Perfect par 3

Agree anything over 200 yards isn't required as a par 3 but theres a few crackers.

4th at Swinley (198 so I'll count it)
10th at Sunningdale New
15th Sunningdale Old

The first two are right up there in the best par 3's in golf.
 
If a hole has cracking features and is 245 yds long why on earth does it matter what the par on the scorecard says.
It matters because the hole, if well designed, will have a ball dropping on or around the green, or within 10-20 yards from it as the basis for its protection, hazards, chips, lobs, etc. to be faced.
If it is so designed, but the majority of balls are dropping 70 yards short of that, then it is not a good hole.
People are missing this key point. If the hole perfect, as per OP, then you do not design it only for a length of 230 or whatever. It is then far from perfect for 95% of golfers. Thats not a perfect hole.
 
It matters because the hole, if well designed, will have a ball dropping on or around the green, or within 10-20 yards from it as the basis for its protection, hazards, chips, lobs, etc. to be faced.
If it is so designed, but the majority of balls are dropping 70 yards short of that, then it is not a good hole.
People are missing this key point. If the hole perfect, as per OP, then you do not design it only for a length of 230 or whatever. It is then far from perfect for 95% of golfers. Thats not a perfect hole.
The protection can be anything, but all holes will suit balls coming in at different angles and therefore be more or less susceptible to players of different swing speeds .
What is it that is unique to a hole at 249 yds that makes it a bad hole but if the tee was one yard further back it could be a good hole?
 
The 17th at JCB is mickey mouse golf, American design at it's worst. The whole place is one of the most overrated courses in the country at the moment. Rick Shiels is just picking up freebies to big it up. He talked about how long and tough it was, yet the Legends Tour guys ripped it apart. A strong field European Tour or LIV Tour event and the winning score would be -20 minimum.
 
The protection can be anything, but all holes will suit balls coming in at different angles and therefore be more or less susceptible to players of different swing speeds .
What is it that is unique to a hole at 249 yds that makes it a bad hole but if the tee was one yard further back it could be a good hole?
One yard further back, it would be an even worse hole.
 
I love the 4th at Castle Stuart, it's got a castle in the background (The Original Castle Stuart) and visually just looks amazing, especially on a nice day.
Then when you walk up, it opens right up.
It plays between 160 - 200 Yards depending on which tee you play off.
 
One yard further back, it would be an even worse hole.
This implies that there are some distances that are automatically bad holes.
What is the minimum distance that a hole can be over 250 yds before it can be a good hole? If a hole of 300 yds can be a great hole for long hitters why should a hole of 240 yds not be similarly great for shorter hitters?
 
I posted earlier but I'll also add, what makes a perfect par 3...

Use the correct teeing area for the day given the field & weather, in order for the bulk of players to have a shot with the range of club(s) the green was designed for
 
The 17th at JCB is mickey mouse golf, American design at it's worst. The whole place is one of the most overrated courses in the country at the moment. Rick Shiels is just picking up freebies to big it up. He talked about how long and tough it was, yet the Legends Tour guys ripped it apart. A strong field European Tour or LIV Tour event and the winning score would be -20 minimum.
A lot of those legend tour players hit the ball as far as they ever have due to modern club and ball tech.
 
I posted earlier but I'll also add, what makes a perfect par 3...

Use the correct teeing area for the day given the field & weather, in order for the bulk of players to have a shot with the range of club(s) the green was designed for
A lot of older clubs have small greens and the over time they pushed the tees back.
 
Lots of water and a bunker….

Not a problem for the youth (think he was 11 here).

:unsure:

I’d say this is a good design, it’s not too long, slightly downhill, but the only miss is long/left - which really isn’t something you’d play for as anything straight or right would probably be in the water at the back. You can also lay up short of the rambla of course.

