Show some love to the 9-hole and executive

[golfintheworld]

Who out there didn't learn on something shorter than a par 71 or 72? 9-hole and executive are there to learn the nuances of scoring. They teach shot making as well as no-pressure scoring. I maintain that if you can't shoot par on these courses, you'll never on anything longer.

So with that, can I hear some love for the short guys?  I play at a 3100 yard 9-hole in Dix Hills. I bring 3 clubs and play for par. I get there at 730am on Sunday morning and I'm home by 930am. I can practice anything I want. Sometimes 2 balls to different targets. Shots out of strange lies. I'd like to hear some of your stories.

[SavvySwede]

1 hour ago, golfintheworld said:

Who out there didn't learn on something shorter than a par 71 or 72? 9-hole and executive are there to learn the nuances of scoring. They teach shot making as well as no-pressure scoring. I maintain that if you can't shoot par on these courses, you'll never on anything longer.

So with that, can I hear some love for the short guys?  I play at a 3100 yard 9-hole in Dix Hills. I bring 3 clubs and play for par. I get there at 730am on Sunday morning and I'm home by 930am. I can practice anything I want. Sometimes 2 balls to different targets. Shots out of strange lies. I'd like to hear some of your stories.

I don't think a 9 hole course should be compared to an executive. When I play 9 holes a my regular course I don't play it any different than I would if I planned to play the second 9.

I did learn to play an executive though. Small elevated greens surrounded by pine trees, miss the green and you're in the pine straw. Made me learn to keep the ball where I can see it real quick.

[iacas]

I didn't learn to play on an executive course.

And technically a course full of nothing but par threes is tougher to get to par on for many golfers… they don't have four par fives and some shorter par fours. Par threes are, relative to par, some of the toughest holes to score on for better golfers.

Executive courses are also not often a great bargain for the course owner. The expensive areas - tees and greens and bunkers - are still prevalent. The fairways and rough are less, but they're the less costly areas.

[Hardspoon]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Executive courses are also not often a great bargain for the course owner. The expensive areas - tees and greens and bunkers - are still prevalent. The fairways and rough are less, but they're the less costly areas.

Huh. Never thought of this.

It's funny - I used to play a lot at a course that could be considered an "executive" (4200 yards):

http://golfclubatlas.com/courses-by-country/usa/walnut-lane/

...and it was one of the courses I played most as I learned the game.

But now, I have no interest in playing a par-3 or executive course. I'm not sure why, but it just doesn't appeal to me.

 

[Club Rat]

4 hours ago, golfintheworld said:

"Show some love to the 9-hole and executive"

They have attributed to the golf industry for many years.
They offer people an alternative opportunity to play and families a place to introduce juniors to the game.
There also good for introductory leagues and senior golfers.

The RTJ trail courses have Par 3 courses that are Spectacular.

[jsgolfer]

Maine has a plethora of 9 hole courses, at my high school we played on a very short 9 hole course, Pine Hill.  There are 26 9-hole courses within 50 miles of Bangor.  

[colin007]

I learned to play on a par 3 course, but I would only ever go back if I had a friend who wanted to learn how to play and wasn't ready for a "real" course. I'm with @Hardspoon on that, no interest at all in playing there again.

[boogielicious]

10 hours ago, jsgolfer said:

Maine has a plethora of 9 hole courses, at my high school we played on a very short 9 hole course, Pine Hill.  There are 26 9-hole courses within 50 miles of Bangor.  

Mass does as well. There are three within 5 miles of my house and two of them are quite good.

[JonMA1]

My home course is nine-holes but it's tougher than any of the 18 hole courses I've played (I've only played a dozen or so other courses). I've only seen a few people play from the tips in the four years I've played there.

[Blackjack Don]

Hmm, reading this thread started me to wonder what's the average score of the average golfer on par 3's? I found this thread:

This didn't give me an average score, but some insight into people's frustration with golf. I'm guessing the average golfer would struggle to play 9 over a par 3 course, maybe even +2 average on every hole. I haven't ever played a par 3 course, but I'm sure Eric is right that they don't have more lushness than the average muni. What does the average golfer shoot on the par 3's on a regular course? Closing in on +3 over?

