[Paul Gray]

I've read a few murmurs of discontent recently regarding genuinely long par 5's on modern courses, holes of maybe 650 yards or so. If we consider that 500+ yard holes were genuine monsters when created in The Golden Age, what, if anything, is inherently wrong about a 650 yard hole now? Is the issue a bland second shot for most players?  And if a 650 yard hole is fundamentally a mistake now, does this not imply that the ODG's were wrong to create 500 yard holes for golfers with hickories?

[Matt Kardash]

Honestly, I think a genuine monster long par 5 would have to be closer to 700 yards today for the elite player. 650 is a drive, 3 wood and a small pitch.

[Phil Young]

Paul,

When Bethpage Black opened for play in 1936 the 7th hole was measured at 600 yards... That summer Jimmy Hines hit driver 3-iron OVER the green... Heck, in 1913, Donald Ross designed what may have been the first par-6 hole in America, the 610-yard 5th hole at East Lake...

The ODG's weren't afraid of a bit of a distance challenge...

[Thomas Dai]

How about a trial doing away altogether with par-5's for Pro's (men)? For them any hole over 300 yds to be classified as a par-4 and below that yardage a par-3?


If so, would there be a psychological effect  - ie 'I must not drop a shot to par on this hole'- and thus the possibility of more higher gross scores through gamble and take-it-on shots as players attempt to reach greens 'in regulation'? A further 'if so', would this scenario disadvantage the shorter hitting Pro's?


Just wondering?



Atb

[Greg Smith]

Some Golden Age architects really liked monstrous three-shotters.  I think of Devereux Emmet in particular; he seemed to try and work in a 570-600 yard hole on most courses -- even though many of his works were kind of short overall.  In 1921, that length of hole would REALLY be a stretch. 
 
And then there's Tillinghast and his Hell's Half Acre concept.  Can't do that with 465-yard par-5s.  I've seen a few HHA holes that were ~ 520 yards (my main source here is Wexler's books), but some were rather longer even in the 1920s.

[Tom_Doak]

Paul:


When I was in college (21 years old) I wrote a long article for GOLF Magazine on all the par-5 holes we could identify that had never been hit in two shots.  They called it "The Untouchables" without fear of lawsuit, because a contributing editor named Oscar Fraley had written the famous book of the same name.


We identified about 20-25 holes that had never been hit in two at that time.  [All of them have been hit in two since.]  I also sent a questionnaire to each member of the ASGCA to get their thoughts on that type of hole ... many believed [in 1982] that no one should try to build a true three-shotter ... the reachable par-5 holes at Augusta were their idea of great.


I am still a fan of the long par-5 which is ALMOST unreachable but convinces long hitters to overswing.  However for a true "untouchable" par-5 today you have to build a hole in excess of 650 yards, and that's a long way.  I did see a par-5 at Promontory in Utah this summer that was 720 yards from the back tee; I declined to play it from there!

[Jim Nugent]

Tom, how do you feel about the flip side of the ultra-long par 5, i.e. the ultra-long par 3 that requires pro's to hit 3-wood or even driver?  Plenty of ODGs used to design holes like that.  Today that could mean 280-300 yards from the tips. 

[Tom_Doak]

Tom, how do you feel about the flip side of the ultra-long par 5, i.e. the ultra-long par 3 that requires pro's to hit 3-wood or even driver?  Plenty of ODGs used to design holes like that.  Today that could mean 280-300 yards from the tips.

Jim:


I would be more likely to call a 280-yard hole or 300-yard hole a par-4, instead of a par-3, but I'm all in favor of them. 


When you call a hole like that a par-3 then you're expected to build a relatively large and receptive green to make it "fair," and then it's just a boring hole where everyone hits a long club and everyone makes 3 or 4.  When you call it a par-4 you can do anything you want, and players have the option of hitting 5-iron off the tee if they prefer.  [Apparently it is not acceptable to build a par-3 where someone lays up.]  We just built a 260-yard par-4 at Tara Iti, the 7th, with a tiny green and a nasty contour at the front, and it is one of my favorite holes there.

[Mark Pavy]

Didn't either Old Tom or Willie make 3 on the 1st (571yards) at the very first Open (1860)? I'm sure somebody told me it was a tap in as well. I guess the long hole has been around for a while.

