Why I hate the Blue tees at short courses

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by Grumpter

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dave2512

I'd like to take a look at the scorecard if you'd be so kind to provide the course name. I like quirky courses. There's a course here with a 199y par 4 that is impossible to get to from the tee. I've played it twice this summer and both times I struggled to a double.

Here's one of the courses - http://www.centersquaregolfclub.com/images/CSGC-Scorecard.pdf

Interesting - I've never seen a course laid out that way before. So what exactly is the reason you can't use a long iron off the tee to mix things up? Do you at least get to hit a long iron second shot on the par 5s?

[darkhunter139]

Originally Posted by Goonsidious

These par 3's are the best. Gives you a taste of what the pros have to deal with during some of their long par 3s.

Another obstacle in golf for you? Sounds like a fun opportunity.

Too bad I am not a pro.

200 yard par 3's suck. Takes all the fun out of it being a par 3 for me.

[BuckeyeNut]

LOL...sounds like a drama queen thread.  Complaining about par3 that are too long on short courses?   HEH

[LuciusWooding]

Originally Posted by Grumpter

Here's one of the courses - http://www.centersquaregolfclub.com/images/CSGC-Scorecard.pdf

So hole 3 is 160/200. I'll give you that 40 yards difference is a lot, since the whites are 6,000 and the blues are 6300. But the other 2 in question are different by 25 and 18 yards. Honestly, in the case of those 2 it's the difference between your 3 iron not being enough and your 4 iron being plenty.

The white tees are only 300 yards shorter than the blues. There's absolutely no way you can argue the whites are too short to be a challenge, most holes are only a club shorter on approach. If it makes a big difference on 1 of the par 3s, and makes the other two long ones reachable with an iron for you, I guess that means the white tees are the way to go. The only reason the blues are that way is to make at least a few of the holes worth playing for longer hitters. Someone with good length could easily take on that course without having to hit more than a 5 iron to hit GIRs, perhaps not even needing a driver off the tee on most holes. In fact, there are a number of holes that would be 5 iron, wedge.

I like using all my clubs, so I often find myself wishing I had the chance to hit long irons instead of the 9 and 7 all day. It favors me and thwarts others, even if it's really hard to make birdie these sort of holes drive up the handicap rating of the course which helps my hcp get lower. Plus if I get a stroke on a hole like this, I can usually get a good look at a net birdie.

Play the whites. It's your round, and it's not like the blues are such a higher challenge (except on those holes you're complaining about). If you feel like you wish the hole was closer to the tee, generally the solution is to not play from that set of tees. You'll be pleasantly surprised that the white tees are, in fact, closer to the hole! Or play the blues if you want, but quit complaining how you have to dirty up your 3 iron because the mean course designer had the audacity to make a hole 200 yards long, or how you carry a club for exactly that distance for some reason despite the fact you can't hit it and there are alternatives.

[Chas]

Originally Posted by Grumpter

I don't mind the challenge but find it annoying when 3 out of the 4 par 3's are at that length. I prefer a nice mix. The course I played yesterday (link to scorecard above) had 3 par 3's where I had to hit 3 iron but the longest approach shot on any of the par 4's left me with a 6 iron (420 yard hole). Other than that one 6 iron it was almost all wedges after the drive. The 8th hole is 405 yards but a 90 degree dogleg where I was able to drive over tall trees to cut off much of the corner and ended up with a 95 yard approach shot. Every other par 4 was under 400 yards.

I would find such a course rather annoying as well.  I don't recall having played on a course remotely like the one you describe.

As you say, there needs to be some sort of comparability between the mix of par 3 lengths and the approach shots you're facing after hitting the fairway.  I wonder why the course was set up that way.

[Grumpter]

Originally Posted by LuciusWooding

So hole 3 is 160/200. I'll give you that 40 yards difference is a lot, since the whites are 6,000 and the blues are 6300. But the other 2 in question are different by 25 and 18 yards. Honestly, in the case of those 2 it's the difference between your 3 iron not being enough and your 4 iron being plenty.

The white tees are only 300 yards shorter than the blues. There's absolutely no way you can argue the whites are too short to be a challenge, most holes are only a club shorter on approach. If it makes a big difference on 1 of the par 3s, and makes the other two long ones reachable with an iron for you, I guess that means the white tees are the way to go. The only reason the blues are that way is to make at least a few of the holes worth playing for longer hitters. Someone with good length could easily take on that course without having to hit more than a 5 iron to hit GIRs, perhaps not even needing a driver off the tee on most holes. In fact, there are a number of holes that would be 5 iron, wedge.

I like using all my clubs, so I often find myself wishing I had the chance to hit long irons instead of the 9 and 7 all day. It favors me and thwarts others, even if it's really hard to make birdie these sort of holes drive up the handicap rating of the course which helps my hcp get lower. Plus if I get a stroke on a hole like this, I can usually get a good look at a net birdie.

Play the whites. It's your round, and it's not like the blues are such a higher challenge (except on those holes you're complaining about). If you feel like you wish the hole was closer to the tee, generally the solution is to not play from that set of tees. You'll be pleasantly surprised that the white tees are, in fact, closer to the hole! Or play the blues if you want, but quit complaining how you have to dirty up your 3 iron because the mean course designer had the audacity to make a hole 200 yards long, or how you carry a club for exactly that distance for some reason despite the fact you can't hit it and there are alternatives.

I'll reiterate:

4) I don't mind hitting my long irons at all. However I also don't like hitting a 3 iron or more on 3 out of the 4 par 4's. Add that yardage to some of the par 4's so they aren't all Driver/Wedge holes.

[Grumpter]

Originally Posted by Chas

I would find such a course rather annoying as well.  I don't recall having played on a course remotely like the one you describe.

As you say, there needs to be some sort of comparability between the mix of par 3 lengths and the approach shots you're facing after hitting the fairway.  I wonder why the course was set up that way.

There's another one I play early in the season as well. They have 3 nine hole layouts but the only interesting combination of the 3 nines has 3 of the par 4's at about 200. Otherwise would be a pretty good layout IMO.

[Dave2512]

Probably more to do with available space at the time of contruction than anything. They had to do something to make a short course challenging. I don't see that much around here unless it's an older course that had to be modified because it was too short to be interesting. If anything most of the newer courses here are long just for the sake of being long and don't offer much besides that. My favorite course in the area plays just 6300-6400 from the middle tees, lots of 310-360y par 4's and it's a tough layout. Not many legit opportunites to hit driver-wedge unless your avg drive is 220y or can shape the ball at will. Long hitters must club down or suffer a day of lost balls. They won't let you play the back tees unless you have permission from the head pro. If all you saw was the course you'd swear it was somewhere along the UK coast, links style with knee high grasses just off the fairway.