18 great holes 250 yds to 300 yds (mens back tees)

[Brad Tufts]

Good stuff Mark...would be fun to see what you ultimately had in mind for Tucker's Point.  The Rulewich version is not terrible, but has a bunch of funky holes.  Last time I played it, it was firm and windy, and probably the hardest 6000y course in the world at that moment!


Given the three holes mentioned at Myopia, I'd say #1 is a good hole, #3 is a great hole, and #6 is not a great hole.  #6 sets up like a neat risk-reward, but the green slopes so hard at current speeds that sometimes it's tough for a chip to hold the green, let alone a full wedge.


And I'd like to nominate the 277-yd 6th at my home course, Tedesco!  30 feet uphill to our wildest green, sort of like a potato chip with multiple fall-offs and sideslopes to stop your wedge (or driver).  Long, far left, and right are dead.  The wedge from 85y is still challenging due to the green.  The next hole is only 35y shorter as a par three, so playing the two holes in 7 shots is always the goal.

[Thomas Dai]

The 4th at St Enodoc has been mentioned a couple of times. Sorry, splendid hole it may be but it’s DQ’d from this exercise being 323 yds from the men’s back tees.
Other holes mentioned may also fall outside of the 300 yd men’s back tee limit, which was very deliberately chosen for there seems to be a distinct gap in the men’s game between long par-3’s and the ego/vanity mark at 300 yds. And it’s that gap, the ‘ego/vanity gap’ (?) that I wished to explore.
Atb

[Pete_Pittock]

More in the unique category, the gully hole Astoria G&CC #15 269.

[Steve Wilson]

i'd like to mention the 5th and 7th at Golspie  the 5th at 288 is drivable but being hard by the North Sea don't go left and lots of long grass on the right.   A blind second to a bathtub green that is open on the far end allowing the ball to run through into either of two nasty pot bunkers.  The reward should you reach safely with your first or second is a small flat green giving you an excellent chance to make a putt.


The 7th is a few yards shorter but plays uphill.   The element of blindness is softened by a  directional flag.  Long hitters might fly the ball to the top but the ground up there is so rumpled you are guaranteed one or more capricious bounces--maybe onto the green maybe into the gorse.  But this green is as findish as the 5th's is benign.  A valley of sin front and center that is part of the putting surface, a runaway section back right, and virtually unreadable portion back left.


Both holes rely on blindness as their claim to fame and as integral to the degree of challenge  I always look forward to playing them as the suspense of what's on the other side provides for delicious expectation or ominous dread. 

[Peter Flory]

Can you make a small exception for #6 at U of M?  The card says 310, but from the modern tips, it's 292 to the middle of the front green, which is usually where the pin is located. 

It was the first hole that I ever played where the architecture really grabbed my attention.  Hopefully it gets restored one day and the back of the green gets enlarged to its original dimensions. 



When the pin is in front, the backstop is fascinating to try to use on the approach pitches.  It's about a 10 foot elevation difference between the front of the green and the back. 

[Tom_Doak]

The 4th at St Enodoc has been mentioned a couple of times. Sorry, splendid hole it may be but it’s DQ’d from this exercise being 323 yds from the men’s back tees.
Other holes mentioned may also fall outside of the 300 yd men’s back tee limit, which was very deliberately chosen for there seems to be a distinct gap in the men’s game between long par-3’s and the ego/vanity mark at 300 yds. And it’s that gap, the ‘ego/vanity gap’ (?) that I wished to explore.

That tee at St. Enodoc was added +/- 20 years ago; the hole was 274 yards when I first saw it and much better for not having that tee.  So if that was due to the ego/vanity gap, it's the gap of some green chairman or consulting designer rather than Braid.


Mark will say this makes his point that we shouldn't just focus on back tees, but Mark is also an advocate for providing many choices of tees, so maybe that disqualifies him.

[Dan_Callahan]

There are a few at Cruit Island, but my favorite is the 7th, which is 293 yards.


**EDIT** I take that back. The 7th is 293 meters, so it goes over the 300-yard max. But the 5th is 280 yards and is also a blast, so I'll nominate that one.

[PCCraig]

The 13th at Rock Creek is a pretty terrific 250+ par 3.


Also a 13th, the ~280 yard par 4.


The 290 yard par 4 8th at Pinehurst #3.

[Mark_Fine]

Tom,
Yes I am a strong advocate for more tees (particularly shorter ones) as if they are done well they can cost almost nothing relative to the added options and enjoyment they bring.  I am NOT an advocate of adding many new back tees unless there is very strong reasons to do so.  Very few golfers use those back tees relative to shorter tees. 

And yes that example does make my point 

Note:  Take all the greatest par fours you can think of and add a tee in the 250-300 yard range (if there isn't one in this range already).  Now you have a really interesting option on the best fours on the planet and you didn't hinder their design one iota!!

[Thomas Dai]

Note:  Take all the greatest par fours you can think of and add a tee in the 250-300 yard range (if there isn't one in this range already).  Now you have a really interesting option on the best fours on the planet and you didn't hinder their design one iota!!

Now you're talking!


