We've launched the new forums! Read more here

do you think most average public courses par5's are really long enough to be par 5's?

Perhaps we should discuss other pressing concerns about public courses. Are the cups too round? Are the fairways too wide? Are the greens too flat? Are there enough tee boxes to suit all of us? Why don't the cart girls ask us out?
 
SC LEFTY said:
Perhaps we should discuss other pressing concerns about public courses. Are the cups too round? Are the fairways too wide? Are the greens too flat? Are there enough tee boxes to suit all of us? Why don't the cart girls ask us out?
Click to expand...
I'm with you. This discussion is completely based on one's skill level, state of their game and personal preference. What's too short of a hole for one is perfect or too long for another. You don't like the length of the par 5s on one course go find another. I'm by no means a long hitter and it's fun being able to step up to my second shot on a par 5 and have an outside chance of hitting the green in 2. It's also disappointing sometimes to smoke a drive on a par 5 and still have 300+ left.
 
I just think that the discussion is tough to have because there's a million factors. I can sort of agree with the OP that a 450 yard par 5 is a little funny if its straight, wide, and boring but that's rarely the case on any well designed course.
Typically there's a corner that needs to be cut, a deep bunker or water to carry, or OB in play on one or both sides. There's a local par 5 that is 460 from the tips and dead straight, however it has a narrow fairway with overhanging branches and OB on both sides. I see waaaaay more doubles or worse than birdies on this hole.
 
Can’t discuss this without also accounting for layout, which is key counter balancing distance alone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
500 from the blues, and 450 from the whites is totally acceptable.

If you hit a 290 drive from the blues (very good drive on average for any player), then you still have to hit a 210 yard shot into the green. Even PGA pros aren't hitting 210 yard greens with great consistency. Meaning that a chip, and two putt makes it a 5.

450 means a 260 drive from the whites has you at 190 to the green. Most players on the white are almost never hitting a green from 190. Add a 3rd shot to hit the green, and 2 putts and you're on it.
 
The par 5s at my home course are (from the white tees): 466, 492, 476, 479, 440, 434 and 419. I am around a 10 handicap, and the first three listed I have never reached in two. 466 the green is at the top of a huge slope with a very small green; even with a max drive I have 200 left which I cannot hold - best is several feet short on the upslope. 492 is a double dogleg, best ever was 10 yds short in 2. 476 is like the first - green is small and at the top of a huge rise. The only two that I have ever reached in two are on the Lakes nine - 434 second shot plays downhill, green slopes away severely behind traps and mounds. On in two but most likely at the back bottom of the green. The 419 has a huge ravine from 100 yds out, so a well caught fairway wood sometimes runs up and on if it doesn't get caught in the trap that covers 70% of the front of the green. Too easy? I don't think so - yardage isn't everything.

Now on the other hand seven woods used to be a par five when we had back-to-back-to-back par threes. When they took them out they had to shed a stroke to maintain a par of 36 so they turned the 442 yard par five into a par four. Pars here are as rare as birdies are on the fives.
 
SC LEFTY said:
Well then if that doesn't make sense, how about this? 90% of golfers probably think the lengths are fine. Not only that, your "too short" premise is not even a consideration to the vast majority of them. They consider each hole on it's own merits, yardage being only one part of the equation. I will, however, stick to my guns with one part of my earlier response. At it's core, golf is a game where they hand you a scorecard and a pencil at the start. You go out, play, and total your score at the end. If you feel that you have mastered the par 5's where you are currently playing, and your scores are too low because of that, I suggest you need to look for a longer course that will challenge you.
Click to expand...
Im not discussing this as though I am some bigshot who is too good for 470 yrd par5's. So for anyone taking this that way lets get that ideology out of the discussion please.

But again....mastering the hole/s (or not) has nothing at all to do with it regardless.
And just because too many people may play tees that are too long for them doesn't at all mean the par 5's are long enough. That's doesn't make them the right distance. It may make those short par5's the right distance for them which would be more in line with a more forward tee if they played them in the first place.

Playing today (for example) my tees are 6456 and are one set in from the 7040 yrd tips. And so I was on the 475 par5 9th. I hit a bad tee shot (driver) pull hooked one and ended up in the trees on left side of the hole. And so Im of course off target and also significantly shorter than my normal good drive length. So this... in my book of course a screw up shot I made :(
Well now I have to punch out to get back on the beaten path and I do that and also manage to move forward some too. I now have (for shot 3) a 9iron left over to the green which I do hit well to about 12 feet and looking at birdie putt. I ended up with a 2putt par.