 
This implies that there are some distances that are automatically bad holes.
What is the minimum distance that a hole can be over 250 yds before it can be a good hole? If a hole of 300 yds can be a great hole for long hitters why should a hole of 240 yds not be similarly great for shorter hitters?
It doesnt imply that. Its a function of who is playing it, and whether it is designed as a one shotter, or a two. 251 yards can be a great hole. As a par 4.
But the focus on whether it is called a par 3 or par 4, or whether it conforms the the ranges for each, is not the point. The critical element is whether it is DESIGNED as a par 3 or par 4 that influence its greatness or not.
A250 yd hole designed as a par 4 could be a great hole. A 250yd hole designed as a par three cannot be a great hole for 99% of golfers. Changing its recorded par, or whether a hc golfer has a shot there or not is irrelevant. It is purely how the hole plays, that makes it great or not.
 
Last edited:
Lots of water and a bunker….

Not a problem for the youth (think he was 11 here).

:unsure:

I’d say this is a good design, it’s not too long, slightly downhill, but the only miss is long/left - which really isn’t something you’d play for as anything straight or right would probably be in the water at the back. You can also lay up short of the rambla of course.

Looks scary to me. A fairly long carry (150+yds?). I'd probably hit my 11 wood to carry and land soft enough not to shoot on through. One of my hybrids might work. Some of the older guys I play with would have to lay up. In a way it's kind of like the 12th at our course. Last weekend from the whites it was probably a 160-170 carry over the pond in front of the green and if you don't HIT the green the ball will shoot though and go bye-bye oob. Everybody in my group played short and left to avoid making a complete mess of things.
 
Looks scary to me. A fairly long carry (150+yds?). I'd probably hit my 11 wood to carry and land soft enough not to shoot on through. One of my hybrids might work. Some of the older guys I play with would have to lay up. In a way it's kind of like the 12th at our course. Last weekend from the whites it was probably a 160-170 carry over the pond in front of the green and if you don't HIT the green the ball will shoot though and go bye-bye oob. Everybody in my group played short and left to avoid making a complete mess of things.

To be fair, the greens in Spain hold pretty well, but downwind it’s could be challenging to stop it. I’ve had to hit a 5 wood there myself when playing into a headwind.
 
I think we have a nice variety.

Four par 3s. Tees on them can be set so that the four will be playing 140; 160; 180; 200.

The two longer par threes are lightly bunkered (one front side each but with both having a wide clear way in not requiring carry...the two shorter ones heavily bunkered with the shortest requiring full carry to the green; the 160yder having a route to one side of the green not requiring carry. Even though we have small greens all four have options for easy and very challenging pin positions.
 
Last edited:
We have 5 par 3s, 3 of them I would say are good holes - a tough 215 yarder with a tiny green which is probably the toughest scoring hole on the course, a 140 yarder which is nicely framed by bunkers and a 120 yarder which should be easy but is an easy card ruiner due to it being surrounded on 3 sides by a stream and OB left.

The other 2 are back to back and poor holes tbh and feel like they've been put in because they ran out of space ?.
 
It doesnt imply that. Its a function of who is playing it, and whether it is designed as a one shotter, or a two. 251 yards can be a great hole. As a par 4.
But the focus on whether it is called a par 3 or par 4, or whether it conforms the the ranges for each, is not the point. The critical element is whether it is DESIGNED as a par 3 or par 4 that influence its greatness or not.
A250 yd hole designed as a par 4 could be a great hole. A 250yd hole designed as a par three cannot be a great hole for 99% of golfers. Changing its recorded par, or whether a hc golfer has a shot there or not is irrelevant. It is purely how the hole plays, that makes it great or not.
Many of these holes were designed back in the day of persimmon woods and irons when distances for top players were shorter they could be played as one or two shotters and remain excellent holes.
The idea that just because a 230 yd hole has marked on the card par three it is unsuitable or a bad hole for the ordinary club golfer is just not true.
 
The idea that just because a 230 yd hole has marked on the card par three it is unsuitable or a bad hole for the ordinary club golfer is just not true.

I would argue that. I'd much rather play a par 4 where you're thinking about it, and having to play for position than a long par 3 where it's grab the biggest thing you've got in the bag and muller it for all your worth and just pray that you find the green. There's no skill in that.
 
Top