Long par 3's - Are they fair?

[Threeoffthetee]

I'll start by being honest....my game's in bits at the moment but let's not allow my 14 handicap (and going the wrong way) get in the way with a good debate.

I recently played in a comp. at a course that had two 220+ yd par 3's (one of which is uphill) to greens so small I have seen larger on a pitch and putt course. My argument is this, golf should be a fair test of ability and a hole of this nature is simply a test of power...not skill.

My point is that at this length I am hitting a three wood if I want to carry, but with this club, there is no way I can hold a small saucer-shaped green like the ones on offer. Furthermore at this length some poor souls had to go with a driver. My playing partner who hits the ball a mile went at the greens with a five iron and a four iron giving him a chance of sticking if he finds the surface.

So a shorter hitter has to play a more difficult shot knowing that even if they manage it they have little chance of success. The holes would have been a stern golfing test at 170-180 yds given their size and protection, why the need to make them impossible....or is it just me?

ps - anyone who does not share my opinion should mention how far they hit a five iron in their response

 

[BLAM]

They're not fair to people who want want to keep a decent pace. The ones in my neck of the woods are almost guaranteed to be a source of log jam.

 

[FairwayDodger]

I always think they're a bit harsh but console myself that the ladies tee is usually 40-50 yards further forward!

 

[HomerJSimpson]

We have 6 par 3's. Two are 220+, three are 170-180 and only one is short at 138. They are tough especially the 229 yard opener and the 218 yard 17th with OB tight left. Are they fair. In my opinion probably. I don't get shots at four of them (SI's 13, 14 and 17 and 18) and there are two that I'd take four at every time and look to make it up elsewhere. It needs a long iron or hybrid and on my day I can hit all of them. I guess if you are getting shots at them then play them as a four and move on.

As an aside Queensmere, the 12th at Wimbledon Common is close to the par 3 limit at 245 yards and is tight, tree lined and although plays fractionally downhill is still a fearsome test http://www.wcgc.co.uk/course/holes/hole_12_queens_mere

 

[louise_a]

Our longest par 3 is 190 yds from the red tee. It is downhill so when the ground is hard it ought to be reachable with a good run. So far I haven't reached it, my longest shot goes 170-180 but more often 150-160. I can hit a 5 iron 140-150.
I realise I won't reach this green and just hope a good pitch gives my at least the chance of a par.

 

[Achilles]

I'm not a massive fan of long par 3's and I've had this debate a few times before. If you look at the best par 3's in the world I'd expect the most popular ones to be shorter than 160 yards. The 17th at Sawgrass and 12th at Augusta to name just two.

We have three par 3's that are 200+ off the back tees. Our 9th and 11th both tend to play longer and are nearly always wind affected and I rarely ever hit the green on either hole. Our 18th is another long one but is played from an elevated tee which isn't so bad. I'd much prefer a shorter hole with a well protected green.

 

[Threeoffthetee]

At least it isn't just me.....

 

[Neddy]

Don't think you should have to hit a 3 wood or higher on any par 3 hole. 180 yards should be the max IMO. Max length i have ever played is 200. At 220 I would have to take driver (or lay up!)

 

[Imurg]

Our longest is 208 - that's plenty long enough.
Anything longer than that and you're asking Handicap Golfers to hit an accurate 3 wood or more into a green that is probably guarded by bunkers or the like....
I've played a 240 yard par 3 before.

Into the wind, I hit my driver and didn't reach - and I didn't have a shot on it either....
Most others in the group couldn't get near it on a calm day.

Pointless.....

To me, they're simply a way of increasing the overall yardage of a course to make it "look" better than it is.