So think about this for a moment. After a bad tee shot (which I screwed up) I then have to punch out with a recovery shot and yet all I have left over afterwards to the green is only a 9iron? And im putting for bird? Honestly imo something not quite right about that on a par5. Just because a hole is too long to be a par 4 doesn't mean its really a par5. At best after a bad tee shot requiring recovery on a par 5 my first putt imo should be for par at best, never a bird. Or I shouldn't even been close to 9iron territory for that 3rd shot approach. I think a 9i approach is maybe what I should have left after the first two are "decently good" shots on a par5. But certainly not after a screwed up tee shot which required recovery. Not for a par5. Yea on a 4 but not a 5.
 
rollin said:
Im not discussing this as though I am some bigshot who is too good for 470 yrd par5's. So for anyone taking this that way lets get that ideology out of the discussion please.

But again....mastering the hole/s (or not) has nothing at all to do with it regardless.
And just because too many people may play tees that are too long for them doesn't at all mean the par 5's are long enough. That's doesn't make them the right distance. It may make those short par5's the right distance for them which would be more in line with a more forward tee if they played them in the first place.

Playing today (for example) my tees are 6456 and are one set in from the 7040 yrd tips. And so I was on the 475 par5 9th. I hit a bad tee shot (driver) pull hooked one and ended up in the trees on left side of the hole. And so Im of course off target and also significantly shorter than my normal good drive length. So this... in my book of course a screw up shot I made :(
Well now I have to punch out to get back on the beaten path and I do that and also manage to move forward some too. I now have (for shot 3) a 9iron left over to the green which I do hit well to about 12 feet and looking at birdie putt. I ended up with a 2putt par.

So think about this for a moment. After a bad tee shot (which I screwed up) I then have to punch out with a recovery shot and yet all I have left over afterwards to the green is only a 9iron? And im putting for bird? Honestly imo something not quite right about that on a par5. Just because a hole is too long to be a par 4 doesn't mean its really a par5. At best after a bad tee shot requiring recovery on a par 5 my first putt imo should be for par, never a bird. Or I shouldn't even been close to 9iron territory for that 3rd shot approach. I think a 9i approach is maybe what I should have left after the first two are "decently good" shots on a par5. But certainly not after a screwed up tee shot which required recovery. Not for a par5. Yea on a 4 but not a 5.
Click to expand...

Let's replay that hole, but say it's 500 yards. In the scenario you're talking about, you're still only hitting a 7 iron into that green. You could very easily tell that story the same way - I'd imagine most mid caps are expecting to hit a green and getting a birdie putt.

If someone's averaging 250 off the tee, par 5s would have to be about 600 yards long to provide the scenario you're arguing for - 2 decent shots plus a 9 iron.
 
mpeterson said:
Let's replay that hole, but say it's 500 yards. In the scenario you're talking about, you're still only hitting a 7 iron into that green. You could very easily tell that story the same way - I'd imagine most mid caps are expecting to hit a green and getting a birdie putt.

If someone's averaging 250 off the tee, par 5s would have to be about 600 yards long to provide the scenario you're arguing for - 2 decent shots plus a 9 iron.
Click to expand...

yea but not after a poor tee shot requiring recovery...no? I mean we wouldn't expect it on a 4, so why a 5?
 
rollin said:
yea but not after a poor tee shot requiring recovery...no? I mean we wouldn't expect it on a 4, so why a 5?
Click to expand...

I was saying the expectation with a 7i (rather than the 9i you hit). That's still a distance I'd be expecting to hit the green from.
 
mpeterson said:
I was saying the expectation with a 7i (rather than the 9i you hit). That's still a distance I'd be expecting to hit the green from.
Click to expand...

But (and BTW thanks for the discussion) but maybe expecting to have a 9i 3rd shot after a bad tee shot and having to recover is part of the problem. I mean I wouldnt expect a 9i for a 3rd shot on a 5 where I hit a bad tee shot. Nor even a 7iron. I think that's part of what it Im getting at. We've become use to this but if we remove our experiences from the equation, shouldn't the idea of a par5 leave us with something more significant than that? The hole is not a par 4 I understand its too long to be one but at the same time a 5 needs more than that imo. IDK, no big deal I guess but just seems to me like it should.
 
rollin said:
Im not discussing this as though I am some bigshot who is too good for 470 yrd par5's. So for anyone taking this that way lets get that ideology out of the discussion please.

