Ottawa Citizen Amateur Championship - Round 1 Men's - results

[tw68ca]

This thread somewhat amazes me. As I understand it, the rules of entry for the tournament essentially accept a handicap if verfied by a club pro, is that correct? As I understand it, Mr Farazin had an index signed off at 7.2 by one of the pros at Greyhawk.

He went on to shoot 77 in the first round of the tournament.....I don't know what sort of a rating the orgaizers may have applied to the course for the day, but if past tournaments are any indication, I suspect the gold tees were played.

Assuming, then, a course rating of 72.3 and slope rating of 124, this gives him a differential of 4.28.

To those of you who are accusing the man of "reverse sandbag" cheating, do you know what the odds are of an 7.2 index beating his handicap factor by 3 srokes in a tournament round? Try 50 to 1. See this link

http://www.popeofslope.com/sandbagging/odds.html

For those of you who do not know, Mr. Knuth developed the modern method of handicapping for the USGA.

If you have a problem with the Citizen entry procedures, perhaps you should take it up with the committee, but I hardly think it's fair to call Mr. Farazin a cheat for reporting an index too low in order to gain entry to the tournament. Sad that all this appears to have ruined the experience for him.

[Colby]

I'd say that's about as close to topic as this thread has been for the last 25 posts.

I am not positive, but I think its unofficial.

It is RCGA approved, which means, if you are an RCGA member it is an official handicap, if you are not an RCGA member, it is unofficial.

[Adska]

You don't think anyone cares about the tournament?

What about the organizers and volunteers who spend many hours making sure the tournament runs smoothly? What about the players who keep coming back every year and also the family members of these players?

In the grand scheme of life, you're right... This tournament means nothing. However, saying that no one cares is an insult to myself, and I'm sure many others.

On a side note, Kanata played absolutely incredible yesterday. The fairways were gorgeous, and the greens were lightning fast. We couldn't have been luckier as players.

[GarthM]

This thread somewhat amazes me. As I understand it, the rules of entry for the tournament essentially accept a handicap if verfied by a club pro, is that correct? As I understand it, Mr Farazin had an index signed off at 7.2 by one of the pros at Greyhawk.

He went on to shoot 77 in the first round of the tournament.....I don't know what sort of a rating the orgaizers may have applied to the course for the day, but if past tournaments are any indication, I suspect the gold tees were played.

Assuming, then, a course rating of 72.3 and slope rating of 124, this gives him a differential of 4.28.

To those of you who are accusing the man of "reverse sandbag" cheating, do you know what the odds are of an 7.2 index beating his handicap factor by 3 srokes in a tournament round? Try 50 to 1. See this link

http://www.popeofslope.com/sandbagging/odds.html

For those of you who do not know, Mr. Knuth developed the modern method of handicapping for the USGA.

If you have a problem with the Citizen entry procedures, perhaps you should take it up with the committee, but I hardly think it's fair to call Mr. Farazin a cheat for reporting an index too low in order to gain entry to the tournament. Sad that all this appears to have ruined the experience for him.

FWIW the Citizen does not attempt to rate the courses. Best guess is that it would be from the Blues at GH = 71.3/122 giving him a 5.28 and 22:1 odds according to the Pope.

[Shivas Irons]

If you have a problem with the Citizen entry procedures, perhaps you should take it up with the committee, but I hardly think it's fair to call Mr. Farazin a cheat for reporting an index too low in order to gain entry to the tournament.

There is nothing wrong with debating rules of eligibility but how about we leave any references to indiviual players out of the discussion.
Andru - correct that in the grand scheme of things it really doesn't matter, but judging by the length of this thread there seems to be many that care deeply about this tournament.

[LBH]

From what I've been told by members, Predator played strong blues, meaning the tees were a mix of blues and gold. So yes shooting 77 was good.

[Kilroy]

It is unofficial if you are not a member of the RCGA.
It can be used for official handicapping if you are a member.

off topic i know, but is the handicapping tool on this site (which i use) 'official'?

[Sakuraba]

FWIW the Citizen does not attempt to rate the courses. Best guess is that it would be from the Blues at GH = 71.3/122 giving him a 5.28 and 22:1 odds according to the Pope.

at an index of 10, the odds jump to 276:1 if I'm reading the pope correctly.

[Shivas Irons]

It is unofficial if you are not a member of the RCGA.

am I correct in assuming that if you do not belong to a club you cannot be an RCGA member?

[GarthM]

am I correct in assuming that if you do not belong to a club you cannot be an RCGA member?

No, both the GAO and QGA have public player programs that I believe give you membership in the RCGA. It may be limited membership but enough to carry an official handicap.

[Kilroy]

The future of this thread....


Farzin took some bad shots in here and I am always forced to consider moderating such posts. Of course whenever someone's opinions are edited or deleted, censorship and freedom of speech are tossed back at me.

