[Tommy Williamsen]

I think many of us would think that designing the second shot on a par five is one of the most difficult shots to design. To make it interesting for the long hitter and for those of us that are relatively short takes creativity and maybe some luck.

11 and 16 at Sawgrass have second shots that keep everyone's interest. 15 at Ballyhack challenges the long hitter and gives me two options: one safe and the other risky.

17 at Baltusrol Lower challenges the long hitter to take on the cross bunkers. If I hit a good enough drive I might take them on but a layup might be prudent. For many it is a four shot hole so the second shot is a layup to the layup.

The fourth hole at Four Streams is a good example of a medium length par five.  From the tee there is a series of deep bunkers down the right side. If you hit a good drive you have a decision to make because there are cross bunkers that jut out into the fairway.  There is, however, fairway all the way to the green along the left side.  The decision is, "Do I try to carry the bunkers, hit it down the left side into a smallish fairway, or layup to about 125 yards. The green has some good slope right to left.  There is a bunker fronting the left side of the green. If you decide to go for the green from a long distance the ball can be run onto the green by hitting it to the right side, where the slope of the land will funnel the ball onto the green.  There are decisions to be made on all three shots.

[Ira Fishman]

Waterville 18 fits the bill. There is the drop off to the beach along the whole right side. Bunkers protect the left in the landing area. For us shorter hitters the landing area narrows at 125 yards or so from the middle of the green. For long hitters, there are drop offs into hollows left and right short of the green. It also is a very scenic hole.


Ira

[Tom_Doak]

I think a lot of people want us to do more with this shot than they ought to want.


The second shot for a long hitter on any par-5 now is aiming at the green.  So you've got to design the green to accept a very long approach.  This is appropriate, since a lot of regular golfers will have a long third shot [or fourth shot] to get home.


It's the idea that everyone else needs some interesting hazard to negotiate on the second shot, that gets me.  If we put a bunker 100 or 150 yards from the green, most of the people who go in it are going to make six or seven, because the good players will be well past all that.  So why do you need much of anything there?  Just hitting two solid shots up the fairway, and avoiding losing distance in the rough, is the primary objective for most.


If anything, I would put bunkers +/- 50 yards short of the green, to catch the player who thinks he is trying to go for the green in two, but really can't.  Even pros would be wary of bunkers in that position, if they weren't 100% sure of getting past them.

[Peter Pallotta]

Because they are so familiar to millions of average golf fans and so highly prized and praised for the excitement they annually provide, it's probably natural and to be expected that the experts and true cognoscenti are often more critical of/discerning about the two back nine Par 5s at Augusta than the rest of us.
And yet, in the context of Tommy's specific question about the 2nd shot on Par 5s, I think the 13th and 15th can more than hold their own.
Of course, the 2nd shot on the 8th hole at Crystal Downs: thrilling and challenging and fun, with nary a fairway bunker in sight. 'Go and do likewise'.

[Jim Sherma]

I think that par-5's fail more with lousy second shot options as opposed to being made by good options. Two that fail miserably are both on Iron Valley, a PB Dye course in Lebanon, PA. After a decent drive the best option on both holes are swinging away at the green, not a great choice but better than the alternative. The lay up is to an area that slopes down right to left to a hazard that continues all the way up to the green. Both fairways are always soft and the prospect of a wedge-9 iron off a mushy hook lie with a hazard left is worse than just blowing it at the green and dropping somewhere by it lying three if I overcook it. Other failures would include a lay up that needs to be taken with a short iron leaving a long iron/wood to the green.

[Peter Flory]

Streamsong Red #7 has the most interesting 2nd shot that I can think of for a par 5.  Water left, which makes it a gamble to go for it.  But the real magic is the mounds to the right and the ability to use the fairway to the right to position the 2nd shot for the ideal pitch.  That could even mean intentionally knocking it past pin high and then having a backwards diagonal pitch around a mound.  It could mean leaving it way right to leave a fuller shot to get some spin.  And the long green creates a lot of different possible combinations so that you really have to factor in the pin placement when devising the strategy. 


It's a hole where every time I play it, I stand there and re-examine what I should have done instead. 

[Michael Tamburrini]

The 6th at Cruden Bay is the second shot that I always found most interesting (granted, I haven't played as many courses as most on here).