But again....mastering the hole/s (or not) has nothing at all to do with it regardless.
And just because too many people may play tees that are too long for them doesn't at all mean the par 5's are long enough. That's doesn't make them the right distance. It may make those short par5's the right distance for them which would be more in line with a more forward tee if they played them in the first place.

Playing today (for example) my tees are 6456 and are one set in from the 7040 yrd tips. And so I was on the 475 par5 9th. I hit a bad tee shot (driver) pull hooked one and ended up in the trees on left side of the hole. And so Im of course off target and also significantly shorter than my normal good drive length. So this... in my book of course a screw up shot I made :(
Well now I have to punch out to get back on the beaten path and I do that and also manage to move forward some too. I now have (for shot 3) a 9iron left over to the green which I do hit well to about 12 feet and looking at birdie putt. I ended up with a 2putt par.

So think about this for a moment. After a bad tee shot (which I screwed up) I then have to punch out with a recovery shot and yet all I have left over afterwards to the green is only a 9iron? And im putting for bird? Honestly imo something not quite right about that on a par5. Just because a hole is too long to be a par 4 doesn't mean its really a par5. At best after a bad tee shot requiring recovery on a par 5 my first putt imo should be for par at best, never a bird. Or I shouldn't even been close to 9iron territory for that 3rd shot approach. I think a 9i approach is maybe what I should have left after the first two are "decently good" shots on a par5. But certainly not after a screwed up tee shot which required recovery. Not for a par5. Yea on a 4 but not a 5.
Click to expand...

Maybe we should just agree to disagree. I think a 475 yard par 5, which would take a 250 yard drive and leave 225 to the green, is fair because it gives long hitters a birdie opportunity, and average and even short hitters a par or maybe birdie chance. If, at 6500 yards, there are not enough other holes on the course long enough to challenge you, as I said earlier, why not move back to the 7000 yard tips, or play elsewhere?
 
Just for the sake of discussion, why not take today as a learning experience? You are a 15, so I'm assuming you can shoot as low as the high 70's, up to the mid 90's. Most rounds you are mid 80's. You have decent ball striking ability most times, but are prone to a few blow up holes due to a swing that's not where you want it to be yet. You'll lose strokes around the green, and by poor swings and course management away from it. Today you learned you don't need driver off every par 5. A couple of short irons for your 2nd and 3rd shots will still leave you a birdie chance. At worst, an easy par. What's wrong with that? When your game, and swing get better, you'll have plenty of chances to "go for it" and not turn those 5's into 7's.
 
Rollin, I get where you are coming from, but in general better players score better relative to par on longer holes and have the highest relative to par on par 3s. Better players have poor shots less frequently and their misses tend to not be as bad. So, a bad shot won't be as bad and a par 5 gives more opportunity for recovery. The opposite is true for high handicappers. They have trouble advancing the ball--much less doing so in the desired direction. Two or three bad shots on a par 5 are both probable and penal and lead to bigger numbers relative to par then a par 3 which has less ground to cover.
 
rollin said:
yea but not after a poor tee shot requiring recovery...no? I mean we wouldn't expect it on a 4, so why a 5?
Click to expand...
So you hit a bad tee shot, what 200 into the trees? You punch out and advance it another 130-140? That would leave 130 ish on your 3rd shot...how does that not make sense? A good drive leaves you a 200ish second shot which is a tough shot for a midcapper. Debating until everyone excepts your premise is never gonna happen but it's par for the course. Lol
 
Roughly half of the area par 5's are in actuality long par 4's. In my mind it should either take a blistered drive from a gorilla ? or three shots, even if the second is laid up to a distance.

Length isn't the determining factor for me on whether it should be a par 5 or not, to me a perfect par 5 gives a very long player a chance to get home in two, and if not protected by length alone, is protected in other ways.

