What Makes a Great Par 3?

[Jason Thurman]

After reading the "controversial thread", playing a round on my home course today, and watching the Pebble Beach Pro-Am, I'm realizing that I have a hard time defining what makes a great par 3. I know it when I see it, but I wonder if there's a more quantifiable way to define it.

In spite of any mounding, the 7th at Streamsong Blue looks really compelling. 7 at Pebble Beach is similarly stunning visually. How much of it is about dramatic terrain and scenery?

My home course is an old and largely unheralded Langford and Moreau design that, nonetheless, features an excellent set of par 3s. I love that several of them seem cross the least interesting sections of the property, using great green complexes and uncomfortable distances to create shots of interest on terrain that holds very little by itself. Alternatively, another par 3 on the course traverses an extremely deep ravine at the property's edge in a way that creates playability and routing flow on a section of the property that must have been the most difficult area of the course to incoporate into the design. Are par 3s the ideal place to create "transition holes?"

Par 3s are really straightforward. Most of us are just trying to hit a ball from a flat and perfect lie onto a defined target (the green), which sounds a lot like what I do at the driving range. With that in mind, how do some par 3s transcend the simplicity of their concept? What are the ingredients that make a great par 3?

[Paul Jones]

My definition would include a chance to make birdie and bogey - most modern par 3 are now 200+ and take birdie completely out the picture.

[John Kirk]

Most importantly, a variety of pin positions that change the shot requirements from one play to the next, thereby making the hole versatile.

[Sam Morrow]

I think a great par 3 has to have multiple options and good strategy. If this fails then I want quirk. 5 and 10 at Dismal might be two of the silliest holes I've ever played but they are still two of my favorites.

[David_Elvins]

Most importantly, a variety of pin positions that change the shot requirements from one play to the next, thereby making the hole versatile.

Some modern designers go overboard, its like playing a completely different hole each round.

[Ronald Montesano]

Which is it, versatility or consistency?

One great par three and three forgettable ones would worry me. I'd rather see four par threes that complement each other.

Bandon Trails combines them as well as any course I've recently played...the downhill but longish 2nd, the wee slightly-uphill pitch at the 5th, the slightly-downhill, brutish 12th and the flat and murky, mid-length 17th. It really is an enviable quartet.

[Matthew Rose]

I'd rather see four par threes that complement each other.

Yep.... I'm a fan of those rare chances when I can hit four different clubs, play in four different directions and be asked to hit different shots. It's also nice when the trouble alternates left and right.

I don't mind a 225 yarder at all but don't give me four of them. I do enjoy the thrill of a well-executed drawn-in hybrid though. Long par-3s if designed well can be fun because they can provide all sorts of opportunities for the ball to do various things on the ground due to the longer clubs being hit into them. I really want to play a Biarritz hole one day for this reason.

[Josh Tarble]

One thing that sticks out in my mind is making the hole's difficulty inverse from what would be expected.  Many great short par 3s are far more difficult than their length, I think that makes them very memorable and great in a lot of people's minds.  That's probably not a sure fire method, because I'm sure there are a lot of easy, bland 200 yarders but I think it does hold up for the most part.

[Bob_Garvelink]

I agree with the posts above that there seems to be an abundance of long par 3's these days which personally irritates me.  I feel that par 3's should be a biride if you play them well and a bogey if you play them poorly.  Par 3's in my opinion are best when elevated.  I like having an eye in the sky and elevation allows you to scout out your best option for the hole.  Additionally, I think that the green formation is crucial.  I tend to favor mounds in the center of the green that depending on hole location allow one to use slopes to funnel the ball toward the hole.  If you miss the wrong tier then your ball rolls away from the hole but if you hit it right.......then there is nothing better than watching your ball funnel toward the hole.  Afterall, the greatest reward in golf is the hole in one and par 3's are usually your only chance of this happening.

[Jason Thurman]

What counts as "long" in 2013? What's a distance from the middle tees that makes you just a bit nervous when you look at the card?

For me it's anything over 210 yards from whatever tees I'm playing (usually around 6500-6900). My home course has two in that range, which is tough, but it also has two under 150 which balances things out. You get two chances to be very aggressive, and two holes that require a great shot just to hit the green. I like that mixture, and agree with others who like to hit four different clubs on par 3s during a round.