Firstly, getting on the green in two is a fantasy for the vast majority. If it's into the wind, most people wouldn't be long enough. If it's downwind, it'd be pretty much impossible to stop the ball. That's before we add in the elevated green, the burn short, hay and death to the left, and the fact that it's completely blind and, because the hole doglegs left, even getting the correct line is nigh on impossible.


So, you're going to lay up. If you do, there's two smelly wee bunkers that sit on the outside of the dogleg, about 120 yards from the green. They look innocent enough and they just sit there, goading you. The ideal lay up is as close to them as possible. Do you want to risk going in them? If you lay up short of them then your third short will be blind (and you'll be hitting to the aforementioned elevated green with a 6 iron, most likely into the wind - it's not ideal). If you go past them then you're getting close to the burn.


The only other option would be to try and carry the burn and miss the green right but it's dependent on weather conditions and carries it's own risk.


As far as second shots on par 5s go, I haven't played any that caused me more issues and more stress.

[Thomas Dai]

A perhaps overlooked aspect of par-5's (par-4's too) is cumulative wind direction.
The following contains some generalisations as it's the only way I can describe matters via a keyboard.
Whereas on a par-3 only 1 full shot should be effected by the wind and on a par-4 hopefully 2 shots on a par-5 its hopefully 3 shots (okay 2 sometimes for some 4+ sometimes for others).
But whereas (for descriptive purposes) a 20 yd wind against, assuming solid club/ball contact, on a par-3 is say 20 yds against on a par-4 its say 40 yds against. However, on a par-5 it's likely to be 60 yds against, ie the hole is playing 60 yrds longer. And the opposite downwind.
Just throwing another aspect into the mixer. There are others.
atb

[Ally Mcintosh]

On three of the six par-5’s at Carne, the second shot is the most thought-provoking shot on the hole.

[Tim Martin]

Lots to think about on the 2nd shot on Yale 18.  You have to decide on playing left to the upper fairway or right to the lower fairway. If you pick the upper then you have to think about what distance you want to hit the shot as getting stuck on the downslope at 140 yards is inferior to a level lie on top at 165 yards. Lots of options.

[Jeff_Brauer]

I think a lot of people want us to do more with this shot than they ought to want.


The second shot for a long hitter on any par-5 now is aiming at the green.  So you've got to design the green to accept a very long approach.  This is appropriate, since a lot of regular golfers will have a long third shot [or fourth shot] to get home.


It's the idea that everyone else needs some interesting hazard to negotiate on the second shot, that gets me.  If we put a bunker 100 or 150 yards from the green, most of the people who go in it are going to make six or seven, because the good players will be well past all that.  So why do you need much of anything there?  Just hitting two solid shots up the fairway, and avoiding losing distance in the rough, is the primary objective for most.


If anything, I would put bunkers +/- 50 yards short of the green, to catch the player who thinks he is trying to go for the green in two, but really can't.  Even pros would be wary of bunkers in that position, if they weren't 100% sure of getting past them.

Interesting take, and in many ways I agree.  I mean, if we have 14 repetitive tee shots where the basic goal is to hit is as far as you can, why would the second shot on 2-4 par 5 holes be the first thing a gca fixed?  To TD's point, probably the hardest club to hit is FW wood "off the deck" and for most average players, maybe that alone is the challenge of the second shot on a par 5, providing the middle and forward tees on a course allow reaching most if not all par 4 holes with something less than a full 3W.


No doubt the second shot on a par 5, for most, is inherently the weakest strategic shot.  Tee shots set up the approach, and the approach shot is key on any par 4, setting up a strategic relationship in an efficient minimum of 2 shots.  It's hard to set up a shot to set up an approach shot, but not always impossible.  It's just that a lot of golfers don't like it, and of course, its one more chance for a golf hole to go haywire, sometimes taking an entire round with it.


Over the years, I have had several ideas. 


I tend to think the centerline bunker, with a wide green, may work better on second shots of par 5 holes than on a tee shot.  It gives the 4 way option on the second hole, depending on it's distance from the green and hole length.


Perhaps more rolling ground contours from the front of the green back to 140-160, where it is flat isn't a bad strategy.


The Pete Dye (and others) of having the tee shot draw/fade setup and the second shot set up for a fade/draw seems like a nice well rounded test for a par 5.  Add a green that is shallow (at least for the Sunday pin)  and there are 3 distinct shot tests.


