Most intimidating par 3's?

[Chris Newton]

The 8th hole at Aronimink is 238 yards from the tips and is one of the tougher par 3's that I've played. During the 2011 AT&T National, the tees were moved to the gold tee box on Saturday due to the number of player complaints about the hole playing too difficult from the back tees during the first two days.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick and Mark,

The lay-up on the 5th at PV is at least as hard to hit as the green on 14, and many of the misses are worse.

Scott,

From the back tees on both holes and the front tees on both holes it's not even close, # 14 is significantly harder in terms of making big numbers.


On 14 I have between a four iron and a six iron depending on the wind.

From what tee ?

If it goes in the water you drop down below and pitch on for three. But the reasonable area to hit your shot - grass and sand - is quite large for a drop shot mid to long iron. And the green is not nearly as treacherous as the 5th.

"IF" it goes in the water ?

What are the odds that you'll hit the ball in the water on # 5 ?     Almost nil.

What are the odds you'll hit the ball in the water on # 14 ?    Very high.

Why do you think there's a drop zone on # 14 ?
Because the shot is so hard that you'd be there all day if there wasn't.

I have missed the green both right and left in a few different spots and recoveries don't even approach the terror of a simiar miss on the 5th.

The target size on # 5 is significantly larger than on # 14

You can make lottery numbers on the 5th through a comparitively marginal miss, it's uphill ever so slightly and at least three clubs longer than 14.

To an enormous target area, versus a tiny target area.

In addition, the wind has a far more negative impact on # 14.


It's not even a contest.

That's correct, # 14 is far more difficult.

What's your handicap and how many times have you played the course ?

[J_ Crisham]

11th at Plainfield, 17 at Beverly from the right tee box, 10 at Chicago Golf-short but disastrous if in the wrong spot relative to the pin location.

[Josh Tarble]

Howard and Ash, I was just looking through some pics of Kidnappers...#6 definitely looks tougher than I remember. Perhaps it doesn't stick out as much since all the 3 shotters are pretty damn intimidating!

[JSlonis]

Pat,

In the recent Philly Open at Pine Valley, the 5th hole ranked 3rd most difficult while the 14th hole ranked 13th.

I will point out that #14 played from the back of the middle tee at 200 yds. It could've been played about 10-15 yards more from the top back tee. Even with that added yardage, I don't think it would've made enough difference to catch up to hole 5. Usually from the back tee on #14, even if the actual yardage is 215-220 yds, it plays significantly shorter. Normally a 4 or 5 iron for better players.

#5 can play at a similar 215-230 yards but with the uphill and prevailing wind, usually plays much longer. I've seen better players hit anything from a 3 iron to a 3 wood.

The one observation I'd make when comparing the holes is that even with a ball in the water on #14, you'll usually make 5 at worst. If you miss #5 just slightly right and you get down that slope, there is no guarantee of a 5 and you could make more easily. I've seen the same with balls hit on that left hillside as well.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Pat,

In the recent Philly Open at Pine Valley, the 5th hole ranked 3rd most difficult while the 14th hole ranked 13th.

Jamie,

You can't compare the respective difficulties of the holes based on score when one hole has a drop zone that leaves the golfer little more than a sand wedge.

If # 14 didn't have a drop zone, score would be a valid comparison

I will point out that #14 played from the back of the middle tee at 200 yds. It could've been played about 10-15 yards more from the top back tee. Even with that added yardage, I don't think it would've made enough difference to catch up to hole 5. Usually from the back tee on #14, even if the actual yardage is 215-220 yds, it plays significantly shorter. Normally a 4 or 5 iron for better players.

#5 can play at a similar 215-230 yards but with the uphill and prevailing wind, usually plays much longer. I've seen better players hit anything from a 3 iron to a 3 wood.

Jamie,

Those additional yards, and added elevation, heighten the intimidation factor.

The usable target at # 14 is so much smaller than the usable target at # 5

You're comparing the yardages to the middle of the respective greens.

# 5 has a very large area well short of the green, allowing the golfer to miss the green and lay up short.

No such luxury exists at # 14, where shots hit short of the green find a watery grave.

The one observation I'd make when comparing the holes is that even with a ball in the water on #14, you'll usually make 5 at worst. If you miss #5 just slightly right and you get down that slope, there is no guarantee of a 5 and you could make more easily. I've seen the same with balls hit on that left hillside as well.