My wondering about par 3 scores led me to this page:

Little known strategy for breaking par

The author states that we need to consistently be above 60% of the yardage we need on every par 4 to make par on the hole. A 400 yard par 4 would require a >240 yard drive, consistently. Not for nothing, but I'm not going to cover that very often. Even with a straight drive, I'm still going to average 220 off the tee, so it's going to be a struggle to get home. 

The answer for me isn't playing par 3's and executives. I am going to stick with playing from 200 yards out and see how it goes. The math alone tells me it's better for me. If I play a regular course, then I'm going to be thinking par. If I play a par 3, I'm going to be frustrated because making a par on a 3 is tougher than longer holes, on average. Possibly closer to par since I don't ever have to hit a driver or metal, unless the hole is over 200, which no longer puts it in the category of a useful hole on a par 3 course.

Just thinking out loud here. If there is a reason to give some love to short courses, then perhaps my Play 200 is only a bad idea because it hasn't been fully fleshed out? Par 3's aren't going to get love, or respect, I'm afraid. People want to play a regular course.

 

 

[Good Ash]

There is an executive 27 hole course where I live in a retirement community and it is pretty fun (you have to tee off early though or the round takes longer than if you were at a full length course because of the retirement community).  Lot's of par 3 and short par 4's.  What I like about the par 4's is they really make you weigh the cost benefit of trying for the green and a lot of your tee shots are the same as a 5 to 7 iron approach shots where you are hitting to have an angle at the green.   They have narrow fairways, lots of hazards around the green and tree's that block the angles.  The par 3's are pretty unique as well.  It's not a course that I frequent but I try to play it every so often because it really puts an emphasis on my approach shots and my iron play.  In my experience the par three courses that have character are great and seem to do well.  

I think a lot of par 3 course can seem like your hitting the same shot over and over into the same green complex and most people think of these courses when thinking about the typical par 3.

[MrDC]

I live a stones throw from a 9 hole course, can practically walk there, it's great for those days when I only have a little time or a practice round, walk for $15.

I learned to play on a par 3 course, spent my first year playing there and there alone, it's a replica course with the each hole a best of par 3's from around the country, very cool, and it has lights so you can play at night! open till 1am in the summer.

I won't go to the short courses if I have time to play a round, but will in a pinch, and to practice.

[dave s]

One in my local area.  Sadly, it's overpriced and not kept in very good shape.  It's a course I like to go to and practice iron and hybrid tee balls.  Two holes I can hit driver, but choose to hit a hybrid for practice.  Big stink is the greens are always shaggy and really spongy.  Walking on them kind of gives me the willies. 

5 par 4s and 4 par 3s.  If it's not busy or too stacked up (it's an evening golfer place for some reason) I'll hit 2 tee balls on every hole and play out each if I can get away with it.

Good practice track, but otherwise I wouldn't play there to be honest.

dave

[No Mulligans]

I mostly play Executive courses, and prefer it that way.  I play often, two to three times a week.  I can't commit 4+ hours each time I play, especially on my early morning before work rounds.  The course I play most often (four par fours, 14 par threes), I get out early and play in two hours or less.  Last time I played it in 1 hour 40 minutes (I was first out and jogged a bit between shots).

Full courses for me, that's a once or twice a month outing.

[No Mulligans]

On 2/5/2017 at 9:24 AM, Blackjack Don said:

Hmm, reading this thread started me to wonder what's the average score of the average golfer on par 3's? I found this thread:

This didn't give me an average score, but some insight into people's frustration with golf. I'm guessing the average golfer would struggle to play 9 over a par 3 course, maybe even +2 average on every hole. I haven't ever played a par 3 course, but I'm sure Eric is right that they don't have more lushness than the average muni. What does the average golfer shoot on the par 3's on a regular course? Closing in on +3 over?