Larry Packard always put a double dogleg, or zig zag par 5 on each design, as well as one double dog leg in the same direction, maybe even one each in opposite directions.  Again, while the second shot might not be anything special, the par 5 is the only type of hole you can execute that kind of hole pattern.  Maybe the fourth par 5 would have been perfectly straight.


I always liked the 6th at Muirfield Village (it may be changed now) where the par 5 was gently uphill, and Jack staggered bunkers all the way from LZ 1 to green.  Looks great on the right land, and instead of saying "let's not punish average golfers" it gives each distance level something to zig zag towards the green, not unlike the Mac Prize winning hole.


I also like a reverse slope green, a la Ross on 14 at Oakland Hills for a reachable par 5.  It makes landing over any cross bunkers 50 yards from the green as TD postulates, a bit trickier, and hopefully, still playable by others approaching on the third shot with a short iron.


Perhaps one with trees or bunkers on both sides for accuracy, one "locked up" either right or left, etc.  How about an open second LZ, paired with a very rolling green?


I always try to group those 3-4 second shots and try to make sure each has some distinct characteristic.  While again, maybe not the most special shot, at least it is a unique challenge.

Also, I recall working with PGA Tour player Notah Begay III at Firekeeper.  The 11th is a par 5 of 540 yards, so I used an "Eleanor's Teeth" type green.  He reminded me that at a 286 driving length, and no more than 255 second shot, that 540 yards was at the long end of reachable for him.  Larry Nelson had about the same statistics in his heyday, and directed me to make those length holes with a narrow ramp into the green.  He figured Norman would be flying a 2 iron in, and all he asked for was a chance to get on that green with his accuracy, so many of my par 5 holes feature what I call the "catwalk" approach to the green.

The average drive on the PGA Tour is still "only" 295, perhaps making 560 yard holes unreachable for at least the bottom half of the players on Tour, and they are still the "best of the best" with only 1% of amateurs anywhere close to their distance.  Short version, I believe designing anything other than an annual TPC or Tournament course for the two dozen 320+ drivers is ridiculous, and disregarding how the other 99% play is not a great design. 




 

[Ira Fishman]

Although not as dramatic as Yale 18, Number 8 at Blackwolf Run River presents the high/low fairway option. Both Par 5s on the back nine (11 and 16) keep even good players’ attention on the second shot. The course has one of the stronger collections of Par 5s among courses that have four of them.


Ira

[Tommy Williamsen]

Jeff Brauer wrote,
"I always liked the 6th at Muirfield Village (it may be changed now) where the par 5 was gently uphill, and Jack staggered bunkers all the way from LZ 1 to green.  Looks great on the right land, and instead of saying "let's not punish average golfers" it gives each distance level something to zig zag towards the green, not unlike the Mac Prize winning hole."

Jeff, I think you mean number seven.


Maybe on some holes the more difficult of the first two shots is the second shot. Going back to MV, number five has a relatively straight forward tee shot but the second shot has a lot of risk reward for most players.

[Rob Marshall]

"Larry Packard always put a double dogleg, or zig zag par 5 on each design, as well as one double dog leg in the same direction, maybe even one each in opposite directions.  Again, while the second shot might not be anything special, the par 5 is the only type of hole you can execute that kind of hole pattern.  Maybe the fourth par 5 would have been perfectly straight."

Jeff,
I think the 2nd shot on the 7th on the Island at Innisbrook is a perfect example. I love that hole. Best par 5 on the property.

[Ira Fishman]

I think a lot of people want us to do more with this shot than they ought to want.

It's the idea that everyone else needs some interesting hazard to negotiate on the second shot, that gets me.  If we put a bunker 100 or 150 yards from the green, most of the people who go in it are going to make six or seven, because the good players will be well past all that.  So why do you need much of anything there?  Just hitting two solid shots up the fairway, and avoiding losing distance in the rough, is the primary objective for most.

I do not think either 14 or 17 at Streamsong Blue subscribe to this philosophy. And both are excellent holes even for aging short hitters like myself.


Ira

[Kalen Braley]

I think a lot of people want us to do more with this shot than they ought to want.

It's the idea that everyone else needs some interesting hazard to negotiate on the second shot, that gets me.  If we put a bunker 100 or 150 yards from the green, most of the people who go in it are going to make six or seven, because the good players will be well past all that.  So why do you need much of anything there?  Just hitting two solid shots up the fairway, and avoiding losing distance in the rough, is the primary objective for most.

