Compete or just play your own game?

[1972Apex]

Interesting.
I still disagree. If someone's cap is 3 strokes lower, there is no question as to who the better golfer is. The odds are definitely in their favor. As you said, the guy expecting to play with handicaps would be the loser, most of the time. I can undrestand the lower capped player not wanting to square up the odds if the primary goal is to win.
If, however the goal is to have a game where anyone can win, by being "on" that day, well it's obvious that a handicapped game does the job of leveling the field.

As for playing with handicaps hampering improvements. I feel you're way out in left field on that, but it is an interesting viewpoint. Improving has more to do with dedication, effort and focus. Hanicapping does not inhibit that.

Hey, if we all agreed this would be a very boring forum and everyone would have stopped posting years ago

3 strokes is close enough. I played a 3 handicap last week (I'm a 7) and beat him by 2. He was a little off that day and I played really well. Quite frankly it made it a LOT more enjoyable than if I had asked him for strokes!

[sensfan63]

I'm with 1972Apex on this one. If two golfers are relatively close to each other in handicap, then giving/taking strokes is unnecessary. When I say relatively, I would classify that as anywhere from 1 to 5 strokes difference (assuming a mid-teens handicap). I guess the difference would have to be a little bit smaller once you get to single-digits.

I liken it to playing hockey. If you absolutely dominate the league that you play in, you're not going to get any better. If you constantly play with players that are better than you are, you'll see your game improve, no doubt. It's like osmosis, but for sports.

[Kilroy]

That still works when the game is handicapped.

[sensfan63]

That still works when the game is handicapped.

Not as much if it's not handicapped, IMO. Like another poster said, too often the player receiving strokes plays to the situation and doesn't simply play the hole.

Think of it this way - if you're playing hockey with players that are a lot better, do you think you'll get any better if everyone else lets you waltz through them and score, just to make you feel good. Probably not. (Not totally analogous, I know, but it's the best I could come up with on such short notice)

My mom is the perfect example. She's spent the last 10 years hovering between a 10 and 15 handicap. Now, she's 60+ years old now, but she still has stretches where she'll fire in the low to mid 80s, and her handicap goes down. What does she do? Complains that she has to give x-number of strokes more than before, because her handicap went down! Crazy. She should be overjoyed, IMO.

[Kilroy]

I fully understand the thinking. Still, the concept of handicapping is pretty popular. The points for and against it can go on ad nauseum.

[mberube]

That’s all good but rarely will you find a 15+ handicap play heads up with a 5 hdcap. That’s just not fair. As a low handicap, unless the guy insists, I’ll play him heads up but I have no issue giving him strokes. Personally, I find myself playing better when I give strokes to a fellow competitor.

[jeffc]

I don't often bet when I golf but am not opposed to doing it but to say it hampers my ability to improve is absolutely ridiculous. What hampers my ability to improve is time - work, family obligations, playing 25-30 rounds a year and virtually no practice time.

I don't disagree playing with better people makes you learn and play better but it has nothing to do with playing for strokes or not. There is a reason there are handicaps. Granted if I were within a stroke or 2 either way I am not too concerned but more than that you better believe I want strokes. Why would I bet if the odds were stacked against me unless you want to give me odds.

[jeffc]

Me neither. I also don't play hockey games for $. Do you?

[Golfmad]

The only thing that handicapping does is give rise to sandbagging.

I won't play in any tournament that involves a handicap. It's a waste of time, since so many guys use it to cheat.

[Kilroy]

No question that in open events sandbagging can be a problem. However, when its people you know playing for a few sheckles "to keep it iteresting" sandbagging is a non-issue.

[fundonny]

Geez, remind me not to play with folks who think I'm cheating them. I shoot what I shoot, sorry.

[mpare]

While I did check off in favour of playing straight up, I often gives strokes to my opponents. I have no problem doing so to one who properly tracks his handicap. Besides it makes me play harder to overcome the strokes that have been alloted to even up the match. However, I am reluctant to give strokes to anyone who, when asked what's your handicap, responds "Oh it's about ...." No, it's not "about" X, nor is it close to X, nor is it adjusted because you've played the last round or two poorly. Those folks will not get strokes from me. Conversely, I don't think it fair to the higher handicap to have to play straight up with a lower handicap. If the handicaps are properly calculated, then the higher handicap will lose most of the time in that case. That isn't fair to him. Nor will having his nose bloodied in this way improve his play. On the other hand, the higher caps' play should improve if he simply uses better strategy when getting strokes. That alone will help him immeasurably. Better strategy yields better scores.

[mpare]

I agree 100%.

No question that in open events sandbagging can be a problem. However, when its people you know playing for a few sheckles "to keep it iteresting" sandbagging is a non-issue.

[jeffc]

The only thing that handicapping does is give rise to sandbagging.

I won't play in any tournament that involves a handicap. It's a waste of time, since so many guys use it to cheat.

i think we are referring to a friendly wager and not a tournament.

[justsomeguy]

i think we are referring to a friendly wager and not a tournament.

What starts out as a "friendly wager" can turn out to be anything but friendly by the end of the round - especially if there were some "negotiations" over strokes to be given at the beginning of the round.

People do funny things when it comes to $$$ sometimes. Why risk friendships and/or make enemies over a few coins? Personally I would rather avoid that whole scene by playing strictly for the love of the game. The game is interesting enough for me.

[jeffc]

To each their own. I have never had anything get ugly - if it does fine, I just know who not to bet with in the future....

