Your Club's Format for Match Play

[tigger12]

I am wondering how your club runs their club match play competition?
Do you use 100% of handicaps when calculating how many strokes are to be given, or do you use a percentage? ( **. 75 or 80 percent)
Maybe something else. ( **. max number of strokes)
There is some discussion in our club on which format is the most equitable.

Thanks

[habsfan]

I am wondering how your club runs their club match play competition?
Do you use 100% of handicaps when calculating how many strokes are to be given, or do you use a percentage? ( **. 75 or 80 percent)
Maybe something else. ( **. max number of strokes)
There is some discussion in our club on which format is the most equitable.

Thanks

80%

[BC MIST]

80%

What is you club's reasoning for the 80%? The very lower handicap player already has a slight mathematical advantage. Providing less than the full difference gives the better player an even greater chance of winning.

[habsfan]

What is you club's reasoning for the 80%? The very lower handicap player already has a slight mathematical advantage. Providing less than the full difference gives the better player an even greater chance of winning.

I couldnt tell you the reasoning I've been there 6 years and every handicap event as been played as such. Your reasoning seems fair though.

[Kilroy]

I have seen this done countless times and it makes no sense to me. The handicapping system is designed to level the playing field and this is just messing with it because the low 'cappers wine that they have to give too many strokes. How did it become such an accepted practice?

[justsomeguy]

Metcalfe uses 100%.

[sharkshooter]

How did it become such an accepted practice?

Keeps the riff-raff out? I mean, at about a 20, 80% costs me 4 strokes per round.

Seriously though, is it embarassing for a low handicapper to lose to a high handicapper?

[Kilroy]

I hear the term 'sandbagger' tossed around a lot when a high handicapper wins. Always in jest of course.

[habsfan]

I hear the term 'sandbagger' tossed around a lot when a high handicapper wins. Always in jest of course.

The problem is it's always followed by that famous line "I don't know what happened, played my best round of the year" or "I just took a lesson" heard that once too many times.

[Johnyc]

The problem is it's always followed by that famous line "I don't know what happened, played my best round of the year" or "I just took a lesson" heard that once too many times.

I've heard that myself. Oddly, more often then one would think possible.

[adam]

The only reason to use less than 100% of handicaps is because of sandbaggers. Of course this also hurts the legitimate 20 handicappers who like to play in club events. I have found that not enough golfers understand the math behind handicaps to get people wanting to use 100%.

[Shreen]

The only reason to use less than 100% of handicaps is because of sandbaggers. Of course this also hurts the legitimate 20 handicappers who like to play in club events. I have found that not enough golfers understand the math behind handicaps to get people wanting to use 100%.

Or is it due to variability? A 20 handicap could have his top 10 scores ranging from lets say 17-27 over par. A good round could win 5 extra holes. A scratch would have to play -5 to match. As scores get close to par (or below) there is an added premium on each stroke. Every player is different, but using 80% may minimize that variBility gap. Thoughts?

[adam]

Or is it due to variability? A 20 handicap could have his top 10 scores ranging from lets say 17-27 over par. A good round could win 5 extra holes. A scratch would have to play -5 to match. As scores get close to par (or below) there is an added premium on each stroke. Every player is different, but using 80% may minimize that variBility gap. Thoughts?

A golf buddy of mine and I were talking about variability last year as we had each had our best rounds of the year in the same week. I was a 7 or 8 handicap and had shot even par (about 6 better than my handicap) and he had shot 81 off of an 18 handicap (about 6 better than his handicap).
We kinda back tracked and looked at some bad rounds and a bunch of average rounds we had put up and found that we both had about the same large variance in scores. I thought that my scores would be distributed closer to my cap but that didn't seem to be the case.
This of course is just 2 golfers but I really wouldn't be surprised if the average scoring range was similar across different handicaps.

[Shreen]

A golf buddy of mine and I were talking about variability last year as we had each had our best rounds of the year in the same week. I was a 7 or 8 handicap and had shot even par (about 6 better than my handicap) and he had shot 81 off of an 18 handicap (about 6 better than his handicap).
We kinda back tracked and looked at some bad rounds and a bunch of average rounds we had put up and found that we both had about the same large variance in scores. I thought that my scores would be distributed closer to my cap but that didn't seem to be the case.
This of course is just 2 golfers but I really wouldn't be surprised if the average scoring range was similar across different handicaps.

Usga website recommends full 100% cap

[Kilroy]

Perhaps the fellas who insist on 80% are the real sandbaggers?

[justsomeguy]

I think it is simply human nature - better players really do not like "losing" to lesser-skilled players. They are horrified by the fact that they could lose to somebody who completely duffs a shot 5 or 6 times in a game. Add in the fact that many of these better players are very competitive by nature and are often very involved in organizing the club events and tournaments and voila - the 80% rule becomes normal.

OTOH, I think the statistical advantage that the very low handicap player is supposed to have has been overstated. I'm sure it is true across all handicap levels, but I'm not sure if there has been any research to slice and dice the statistics any finer. I suspect that if one were to compare only matches where the handicap difference was large (say, 10 or 12 strokes), then the higher-handicap player would be shown to have the advantage. Hence the reason for flighted tournaments and/or team match play where the total handicaps of all teams are roughly equalized.

[savosean]

Should be 100% if you want the most fair gameplay.

Someone has a 3 handicap, against someone with a 10 handicap.

The 3 handicap is now giving the 10 handicap 7 strokes on the 7 hardest holes on the golf course rated by the courses handicaps.

[g8r]

already been said...lower handicap golfers just dont like losing to higher handicappers and dont think its fair that they have a chance at losing.

in an ideal world, if you both shoot to your cap, shouldnt you the match be tied?

[Kilroy]

FWIW - Our match play games in my regular group (100%) seem to average out over time. We all have good days and bad days, but nobody's wallet gets fat over the long term. We range from 10 to 20.

[sharkshooter]

The only reason to use less than 100% of handicaps is because of sandbaggers.

Is it possible some sandbagging is a result of the fact they know they will only get 80% of their handicap, so they intentionally inflate it to compensate?

Just a thought.