I do not think either 14 or 17 at Streamsong Blue subscribe to this philosophy. And both are excellent holes even for aging short hitters like myself.

Ira

Ira,

Same for Pac Dunes, Ballyneal, and RCCC.  I used the Google Earth measurement Tool to see if there were fairway bunkers where at least part of the bunker was 100-150 yards from the green.  As a high capper, I also absolutely loved all 3 courses.

Pac Dunes - All 4 par 5s have at least 2 bunkers on each hole in this range.
RCCC - 2 of 3 par 5s have at least 1 bunker in range.
Ballyneal - 2 of 3 par 5s have at least 1 bunker in range.

[Tom_Doak]

I do not think either 14 or 17 at Streamsong Blue subscribe to this philosophy. And both are excellent holes even for aging short hitters like myself.

Ira

Ira,

Same for Pac Dunes, Ballyneal, and RCCC.  I used the Google Earth measurement Tool to see if there were fairway bunkers where at least part of the bunker was 100-150 yards from the green.  As a high capper, I also absolutely loved all 3 courses.

Pac Dunes - All 4 par 5s have at least 2 bunkers on each hole in this range.
RCCC - 2 of 3 par 5s have at least 1 bunker in range.
Ballyneal - 2 of 3 par 5s have at least 1 bunker in range.

Touché.  But, to be fair, all of those courses have fairways that are 60+ yards wide and little to no rough, so that even with the bunkers, you've got a lot more room for your second shot than on your typical parkland course.

[Tommy Williamsen]

I don’t think that every or even most par fives should have second shots fraught with danger. One or two might have the second shot more difficult than the drive. Having both the drive and second shot filled with danger is too much. Not even Pine Valley has that.

[Kalen Braley]

I do not think either 14 or 17 at Streamsong Blue subscribe to this philosophy. And both are excellent holes even for aging short hitters like myself.

Ira

Ira,

Same for Pac Dunes, Ballyneal, and RCCC.  I used the Google Earth measurement Tool to see if there were fairway bunkers where at least part of the bunker was 100-150 yards from the green.  As a high capper, I also absolutely loved all 3 courses.

Pac Dunes - All 4 par 5s have at least 2 bunkers on each hole in this range.
RCCC - 2 of 3 par 5s have at least 1 bunker in range.
Ballyneal - 2 of 3 par 5s have at least 1 bunker in range.

Touché.  But, to be fair, all of those courses have fairways that are 60+ yards wide and little to no rough, so that even with the bunkers, you've got a lot more room for your second shot than on your typical parkland course.

Tom,

That's a fair point. As I recall all the tee shots for each course, the only two that were a bit nerve racking was 17@RCCC for its do or die nature and #3 at Pac Dunes due to all the gorse down the left which has since been removed. Ballyneal as I recollect is especially interesting as you really have to hit something gawd-awful just to lose a ball.

P.S.  I'm sure with multiple playings I'd probably fret over #14 at PD, some people on GCA have put up some monster numbers, but in my only playing I knocked it inside 8 feet for an easy birdie. 

[Jeff_Brauer]

Jeff Brauer wrote,
"I always liked the 6th at Muirfield Village (it may be changed now) where the par 5 was gently uphill, and Jack staggered bunkers all the way from LZ 1 to green.  Looks great on the right land, and instead of saying "let's not punish average golfers" it gives each distance level something to zig zag towards the green, not unlike the Mac Prize winning hole."

Jeff, I think you mean number seven.


Maybe on some holes the more difficult of the first two shots is the second shot. Going back to MV, number five has a relatively straight forward tee shot but the second shot has a lot of risk reward for most players.

Ok, my bad on the hole number.  As to your "fraught with danger" comment on another post, I agree.  Of course, I think in terms of setting up shots, not punishing any way.  But for strategic value, at least some version of the tee shot ought to theoretically make the second shot easier, but not all of them.


I think many architects (and golfers!) informally look at holes with an eye towards a balance of difficulty.  I mentally rank the individual shots, i.e., simple (1), medium (2), or 3 (difficult).  Most par 4 holes in that kind of system would rank as "6", or at least from 4-6.  I would probably look again if I had a long par 4 with a ranking of 8 or 9, as it would probably be way too hard for average players.  A par 5 with all 2-3 difficulty rankings would just extend that misery even further!

[Tom_Doak]

Having both the drive and second shot filled with danger is too much. Not even Pine Valley has that.