I asked that the insults stop, and for the most part they did. The thread turned to discussing entry rules and such. That's OK.

So now "the accused" has had his rebuttal, and while it too had some elements of a questionable nature (forum rules wise) I will not edit it, nor will I close this thread at this point.

Some have asked, "why is this thread still here?" The rules are there not to control conversation, nor to interfere with people expressing opinions, but to prevent people from being abusive to others. When people are habitually abusive I remove the posts and warn them to stop or risk being banned - that is a problem user. When a long term poster with no history of being abusive to others expresses a strong opinion that is insulting to someone I will do as I did here, ask them to refrain, but without moderating the posts. Nobody really wants that level of censorship. What we want is a civil place to discuss and inform.

So... Let's move on. This is a dead issue, but there are a few more rounds to play in the event.

[wattsy]

am I correct in assuming that if you do not belong to a club you cannot be an RCGA member?

Nah, I'm pretty sure you can buy a membership for a certain fee. I remember buying an Ontario Public Golf membership a few years back because I liked their tourneys better.

[Ginker]

I haven't read all the posts in this thread but if ppl are argueing about sand baggin down to play in this tournament I am with them.. If you don't meet the required factor you shouldn't be allowed to play regardless if you do shoot a good score.. Get your index down and play next year... I played the second year of the tourny and had a guy in my group that shot 105 both of the first 2 rounds.. Thats ridiculous.. I think there should be a rule that if you miss the cut by a certain number of strokes you are not allowed to play next year.. Maybe there is now? I haven't paid much attention as I can't get the time off to play in it these days.. I do understand that some ppl may have one bad round (my 91 the first round at stonbridege, but I followed it up with a 74 at Talon) but 2 rounds over 100 common..

[jvincent]

No, both the GAO and QGA have public player programs that I believe give you membership in the RCGA. It may be limited membership but enough to carry an official handicap.

I'm a GAO public player and it's a full RCGA membership. Of course there's no club per se so you don't have local tournaments like intersectionals.

It get's you into all the RCGA tournaments that you qualify for and there is a public player only tournament that never seems to line up with my holiday / work schedule.

[Andy4Par]

I just don't get it???

How does getting a handicap card signed down from a 10+ handicap to below 8 handicap work in your favour to get into a tournament (not full) and allow you to sandbag? Don't you get less strokes, even if you shoot a higher score.

I rather doubt the tournament organizers, officials, players would care...would they?

If sandbagging is to declare a higher handicap, play to a much lower handicap, take more strokes off total score lowering your net score thus gaining an unfair advantage....wouldn't reverse sandbagging be to declare a lower handicap, play to a higher score and take fewer strokes off resulting in a higher net score...proving ???

Ok, now I'm more confused....

[Big Johnny69]

You don't get any strokes towards your index in the Citizen.

[jvincent]

Ok, now I'm more confused....

The issue is that a certain handicap is required to enter. Without lowering their handicaps some people would not get in.

[LobWedge]

If the Citizen people want this event to continue to have a respectable reputation some changes need to be made, and procedures need to be tightened so that situations, like the one alleged here, have a much lower chance of occurring in the future.

1. Official RCGA handicaps need to be used and verified for all entrants. The only official handicapping system in use in Canada is administered by the RCGA, under the auspices of the R & A. As was mentioned earlier, there are public player programs administered by the RCGA and provincial bodies that allow the non-club member to maintain an official handicap. There are other organizations that administer unofficial handicaps for their purposes only, such as the National Capital Golf Tour, and the former OttawaGolf Tour. The "handicaps" kept by these groups are for tour purposes only and the have disclaimers stating this due to special rules and conditions of competition that apply only to their competitive rounds.

2. The field should be limited to 72 players who should be eligible to play all 4 rounds. No cut. A smaller field makes things easier to administer for the tournament committee and rules officials during the event.

3. OR, completely abandon the handicap requirement altogether and hold a single, 18 hole qualifying round open to the first 144 entrants, and only the top 72 and ties move on to the 4 official tournament rounds. OR, The committee can set, if it wants, a qualifying standard, let's say 79. The committee can then use this standard to determine who moves on. This also makes things much easier for the committee by helping to weed out potential cheats, sandbaggers, reverse sandbaggers, etc., without doing any "damage" to the official event. It's much more difficult to shoot a good score under the gun for 18 holes, and it will make the quaifying field that much more "legitimate".

[faldo]

Farzin, I'm still going to consider you a buddy who I'll be happy to golf with this year but part of your rebuttal bothers me.

After reading about how the slope/course rating system works, I feel you were unfair to all the rest of us of your Touring Competitors over the last few seasons. According to the SLOPE page the odds of what you did (see your quote below) would be simply astronomical. Not impossible but almost.

I played in your tour and won 4 times in one year playing 5 or 6 under my handicap each time in some events to win. Do you know why?

It seems to me that you were happy to take the lion's share of our prize money & the overall trophy at least partially due to an inaccurate HCP?

