How do we promote match play format in America?

[Forrest Richardson]

At the 2003 Annual Meeting of the ASGCA there was discussion about how the game could be made more fun and enjoyable. There was a great spectrum of ideas.

A focus became the idea to promote match play in America...which many thought an almost impossible task.

Is it? I would love to hear some ideas on how you think policies, handicap, etc. could be adjusted so that match play could be promoted — and embraced — in America. (Or, do you even think this is a good idea?)

[THuckaby2]

I think it's a great idea.  Lots of people play match play anyway.

One way to start is to allow for hole-by-hole posting for handicap purposes, as Tom Paul has set forth many times in here.  Do that, and people are more inclined to pick up and move on... which is what you do in match play... I really think people DON'T play match play more often because they think they need to play out every hole for handicap purposes.  The fact is they don't, but they don't know it or believe it.

Outside of that, well... it's gonna be very tough to change attitudes.  "What did you shoot" seems to be the standard question asked here far far far more than "how did you do"... you know?  I don't know how to change that.  But the Tom Paul idea would be a great way to start... and it wouldn't be that tough to implement.

TH

[Dan Kelly]

My eighth-grade daughter is playing on the high school team this spring.

At least here in Minnesota (so far as I know), ALL of the competitions are team vs. team, stroke play. When I was the scorer for one group during tryouts, I had to explain to one of the girls -- a senior -- what "match play" was.

We could promote match play in this country by getting the kids playing more matches and learning to appreciate the format.

[ForkaB]

One thing would be for clubs to have more match play tournaments.  In the UK/Ireland, most clubs have at least 4 season-long "knock-out" competitoins in various guises:  scratch (for the better players); handicap; 4-somes; 4-ball better ball; mixed foursomes; and often 1-2 competitions where you qualify through stroke play and then go into a match play knock-out.

If spread over the year, these competitions do not take up much tee-time space, and what space they do take up diminishes as the year goes by and players are knocked out.  As well as promoting match play, they also allow members to meet and play with other members who they may not know, or not know well.

It's a great idea which will never be adopted in the USA, alas.....

[Brent Hutto]

In my experience, match play games are the norm for friendly or betting games among club golfers in the US. Tournaments, however, are generally medal play and as Rich says that's unlikely to change.

Tom has identified the connection between stroke-play and the handicap system and as long as that connection endures, golfers serious enough to keep a handicap are going to treat every stroke as sacred. That said, the reason the handicap system reifies stroke play is because it reflects the social norms of golfers who think "How'd you play?" is always answered with a number. So the usual handicap computer system requires entering a stroke-play score for each round because that's how US golfers think about the game and in turn the golfers are reinforced in thinking that way because they have to turn in a score for each round. I don't see that loop ever being broken out of in this country.

[JESII]

As, I believe, they do in the UK, only count tournament scores towards handicaps.

For most players this means breakfast tournaments and the like, but it would certainly change the day to day fixation on total score.

As a high school senior, I was part of a group that traveled through England for a couple of weeks playing school and club teams. I felt real proud of my 3 handicap until I lost to a few 8 handicaps (that would have beaten me 8 of 10 times). This is when I learned of their handicapping model. Is my memory correct? Is this system still in place?

[Jim_Kennedy]

Forrest,
Mr. redanman beat me to it, more match play events on tour.
Revamp golf's "silly season" with them.

[Kelly Blake Moran]

Most matches in school and certainly on Tour are stroke play.  I for one enjoy match play and do not need to endure one more stroke into the cup!  

The ASGCA meeting was in 2003 and you're just bringing it up?  I hope you weren't put in charge of following through on this matter.    I noticed there is no mention of this important issue on the ASGCA website.  What were the ideas for promoting matchplay that came out of the meeting?

[john_stiles]

You have the fine USGA competitions and some of the great events at the clubs and associations but after that tradition, match play is toast.

For most formal competitions (high school, college, professional)  match play just takes too long.

A few, newer professsional events have put match play back on the TV but I cannot see the format going much further.

[ForkaB]

In the UK/Ireland, most clubs have at least 4 season-long "knock-out" competitoins in various guises:  scratch (for the better players); handicap; 4-somes; 4-ball better ball; mixed foursomes; and often 1-2 competitions where you qualify through stroke play and then go into a match play knock-out.