True, and an excellent example:  if you drove it into a lateral bunker at the 7th, which forced you to lay up short of Hell’s Half Acre, that would be not much fun.

[Thomas Dai]

On three of the six par-5’s at Carne, the second shot is the most thought-provoking shot on the hole.

Proper par-5’s. No mollycoddling! And with an almost complete absence of bunkers too.
Atb

[John Mayhugh]

I think the 5th at Holston Hills works really well. 554-574 from the tees most play. Ran's description:
One of the game's most attractive long three shot holes. Bunkers lurk down both sides of the fairway and the grass faces are high enough to prevent the golfer from hitting more than a mid iron out. Any misstep on the first two shots and in all likelihood, the green fails to be in reach for one's third. The bunkering insists that the golfer concentrate on each of his three shots, a rarity.https://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/holston-hills-country-club/holston-hills-pgii

The ideal line and distance for the second shot vary based on where your tee shot is and your appetite for risk. There's a small depression in the fairway about 240 yards from the tee. and a large bunker about 285 (a little uphill). If you drive it 220, you only have about 105 yards to get past the primary fairway bunkers, but a low shot could hit the face and drop in - I've seen it happen a lot. A longer tee shot brings temptation to try to hit it closer to the green, bringing the bunkers on the left into play. No matter where I've driven it on the hole, there's really never an automatic second shot. You have to plot your way around the hazards.

holston 5th aerial by john mayhugh, on Flickr

[Brett Meyer]

Although not as dramatic as Yale 18, Number 8 at Blackwolf Run River presents the high/low fairway option. Both Par 5s on the back nine (11 and 16) keep even good players’ attention on the second shot. The course has one of the stronger collections of Par 5s among courses that have four of them.


Ira

I agree completely with this--all three of those second shots are excellent and completely different from each other. The layup on 8 is probably the best split fairway shot that I've seen. It's really intimidating to hit to the high, mostly blind upper fairway but doing so means that you don't have to hit a shot to a high, mostly blind green on your third. It's a completely clear view of the green on the third from the upper fairway.


The second shot on 11 is one of the most thrilling shots that I've ever seen on a golf course. I also think that it's a very effective use of trees on a shot, something for which the River Course is otherwise notoriously hit-or-miss (there are too many of them on both 9 and 13). The carry over the river on the second is further the further right that you go but if you bailout left, the narrow poplar trees can knock your ball back into the water. So you'd better hit at least a pretty good shot if you go for the carry. A fade off the trees works nicely.


The 16th is the most questionable of these three for me, but I think that it still works. Here you have the big linden tree on the edge of the river blocking the direct path to the green. If you've hit a long drive and can reach the green, you'd better hit it solid to carry the tree or with a pretty good draw to go around it. If you can't reach the green, you need to be careful to either hit it far enough right to avoid the tree, or far enough back to go over it or left of it. I think that it'd take a few plays to figure out exactly where you can and can't be around this tree (and that will differ for people of different skill sets), but it gives you a lot to think about and plenty of room to avoid it.

[Brad Lawrence]

I think the 5th at Holston Hills works really well. 554-574 from the tees most play. Ran's description:
One of the game's most attractive long three shot holes. Bunkers lurk down both sides of the fairway and the grass faces are high enough to prevent the golfer from hitting more than a mid iron out. Any misstep on the first two shots and in all likelihood, the green fails to be in reach for one's third. The bunkering insists that the golfer concentrate on each of his three shots, a rarity.https://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/holston-hills-country-club/holston-hills-pgii

The ideal line and distance for the second shot vary based on where your tee shot is and your appetite for risk. There's a small depression in the fairway about 240 yards from the tee. and a large bunker about 285 (a little uphill). If you drive it 220, you only have about 105 yards to get past the primary fairway bunkers, but a low shot could hit the face and drop in - I've seen it happen a lot. A longer tee shot brings temptation to try to hit it closer to the green, bringing the bunkers on the left into play. No matter where I've driven it on the hole, there's really never an automatic second shot. You have to plot your way around the hazards.

holston 5th aerial by john mayhugh, on Flickr

I’ve only played HH twice but I said 5 was the best three shot par five I had ever played.  Longer par fives can often feel like two meaningless slaps to the hundred yard marker but this hole presented a fun challenge to get yourself into a position for a wedge and birdie opportunity.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()