That's only because there's a drop zone leaving you a sand wedge into # 14.
Without that drop zone the golfer could be there all day.
That's why they introduced the drop zone.

# 14 is more intimidating, by far.

[Scott Warren]

Patrick,

"IF" it goes in the water ?

What are the odds that you'll hit the ball in the water on # 5 ?     Almost nil.

What are the odds you'll hit the ball in the water on # 14 ?    Very high.

Why do you think there's a drop zone on # 14 ?
Because the shot is so hard that you'd be there all day if there wasn't.

The fact is that the drop zone on 14 is there. The fact is - as JSlonis says - that the water is really far more forgiving than what's right of 5 green because if you rinse on on 14 you get a drop in a fairly pleasant spot and pitch on.

The fact is that 5 is longer and uphill, with horrible lies and the potential for a lost ball where a similar miss on the 14th means a penalty drop in a kind area and then you pitch on.

A competant player should have no reason to make a huge number on the 14th, though he might regularly make 4 or 5 and might never par it.

The same player has many ways to make 6, 7 or worse on the 5th.

The scoring stats from the Philly Open further support this stance.

To answer your question, I am a 5.6 handicap in Australia and have played the course four times from the member's tees.

[JSlonis]

Pat,

That's just it... #14 has a drop zone because of the water hazard. Most par 3's with water hazards either have a drop zone or a somewhat reasonable spot to drop after taking relief. In comparing holes, we can't pretend that the drop zone isn't there all the time.

Maybe I look at it fully through the eyes of my own game, but day in and day out, I think #5 is a much tougher hole. My overall comparitive scoring would bear that out. Also, the green on #5 is much tougher as well.

[Doug Siebert]

At the other end of the spectrum (in terms of length) is the 3rd hole at Kittansett. Only 165 yards and a very big green. But with the ocean coming in from the right, a beach that goes on forever, and an elevated green that is angled so that you really can't see much of the putting surface, it's a tough hole to pull the right club. Add to that the fact that you can't help but want to hit it close because you know you might never get another shot at it, and it's one of the toughest short par 3s out there.

This is one really cool hole.  Anyone can build a par 3 surrounded by water, but it takes some imagination to put the green on the beach instead.

[Doug Siebert]

While I think holes like the one at Port Royal are certainly intimidating, it is not that hard to make a hole intimidating with that kind of link.  There's a course around here with a 245 yard par 3 where you hit over wetlands, and basically short or right is in the wetlands, long is lost, and left is OB.  Your bailout, as such, is to hit a bit short left of the green (forced carry of "only" 200)  Obviously it plays much shorter from the other tees, but it is a hard hole for everyone.

Any hole with a 240 yard shot and some obvious trouble that awaits bad shots is going to be intimidating, because even players for whom 240 yards is only a 4 iron don't consider a hitting 240 yard shot square on the target to be automatic.

It's more difficult (and a more impressive feat) to make a shorter par 3 intimidating.  Like TOC's Eden, or the picture Mike posted of Dismal's 5th (which from the regular tees is like a 9 iron, but you can pretty easily see what will happen if you don't catch it square)

[David Davis]

It is funny how some of these holes they just keep stretching out like crazy. That a par 3 needs to be stretched to 2x it's original length is a bit ridiculous in my opinion. We have a par 3 here in NL, it's #11 at Goyer GC. This hole plays often into the wind, when the pin position is on the smallish back plateau the distance is right around 270 yds to the pin. Add wind and it's the only par 3 I've ever hit a driver on. It doesn't feel intimidating from the tee although it goes over water for half way. You'd have to duff it for the water to come into play.

Ironically enough it's S.I. 18.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

"IF" it goes in the water ?

What are the odds that you'll hit the ball in the water on # 5 ?     Almost nil.

What are the odds you'll hit the ball in the water on # 14 ?    Very high.

Why do you think there's a drop zone on # 14 ?
Because the shot is so hard that you'd be there all day if there wasn't a drop zone.

The fact is that the drop zone on 14 is there.

Yes, but there is no drop zone on # 5.  WHY ?
Because there's little chance of hitting it in the water on # 5.
The drop zone is there for a reason, and the reason is that there's a high degree of certainty that you'll hit it in the water, over and over and over again.

The fact is - as JSlonis says - that the water is really far more forgiving than what's right of 5 green because if you rinse on on 14 you get a drop in a fairly pleasant spot and pitch on.

