No Mickey Mouse (or Goofy) par-4s here

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 28/08/2010 (5754 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

IT’S all the rage in big-tournament golf these days to have a driveable par-4.

Don’t hold your breath for it this weekend at St. Charles for the CN Can­adian Women’s Open.

“You don’t want to make a Mickey Mouse par-4 just to say you had a reach­able par-4,” LPGA Tour set-up man Jim Haley said Friday. “We like it if it’s de­signed right.” The excitement of such a challenge is to bring the possibility of an eagle-two into play, something that could have big impact on the leaderboard. But to be ex­citing, there also has to be some kind of risk-reward proposition.

At this year’s U.S. Open, USGA offi­cials moved up the tee on the par-4 17th at Oakmont to about 230 yards, but it’s a dangerous uphill play to a green sur­rounded by deep bunkers.

Even at last week’s Safeway Clas­sic at Pumpkin Ridge in North Plains, Ore., LPGA officials were able to move forward the tee on the par-4 17th to present the players with a choice of laying up or challenging a fairway and green bordered by a menacing creek. All of it was visible from the tee.

At St. Charles, the old MacKenzie/ Ross design doesn’t have a great fit for such a gamble.

Winnipeg Free Press | Newsletter

Mike McIntyre | On Sports

Thursdays

Keep up to date on sports with Mike McIntyre's weekly newsletter.

Sign up for Mike McIntyre | On Sports

Sign Up

I agree to the Terms and Conditions, Cookie and Privacy Policies, and CASL agreement.

The 17th, a par-4 playing regularly to 365 yards this week, has a members’ tee at 280 yards, but there’s just not enough of a risk-reward on that tee shot and it would simply make the hole easier for the longer hitters.

The third, a par-4 on the card at 294 yards, would seem to be the most likely candidate but there are a few things working against it.

It’s early in the round to make a big buzz and the green location, a slight dog-leg left and behind some guarding bunkers, isn’t ideal for this purpose.

“I’ve thought about (No. 3) and we’ve talked about it, but you’ve got that (left­side) tree in the way and you don’t have real good vision of where it’s going to land,” Haley said.

tim.campbell@freepress.mb.ca