rosecott
Money List Winner
I see what you're up to, Gibbo. You're looking towards the time when you're off 13/14 and don't get a shot an some par 3s.
Long par 3's - Are they fair?
- Thread starter Threeoffthetee
- Start date
I see what you're up to, Gibbo. You're looking towards the time when you're off 13/14 and don't get a shot an some par 3s.
DaveM
Tour Winner
Funny but I've never, given much thought to the length of the holes. As regards fairness. Other than to think what club do I need for this hole and how should I play it.
Andy808
Tour Winner
We have two par 3s that are 200 plus yards. The first is 216 off the whites with OOB down the right, a ditch runs across the hole then down the right of the hole and there are 2 bunkers, one is about 30 yards in front of the green but looks like it's tight to the green and the other is on the right of the hole. The tee is on the right and the fairway by the green runs to the right towards the ditch. It's a pig of a hole to start on. The other is pretty flat with 3 bunkers protecting the green, 2 are front right and protect the green from balls running down the slope of the green. The other is to the left of the green which is about 5 foot deep and only about 4 foot from the side of the green making it vitually impossible to stop the ball near the hole if the pin is that side of the green. I've never had a par on the first in a comp but I play it more like a par 4 anyway.
jdchelsea
Head Pro
If a par 4 was say 220 yards most would be hoping if not expecting to par it. The majority of people who couldn't reach a long par 3 are more than likely bogey golfers so a 4 would be a net par anyway. So a decent iron within 30-40 yards, decent pitch/chip and two putts for your net par. Simples 
A1ex
Head Pro
Two 200 plus par 3's where I play and they're great. Very easy to drop a shot but like any par 3, a good tee shot and birdie chance.
Long par 3's are some of the best holes going!
Long par 3's are some of the best holes going!
Region3
Ryder Cup Winner
If a par 4 was say 220 yards most would be hoping if not expecting to par it. The majority of people who couldn't reach a long par 3 are more than likely bogey golfers so a 4 would be a net par anyway. So a decent iron within 30-40 yards, decent pitch/chip and two putts for your net par. Simples
I agree with this.
Par is only a number printed on the card.
If a 240yd hole was a par 3 we'd be thinking very difficult to make par (ie. a 3).
If it said par 4 on the card we'd be thinking good birdie chance (ie. a 3).
Ignore what the card says and just play to get down in as few shots as possible.
RGDave
Money List Winner
So, Mr Hawk, you've seen me play!
There's no difference whatsoever. You could say the same thing about a 595 yd par 5.... for the average player.
I like long par 3s, apart from the 1st at R.A. which is a horror starter hole.
In a way, a long par 3 is a good test of "brains over brawn". Lay it up with whatever club avoids grief, pitch it on and try to sink the putt. We have a 190 yard par 3 over two lakes. I lay up between them and pitch it on. I've parred it 3 games running. The issue for me is a 3 iron lands a few yards short of dry land and a 5 wood will go through the back.
RGDave
Money List Winner
Yes, that's the answer.
We have a 459 yard par 4. Guess how many people parred it last 2 comps? Not one. Not even the scratch guys or the big hitters.
I play 4 iron (12 yard wide fairway
) 5 wood (20 yards wide at this point) and if all has gone well, I'll have 60-100 yards to go. It's a great par 5!
garyinderry
Ryder Cup Winner
at the minute since im back down to 11 i now have no shots to the par 3's at my course. they are fair distances in my book. not too long or short. they really make or break my round. i have to par them all if im to have a fair crack at shooting under my handicap. they measure off the usuall yellow tees.
3rd - 170
5th - 167
8th - 140
13th - 172
i am in agreement that plus 200 yard par 3's are a bit unfair. i like the skill element of trying to hit close to the pin for a par 3. anyone hitting at a 240 yard monster par 3 is not really trying to get close but just somewhere near it. if you are actually able to get close from 240 all the time then you are playing at a different level than the rest of us. especially into the wind.
i remember playing the 12th at concra wood which is nearly 200 yards or so and i cut a soft driver into that. i enjoyed the challenge but wouldnt like to have to attempt that shot every time i played.
3rd - 170
5th - 167
8th - 140
13th - 172
i am in agreement that plus 200 yard par 3's are a bit unfair. i like the skill element of trying to hit close to the pin for a par 3. anyone hitting at a 240 yard monster par 3 is not really trying to get close but just somewhere near it. if you are actually able to get close from 240 all the time then you are playing at a different level than the rest of us. especially into the wind.
i remember playing the 12th at concra wood which is nearly 200 yards or so and i cut a soft driver into that. i enjoyed the challenge but wouldnt like to have to attempt that shot every time i played.
I loathe giving shots at par 3's, many 14/15 handicappers out drive me so a 220 yd par 3 doesn't phase them and they are there or thereabouts for nowt!
Oddsocks
Ryder Cup Winner
The last line.... Is that no what golf is about
barrybridges
Head Pro
I agree with the OP that long par 3s are very unfair.
However, I would qualify this and say that they are unfair for the club golfer, not the better players.
If a club wants the par 3 to play long, why don't they simply set the tee boxes up so that it's longer on the whites but not on the yellows?
The hole point of a par 3 hole is that you are shooting for the green and not the fairway (otherwise FIR would exist on par 3s) so any hole where it is difficult to reach the green (in length) let alone dispersion is too tough.
That said, I also agree with those who say that it shouldn't be a par 4 either (IMHO par 4s shouldn't be any less than 300 yards).
Everyone always seems to trot out the same arguments about golf being a fair 'test' but for most people it isn't supposed to be a stressful and unenjoyable experience. Golf can still be testing without being punitive.
It's an expensive game to play at the best of times and the last thing we need is impossible-to-reach tight par 3s which encourage people to lose more balls into the trees.