[Thomas Dai]

Tom, how do you feel about the flip side of the ultra-long par 5, i.e. the ultra-long par 3 that requires pro's to hit 3-wood or even driver?  Plenty of ODGs used to design holes like that.  Today that could mean 280-300 yards from the tips.

Jim:
I would be more likely to call a 280-yard hole or 300-yard hole a par-4, instead of a par-3, but I'm all in favor of them. 
When you call a hole like that a par-3 then you're expected to build a relatively large and receptive green to make it "fair," and then it's just a boring hole where everyone hits a long club and everyone makes 3 or 4.  When you call it a par-4 you can do anything you want, and players have the option of hitting 5-iron off the tee if they prefer.  [Apparently it is not acceptable to build a par-3 where someone lays up.]  We just built a 260-yard par-4 at Tara Iti, the 7th, with a tiny green and a nasty contour at the front, and it is one of my favorite holes there.

I remain to be convinced.


Golfers, especially men, generally have big egos, and better players normally have the biggest egos of all. Very few can resist a challenge, their ego and vanity won't let them. Tell them a hole's a par-3 and they're going to want to make 3 or even 2 every time, any higher score is seen as a slur against their character, their manhood. They mostly can't resist attacking the hole in the hope of making 2 or 3 even if the par-3 is say 280-300 yds long, they're hitting a fairway metal and the hole has a small heavily contoured green surrounded by trouble.


There are exceptions, Billy Casper at Winged Foot in 1959 or Bobby Locke's hollow left of 14 at Portrush for example, but generally the best players can't resist a challenge, so feed them one, feed their egos and let's see how good they really are............whilst all the time giving John or Jane Average an alternative method to play the hole.


Atb

[Mark Pavy]

[Apparently it is not acceptable to build a par-3 where someone lays up.]  We just built a 260-yard par-4 at Tara Iti, the 7th, with a tiny green and a nasty contour at the front, and it is one of my favorite holes there.

The first hole I think of when lay up Par 3's are mentioned is the 15th at Kinloch NZ. 224m/248y, absolutely dead left and a green that sits the wrong way (at least for my shot shape) but is bowl like from a lay up area. Should be more of it.

[abmack]

Famous examples of the LONG par  5 from championship golf include Baltusrol-17, Olympic-16, TCC (composite)-14, and Pebble Beach-14, and TOC-14. I haven't played Baltusrol or Olympic. Essex County Club-3 and Ekwanok-7 are also properly in this category and deserve to be mentioned among the best. (100 years ago, Ross built a 623 yards... If you somehow could adjust for distance inflation, what would be the equivalent in 2015 yards?)

When they were build, all of these were untouchables... no longer the case. I tend to think that if you were one of those who could get home, you'd be crazy to try and thus face a somewhat boring second shot.


Though I'm sure there are holes I fail to consider, the 18th hole at Yale (621 yards) stands out to me as the world's greatest long par 5. Like a few other holes at New Haven, it's completely unique in golf. I don't know of another hole similar built before or after. Unlike the other holes I mentioned, the second shot can be just as interesting, exciting, and exacting as the tee shot. I'm not sure that anyone but lefties, who hit right-to-left fades, could get it up fast enough to even get it on in two shots. Apparently this hole is controversial... Are there legitimate critiques or are the detractors simply unable to figure out what to do given that the other courses they've played, built by Jack Nicklaus, Tom Fazio, et al., caused an underdevelopment of their imaginations?

[Matt MacIver]

Not a tour course but Talamore in Pinehurst has as it's opening hole a par 5, 625y from the tips and 609y from the Blues, which play 6500y with a slope of 131. Frankly it was cr$p way to start a resort round, perhaps with more play I/my group would grow to appreciate and/or embrace it. Though it seems disconnected to the comments I found below on their site:


According to Rees Jones: “This is a position course. Length isn’t going to benefit the long hitter. What I’m trying to do is require thinking.I don’t want to take the drive golfout of the golfer’s hands, but what I want him to have to think about whether he wants to use it. You have to manufacture golf shots and make them happen. Strategy is an important key to a successful round of golf here. My hope is that golfers will enjoy this dimension of the game. Talamore is intended to capture the best of classic golf in the Village of Pinehurst area. The site has a spirit that’s unmistakable: one that allowed for a remarkable diversity of features. There’s a challenge in the course that’s meant to add to the enjoyment of the game. After all, golf is supposed to be fun.”

