|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on May 29, 2012 15:09:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by cloran on May 29, 2012 19:03:48 GMT -5
At least they averaged only 17.8y off with the 5 iron... close enough for government work.  |
|
|
|
Post by rohlio on May 29, 2012 23:02:05 GMT -5
"200+ yard par 3’s are increasingly common, but that doesn’t mean that they make sense. Is hitting 3W into a par 3 fun?"
Best sentence in the whole article. I am sick to death of hitting 4 hybrid through 3w at par 3's. Is it that hard to design a fun playable par 3 with a mid iron? It seems like all the yardage that gets added when I play tips on most courses is on the 4 par 3's.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on May 30, 2012 7:27:55 GMT -5
I completely agree. I remember feeling this way since I was a junior golfer. I'm not sure where the idea that par-3's should be a long iron to hybrid for me, who generates 110-113 mph of driver speed, was mandatory. I always thought of par-3's more of being a hole where you hit an iron into the green. And that meant about 5-iron for the regular golfer as the longest club.
I can't get thru it pretty well and it probably provides me with an advantage over other golfers because I hit my long irons pretty well because I focus on them. But, it usually doesn't make for a classic, interesting golf hole.
3JACK
|
|
|
|
Post by iacas on May 30, 2012 7:34:22 GMT -5
Some of the most interesting and widely known holes are the short ones, be they par 4s or 3s (some par fives, but not typically). The 10th at Riviera. The drivable holes anywhere. 12 at Augusta. 7 at Pebble Beach. 17 at Sawgrass. 12 at Muirfield Village. 18 at St. Andrews. etc. I completely agree. I remember feeling this way since I was a junior golfer. I'm not sure where the idea that par-3's should be a long iron to hybrid for me, who generates 110-113 mph of driver speed, was mandatory. I always thought of par-3's more of being a hole where you hit an iron into the green. And that meant about 5-iron for the regular golfer as the longest club. I can't get thru it pretty well and it probably provides me with an advantage over other golfers because I hit my long irons pretty well because I focus on them. But, it usually doesn't make for a classic, interesting golf hole. |
|
|
|
Post by cloran on May 30, 2012 10:11:58 GMT -5
I'm always amazed by how par 3s are handicapped on the scorecard. The par 5s are usually the "hardest" and par 3s the "easiest"... But why? That should be reversed in 90% of the cases.
My home course has 27 holes set up as three 9 hole tracks. There are 2 par 3s on each nine hole track, and they are ranked 8/9 in every case. The par 5s are 1/2/3. On the "blue" course there is a 190y par3 from the WHITE TEES... 205+ from the blue tees... and it's the #8 hoc hole. Guys hit driver off the tee for chripes sake. That same blue course has a 507y par 5 that I reached with a toed-pop up drive of 230y and a solid 3 wood the other day, yet it's the #1 hc hole.
The green track has two par 5s ranked 1/2 respectively. Both holes are UNDER 485y. Yet the 175y par 3 (again, from the white tees, closer to 190y from the blues) that always plays INTO the wind is the #8 hc hole. I very rarely see anyone par the hole, never mind birdie it.
Am I just screwed up in the head and the #1 hc hole is the EASIEST? Have I been reading score cards wrong this whole time?
|
|
|
|
Post by pavaveda on May 30, 2012 11:06:34 GMT -5
Cloran, there's an article about this in Golf Illustrated. In the article it says, "You'll see a lot of par-5s tagged with low hole-handicap numbers. That's because for ... higher-handicap players, it can be tough to string together three good shots. It's not so hard for longer-hitting, steadier players..." "On the flip side, the highest hole-handicap holes tend to be par-3s. When played from the proper tees, the scoring gap between strong and weak players typically is far less."
|
|
|
|
Post by iacas on May 30, 2012 11:15:07 GMT -5
Cloran, there's an article about this in Golf Illustrated. In the article it says, "You'll see a lot of par-5s tagged with low hole-handicap numbers. That's because for ... higher-handicap players, it can be tough to string together three good shots. It's not so hard for longer-hitting, steadier players..." "On the flip side, the highest hole-handicap holes tend to be par-3s. When played from the proper tees, the scoring gap between strong and weak players typically is far less." What he said. It's not about which holes are most difficult, it's about where a higher handicapper is more likely to need strokes to play with a lower handicapper. A low and a high will often both make 4s on par 3s. A low will often make a 4 or a 5 on a par five while the high will make 5, 6, 7, 8... |
|
|
|
Post by cloran on May 30, 2012 12:21:09 GMT -5
That makes sense... thx homies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on May 30, 2012 13:15:23 GMT -5
I think where the issue comes into play is in match play with handicaps. Also, if you're playing in the summer and the ground is rock hard, the big handicap players can shoot well below their average because they are hitting low trajectory shots that are rolling forever. We used to run into that problem at my home course in NY. I remember one year my buddy and I played in a twilight league for the helluva it and come July when the ground was rock hard, we didn't stand a chance because you'd get guys getting 12 strokes for 9-holes and shooting 41, which would mean having to shoot 29 to stand a chance...which was also the course record for 9-holes.
3JACK
|
|