 

[fundy]

Our 8th is just over 220 off the backs and almost always plays into the wind, on a calm day its a good solid hybrid, saturday had to rip a 3 wood to get back edge, plenty of decent golfers couldnt reach with driver, in winter into the wind its often out of reach for the majority, not the best of holes imo, much prefer a shorter par 3 with the challenge to be at the green end rather than a distance issue

 

[Evesdad]

My third is 200 from the whites with bunker infront and right Ive got it on in one twice in 18 months! The last time was last week and got a birdie! Tough old hole usually take 5i and pitch on. The 16th is 195 from the whites and pretty straightforward but can still prove tricky if pin is at the back on two tier green.

Not a big fan of em!

 

[srixon 1]

You should try having a game at Meyrick Park in Bournemouth. 1st and 4th holes are both par 3's. Off the back tees the 1st measures 244 yds and the 4th is just shorter at 242. The last time I played there was with a pro and he hit his driver to a couple of inches on the 1st.

 

[JustOne]

Our longest is 241yds and you simply take a 3 if possible and go to the next. The long par 3's generally make up (score wise) for a few short par 4's or par 5's elsewhere in the round where you should be looking at birdie.

Learning where to miss a par 3 is the skill, for example short at Homer's gaff is a good call as left, right or long are awkward to say the least (depending on pin position).

 

[GreiginFife]

While I'm not a fan of them I wouldn't say they are unfair. Golf is a test at all levels so to say a long par 3 is unfair is to say that a short, easy par 4 is unfair (unfair doesn't just have to be for a bad reason).
I have found that most long, tricky par 3's are low enough on the SI for most mid/high HC'ers to get a shot and so takes some of that unfair element away.

 

[HawkeyeMS]

If people can't reach a 220yd par 3 then they probably can't reach 400+ yd par 4s in regulation either so what's the difference. The key point you make is the size and shape of the green. Both our long ones have long greens which allow a ball to run up to them if you hit it straight. I quite like them and would rather have what we have than a noddy par 4 or too many short par 3s

 

[DCB]

Our first is a 238 yd par 3, our second hole is a 245 par 4 which in effect becomes a 245yd par 3 as SSS is one below par. Walk off with a 4 at each of them and you are happy. Scramble a 3 and you are delighted. As someone has already said, these types of long par 3s are offset against some shorter par4s so it is swings and roundabouts.

You try to tailor your game to suit. That's all you can do.

 

[Hobbit]

If people can't reach a 220yd par 3 then they probably can't reach 400+ yd par 4s in regulation either so what's the difference. The key point you make is the size and shape of the green. Both our long ones have long greens which allow a ball to run up to them if you hit it straight. I quite like them and would rather have what we have than a noddy par 4 or too many short par 3s

^ is the right way to look at them. And in many cases they are shot holes too.

 

[Liverbirdie]

Out of interest what is the SI of both of them?

Two on one course is tough, but they do offer a good challenge though. Two that spring to mind for me are the 16th at Carnoustie and the 17th at Littlestone. I needed a 3 wood for both of them. When you do par these type of holes, after missing, with a chip and a single putt it would leave you with a nice inner glow.

Also, as mentioned, do you have any par 4's under 300 yards?

I hit a 5 iron approx 175 yards.

 

[Scadge]

I agree with those who say it depends on the rest of the course and the balance therein. Our threes increase in length 160, 171,189, 210 with some giving chances and others commanding respect. I like a log par three as much as I think every great course should have a hopefully driveable par four and reachable par five preferably with a good risk and reward element. Clearly though I agree your point that longer par threes shouldn't have microscopic upturned saucer like greens. However, I don't go along with the anti-power sentiment - a golf ball has to be hit and there has to be something in a golf course that gives me a chance against the pitch and putt demons amongst you.

 

[G1BB0]

a par 3 that requires a wood from an average length player is bollox!!!!

for any senior or shorter player its a driver = no chance, most par 3's have tree's, bunkers, water and so forth as protection also.

Whats the point? Oooooh this course is par 73, 7000yds long and 4 200+ par 3's.... Enjoy, I will play somewhere that I actually have a small chance as opposed to no chance tyvm.

We arent all 5 & under h/c hitting 250+ drives and 180+ 7irons.