17 Waste Management isn’t a drivable par four. It’s a par three.

[mike_malone]

When you say a par four is drivable then it isn’t a four it’s a three.  Just a another example of the silliness of par.

[James Brown]

Disagree strongly.  TOC has a number of holes that are drivable in the right wind and are not par 3s. Neither is 17 at TPC Phoenix. 

[Joe Zucker]

Here is some thorough academic research that shows that par does matter.  Even if it is just a number, players do respond to par and it plays a part in how they score on a hole.


https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3311649

[Tom_Doak]

That’s what Mrs Dye said last year about the revised 12th hole at TPC Sawgrass . . . that Pete didn’t believe in that kind of hole if it was intended to be driven.


But of course there were a few idiots who told her she was wrong.

[Matt_Cohn]

Par is defined as the "expected" score for an expert player, and must allow for two putts. Unless you expect players to drive the ball on the green, it's a par 4. Reachable in one doesn't make it a par 3.

[Thomas Dai]

The scores in TV-pro golf appear to be amazing low because ‘par’ in relation to distance is a joke for them.
Atb

[Sean_A]

ATB is right. The concept of par needs to be adjusted.  If a touring pro (expert) guy shoots par these days 99% of the time they will struggle to make a cut!  It is the line between par 4 and 5 which causes all the "trouble".  But of course we must remember that par has no inherent value in relation to golf.  Par is a concept which one can choose to make important or not. The problem is the expectations of par often become intertwined with design expectations...big mistake. 

Probably the best aspects of the distance explosion has been the slow erosion of par and that courses don't need to be tempered by the expectations of par.  For example, guys can routinely reach par fives in two to greens which may be very unfriendly for a long approach.  So what? People (most anyway) accept that a par five green probably shouldn't be friendly for long approaches. The same is true of short par 4s.  This freedom from par makes things much more interesting if archies take advantage of the situation.  Hell, I expect most archies hope that the current ideas of par lengths don't change!  If I was an archie that would be my hope.

The challenge now is to get folks bought into the idea that the 225-275 yard par 3 is just as valid as the 325 yard par 4. If par was chucked aside or not labelled for each hole this would be much easier to accomplish. Holes are just holes.  If we simply said course A is a par 67 for pros/top Ams and bogey 75 for handicap players golf would be far better off.

Ciao 

[Steve Kline]

I agree with Sean.


I posted in another thread that the PGA Tour scoring average on par 5s in 2018 was 4.65. Basically, there is no such thing as a par 5 on Tour because they are all (even 600 yard par 5s) reachable in two by most players.


If the max par on Tour was 68, then it would seem like every course just got a lot harder without ever changing the course. At the Farmer's, instead of Rose shooting a winning score of -21, he would have a shot winning score of -5.


If defending par is so important, just change the scorecard. That's a lot better for the game overall that changing courses and trying to add distance everywhere.


Also, make the occasional 290 yard hole a par 3 on Tour. Now, scores would be measured against a par of 67.


The most exciting and testing golf is the course/hole that can yield birdies but disaster lurks everywhere. Length is not at all required to make that happen.

[Doug Siebert]

Disagree strongly.  TOC has a number of holes that are drivable in the right wind and are not par 3s. Neither is 17 at TPC Phoenix.

Which brings up another factor - just because you can drive the green doesn't mean you'll be in position to make a birdie. I drove four of the par 4s last time I played TOC, and I birdied exactly one. My putt on 10 was about 150 feet (I was within 15 feet of the hole on #8 though  )

[Erik J. Barzeski]

PGA Tour pros average about 3.5 from any hole (from the tee) ~265 yards. From longer, they average > 3.5.

Thus, the 17th is a par four. It's a relatively easy par four, but it's a par four.

[Jim Nugent]

When you say a par four is drivable then it isn’t a four it’s a three.  Just a another example of the silliness of par.

What does 'drivable' mean?  e.g. DJ drove a 433 yard par 4 at Kapalua last year, and came an inch short of an ace.  Is that hole now a par three?
What about 10 at Riviera?  Every year a fair number of pro's drive it.  Even so, sometimes the average score there is around 4 IIRC.  Par 3 or par 4? 

If you accept Mike's proposition, doesn't that mean there are virtually no par 5s?  After all, pro's regularly reach nearly all of them in two. 

I just saw the average score so far this year on #17 is 3.74 strokes.  One helluva par three.

[jeffwarne]

If the lake were a bunker(a real one) it'd be a more interesting hole.
Might as well have them just drop their drives pin high right and short right, cuz that's where they hit it
zzzzz

[Dave Doxey]

It's an interesting hole.  Chesson Hadley drove the green and ended up making double.  Good for viewers.

[RussBaribault]

What does it matter the par of the hole??? Really.....Does anyone actually look at it when examining a leaderboard? NO!! It's about your total strokes over four rounds of golf. Just enjoy it!!