Let me give a couple examples... Hole 1 on my second most played course is a par 5 (?) of right around 500 yards. It usually plays downwind and the tee shot is downhill. With nothing other than the odd 15 year old pine tree as a deterrent, it's really a long par 4. I've had more eagle putts on this hole and have made more eagles than the rest of my golf career combined. If I don't walk away with a birdie I feel like I left one out there, but as always with any longer hole you have to get off the tee. Hole 1 of my most played course is a par 5 of 500 yards. Unlike the other, this plays as a par 5. It's slightly uphill and relatively straight. The first defense it has is that it normally plays into the wind. The second defense is unless you hit it into the right rough, you have to hook one into it to have an eagle putt. Although straight the green is tucked back into the tree line on the left. There's enough trouble that it truly takes 2 great and starategic shots to get home.

My favorite par 5 that I play regularly is right around 550. To me it's the perfect par 5. Driving landing area is wide enough that any decent shot is good. From there you are left with a choice. You can either go wedge/wedge or you can go for the green. There is a lake that fronts and lefts the green, there is OB right and long. The last time I played it I hit a decent drive that just dribbled into the left rough. Playing into the wind that day I knew I had to hit a 3w perfectly to have an eagle chance. I wailed into that shot and saw it tracking right at the flag. Dead on it.

I saw it hit, seemingly right on the flag, then go bounding towards the abyss that is long right. When I got to the green, I had a huge gouge/ballmark just 6" from the flag. My ball was nowhere to be found. If I can't hold an into the wind green with my ball flight, no one can. Great hole. Probably a guarantee par if you just hit 7i/7i/W, but that's not how I play golf. Your second has to be perfect to give yourself a chance at an eagle. It also takes some stones to even go for this green.
 
moosejaa said:
So you hit a bad tee shot, what 200 into the trees? You punch out and advance it another 130-140? That would leave 130 ish on your 3rd shot...how does that not make sense? A good drive leaves you a 200ish second shot which is a tough shot for a midcapper. Debating until everyone excepts your premise is never gonna happen but it's par for the course. Lol
Click to expand...

fwiw when we debate something thats what a debate is. Its a discussion where certain opinions and points are given and then debated and/or discussed. If a point is made that is not 100% without question and leaves itslef open to question and/or subjective opinion , then what good is a debate discussion if one doesnt respectably challange that point. But this topic (everything about it) is kind of subjective anyway. If i were to design a par5. I would make it (assuming people are pllaying correct tees for thier distances) I'd make it so that it would take two of the longest shots in ones bag to be hit very well in order to barely reach it. Or if not via distance integrity then of course it would instead have some risk or a layout detriment of some sort. I wouldnt make it unfair or overly difficult to par it. But par meaning getting on in 3 and 2 putting. Bird is a whole other thing. Nothing imo needs to offer a real good chance at bird. getting on in 3 in otself is enough for a birdie putt chance as it is.
 
Well, how about back bunch of years ago when Nicklaus was in his prime, #13 at Augusta...you didn't see the pros going for that green with 7 or 8 irons. It was a formidable par 5. August has had to lengthen it because of the length the pros hit it today. Back in the day it could be risk/reward because of the creek in front of the green. It still is today.
So, many public courses were built before technology in golf equipment advanced to where it is today. And, these courses can't just add length like August is able to do.
Why do you think that the pros play courses where par 5s are turned into par 4s for the event instead of playing them as par 5s?
Par is just a number. If where you play, your par 5s are too short...consider par for you to be 2,3,4 shots less. Look more at the course rating, not what the scorecard says.
 
I understand what rollin is saying with the punch out issue. I look at it this way. Short 5's are really a par 4.5. The punch out while going forward costs you half a shot. That means you have a normal iron into the green and 2 putt for par.
 
ntanygd760 said:
I understand what rollin is saying with the punch out issue. I look at it this way. Short 5's are really a par 4.5. The punch out while going forward costs you half a shot. That means you have a normal iron into the green and 2 putt for par.
Click to expand...
475 yard par 5, bad drive(?) and a punch out leaves a 9 iron? Must not have been that bad a drive or one nice punch and run. 4.5 to you but not most amateurs.

@SmiterOfPV1x, you big hitters saying a 500 yard hole is par 4 is a joke, I don't care if it's downhill with the wind. Most amateurs aren't gonna get there in 2 even with a good drive.
 
The punch out 9 iron wasn't me. I would be the idiot trying thread a 5 wood through a 1 yard wide gap. Unless you are in total jail running a punch out 100 yards shouldn't be that hard. 230 crap drive plus 100 leaves 135 on a 475 hole though.