The 1st at Hoylake/RLGC, across the OB cop would be splendid at such a length. Foxy at Dornoch? Road Hole at TOC? The list could be long, very long.


Imagine 18 such classic and iconic holes all played between 250-300 yds.
Max length for 18 would be 5,400 yds.
Time to play less. Land footprint less. Water usage less. Running costs/cost to play less.
Challenge and fun factor high, potentially very high.
And this is before considering the equipment debate.



atb

[Sean_A]

Note:  Take all the greatest par fours you can think of and add a tee in the 250-300 yard range (if there isn't one in this range already).  Now you have a really interesting option on the best fours on the planet and you didn't hinder their design one iota!!

Now you're talking!


The 1st at Hoylake/RLGC, across the OB cop would be splendid at such a length. Foxy at Dornoch? Road Hole at TOC? The list could be long, very long.


Imagine 18 such classic and iconic holes all played between 250-300 yds.
Max length for 18 would be 5,400 yds.
Time to play less. Land footprint less. Water usage less. Running costs/cost to play less.
Challenge and fun factor high, potentially very high.
And this is before considering the equipment debate.
 


atb

In this scenario I imagine trudging miles forward on hole after hole. Very, very dull.

Ciao

[Sean_A]

The 4th at St Enodoc has been mentioned a couple of times. Sorry, splendid hole it may be but it’s DQ’d from this exercise being 323 yds from the men’s back tees.
Other holes mentioned may also fall outside of the 300 yd men’s back tee limit, which was very deliberately chosen for there seems to be a distinct gap in the men’s game between long par-3’s and the ego/vanity mark at 300 yds. And it’s that gap, the ‘ego/vanity gap’ (?) that I wished to explore.

That tee at St. Enodoc was added +/- 20 years ago; the hole was 274 yards when I first saw it and much better for not having that tee.  So if that was due to the ego/vanity gap, it's the gap of some green chairman or consulting designer rather than Braid.


Mark will say this makes his point that we shouldn't just focus on back tees, but Mark is also an advocate for providing many choices of tees, so maybe that disqualifies him.

Assuming the tee is on the way from the 3rd green, I don't see an issue with a longer tee for #4. Folks are walking right by the area, why not put a tee in? I feel the same for 18 Kington. If there is a good spot for a new tee longer than what exists and the walk is the same, why not?


Ciao

[Mark_Fine]

Sean,
I feel that way on some courses trudging all the way "often backwards" to the back tees.  Maybe now you know how all the forward tee players feel.  It is actually not that bad as you have to cover that ground anyway as you are walking forward.  Enjoy the walk. 


My main point is that those 250-300 yard tees/starting points for the hole, are available on almost every great par four. 

[Sean_A]

Sean,
I feel that way on some courses trudging all the way "often backwards" to the back tees.  Maybe now you know how all the forward tee players feel.  It is actually not that bad as you have to cover that ground anyway as you are walking forward.  Enjoy the walk. 


My main point is that those 250-300 yard tees/starting points for the hole, are available on almost every great par four.

Mark


I don't consider it the same thing at all.  You are suggesting mega forward tees in front of the forward tees. That creates long walks between green and tee on every hole. IMO, the fewer and shorter the breaks in being engaged with the course the better. While you won't walk any further, you will be less engaged for more time while on the course. I can walk anywhere for free.  Why make me do that to reach a tee after I paid money? Basically, mega tees encourages cart use and that is exactly what golf should be avoiding. I can understand that hands are tied once a course is built and trying to "fix" the design with retro-fitted tees may be the only solution, but its really lipstick on a pig. Archies screwed up and now they say they have a great solution  . Placing a back tee at 4 St E just offers a tee option in dead space. Mega tees are not typically in dead space.  They are in playing areas from tees further back.

Ciao

[Dan_Callahan]

The 1st at Hoylake/RLGC, across the OB cop would be splendid at such a length. Foxy at Dornoch?

I feel like moving up on Foxy would make the hole far less interesting. I've only played it once, and I'm sure the strategy can change day to day based on weather and wind. But when I was there, it was about 460 yards, playing into a decent headwind. A shot down the right would leave a blind second. Not just blind, but you could be stuck behind some tall dunes. If you were too tight to them, there's no way you can get over with a long iron, so you'd be forced to play short of the green. Going down the left, on the other hand, gave you a clear view to the elevated green and no mounds to clear. If I was playing from 300-yard tees, I'd just bomb the ball as far as I could. You'd clear all the mounding on the right and would end up somewhere near the base of the green. Even if you got stuck behind a mound, you'd be throwing a 60-degree wedge up and over it without any issue. The hole basically turns into a pitch and putt.

[Mark_Fine]

Sean,
There are probably already forward tees at these distances on most holes (or at least there should be).  How do you think those players get there after playing the previous hole.  There is no architectural error.  You have heard me say we are setting up regulation length 18 holes courses to play as 18 par three holes on certain days/times.  Golfers love it.  You don't have to play all the holes from this distance if you don't want to but "the option is there".