My favorite par 3 is probably the fourth at The Prairie Club (Dunes). For one, it's stunning. But what I really love is the way that the HUGE green can funnel the ball in multiple directions. As I remember, it's around 70 yards deep, which gives the hole a lot of versatility. The contours are severe enough that even from the tee, it's easy to see slopes you can use to work the ball toward the target. I've never hit a more satisfying shot in golf than my hard 4-iron into the wind that drew right into the slope in the middle of the green, ran up the backstop, and funneled right to within five feet of the pin.

From the tee:



The huge green:

[Mike Hendren]

Let's start with:  it should be reachable.

[Mike_Young]

I think many of the great par threes don't have tees coming from all different angles and therefore the golfer is limited in how he approaches the green vs. a par four or par five hole where he might be coming into a green from 50 yards left or right of the center of a fairway.  So having one main angle of attack it seems that the really good ones only allow for less than a half club miss without pretty severe penalty or work.  Of course this may not hold for those over 220 yards in length.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Let's start with:  it should be reachable.

Perhaps no dogleg?

I've always thought that with no shot relationship strategy, par 3's ought to be great :"concept shots."  The CBM molds work well, either with precision on the shorty, or running shots on the Biaritz or Redan.  I wouldn't mind a strongly suggested fade or draw on a par 3.  The precisions can come from a small green (for practicality, on long par 3's) or with a big, subdivided green on shorter ones for ballmark resistance.

Nothing I hate more than a "straightforward" par 3 (i.e., standard sized green surrounded by bunkers) which seems like a waste of a shot with little interest.

[Joe Hancock]

I like to encounter a par 3 that is asking me to aim somewhere besides at the pin. If I see that once or twice in a round, it makes golf more fun for me.

A Redan is like that, and so is a par three with it's green sited such that a karem (sp?) shot is the best, or most fun, option.

Joe

[Tim Leahy]

My favorite par 3's are all elevated tees. Something about that second delay watching your ball drop that makes it a better par 3.

[Sean_A]

To pick some in GB&I which are usually nominated as great/world class

Postage Stamp

Redan

Eden

#8 Ballybunion

#7 Rye

#13 Addington

#4 Swinley Forest

Calamity Corner

Cader

What are the common threads between these holes?  Are there common threads between these holes?  The one thread I can see for all is that the aerial route is the best (in some cases only way) way to play these holes.  Is this trait is in stark contrast to many/most of the other holes on each of these courses. 

Ciao

[Nigel Islam]

What is your home course Jason? I want to look at the satellite views.

[Jeb Bearer]

Let's start with:  it should be reachable.

If it's not then would it still be a par 3, or a short 4? Personally, I like a hole every now and then that stretches the limit, maybe even requiring a driver from the tee. Granted, too many gets dull; it has to be well designed; and you risk alienating short hitters. Still, for a well-designed hole I don't think length should necessarily factor into whether it's a "great" hole or not, IMHO.

[Matthew Petersen]

Obviously variety is the spice of life and it's true of par 3s as much as anything.

I do like a short par 3 with a medium- to large-sized green that has a small front portion where they can put the pin that really gets you thinking. You can either have a severe hazard or a simple runoff short of the green. Just the kind of shot where you know you can play safe to the middle but you may find it difficult to 2-putt ... or you can go for it and potentially bring disaster into play. But it's such a short shot you're tempted to try ...

I can think of several holes with that sort of dilemma that I like quite a lot.

[Bob_Huntley]

All four of the par threes where I have had an ace. The degree of difficulty, the weather conditions and pin position have all been made harder as each year goes by.

Bob

[Jason Thurman]

What is your home course Jason? I want to look at the satellite views.

Clovernook CC in Cincinnati. There are small photos of every hole and a scorecard at clovernookcc.com, if you look hard enough and click the right links (if you get a message that you're not authorized to view the photos, you just clicked the wrong link and should try again).

[Wyatt Halliday]

As a general rule I despise par threes. You always have the same lie, there is no thought process behind getting to the proper approach position, and the are a finite amount of ways to approach the shot from the tee. They can be stunningly beautiful and very intimidating, but mostly par threes are just boring. This forum breaks its back talking about how options define great architecture, but what great slew of options are presented on Par three holes? There are generally two-fire at the flag or aim for a position to make par. Speaking of which, don't we always cry about how par is just some arbitrary number that shouldn't be taken too seriously. I say be done with all par threes. Lets end the boredom.