Just to take the debate on Par 3's in a different direction what would you consider an acceptable length for a Par 5 the 3rd at my club Styrrup Hall plays 712 off the back tees and normally plays into the wind!!! most of the time you have to play the hole brilliantly just to scrap a par!! just wondered if it was just me that thinks this is abit long??
|
 |
 Par 3 debate - agree with the majority, I just don't enjoy long par 3's. We have 3 at 173, 205 and 225 so have only one opportunity to experience the delight of hitting a precision short-mid iron into a par 3(unless you really duff your tee shot on one of the longer ones!). The lengthening of courses - totally stupid, leave well alone to allow the game to be enjoyed by the maximum amount of golfers. If technology makes things too easy for you then your handicap will come down until it ceases to be too easy. For the pros just make them use a tournament grade ball that doesn't fly as far. Any amateur wanting to make it as a pro will need to use/practice with this ball. the rest of us can enjoy our golf without facing crazy carries to fairways, constant fairway woods into greens and ludicrously long par 3's. If you're one of these amateurs that has to play with identical kit to the pro's, you can, again your handicap will reflect this. IMHO good golf should be more about precision than brute force coupled with the flexibility of youth. You can have a course that is perfectly challenging at 6840 yards. 10 x par 4's at average of 400 yards, 4 x par 5's at average 550 yards and 4 par 3's at average 160 yards. Make sure the green staff understand teeing position versus weather conditions and you have a great test of golf without being too harsh. I like Boa's comment re the Players Club and pros not being able to hack it off the back tees. I've witnessed this in pro-ams as well which were thoroughly miserable for the 75% of the field, amateurs, that were footing the bill for the day. In this country we seem to be just copying the US for sheer length. What they seem to ignore is the amount of times they have elevated tees, warmer conditions and that they have the fairways super hard and fast. I've witnessed many instances of tee shots, in US tourneys, running for well over a hundred yards. We'd all be hitting 300+ if we had the same conditions.
|
|
 MacB: That's possibly the most salient argument I've heard about course design re: length!
Architecture should be for the majority & not the elite few (even the elite few within the elite few) - seeing how it's *US* who actually pay for their upkeep either through membership or through a (more often than not, extortionate) green fee.
You ought to cut'n'paste that post & email it to the R&A, EGU & PGA. Hell, if it were a petition, I'd sign it!
|
|
 Indeed, an excellent observation MacB. Perhaps you are missing your vocation! Some comments from various course designers that I've found interesting: "It is quire easy to make a course too difficult just by length. Acourse must be laid out in such a manner that the good short golfer can get to the green quite as well as the long hitter" Donald Ross "The emphasis should be on natural beauty, not on artificial features. There should always be an alternative route for the weaker player, yet a sufficient number of heroic carries to challenge the stronger one. There should be a complete absence of annoyance caused by the searching for lost balls (in heavy rough) and the beginner should not be continually harassed by losing strokes from playing out of sand bunkers" Alister McKenzie "A great golf hole is one which puts a question mark into the player's mind when he arrives on the tee to play it" Mackenzie Ross "The vital things about a hole is that it should be either more difficult than it looks or look more difficult than it is" "Course should provide as much opportunity for mental agility as for physical effort" Tom Simpson
|
|
 Boanegas
I've read every book known to man on Hogan, and its in one of them, will try and dig it out. Incidently, Vijay Singh has a driver at 6 degrees open apparently. Back to Hogan, Davis Love hit one of Hogans old driver and practically wrapped it around his waist trying to hook it, and all he got was a little fade................
|
|
Wormburner All I can tell you from OBSERVATION that Hogan;s PERSIMMOM driver ar Carnoustie looked just a TAD toed-out, the same as MOST top amateurs and professionals whose swings-at least with a driver and fairway woods TEND to draw the ball.
|
|
 Re Par 3 discussion.... I feel Par 3's should test your mid-iron type play, or long iron to short iron play. I really dont see the point of long Par 3's that require a hefty wood/rescue strike from a good player and are almost unreachable by many golfers. Par 4's test your driving and approach skills, Par 5's test your strategic skills and wedge play, a Par 3 should test your pure iron play. Whats the point of having to hit the same driving shot you hit on all the other holes off the tee? All the Par 3's I know that I rate aren't long, I mean 190yds or less, but there are some real challenging holes.