[Sakuraba]

I have trouble playing if I'm not gambling something.

I have a buddy who is very close to my level, we now play a $2 game every 3 holes, plus an additional bet for no doubles on either the front or the back 9. So far we haven't lost or won anything from each other!

[jonf]

Interestind debate. There is definitely something to be said for playing straight up, regardless of handicaps.

The summer I worked at a golf course, one of the other guys on the grounds crew was an aspiring pro golfer, +1 handicap. We went out for a round after work one day, playing straight up. After 12 holes, we were even. I was about a 19 cap at the time. I went on to crumble on the final 6 holes, but those first 12 were probably the competitive highlight of my golfing career (pre Ryder cup, of course).

Had we been playing with strokes, I would have 'won' the round, but it would not have been very interesting for either of us. Being even with a player who is that much better than you is pretty exhilarating. Playing without strokes just forces you to play that much better.

[jeffc]

Interestind debate. There is definitely something to be said for playing straight up, regardless of handicaps.

The summer I worked at a golf course, one of the other guys on the grounds crew was an aspiring pro golfer, +1 handicap. We went out for a round after work one day, playing straight up. After 12 holes, we were even. I was about a 19 cap at the time. I went on to crumble on the final 6 holes, but those first 12 were probably the competitive highlight of my golfing career (pre Ryder cup, of course).

Had we been playing with strokes, I would have 'won' the round, but it would not have been very interesting for either of us. Being even with a player who is that much better than you is pretty exhilarating. Playing without strokes just forces you to play that much better.

were you playing for $?

[jonf]

were you playing for $?

No, just bragging rights. Had money been involved, I would have been left in the dust, I'm sure.

And, to be fair, he was off his game that day. He seemed to pick it up though when he realized he was in danger of losing (or just barely beating) a lowly 19 capper. Funny how that works.

[Kilroy]

Had money been involved, I would have been left in the dust, I'm sure.

Interesting comment. I have to ask, what do you mean by that?

[jonf]

Interesting comment. I have to ask, what do you mean by that?

I just don't compete as well when money is on the line.

[jeffc]

I just don't compete as well when money is on the line.

and if you were playing for $ would you want strokes?

[Kilroy]

I just don't compete as well when money is on the line.

Ah, now we hit the real issue IMHO. It wasn't about if it's a handicapped game or not, its about the pressure. That is the difference. Without it some players lose motivation and just don't care about the game being played. Put a few coins on the line and it counts for something so they try harder. We should always try harder. Just the point ol' Harvey was making, and the one I really wanted to explore with this poll.

[Thom Panikorn]

For me if no competition, it's practice. It's just like reading books and doing assignments, doesn't mean much until the exam. I enjoy playing straight up game with anyone but will give strokes, if needed, if there is something on the line. I don't like playing for lots of money against just one opponent but if you put cash in a pool and you all play for that cash, i feel it's more fun. It's not too personal.

And as for playing against better players for money, as a saying goes "you have to pay to go to university". If you want to see and learn their "best" stuff, you have to put up the cash. It doesn't have to be much, a beer or a couple of bucks will do for most of them. I did and still do pay my dues till these days to play with the better players.

Thom

[mpare]

I remember years ago Ben Hogan saying that he always played for something when he was having a round, even if it was only for dimes. Why? Because it made him concentrate that much more. He hated to lose. Otherwise, he might tend to daydream and that wasn't good for his game. As for me, I have always found that I generally play better if there's something on the line with my opponent - whether it's a few dollars or a match like those we played against the TGN boys.

For those of you who've claimed that putting money on the line can cause relationships to crumble I have a few thoughts. I've been playing for a bit of cash since I was 14 years old. I'm now 61. In all that time, I can only recall one guy who became uncivil during our game, and in his case the root cause of his behaviour was not the money on the line but more fundamental problems in his character. The bet just brought those frailties to the fore. But each to his own. If you don't like to play for something, don't. I'll still play with you. On the other hand, I have never understood nor accepted the proposition that playing with something on the line contaminates the purity of the game. It simply doesn't.

[1972Apex]

Without it some players lose motivation and just don't care about the game being played. Put a few coins on the line and it counts for something so they try harder.

There is actually a name for those people... SANDBAGGERS!!!!!

Motivation has nothing to do with it. They intentionally don't try unless they are playing for money. That way their handicap is higher and voila... they become 'better players under pressure' and win all the coin. This is exactly why I don't fall for this handicap play for money BS!

[Kilroy]

'scuse me?

I for one find competing more enjoyable. The preassure helps me keep my focus. Not competing is like practice. So you are calling me a sandbagger? Ya know dude that's pretty insulting and you are dead wrong.

[1972Apex]

Where did I call YOU a sandbagger???
However if you regularly shoot better when playing for money than your regularly entered scores when not then I have absolutely no hesitation. Whether conscious or not it is still sandbagging. How is that fair to those of us who give 100% EVERY TIME WE PLAY, not just when we play for money?
You yourself are the one who said 'we should ALWAYS try harder'.

[stevek]

.... Put a few coins on the line and it counts for something so they try harder. We should always try harder. .

IMHO Golf's the only sport where trying harder means failing quicker...

I don't usually play for anything but personal bests - only usually compete with myself. After the fact when all the scores are in, (and my wife beats me by 10 like at Greensmere - Legacy last Sunday) I have no resentment in anything but my own poor play and can be genuinely happy for the person who scores a great game.