Question #43 - This hole has been played as a very short par 5 and is listed as 471 yards from the back tee while in reality it measures 455 yards from the back tee - a solid par 4 length. Changes have been made over the years to address the lack of length. The architect's proposal is to convert this hole to a par 4, which is appropriate for its length, and make modifications from tee to green in accordance. An alternative would be to convert the hole into a true par 5 (short but true) by moving the tee box to the rear 20 yards or so.
1.	4/3/2008 3:44:00 PM	A holes par rating is dependent upon its measured length. NCGA course raters determine effective length and assign par rating. It is not a choice that we as golfers have.
2.	4/3/2008 9:41:00 PM	Don't really care - whatever works.
3.	4/3/2008 10:39:00 PM	Been there-done that
4.	4/4/2008 1:57:00 PM	Not many LWW golfers can reach that green in 2. Leave it as a par 5
5.	4/6/2008 12:37:00 AM	This hole is a good par five for the majority of golfers
6.	4/6/2008 3:13:00 AM	Could be done very cheaply.
7.	4/6/2008 7:02:00 AM	This golf course is populated by 99% senior citizens and we don't need a long par 4. This is not a course for pro's, and there aren't going to be a lot of pro's playing on this course.
8.	4/6/2008 11:10:00 PM	"Solid par 4" for whom? There's no way I can reach the green in 2!
9.	4/6/2008 11:11:00 PM	Play to a par 71
10.	4/7/2008 12:59:00 AM	It is always a 5 par for high handicappers.
11.	4/8/2008 4:03:00 AM	convert to par 4 now, go longer to par 5 when funds available
12.	4/15/2008 9:56:00 PM	Make it a par 4 from the blue tees.
13.	4/16/2008 8:37:00 PM	another low priority
14.	4/16/2008 9:22:00 PM	We have enough long par 4's. Best to leave as is.
15.	4/17/2008 1:35:00 AM	Why spend the money for a par 5?
16.	4/18/2008 6:24:00 PM	Leave it as it is today.
17.	4/19/2008 5:52:00 PM	Depends on cost impact and downtime estimates
18.	4/20/2008 1:18:00 AM	It already is a short par 5, and it could be a great par 4
19.	4/21/2008 7:41:00 PM	this hole is difficult already, the trees on the right and the fairway bunkers make it difficult enough
20.	4/21/2008 11:35:00 PM	a nice par 5 for women
21.	4/22/2008 9:57:00 PM	I prefer this hole to be played as it currently is; a short par 5. If anything, the tee could be expanded and made longer by filling behind back tees with lake dredgings at a reasonable cost! As it is today, this is the only par 5 that gives higher handicap players a chance to birdie!!
22.	4/23/2008 4:03:00 AM	I don't think this would be a solid par 4 for most LLW golfers.
23.	4/23/2008 4:51:00 AM	The course should remain a Par 72
24.	4/23/2008 10:18:00 PM	Most people are fine the way it is!
25.	4/23/2008 11:16:00 PM	I guess - whatever is the lesser of the two evils. Shouldn't be a $$ issue to convert it to a Par 4. Not too sure why but this hole plays somewhat difficult as it is for the ladies.
26.	4/25/2008 8:58:00 PM	plenty of room to make it a true par 5
27.	4/25/2008 10:32:00 PM	this is most simple tee to expand

Question #43 - This hole has been played as a very short par 5 and is listed as 471 yards from the back tee while in reality it measures 455 yards from the back tee - a solid par 4 length. Changes have been made over the years to address the lack of length. The architect's proposal is to convert this hole to a par 4, which is appropriate for its length, and make modifications from tee to green in accordance. An alternative would be to convert the hole into a true par 5 (short but true) by moving the tee box to the rear 20 yards or so.

Response Date

Comment:

4/3/2008 3:44:00 PM

A holes par rating is dependent upon its measured length. NCGA course raters determine effective length and assign par rating. It is not a choice that we as golfers have.

4/3/2008 9:41:00 PM

Don't really care - whatever works.

4/3/2008 10:39:00 PM

Been there-done that

4/4/2008 1:57:00 PM

Not many LWW golfers can reach that green in 2. Leave it as a par 5

4/6/2008 12:37:00 AM

This hole is a good par five for the majority of golfers

4/6/2008 3:13:00 AM

Could be done very cheaply.

4/6/2008 7:02:00 AM

This golf course is populated by 99% senior citizens and we don't need a long par 4. This is not a course for pro's, and there aren't going to be a lot of pro's playing on this course.

4/6/2008 11:10:00 PM

"Solid par 4" for whom? There's no way I can reach the green in 2!

4/6/2008 11:11:00 PM

Play to a par 71

10.

4/7/2008 12:59:00 AM

It is always a 5 par for high handicappers.

11.

4/8/2008 4:03:00 AM

convert to par 4 now, go longer to par 5 when funds available

12.

4/15/2008 9:56:00 PM

Make it a par 4 from the blue tees.

13.

4/16/2008 8:37:00 PM

another low priority

14.

4/16/2008 9:22:00 PM

We have enough long par 4's. Best to leave as is.

15.

4/17/2008 1:35:00 AM

Why spend the money for a par 5?

16.

4/18/2008 6:24:00 PM

Leave it as it is today.

17.

4/19/2008 5:52:00 PM

Depends on cost impact and downtime estimates

18.

4/20/2008 1:18:00 AM

It already is a short par 5, and it could be a great par 4

19.

4/21/2008 7:41:00 PM

this hole is difficult already, the trees on the right and the fairway bunkers make it difficult enough

20.

4/21/2008 11:35:00 PM

a nice par 5 for women

21.

4/22/2008 9:57:00 PM

I prefer this hole to be played as it currently is; a short par 5. If anything, the tee could be expanded and made longer by filling behind back tees with lake dredgings at a reasonable cost! As it is today, this is the only par 5 that gives higher handicap players a chance to birdie!!

22.

4/23/2008 4:03:00 AM

I don't think this would be a solid par 4 for most LLW golfers.

23.

4/23/2008 4:51:00 AM

The course should remain a Par 72

24.

4/23/2008 10:18:00 PM

Most people are fine the way it is!

25.

4/23/2008 11:16:00 PM

I guess - whatever is the lesser of the two evils. Shouldn't be a $$ issue to convert it to a Par 4. Not too sure why but this hole plays somewhat difficult as it is for the ladies.

26.

4/25/2008 8:58:00 PM

plenty of room to make it a true par 5

27.

4/25/2008 10:32:00 PM

this is most simple tee to expand