["Richard"]

This has the be the longest post ever!!!

I take it you haven't seen some of BC mists posts from last year

[BC MIST]

I take it you haven't seen some of BC mists posts from last year

Hey!!!

[BC MIST]

BC made some points that I happen to disagree with. I don't think providing more resistance to entering a tournament is the way to grow the game of golf. I understand there's a need to solve a yet to be proven problem ( it's pretty much all speculation at this time ). But the OVGA has it's ultra restrictive good ole boyz club in place. I'm glad the citizen is more 'Open' allowing people to compete and learn how to play tournament golf.

I hope to heaven they have more sense than to adopt the exclusive practices of the OVGA.

The OVGA is an organization that provides tournament golf for golfers who are dues playing members of a golf club. Members pay an annual fee to the RCGA, one purpose of which is to get an official handicap. They also pay from hundreds to thousands of dollars per year for the privilige of being a member and of having the opportunity to play in OVGA tournaments, if they choose. Yes, the practices of the OVGA are ALMOST exclusive, but why should those of us who choose to pay huge membership fees, not be allowed to play in our own tournaments, if non members were to be allowed to play?

The OVGA has instituted a ladder system for "A" class, "B" class and Senior golfers based solely on scores made in OVGA tournaments. Entry into subsequent fields is based on your position on the ladder, not on a handicap, bogus or legitimate. A golfer earns the right to play in tournaments, by playing well enough. If the field of a tournament is not full, then the balance is selected from entrants who are not on the ladder.

Furthermore, the OVGA, GQ and GAO now permits a limited number of non dues paying members into its tournaments.

Having said this, please explain how the above realities equate to, "the OVGA has it's ultra restrictive good ole boyz club in place."

[Sphere Hunter]

Farzin, I'm still going to consider you a buddy who I'll be happy to golf with this year but part of your rebuttal bothers me.

After reading about how the slope/course rating system works, I feel you were unfair to all the rest of us of your Touring Competitors over the last few seasons. According to the SLOPE page the odds of what you did (see your quote below) would be simply astronomical. Not impossible but almost.

I played in your tour and won 4 times in one year playing 5 or 6 under my handicap each time in some events to win. Do you know why?

It seems to me that you were happy to take the lion's share of our prize money & the overall trophy at least partially due to an inaccurate HCP?

Geez, this doesn't seem too friendly to me. I don't know Farzin but if he is having trouble sleeping and no longer enjoying golf, maybe you guys should lay off the guy. Right now, if his next game is a good one, guys will say he's a bagger. If it's bad, guys will say he shouldn't have played in the Citizen. He is damded, and all he did was entry a tournament a record a good score. This isn't right.
Farzin, I read your long post and I feel for you. You are welcome to join us at Greensmere any time. I think you would fit in nicely.
SH

[LobWedge]

Geez, this doesn't seem too friendly to me. I don't know Farzin but if he is having trouble sleeping and no longer enjoying golf, maybe you guys should lay off the guy. Right now, if his next game is a good one, guys will say he's a bagger. If it's bad, guys will say he shouldn't have played in the Citizen. He is damded, and all he did was entry a tournament a record a good score. This isn't right.
Farzin, I read your long post and I feel for you. You are welcome to join us at Greensmere any time. I think you would fit in nicely.
SH

Farzin's a big boy and can take care of himself. I've played many times with him and have always enjoyed the company. Faldo's concern is valid though. If Farzin's true handicap is lower than he's been reporting then the guys, like Faldo and myself, who pay to play on the NCGT (and former OG Tour) have every right to ask questions like these because there's the possibility that our money was taken under false pretenses.

[Kilroy]

Pleaae take that discussion over to the NCGT forum. It does not belong here.

[1972Apex]

Farzin has stated pretty clearly in his post that his game has improved significantly since leaving the NCGT. If any members of the tour feel they have an issue I would suggest making your feelings known to the tour.

Thanks.

[LobWedge]

Pleaae take that discussion over to the NCGT forum. It does not belong here.

No problem with that Dan, just answering SH's post.

[LobWedge]

Farzin has stated pretty clearly in his post that his game has improved significantly since leaving the NGCT. Could you guys please confine the witch hunt to the NGCT Tour site?

That's uncalled for Reid. This has nothing to do with a "witch hunt" and everything to do with getting to the truth for the benefit of all concerned.

[BC MIST]

Farzin, I read your long post and I feel for you. You are welcome to join us at Greensmere any time. I think you would fit in nicely.
SH

In fact, a bunch of us play most Saturday mornings at Greensmere, including SH and a few other forum members. As I look after the tee times 'n stuff, let me know if you want to join us some time.

If you think that Mike Pare was great to play with, wait until you play with us.

[Kilroy]

OK Please drop the discussion of anything even remotely connected to a "witch hunt" or whatever you want to call it. It has been done to death already.