Greg T - There probably are, but I can't name them off hand. End of day, and I'm tired. TOC has one, so there is a pretty good example of striving for the minimum!
Tim - Off the tee that is an easy task with multiple tees, and often, angles, setting the back tee way off to the left or right.
I still recall Colbert Hills. We set 200 yards or more on normally downwind holes as the typical back tee forced carry to save turf (7600 yards and Audubon "rules" of 90 Acres of turf made for some carries) One day, the wind blew from the north and Colbert got worried he couldn't make the carry. He teed it up on 4 and was right. 10 balls fell short in that 40MPH wind (estimated)
So, on windy sites, you need to be way more conservative, or at the very least, built any forced carry tee with some length vs. width - so maybe tees can be set way back on occaision.
At Firekeeper, we actually built a tee for Tiger on the optional carry fw on 18. Of course, Notah is looking ahead to his invitational tourney being there. It's a tough carry, but we built a 15 x 15 foot tee way back for his younger, longer hitting buds on tour. No reason to waste a lot of resources on that.
And, the other thing I have learned over the years is the obvious - the shorter you make any particular carry, the more golfers can experience the thrill. Why design that 290 carry for Phil, etc. when he ain't showing up? Make it a little shorter so that the more typical back/middle/forward tee player can make the carry and have a thrill. If the course ranking goes down a bit, but everyone has a grand time, its a fair trade.
For the women mentioned, and even average Joe's, those old carry bunkers on old courses set at maybe 150-200 yards from various tees are a thrill to carry, even if the only thing in doubt is the potential ground ball. It is actually less fun for them to have to white knuckle it on a maximum carry, which is only a thrill for 1% of players. For the rest shorter is better.
Actually, I think the intentions of the ODG's who designed more of these wasn't necessarily to max out the carry, given how hard it was just to get the ball airborne in those days. I really don't know, but I have the impression they set those things at reasonable, not maximum carries for the players of the day. Of course, many were angled, and most also had a way around, all of which affect placement.