[Carl Rogers]

Somewhere in the pro golfing world, I would like to see a true 3 shot hole for the top 100.  For me, that would mean at least a 125 yard 3rd shot for the longest hitters.  That would mean a hole more than 750 yards ... yes, that is crazy.

[Greg Smith]

Mark:
I believe that eagle on the long 1st at Prestwick was a holed out third shot, IIRC.

[Jim Nugent]

Mark:
I believe that eagle on the long 1st at Prestwick was a holed out third shot, IIRC.

I remember it the same, and I also think Young Tom Morris did it. 

[Rick Emerson]

I think 650 is a good length for a professional par 5. It makes it play for the pros the way a mid to long par 5 plays for us mere mortals. Unless the course was really firm only a handful,of guys can reach in two. Only a bubba or a jb is going to hit a 350 driver and a 300 yard 3 wood and any slight mistake would make going for it impossible and if there is some good trouble around the green that's a really tough second. Most tour pros are hitting a 300 yard driver, a 260 three wood and a half  or  3/4 lob wedge. Put in a cross bunker or make it a bottle type hole or give it a super fun green witha lot of movement and or different areas to land and spin it to with a firm green and it would be a good hole. I think if you put in a cross bunker right at about 120 out and you'd make the pros think. Do I carry it with a three wood  right at my max and get an easy pitch or do I lay up short and take a chance from 135. They still hit pitching wedges and gap wedges close but not as close as a lob wedge. Hard birdie, easy par, just the way most par 5's play for a mid single digit like me.

[JStewart]

Oakland Hills' North Cse has a great and true three-shot par-5, the fifth. From the tips it's about 620 yards and the routing of the hole makes it virtually impossible to hit the green in two. It ordinarily takes two well-struck and well-placed shots to leave you a wedge in for your third. It's by far the toughest par-5 on either course. It will test the future pros next summer in the U.S. Am.

[Mark Pavy]

Mark:
I believe that eagle on the long 1st at Prestwick was a holed out third shot, IIRC.

You and Jim are probably right, I get way too much history from the bar!

[Thomas Dai]

I seem to recall that when Lee Janzen won the US Open at Baltisroll there was a par-5 circa 600 yds and the TV commentators were making noisy chat about how long it was and that no player was going to get to the green in two shots. Along comes John Daly who knocked it green high with a driver and a fairway metal, so the commentators made some more noisy chat. What the commentators omitted to mention was that the previous day Sandy Lyle had apparently hit it over the green in two shots with a driver and a one-iron. And drivers weren't 460cc clubs then and the balls were of the balata age.


No par-5's for male Pro's.


Atb

[Bill_McBride]

The RTJ Trail course in Dothan, AL has a par 5 that's listed on the card at 748 yards from the tips and about 670 from the middle tee.  There are two hills that create speed slots; if you don't reach both you can forget about it. 

[Jim Nugent]

The old Forest Park 18 hole course in St. Louis had a hole (#9) that measured just under 600 yards.  It was dead straight, and never played F&F in my experience.  Even in the 1960s and 70s, I doubt anyone could reach it, unless they had a hurricane at their back.  When FP opened around 1915, I can hardly imagine how long that hole must have played. 

btw, Forest Park held the U.S. Public Links Championship in 1929.  The medalists shot 151 for 36 holes.  That was on a course that was under 5900 yards.  Holes like #9 made it tough against par (which was 70, unless they counted 9 as a par 6), and so did the 6 par 3 holes, 4 of which were around or more than 200 yards long. 

My long-held theory: we can build courses easily under 7000 yards, that challenge the pro's and are still fun for average golfers.  One of the keys for such courses is to include 6 par 3s.  A few of them should be ultra long (250 to 300 yards from the tips).  They will give the pro's fits, and require them to hit long iron or metal if they want to go for the green (or give them a safer route that makes it a 4-shot hole ala #16 at CPC).  For the average guys, call these holes par 4s or build closer tees.

Add four par 5s and a variety of par 4s, including some reachable ones.  Top golfers will use every club in the bag, have plenty of long-iron/metal approaches (to set up par), while bogey golfers can have a blast too. 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()