Do long par threes provide the best templates for heroic short par fours?

[Scott Warren]

I've not been playing much golf since my daughter was born last May - and next to none in the past five or six months (toddler + a cold, wet winter!).

Without current games and courses to occupy my mind when my thoughts turn to golf, I've often found myself daydreaming about the courses I played in my "heyday" and going back through my memories and pictures of them.

It has struck me how often I think about some of the great long par threes I've played and, were I only able to hit a driver about 200-210 yards, what outstanding short two-shotters they would be.

Some examples:

Berkshire (Red) 10th


Ellerston 15th


West Sussex 6th


Woking 2nd


There are others of course: Royal Melbourne (West) 16th, Cypress Point 16th... I have begun to wonder whether holes such as these present the perfect inspiration for a modern architect looking for the ideal 270 to 300-yard hole.

Considering the above pictures from the perspective of a player whose best drive might just reach the front half of the green, there are all the options, space and alternate routes that we all love to see from a short four, but which are all too often absent from those holes.

Were I building a course myself, these holes would certainly be great inspiration for a 300-yard hole.

[Tom_Doak]

The Ellerston hole looks like the 16th at Royal Melbourne (West) with too elevated of a tee and three too many bunkers!


As I start to lose a bit of distance myself, I have found myself hitting driver on par-3 holes on numerous occasions this year, whenever there is wind involved, and often with very good results.  [I wish I'd played Cypress Point this year!]  But I think there is an embarrassment factor for many that keeps them from pulling driver on a par-3.  I have no shame in that regard, and it has been to my benefit in several matches.  On many occasions my playing partners have tried to hit 2-irons or hybrids or something else just after me, and consistently come up well short of the green.


P.S.  Thanks to Grant Rogers for teaching me the magic of the bunt driver.

[Thomas Dai]

Super photos Scott including one of the rarely seen Ellerston.


Holes of this nature are terrific IMO, even though as per TD's post I'm hitting driver to them more and more often these days and the the bunt driver has become a shot I use too, off the fairway sometimes as well. Indication perhaps how much easier the driver has become to hit as technology has developed...no longer the hardest club in the bag to hit decently, but that's another story.


The holes you've highlighted are just the sort of holes I would like to see the male Tour Pros have to play except I'd have them in the region of say 290-330 yds and as par-3's not short par-4's. It would be interesting to see how they'd score when having to hit the longest clubs in the bag on par-3's instead of so many short irons.

One aspect of holes like this for lessor playing amateurs however, is that many will wish to take on the challenge of going for the green and I suspect that ball hunting might become as issue at times. Another reason for tee-it-forward?


Atb

[Mike_Clayton]

Royal Melbourne 16 with a back tee at 280 yards would be one of the best short 4s in Australia - and Alex Russell first drew 4 East as a par four with the green back a bit.

[A.G._Crockett]

Interesting question; off the top of my head I'm going to give a qualified "Not really."

I think in general, I'd like the recovery opportunities to be greater on a long par 3 than on a short 4, assuming that you mean a driveable 4.   The short 4 should have a greater risk/reward element, and offer a relatively easy avenue to make 4.  The long 3 should demand an excellent shot, of course, but make the penalty for missing the green at least somewhat smaller than for the long 4.

[Chris DeToro]

I'm not sure about this either as I'm also a believer that a short par 4 should have more of a risk/reward element.  I'm more in the camp of a long par 3 demanding an excellent longer iron shot with less risk.  A short par 4 should have more of a risk/reward element especially to make a 3. 

[Jason Lietaer]

I agree with Chris and A.G.  I feel like a short par of around 300 yards should have serious trouble around the green which makes the decision hard.  Isn't that the point of those holes -- to make you stand on the tee and know that going for the green is a heroic shot with a huge reward, but that you should really hit 4 iron/wedge and try to take your par?


In my experience the best of the short 4's alway have a similar nickname from the members: "The shortest par 5 in [add geographic descriptor here].  Most of the holes shown in this thread are fantastic long 3s but don't seem to invoke terror or enough of a risk element. 


That said, the Berkshire hole looks like it has promise -- that right side looks deadly and it appears would gather up all the weak misses and make for a lot of bogeys, or worse.


JASON

[Jason Thurman]

Most par 3s aren't strategic, but the 4th at Lawsonia is the rare one that can be. A classic example of the long, brutal par 3s that Langford loved (and not even the best example of such on this course), it plays dramatically uphill and those greenside bunkers are steep and imposing from the tee some 215 yards away. It takes a perfect tee shot to set up a birdie try, and for a lot of players, the reward may not be worth the risk. It can, however, easily be played as a short two-shotter by laying up to the fairway to gain an angle for a simple pitch into the heart of the green.

I wrote this about the 4th at Lawsonia in Michael Hendren's thread from a few weeks ago. It's a significantly uphill par 3 with a green angled 45 degrees to the line off the tee and deep bunkers guarding the direct line to the flag. From an aerial it almost looks like a redan, but it lacks a kickplate to bounce the ball onto the green.

It occurs to me that a hole like this would make a great par 4, and it wouldn't need to be much longer than 250 or 260 yards for most mortals. At that yardage, it sounds extremely reachable and even average players would be tempted to rip at the green. Routed over a good uphill piece of land, the effective carry yardage could be closer to 270 or 280 and most players would come up well short on that line, either in one of the fearsome bunkers or, worse, short of the bunkers and needing to flip a shot over them and onto the green. Bouncing a shot onto the putting surface would require a controlled draw with the driver, which is no easy shot in its own right. The easiest way to make birdie would almost undoubtedly be to drive to the top of the hill right of the green and then hit a simple pitch through the opening in front, but I imagine few players would have the discipline to take that route.

[Jim Nugent]

Interesting question; off the top of my head I'm going to give a qualified "Not really."

I think in general, I'd like the recovery opportunities to be greater on a long par 3 than on a short 4, assuming that you mean a driveable 4.   The short 4 should have a greater risk/reward element, and offer a relatively easy avenue to make 4.  The long 3 should demand an excellent shot, of course, but make the penalty for missing the green at least somewhat smaller than for the long 4.

I think it should go somewhat differently.  CPC 16 (as it played the first few decades of its existence) should be the model for at least some ultra-long par 3s.  An extremely long, hard shot to hit the green, with penalty if you miss.  A relatively easy layup off the tee, perhaps with a mid-iron, if you want to play safe. 

The first option gives you a chance at birdie, if you pull off the heroic shot.  The second option gives you a shot at par, if you can get up and down with a wedge in your hand. 

This is how some short par 4s work.  I want some real long par 3s to work like that, for the pro's, so they have to hit fairway metal or driver from time to time to try and reach some greens in regulation. 

[Bill_McBride]

The Ellerston hole looks like the 16th at Royal Melbourne (West) with too elevated of a tee and three too many bunkers!


As I start to lose a bit of distance myself, I have found myself hitting driver on par-3 holes on numerous occasions this year, whenever there is wind involved, and often with very good results.  [I wish I'd played Cypress Point this year!]  But I think there is an embarrassment factor for many that keeps them from pulling driver on a par-3.  I have no shame in that regard, and it has been to my benefit in several matches.  On many occasions my playing partners have tried to hit 2-irons or hybrids or something else just after me, and consistently come up well short of the green.


P.S.  Thanks to Grant Rogers for teaching me the magic of the bunt driver.

My only career ace was with my driver!   I love hitting driver on par 3s.