We do do these sort of things at LCC, Rhic.

Good, Libl.  I stand corrected.

[JESII]

I guess this should have been my first post on this thread, but...

Forresst,

What is meant by "embraced"?
-more organized tournaments with this format
-more play during home games
-more televised match play competition
What are yo looking for?

[THuckaby2]

In the UK/Ireland, most clubs have at least 4 season-long "knock-out" competitoins in various guises:  scratch (for the better players); handicap; 4-somes; 4-ball better ball; mixed foursomes; and often 1-2 competitions where you qualify through stroke play and then go into a match play knock-out.

We do do these sort of things at LCC, Rhic.

As do we at Santa Teresa AND in my monthly tournament group, Rihc.

[ForkaB]

In the UK/Ireland, most clubs have at least 4 season-long "knock-out" competitoins in various guises:  scratch (for the better players); handicap; 4-somes; 4-ball better ball; mixed foursomes; and often 1-2 competitions where you qualify through stroke play and then go into a match play knock-out.

We do do these sort of things at LCC, Rhic.

As do we at Santa Teresa AND in my monthly tournament group, Rihc.

OK, Omt.  Apologies to you too.

[Jim Johnson]

At the 2003 Annual Meeting of the ASGCA there was discussion about how the game could be made more fun and enjoyable. There was a great spectrum of ideas.

Out of curiosity Forrest, what were some of the other ideas?

JJ

[Brent Hutto]

I'll throw this out for discussion...

I believe medal play, preferably over more than 18 holes, is the correct way for accomplished golfers to compete. Medal play is a more demanding game and a stroke-play competition will best discern the difference between a good player and a slightly better one.

The purpose of stroke-play competition, in my opinion, is to fully test ones game against others. For a weekend golfer out to have a good time and a couple beers every Saturday and Sunday and maybe beat his pals out of five bucks, match play games are much more fun. That's why most weekend golfers play little Nassaus and such with their regular foursome even while turning in a pseudo-stroke-play score for handicapping purposes.

POSTSCRIPT: By an "accomplished golfer" I mean someone who shoots within a couple strokes of par from the back tees under competitive pressure. So a one or two handicapper with lots of tournament experience is "accomplished", the guy with a scratch index who plays in a couple of club tournaments a year and shoots 78 is not.

[ForkaB]

As, I believe, they do in the UK, only count tournament scores towards handicaps.

For most players this means breakfast tournaments and the like, but it would certainly change the day to day fixation on total score.

As a high school senior, I was part of a group that traveled through England for a couple of weeks playing school and club teams. I felt real proud of my 3 handicap until I lost to a few 8 handicaps (that would have beaten me 8 of 10 times). This is when I learned of their handicapping model. Is my memory correct? Is this system still in place?

I'm puzzled about this, Jim.  20 years ago (and I'm NOT saying you are that old.....), an 8 under the UK system was more like a 12 (in those days, your handicap--at that level--was based on your one best stroke play round of the year!).  Under the new/current system, UK handicaps may be a little higher than their US equivalents (due mostly to the fact that they are based for all intents and purposes only on tournament/stroke play rounds), but there is not a UK 8 I know who could beat a legitimate USGA 3 more than 1-2 times out of 10.

You must have had some VERY unlucky draws........

[W.H. Cosgrove]

"By an "accomplished golfer" I mean someone who shoots within a couple strokes of par from the back tees under competitive pressure. So a one or two handicapper with lots of tournament experience is "accomplished", the guy with a scratch index who plays in a couple of club tournaments a year and shoots 78 is not." Hutto

So about 1% of all golfers are accomplished and the rest should be playing some kind of match play.

My regular group plays a nassau with every other member in the four or fivesome.  We can forget the bad hole, forget the constant preoccupation with score and play the game.  

Problem with match tournies is trying to get the darn matches played.

[Lou_Duran]

Why again is match play superior to medal?

Is it because on a given day an inferior golfer may topple his superior?

Might it be a speed of play issue?  (Should golf incorporate a game clock?)

Or does it have something to do with match play as contested in most weekend money games promoting a more aggressive, go for broke approach?

Could match play be more akin to checkers, and medal to chess?

Might it also play into our preference for less discipline and more frequent gratification?

