Distance apparently isn't everything

thepete

New member
Joined
Dec 2, 2010
Messages
2,568
Reaction score
17
Location
Sweden
Handicap
+3
Last edited:
Luke Donald is always saying that they are making the courses too long and what's wrong with 160 yard par 3's, granted he's not a big hitter and that's why he is saying this but I agree.
 
I kinda like the idea of nine 160-225 yd par 3's, five 400-475 yd par 4's, a reachable 320 yd par 4, and three par 5's between 525 and 650 yds. I realize that it would make 59 less meaningful, but it would be a cool change in status quo.
 
Hey, I could play from 5600 yards!
 
We all could but without a great ability to get up and down it might be even harder for some of us.
 
We all could but without a great ability to get up and down it might be even harder for some of us.

Hey I never said I would score well, just said I could play at that distance.

I think it's interesting that at that distance the leader is only 3 under
 
Hope I can get the highlights of this somewhere, pretty cool to see such a drastic change then what we are used to seeing. Really puts an emphasis on your short game.
 
This is pretty interesting, can't wait to see how it turns out. There are a couple of courses like that around here and they are pretty fun to play, although one of them is in danger of becoming a housing development.
 
Hope I can get the highlights of this somewhere, pretty cool to see such a drastic change then what we are used to seeing. Really puts an emphasis on your short game.

its on the golf channel.
 
I was talking to a lad a while back and his home course has 6 par 7 par 3's and he said when other teams come to play they really struggle with the amount of par 3's
 
Luke Donald is always saying that they are making the courses too long and what's wrong with 160 yard par 3's, granted he's not a big hitter and that's why he is saying this but I agree.

I happen to agree with him regarding par 3s.. I don't see a real reason why 6900 has to equate to 230~ yard par 3s and 480~ par 4s which it seems to always have. The extremes are pretty annoying to get to that yardage.
 
It's would be fun to play the layout like that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Bit of a disaster for the tournament organisers, but that was interesting. Did notice that none of these guys took the place apart. Nice to see Scott J grab his first win too!
 
I happen to agree with him regarding par 3s.. I don't see a real reason why 6900 has to equate to 230~ yard par 3s and 480~ par 4s which it seems to always have. The extremes are pretty annoying to get to that yardage.

Verily. Scoring averages for par 3s are always relatively high on the pro circuit - don't see why they have to make them into monsters. There should be a healthy mix, max 1 220+ on a tour course.
 
I kinda like the idea of nine 160-225 yd par 3's, five 400-475 yd par 4's, a reachable 320 yd par 4, and three par 5's between 525 and 650 yds. I realize that it would make 59 less meaningful, but it would be a cool change in status quo.
This is intreresting, but at that yardage it would still play too long for me, the 225 par 3 would be reachable only with my driver. Not the most accurate club in my bag at all. The "reachable" 320 yard par 3 would be a driver/gap wedge, even the 525 yard par five is a three shot par five for me and the 650 yard par five would take a perfect drive, and 2 solid 5 woods to leave me a short chip to reach. Short is relative to the distances a player is able to hit the ball. The OP was correct, the inclusion of 8 par 3's skewers the yardage perception. That many par 3's would not be fun to me.
 
I happen to agree with him regarding par 3s.. I don't see a real reason why 6900 has to equate to 230~ yard par 3s and 480~ par 4s which it seems to always have. The extremes are pretty annoying to get to that yardage.

So Jrod can use something other than a SW. :D

Sent from my DROID X2
 
It is an interesting course layout with a par 65, I could play that
 
Back
Top