|
|
 mmmm....played at Stowmarket on Friday....nice course apart from many blind tee shots but relevant to the par 3 discussion for the 4th hole....all of 250yards with a sodding great oak(?) tree blocking out any sort of chance for any golfer who hits the ball from left to right. OK its downhill for most of the way and in the summer you could reach it with a 5 wood landed short and the ball would no doubt run on to the green.....but in soft autumn conditions....driver for mere mortals....3 wood for the more talented amongst us. Its the oak tree at 90 yards short of the green that spoils it though.... after the thirty odd of us were finished on Friday we reckon we'd removed more than a few leaves and branches between us!!!!!
|
|
 Long par 3s and long courses are for lazy course designers. It takes far more imagination to make an interesting short par 3 rather than just trying to whack the cover off the ball. The same applies to the shorter courses. There are some excellent 5000 yard courses in Scotland that still present a challenge and are not dominated by long hitters. Our course has two par 3s of 200 yards, one of 140 and one of 130. And the 130 can be the most tricky due to a smaller green with slopes front and back, a heavily shrubbed hillock to the right and a seriously strong side wind predominantly from the left. Hopefully this fascination with "championship length" courses will eventually be seen for what it is, a marketing ploy.
|
|
 One of the best Par 3's that I have played is the 8th on Windermere at 129 off the yellows and 137 off the whites it is a superb test off iron skills. You tee off from one hill with the green on the opposite hill with plenty of uphill slope if you are short and plenty of trouble if you go too long.
|
|
Heres the course guide for the 8th on windermere
|
| Edited: 12/10/08 21:57 |
Come on Fugitive, that's a cracking hole! We shouldn't get hung up about what it says on the tee box/card re the par of the hole. There will be a sensible way to play the hole for a player of any standard, and it might not be the "orthodox" way.
|
|
 McStumpy, have you ever played Hacienda Del Alamo? near Murcia, Thats a Dave Thomas designed and is one of the Finest courses in south Eastern spain. Its a shame its situated in the middle of an overpriced housing Urbanization! But is a Great Course in spite of this!
No, I have yet to play golf outside the UK & Ireland. I am supposed to be going to Girona next May for a few days golf - but given the current financial crises and the fact that I work for a bank.... maybe not!
|
|
 Just to take the debate on Par 3's in a different direction what would you consider an acceptable length for a Par 5 the 3rd at my club Styrrup Hall plays 712 off the back tees and normally plays into the wind!!! most of the time you have to play the hole brilliantly just to scrap a par!! just wondered if it was just me that thinks this is abit long??
Whaaaattttt!!!!!! - a bit long? No it's not a bit long - it is 100 yards too long, you could land a f!cking Learjet on that. Just an example of how to 'tough up' a hole purely with length. Absolutely stupid, particularly as the course has a par 4 of 268 off the whites - why didn't they make that a par 3 and really go for Championship status? It's a bloody good job there are some beautiful and intricate short courses that are a fascinating test of finesse, otherwise I would give the game up, as I am losing those abilities and doing my back in trying to play these stupid modern monsters. No more hit and hope crap - next year I am going to actively seek true gems of subtle skill and will stay away from anything that brags about its length. Bring on the gems - keep the airfields for aircraft.
|
|
Alan SO pleased to have had the opoprtunity of having a chat to you today. I agree 100% with everything you have said. The ghosts of such great golf course architects as Braid, Park, Ross, Mackenzie and IMO THE greatest-Harry Colt are probably turning-nay,spinning in their graves at the thought of these large fields with golf holes attached like hideous carbuncles! Why SHOULD the J.B Holmes of this world triumph over great golf artists with silky all-round games but only relatively modest length. I always imagined golf was meant to be ENJOYABLE not a test of strength, endurance and a total lack of imagination! Taz, may I join you in testing and recommending courses exactly as you have described? Surely, there must be SOME about??
|
|
Taz if you take up Boaerges request I would highly recommend Windermere - it is 67 Par but has lots of trouble if you are not straight and not a single bunker on the course and a total distance of 4195 off the yellows. More than a match for your average golfer
|
|