"Water is far more forgiving" ?
You must be kidding.
As to hitting the ball far right and encountering difficulty on # 5, what happens if you hit it far right on # 14 ?
It's far, far more disastrous.
And, one only needs to recover back to the rough/fairway on # 5, without any fear of going into the water, which you still have to face from the drop zone on # 14.

The fact is that 5 is longer and uphill, with horrible lies and the potential for a lost ball where a similar miss on the 14th means a penalty drop in a kind area and then you pitch on.

That's not true and is indicative of your lack of familiarity with both holes.
You ONLY get to drop your ball in the DZ IF you go in the pond.
If you hit it right or long on # 14, you can take telephone numbers on # 14.
As to the uphill issue, it's slightly uphill which helps the ball stop where it hits.
You and Jamie conveniently forget the expansive area short of # 5 green, which effectively shortens the hole.
And you also forget what happens if you hit your ball left on # 5 and # 14.
The left side hill on # 5 helps contain the ball.  There is no such safety net on # 14.

A competant player should have no reason to make a huge number on the 14th, though he might regularly make 4 or 5 and might never par it.
That's not true.
You continue to ignore the fact that golfers aren't limited to hitting their ball in the pond.
If they go long or right they can take huge numbers

The same player has many ways to make 6, 7 or worse on the 5th.

Nonsense.
I've been playing there for about 50 years and have never seen anyone making 6, 7 or worse.
That's a very rare occurrence.
But,
I have seen golfer after golfer hit it in the pond and elsewhere on # 14.

The scoring stats from the Philly Open further support this stance.

No, they don't.
First, you don't know from what tees they played.
And, there's a reason that they didn't play the back tee on # 14.
The hole is too hard from the back tee, far harder than # 5.
# 14 is so hard that they put a governor or cap on high scores, vis a vis the drop zone.
# 5 needs no such cap.

To answer your question, I am a 5.6 handicap in Australia and have played the course four times from the member's tees.
That helps explain your position, your lack of experience.
Play both holes from the back tee and let me know what you think.
The 14th from the back tee is far more intimidating than # 5 from the back tee
From the front tees, the landing area on # 5 is huge when compared to the landing area on # 14.

Jamie is an exceptional player and you shouldn't use his game and club selection in framing your argument.
Jamie is also a member and has a comfort zone borne of familiarity and repeat play that few possess.

The question posed is not which hole produces the higher score, but which hole is more intimidating as you stand on the tee.

The drop zone on # 14 is a safety net which essentially limits or caps scoring thus invalidating the scoring comparison.

To make things equal, remove the DZ, then compare scores.
OR, think, WHY is there the need to insert a DZ on # 14 ?
Why is there no need on # 5 ?

[Scott Warren]

Matt Ward appears to have assimilated into Pat Mucci's body! I know enough about the tournament tees at PV to know I have no business playing them, Pat.

You walked on the tee at #5 in 1967 and commented to your caddie that "this looks like a really difficult par four", before being told it was in fact a par three. That says it all.

I love your fixation on the drop zone at 14 and your desire to debate what the hole would be were it not there. Perfectly summarises the Mucci approach to selective debating!

[Patrick_Mucci]

Matt Ward appears to have assimilated into Pat Mucci's body! I know enough about the tournament tees at PV to know I have no business playing them, Pat.

But, did you venture back and up there and examine the hole from there?

You walked on the tee at #5 in 1967 and commented to your caddie that "this looks like a really difficult par four", before being told it was in fact a par three. That says it all.

I think it was 1964 and the observation and statement was made from the road as I approach the back of the 5th tee.
The statement had more to do with the fronting fairway giving the appearance of a par 4 and the relative narrowness of that fairway when compared to the 4th fairway.   And, that was before I saw the 14th hole. 

I love your fixation on the drop zone at 14 and your desire to debate what the hole would be were it not there. Perfectly summarises the Mucci approach to selective debating!

It's not selective debating, it's got to do with an invalid comparison that you're promoting, namely the scoring comparison.
You can't compare holes based on scores when one hole has a safety net limiting and capping scores.
Surely you understand the folly of your position.

[Jud_T]

Par 3's do not have to be stretched to 250+ yards to be intimidating.  The 2nd hole at Kingsley plays 162 yards from the tips.  If you miss the green in the wrong spot and get too greedy all hell can break loose.  I holed out for a smooth 10 recently after getting cute with a funky lie instead of taking a drop.  Pros and most strong players, and most players frankly, deplore "unfair" conditions and rub of the green that can lead to big numbers in medal play.  I wonder how much the stroke play vs. match play issue raised in another thread has lead to the excessive lengthening of some of these holes and courses in general.