Don't get me wrong though many a rounds a 475 yard par 5 keeps the birdie streak alive so I don't mind. Like I said I think in terms of half pars evaluating a round/course.
 
ntanygd760 said:
The punch out 9 iron wasn't me. I would be the idiot trying thread a 5 wood through a 1 yard wide gap. Unless you are in total jail running a punch out 100 yards shouldn't be that hard. 230 crap drive plus 100 leaves 135 on a 475 hole though.


Don't get me wrong though many a rounds a 475 yard par 5 keeps the birdie streak alive so I don't mind. Like I said I think in terms of half pars evaluating a round/course.
Click to expand...

I know it wasn't you and you're also using your game as a barometer. 230 yards is a good drive for most amateurs. Glad they're so easy for you.
 
Since I don't have a 200 yd club in my bag I think they are all hard for me. If I can hit driver solid and get a lot of roll, maybe 200. I hope to get 160 out of a good second shot. Thank goodness I try to play from the correct tee for my lack of distance.
 
moosejaa said:
475 yard par 5, bad drive(?) and a punch out leaves a 9 iron? Must not have been that bad a drive or one nice punch and run. 4.5 to you but not most amateurs.

@SmiterOfPV1x, you big hitters saying a 500 yard hole is par 4 is a joke, I don't care if it's downhill with the wind. Most amateurs aren't gonna get there in 2 even with a good drive.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% For those who can play the tips and still find par 5's are playing short, be proud of the skill you possess, but be aware amongst most amateurs, you are an outlier. I shake my head when I see people post statements like "I mishit my drive, only went 260, left me a 5 iron in from 220, which I proceeded to hit over the green..." Maybe that's the norm for them, and the group they play with. To me, it comes off as a non passive brag, "look what I can do" even if it's not meant that way. That's fine, as long as you don't then use your length as the barometer for others. Keep in mind the averages most people are hitting in discussions like this. As long as I'm chasing kids off my lawn, it goes beyond a brag when I hear mid to high handicaps talk like this. Maybe it's an "internet golf" thing, where a lot of people want to be a long baller, but I rarely if ever see guys with 12 and up hcp's over power a course. Which makes me shake my head at a 15 hcp complaining about par 5's being too short. It's like hearing a 19 talk about not being able to find the right set of blades for his game. If 90% disagree with your premise, maybe you should realize you're no longer in a debate, you're being told you are wrong.
 
Last edited:
leftshot said:
Rollin, I get where you are coming from, but in general better players score better relative to par on longer holes and have the highest relative to par on par 3s. Better players have poor shots less frequently and their misses tend to not be as bad. So, a bad shot won't be as bad and a par 5 gives more opportunity for recovery. The opposite is true for high handicappers. They have trouble advancing the ball--much less doing so in the desired direction. Two or three bad shots on a par 5 are both probable and penal and lead to bigger numbers relative to par then a par 3 which has less ground to cover.
Click to expand...
I would agree with that. And is exactly why most par 5's are usually rated among the first holes to give a stroke when playing handicap events even if they are not real difficult p5's.
They are generally the place the bogey player needs the most help due to that reason you gave. Our inability to make 2 really good shots in a row and also then some type of a third one too on top of the first two. But just because (the higher the cap the more likely the deficiency) still doesn't make the short par5 any more worthy of being a par5. Again,...my theory being just because (in some circumstances) a hole may be too much to be a 4 doesn't really make it a 5 but only by default is it one.

Much like that same higher capper on p4's will find a lot of bogeys, doubles (and also holes with more than that often enough) so too should the par5. The double on a par4 (a 6) is a 7 on a par 5. That's the way its suppose to be. We shouldn't be deficient and yet end up with bogey on the 5 while that same deficiency is a double on a 4. Imo it should still be a double but too often imo on the short 5's it still ends up a bogey 6. Not only imo shouldn't it be a bogey 6 but should arguably even be more than double 7.

Its sort of like my earlier example from Sunday morning. I was deficient (ok so it wasn't the shortest of deficient drive) but it was deficient and I had to recover from it out of the trees yet I still found myself putting for a possible bird. That same hypothetical deficient drive and same recovery on a par4 and I may not have had that same 9iron leftover but probably perhaps a gap or sand wegde but point is that the 3rd shot if I get it on (which I did on the 5) but on the 4 im putting for par with most likely bogey. That sounds correct. Yet on that 5 I was actually putting for bird. You see, the integrity of the par4 is there but not quite there with a p5 that is not as long as it really should be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top