bridging the routing gaps.
Or, getting the golfer from one section of the golf course to another.

Pat: can you name 5 holes on any 5 courses that do not serve as connectors, that is holes that fail to serve the purpose of "getting the golfer from one section of the golf course to another." It would appear to me that all holes of any length other than zero would technically serve this role. 

Sure,

The 18th hole at Sand Hills for starters.
The 9th as well.

Or any hole that requires a substantive walk/ride to get to the next tee.

Many of the holes at Sherwood.

And, I could use the 18th almost anywhere.

I suspect that you don't understand the routing process and how difficult it can be.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat;  I have heard the same thing and I suppose it is true in certain circumstances.  I also understand your point about target golf but I think it is overstated.  at the end of a par 4 or par 5 the player is usually left with an iron to a green.  He then is faced with the same "target golf" shot as the tee ball on a par 3 and depending on the green complex and intervening terrain, he will have one or more options.  Thus while the options presente off the tee and in intervening shots on 4's and 5's are removed, the final shot on those holes present the same challlenges as par 3's.  On the 3's, every player is given the same test for the approach and perhaps that is worth testing.

S.L,

Not really.
The approach shots to par 4's and par 5's come from an infinite variety of locations, whereas par 3's dictate a set starting point between two fixed markers and extending two club lengths back.

As for using par 5's as transitions, I think Friar's Head is a great example.  Rather than having one nine located largely in the dune lands and the other on the potato field, C&C routed both nines to begin and end in the dunes.  To get down to the potato fields 2 and 11 became par 5's.  Similar devices were used to transition back up into the dunes.  There are many solutions to the routing problem which are only limited by the terrain and the imagination of the architect.  I suppose if he is willing to crank up the bulldozer, even the terrain is less of a limiting factor.
I"m not so sure that was the motive behind the creation of those two holes.
Once up on the northern dune, any hole could have initiated the transition southward.

[SL_Solow]

Pat;  first point is well taken, perhaps it is not a bad thing to occasionally test a player's ability to hit a particular shot when measured against the field, but I agree that it llimits options.

As for Friar's Head and transitions, they could have used other holes but they chose par 5's which incidentally got them all the way down to the flats.  Candidly, I thought that was a key part of a brilliant routing.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Pat,

Strategically, they can be used to require certain shots in absence of connected shot stragegy, and it helps, knowing multiple tees make it fairly equal shot for all players. Similarly, a modern use of Par 3 holes is to cross Env Senitive areas that cannot be touched, and at least the forced carries come with the ball on a tee, and some distance control via multiple tees.

I agree Par 3 holes are the easiest holes to put in a routing and that sometimes they come last as connectors.  In the main, it takes a long time and much trial and error to produce a final routing.  I cannot recall too many instances where I consciously thought of a par 3 as a "connector."  I plan on using 4 (I have never done a course with 3, but have one with five and one with six).

In fact, I actually visualize a short 4 or some other long hole as a better "connector" over tough property.  I have no qualms about an uphill, blind approach on a short 4, compared to other holes where the uphill shot often becomes an unpleasant one, especially for shorter hitters, and after a bum tee shot.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

You bring up an interesting issue.

It's not unusual to see holes that play as both par 4's and par 5's.

Newport has two and they appear on the scorecard as 4/5's.

In thinking about TCC, the second hole plays as a par 4, but, I believe it's converted to a par 3 for the Major events.

Have you ever designed a par 3/4 hole ?

Are you aware of any ?

It would seem to be an inherent asset for a course to contain such a feature.

[Mark_Rowlinson]

Irvine has only two par 3s (and no par 5s if you play from the yellow tee markers). It's good enough to be an Open Championship qualifier.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Mark,

Who designed Irvine and when ?

Thanks

[Mark_Rowlinson]

The club website gives Braid as designer, but no date.

[Jim Sherma]

I've been told, by some well respected architects, authors and historians, that par 3's often serve, primarily, as connectors.

Bridging the routing gaps.
Or, getting the golfer from one section of the golf course to another.

Pat: can you name 5 holes on any 5 courses that do not serve as connectors, that is holes that fail to serve the purpose of "getting the golfer from one section of the golf course to another." It would appear to me that all holes of any length other than zero would technically serve this role. 

Sure,

The 18th hole at Sand Hills for starters.
The 9th as well.

Or any hole that requires a substantive walk/ride to get to the next tee.

Many of the holes at Sherwood.

And, I could use the 18th almost anywhere.

I suspect that you don't understand the routing process and how difficult it can be.

Pat - It was a joke, hence the smiley face, lighten up. I know what you were referring to, just thought I'd attempt to have some fun. Not every conversation needs to be a contest.

[Niall C]

Mark,

Who designed Irvine and when ?

Thanks

From another website, Irvine Bogside which is the Open Qualifier, as opposed to Irvine Ravenspark which is quite a new course laid out in the early 1900's, was laid out in 1887. It doesn't say who did it but good chance Fernie might have been involved at some point although every chance it was one of those Committee jobs with the course constantly being revised. At the time of it being laid out, the Bogside horse track ran around the course. I'm pretty certain the track is no longer there.

Harold Hilton was called in pre WWI to redesign the course and he virtually reversed it which they played for a short period of time (6 months or a year ?) before reverting back to what they had.

Braid didn't do anything until the 1920's. Not sure what he did. So as to who is responsible for only two par 3's ? No idea, hope that helps 

Niall

[Andy Stamm]

The Indiana University Course has 3 par 3s (all of which usually play more than 185 from the whites). The back 9 is 1 par 3 and 8 par 4s, although that's because the clubhouse was moved. As originally laid out each side had a par 5.

As far as architectural merit, it's not great. It's notoriously a dog of a course, but that's probably a little harsh.

"Upon touring the facility shortly after the grand opening in 1957, famed golf course architect and designer Robert Trent Jones Sr. was asked what changes he might make to the facility and he reportedly replied, 'Blow it up and start over again.'"

As far as routing, I'm not qualified to say. There's a lot of land out there and it's routed primarly in the rolling hills as opposed to some nearby flat areas.

But, all that being said, it's been host to many great players over the years as well as tournaments, etc. It's refreshing for college players, etc. to be playing on a course that's not formulaic. I'm sure it presents a different challenge to probably every other course they would play in a given year.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I've been told, by some well respected architects, authors and historians, that par 3's often serve, primarily, as connectors.

Bridging the routing gaps.
Or, getting the golfer from one section of the golf course to another.

Pat: can you name 5 holes on any 5 courses that do not serve as connectors, that is holes that fail to serve the purpose of "getting the golfer from one section of the golf course to another." It would appear to me that all holes of any length other than zero would technically serve this role. 

Sure,

The 18th hole at Sand Hills for starters.
The 9th as well.

Or any hole that requires a substantive walk/ride to get to the next tee.

Many of the holes at Sherwood.

And, I could use the 18th almost anywhere.

I suspect that you don't understand the routing process and how difficult it can be.

Pat - It was a joke, hence the smiley face, lighten up. I know what you were referring to, just thought I'd attempt to have some fun. Not every conversation needs to be a contest.

I understood the joke part as it referenced your second sentence.

I tried to answer the question you posed in the first sentence.
Sorry if you didn't like the answer.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()