[Tim Martin]

No to take this thread on a tangent, but I wonder if there is a more intimidating back-to-back sequence of par 3s than 13 and 14 at Newport CC. While the 4th is probably the most difficult par 3 on the course, I find 13 very difficult, with an uphill tee shot to a semi-blind green, with bunkers and rock outcroppings staring you in the face. At 165 yards, it isn't long, but from the tee you really can't feel any wind, and you know that when your ball gets above the hill, it'll almost always hit a serious headwind.

That is followed by 14, a 210-yard par 3 that is completely exposed and has been into the wind every time I've been there. It plays slightly downhill, but even so I usually have to hit a hybrid to get there.

I agree with Newport 14 as the prevailing wind makes this hole play much longer. I would bet that this hole usually plays more like 230 plus. The fronting bunkers and the steep fall off left make this a scary hole.

[Chris Roselle]

  Pat, I actually agree with you that #14 is more intimdating than #5.  Something about a mid to long iron tee shot playing downhill that gets me.  But I would like to add that if there was no official drop zone on #14 a good majority of players would still be able to drop their ball down in front of the water hazard fronting the green (as long as they can keep the spot where the ball last crossed the margin of the hazard between themselves and the hole).  On #5 there is no reason for a drop zone because the hazard basically fronts the teeing area (and really isn't in play) so players could just go up to the front of tee and drop (or they could certainly go down closer to the hazard and drop as well but that seems silly to me).

[David Cronheim]

I agree it's easier to make a long par 3 scary because who isn't more comfortable hitting a 7-iron over a 3-wood. That said, and irrespective of the merits of the holes as a good or bad hole, for me at least, there are VERY few short holes that can match the terror of a long hole.

I'll throw another couple holes out there too:

#3 at Rock Spring GC in NJ - known as the "Quarry Hole" it's a long Raynor redan over a quarry that is OB.



#12 at Bulle Rock in MD - I wish i could find a better view, but it's all carry over water to a green that juts out into a lake. There is almost no bailout left besides the bunkers. A big bailout finds a downslope that kicks away leaving 60 yards with water behind.

[Jud_T]

How about Blackwolf Run River #4.  219 yards with little room for error except laying up:

[Ben Sims]

Pat,

Make that three votes for #5 over #14 at PV.  Here why.  Trajectory.  A six iron--which is what I hit on #14--off of the elevated tee has a much larger chance of coming down in such a way as to minimize the ball skittering of after landing.  Misses aren't compounded.  On #5, I hit a trapped 4 iron on a frozen rope.  It landed beyond the cross bunker on the left edge and bounded off into the rough, very near a bunker, about 10 yards short left of the green.  Based on the slope of the green, I would like to know how many people get up and down from in front of the green or on the front sides.  I bet more than half of the ball return to people's feet.

Conversely, on 14, hit it and hope.  Anything but a miss short provides a sand shot to try and get up and down.  The bogey I had on 5 was the most testy I had all day.  

[Phil McDade]

How about Blackwolf Run River #4.  219 yards with little room for error except laying up:

Intimidating, yes. And an awful hole to boot.

[Sean Leary]

Maybe I missed it but 17 at Kiawah is up there with 5 at PV for me.

[Jason Topp]

8 at Wolf Creek in Mesquite.  230 yards downhill several stories with water on 3 sides and about 8 yards of "bailout" before desert that is an ESA on the other side.  In a tournament I might intentionally aim for the water, particularly in a heavy wind.

[Matthew Petersen]

Both #6 and #17 at PGA West Stadium. Even trying to lay up to the left on #6 requires an extensive carry over water and you know you can't miss right. Also, even though the condos are well beyond the hole just seeing them there makes you afraid to rip a layuup too hard. Then #17 is a relatively long and downhill shot to an island green.

#16 at ASU Karsten is no cakewalk. I believe Mr. Doak called it "impossible" in the CG (or some similar sentiment). Played it to a back right pin yesterday from 215 and had to agree! To think they can stretch that one to 250-ish for tournament play.

[Dan_Lucas]

Can't believe nobody's mentioned #11 at Crystal Downs yet.
190ish, OB right, can't be above the cup or you'll have another 30 yd. pitch.
I've never played anything harder.