However, I would qualify this and say that they are unfair for the club golfer, not the better players.
If a club wants the par 3 to play long, why don't they simply set the tee boxes up so that it's longer on the whites but not on the yellows?
The hole point of a par 3 hole is that you are shooting for the green and not the fairway (otherwise FIR would exist on par 3s) so any hole where it is difficult to reach the green (in length) let alone dispersion is too tough.
That said, I also agree with those who say that it shouldn't be a par 4 either (IMHO par 4s shouldn't be any less than 300 yards).
Everyone always seems to trot out the same arguments about golf being a fair 'test' but for most people it isn't supposed to be a stressful and unenjoyable experience. Golf can still be testing without being punitive.
It's an expensive game to play at the best of times and the last thing we need is impossible-to-reach tight par 3s which encourage people to lose more balls into the trees.
ScienceBoy
Money List Winner
I have nothing against them, longer par 3s means I probably get a shot. In competition play or if I am not feeling confident then its a mid iron to safety and a pitch on.
If its for fun, no pressure or I am confident I can hold the green I will go for it.
I can see why some people would call them unfair, but if you get a shot then really you should treat any difficult hole as one above its par and find the best way to get two points and move on!
The 9th at Grimsby is a great example of a long par 3, at about 242 yards off the YELLOWS! Its a very easy hole to get a 4 on if you lay up to the tree, pitch on and putt out. To get a 3 need at least two good shots. On a course of top quality par 3s this one is as good as any of the shorter ones (2nd and 13th).
If you really dislike them then forget about the holes actual par and try and score the lowest number YOU can. Look at the hole layout rather than just blasting a 3 wood in hope.
If its for fun, no pressure or I am confident I can hold the green I will go for it.
I can see why some people would call them unfair, but if you get a shot then really you should treat any difficult hole as one above its par and find the best way to get two points and move on!
The 9th at Grimsby is a great example of a long par 3, at about 242 yards off the YELLOWS! Its a very easy hole to get a 4 on if you lay up to the tree, pitch on and putt out. To get a 3 need at least two good shots. On a course of top quality par 3s this one is as good as any of the shorter ones (2nd and 13th).
I disagree with this! I play a hole in a way that I think will give me the lowest score. Course management sometimes dictates you need to lay up on a par 4 or on a par 3, changing to that approach helped me score better, I got stuck in a lot less greenside bunkers trying to carry a 4 iron onto a long par4 green.
If you really dislike them then forget about the holes actual par and try and score the lowest number YOU can. Look at the hole layout rather than just blasting a 3 wood in hope.
Last edited:
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
Both courses i'm a member at have longish par 3's Nairn its the 14th at 211 off the white which can be anything from a driver to a 7 iron depending on the wind. even if you can't reach its only a chip and a putt. Its SI 13 so if you are a mid to high handicapper you are getting a shot anyway.
Tain its the 215 yard 17th off the white over the river twice, but again chip and a putt lowish, SI too i think. I can't see what the problem is???
Liverbirdie
Ryder Cup Winner
To turn it on it's head then - should 200+ par 3's be banned?
I dont think more than 10% of golfers would agree to that.
I know some people who hate 100-110 yard only par 3's and describe them as joke holes. "Not a proper hole", "a pitch and putt hole", "a flick only", "you can't play a full shot in" is mostly what is heard on these type of holes.
We had/have a par 3 which is about 108, it is SI 18, but lots of golfers struggle on that.
If they said less than 120 yard par 3's should be banned, there would be uproar. Golf courses should generallyt appeal to all handicaps between +4 and 28, the tee placement/yardages should help in this respect, and the handicap/SI system should cover the rest in the main.
I dont think more than 10% of golfers would agree to that.
I know some people who hate 100-110 yard only par 3's and describe them as joke holes. "Not a proper hole", "a pitch and putt hole", "a flick only", "you can't play a full shot in" is mostly what is heard on these type of holes.
We had/have a par 3 which is about 108, it is SI 18, but lots of golfers struggle on that.
If they said less than 120 yard par 3's should be banned, there would be uproar. Golf courses should generallyt appeal to all handicaps between +4 and 28, the tee placement/yardages should help in this respect, and the handicap/SI system should cover the rest in the main.
Last edited:
Listening to some on this thread, all par 3's should be a wedge, par 4s an iron and a wedge etc etc. Golf courses need varying length holes to keep it a challenge for the better players, for the lesser golfers, the handicap system kicks in. Get over it would be my reply.
louise_a
Money List Winner
I am quite happy with the par 3s at our place there are 6, 5 of which I can reach so look for pars there.
MadAdey
Money List Winner
I do enjoy a par 3 that you have to hit a good mid/long iron into. At my place there are 3 par 3's. Off the whites 200, 160, 185. I think that they are a good distance for par 3's, but I do know a lot of people that complain about hte longer one as it is very tough to hit hte green. But with it being SI 3 so that does make up for it. But for me 200 is the max any par 3 at a members course should be.
One Planer
Global Moderator
We have 6 par 3's at our place. 4 of them are over 200 yards.
The longest is now 210 yards. Before the course was changed so it played longer, the longest par 3 was 235 yards. This tee box has now been moved about 80-100 yards back to make it a par 4.
The longest is now 210 yards. Before the course was changed so it played longer, the longest par 3 was 235 yards. This tee box has now been moved about 80-100 yards back to make it a par 4.
JustOne
Ryder Cup Winner
As 'Scadge' said earlier....
I'd take a long hole over a short one, I'd also prefer to play off the whites... why should I play a short course just 'cos someone can't hit it very far? They probably already get shots so I'm not sure why the complaining... what do they want? pitch and put courses.. par 5's of 400yds?