Dan,
Wouldn't most any hole in the 250-300 yard range be a drive chip and putt for many golfers?  That green at Foxy is still not easy to hit even with a 60 degree wedge    Again, the option to play the hole from this distance is there.  On many courses the option to go further back (if you would want to) is not.

[Thomas Dai]

I'd rather walk forwards than trudge back (especially if there's then a forced carry!).
As to the 4th at St Enodoc, Googleearth shows there to be 5 teeing areas. 4 of them require a walk forward from the 3rd green, the 5th, the longest playing rearmost, sits to the left and fractionally to the rearmost part of the 3rd green.
Ref the Foxy 14th: angles, strategic and playability options, the dune ridgeline and it's extensions into the valley, the greens contouring, its hole locations and its firmness, the wind direction and strength and the delightfully rascally raised green with both severe mown run-off and gunched sides. Note also how per Googleearth the walk-back from the centre of the 13th green to the rearmost Foxy 14th tee is appox 80 yds.
250-300 yrds can be covered in many different ways. Which way gives the player the likelihood of making the lowest score most frequently however and does the player have sufficient control over their ego and vanity to allow them to pursue the most likely option?
atb

[Dan_Callahan]

Dan,
Wouldn't most any hole in the 250-300 yard range be a drive chip and putt for many golfers?  That green at Foxy is still not easy to hit even with a 60 degree wedge    Again, the option to play the hole from this distance is there.  On many courses the option to go further back (if you would want to) is not.

With no bunkers or hazards in play, Foxy at 300 yards would mean driver every time.

There are plenty of holes with water near the green, or tree issues, or deep bunkers where I might decide to hit an iron if the tees were moved up to 300 yards. The short hole at TPC River Highlands (15?) ... pros all hit driver or 3-wood. But for the average golfer, with OB tight on the right and water in play on the left, there is some thought that goes into what to hit.

And frankly, I'm not scratch golfer, but I like my chances hitting the green on Foxy with a wedge. That green is massive. I might four-putt, but that's a different issue ...

[Thomas Dai]

With no bunkers or hazards in play, Foxy at 300 yards would mean driver every time.
There are plenty of holes with water near the green, or tree issues, or deep bunkers where I might decide to hit an iron if the tees were moved up to 300 yards. The short hole at TPC River Highlands (15?) ... pros all hit driver or 3-wood. But for the average golfer, with OB tight on the right and water in play on the left, there is some thought that goes into what to hit.
And frankly, I'm not scratch golfer, but I like my chances hitting the green on Foxy with a wedge. That green is massive. I might four-putt, but that's a different issue ...

!?
atb

[Tom_Doak]

Note also how per Googleearth the walk-back from the centre of the 13th green to the rearmost Foxy 14th tee is appox 80 yds.

That's because the 13th hole was tacked into the routing at a later date.  The original course went straight from 12 to 14 which is why the back tee for 14 is right beside the 12th green.

[Luke Eipper]

I would consider adding three holes from the Melbourne Sandbelt to the discussion.
3 @ Kingston Heath
9 @ Kingston Heath
1 @ Victoria


Also, just a smidgen over 300 yards is also 10 @ Royal Melbourne West.

[Scott Senior]

I would add....
[/color]
[/color]The Ridgewood Country Club 6 Center 291 yards:[/color]

Known as the “Nickel and Dime”, 6 Center is Ridgewood’s shortest par 4. The hole plays only 275 yards from the blue tees but tests the mettle of even the best golfers. The short length of the hole presents a variety of options. The longest hitters can attempt to drive the green. Most players follow a two-shot strategy. Long hitters who play a driver off the tee can over hit the fairway and come to rest in gnarly, thick rough on the upslope to the green. But a poorly struck iron or rescue tee ball can find either of two fairway bunkers or thick rough. The approach shot is very tricky. A short iron shot that must be played accurately (with a soft touch) up to a small and extremely narrow “plateau green” surrounded by six deadly bunkers with those on the left side of the green the most foreboding. Failure to hit to the upper or lower tier where the flag stick is located will result in a challenging two-putt with subtle breaks that seem almost impossible to be real. This hole claims a place on Golf Digest’s “Top 500 Best Holes in the World” and holds a place among the Sports Illustrated “Top 18 Tillinghast Holes.” The Met Golfer also rates it in their “Dream 18.” Modern legend suggests that the “Nickel and Dime” name comes from the strategy Tillinghast anticipated would be employed by the game’s best players. A Nickel (5-iron) to the fairway would be followed by a Dime (10-iron ) to the green.

[Tom_Doak]

I would consider adding three holes from the Melbourne Sandbelt to the discussion.
3 @ Kingston Heath
9 @ Kingston Heath
1 @ Victoria


Also, just a smidgen over 300 yards is also 10 @ Royal Melbourne West.

You missed the best one:  4 @ Woodlands

[Tim Martin]

11 Lancaster CC  294 yds
14 Leatherstocking GC 285 yds
17 Morris County Club  290 yds

[Tim Gavrich]

Some favorites in Connecticut:

1
- CC of Farmington: 290
- Pequabuck GC: 294


15
- TPC River Highlands: 296