My wondering about par 3 scores led me to this page:

Little known strategy for breaking par

The author states that we need to consistently be above 60% of the yardage we need on every par 4 to make par on the hole. A 400 yard par 4 would require a >240 yard drive, consistently. Not for nothing, but I'm not going to cover that very often. Even with a straight drive, I'm still going to average 220 off the tee, so it's going to be a struggle to get home. 

The answer for me isn't playing par 3's and executives. I am going to stick with playing from 200 yards out and see how it goes. The math alone tells me it's better for me. If I play a regular course, then I'm going to be thinking par. If I play a par 3, I'm going to be frustrated because making a par on a 3 is tougher than longer holes, on average. Possibly closer to par since I don't ever have to hit a driver or metal, unless the hole is over 200, which no longer puts it in the category of a useful hole on a par 3 course.

Just thinking out loud here. If there is a reason to give some love to short courses, then perhaps my Play 200 is only a bad idea because it hasn't been fully fleshed out? Par 3's aren't going to get love, or respect, I'm afraid. People want to play a regular course.

 

 

Par 3s in general are easier for an average golfer based on my experience, but harder for a good golfer based on what I've read.  For an average golfer, a par three only requires one good shot.  A par four requires two good shots in a row, a par five requires three good shots in a row.  Say you have a good shot 50% of the time... being a poker player I'm sure you don't even need to do the math, the results are obvious.

And the data from my last 135 rounds (some are 9 hole rounds), par threes average .84 over, par fours average 1.06 over, par fives average 1.18 over. 

 

[Blackjack Don]

I would think that might speak to length rather than par. Again, simple math says that to be around average on par 4's, one needs to hit a drive of 60% of the hole to have a decent chance at being on in two. An average 400 yard hole requires a drive of 240 yards, leaving 160 to the green. The longer the second shot, the less often one is going to find the green. That's easy enough. The longer the hole, the more important the tee shot. It might seem like par 3's are easier for high hcp players, but the reality is they are hitting second shots, not tee shots. The closer to the hole, the easier. 

11 minutes ago, No Mulligans said:

Par 3s in general are easier for an average golfer based on my experience, but harder for a good golfer based on what I've read.  

Do you mean easier compared to par 5's? Is that because of the required driver distance to the par 5's? Given your stats, I'm guessing your driver carry is around 200. This is the only way the statement makes sense. Frankly, I can't hit it far enough to make second shots easier--assuming it goes straight.

Plus, we all know that it is easier to make progress pitching, chipping and putting than medium and long irons. The amount of time it takes to develop a long game to reverse those stats is prohibitive for most of us. I don't know if we've put enough thought into what constitutes a good game of golf for those of us who will never break 80? The maths tell me I may never come close to it. We all want to talk about our good scores, but some of us will never have one to brag about--without even knowing why. We simply do not have enough gas to get to the green.

[iacas]

21 minutes ago, No Mulligans said:

Par 3s in general are easier for an average golfer based on my experience, but harder for a good golfer based on what I've read.  For an average golfer, a par three only requires one good shot.  A par four requires two good shots in a row, a par five requires three good shots in a row.  Say you have a good shot 50% of the time... being a poker player I'm sure you don't even need to do the math, the results are obvious.

Par threes are easier for higher handicappers (relative to par) because they're shorter holes. But the "%" way is not the right way to think about it, because I can hit two bad shots - or sometimes even one terrible shot - on a par five and still make a par or even birdie.

Par threes are easiest (relative to par) for higher handicappers because they give them fewer chances to screw up.

Par threes are hardest (relative to par) for lower handicappers because they give them fewer chances to recover.

(Generally speaking, of course.)

Note: this is why par fives are usually the lower handicap holes and par threes the higher handicap holes: higher handicappers need more strokes on the par fives than they do on the par threes.

 

[CarlSpackler]

Par 3s kick my butt. Most of my birdies happen on 5s or a very short 4 with little danger. The little course down the street from me is relatively short, but the back has only 4 par 4s and the rest 3s. The shortest of those is about 150 from the back tees. I dread playing the back.