When I used to play decently, I would often lose on the Nassau and skins (match format) in our money games, but fare well on the low gross (those who were in the low gross pool were expected to putt everything outside the leather out).

In individual tournament competition, I seemed to do better in match play, though I often beat guys with lower handicaps who typically posted match scores with never more than a bogey on the card.

One of the fun things about golf is the variety of games one can play.  However, when the bets become significant, I think that it is no longer about golf but gambling.  Match play makes betting very easy and frequent.  This is another topic, but more than a few groups have been dissolved when the bets became so numerous and costly that settling at the end of the round (and bitching) replaced the usual repartee over a couple of rounds of beers.

[Kelly Blake Moran]

I think match play can make the architecture much more interesting because it forces the player to focus on the opponent and adjust their game plan shot by shot which then causes them to focus on the architecture as they ponder the need to be bold or conservative in reaction to the shot and the opponents previous shot.  In medal I think the player is much more apt to play conservatively, whereas in match I think there are more opportunities for them to think creatively, and on the right course the architect has designed the course to encourage and accomodate creativity.

[Forrest Richardson]

Kelly has hit upon a key benefit: The golf course can become more interesting if we are less concerned with strokes/copunting.

Also Kelly—Yes, it was 2003. I am bringing it up because it has lost some momentum. It is not on the ASGCA website because there was no official position adopted by the Society.

Among the ideas discussed were many of those brought up here so far. There was also an emphasis on working with the USGA on more reasonable handicapping procedures for match play — and, of course, getting clubs to promote the idea.

I think the idea to have televised events is essential.

[A.G._Crockett]

Golf seems to have a trickle-down ethic; the masses tend to follow the lead of the Tour.  Therefore, it ain't gonna happen.  Match play is very tough for TV to deal with, and TV runs the Tour, and the Tour runs golf trends in this country.  Match play, unfortunately, will remain restricted to casual games and a few club tournaments.  Mores the pity, too, because the more match play you experience, the more it "feels" like the way the game really is supposed to be played.  I can't quantify that, but it sure feels that way.

Dan K.
We just played a match play event on Monday with our archrival, who also qualified for the state tournament from our league.  We did it to keep some sort of competitive edge between the region tournament and the state, but to have something different as well.  The kids loved it; but to them, it was like a match that just really didn't count.  Huge, huge deficit to overcome with the juniors because of the huge numbers of stroke play tournaments kids play now.

[A.G._Crockett]

I think match play can make the architecture much more interesting because it forces the player to focus on the opponent and adjust their game plan shot by shot which then causes them to focus on the architecture as they ponder the need to be bold or conservative in reaction to the shot and the opponents previous shot.  In medal I think the player is much more apt to play conservatively, whereas in match I think there are more opportunities for them to think creatively, and on the right course the architect has designed the course to encourage and accomodate creativity.

Kelly (and Forrest)
I think match play absolutely makes the player focus on the architecture more, as decisions have to be made constantly about my options relative to my opponent's score and the standing of the match.

My question for you is this:  To what extent do you take any of this into account when you design a course?   Are there match play vs. stroke play considerations at any point in the process.  Forgive me in advance if this is a hopelessly naive question; just  remember that it is coming from a hopelessly non-creative being!

Also, on Monday, the HS team that I coach was playing a match play event at Settindown Creek here in Atlanta, a terrific Bob Cupp design that will host the US Women's Am this summer.  I KNOW that it is a much better match play course than stroke play, but I'm not sure that I can quantify why this is so.  Have you ever finished a course and felt that it would be better suited to one game or the other, and if so, why?

[A.G._Crockett]

Sorry for my third post in a row, but I've done a lot of match play lately, and have it on my mind.

My home course, it seems to me, is very poorly suited to match play because of the way handicap holes are allocated.  #2 is the #1 handicap, #3 is the #5 handicap, and #5 is the #2 handicap, so that most matches give lots of strokes early in the match, then on the 2nd hole of a possible playoff.

My question is whether or not hole handicaps could be allocated in a particular way to best facilitate the popularity of match play vs. stroke play?  For instance, is it better to have odds or evens on the front, and so forth?  Are hole handicaps taken into account when the course is designed?

[Dan Kelly]

We just played a match play event on Monday with our archrival, who also qualified for the state tournament from our league.  We did it to keep some sort of competitive edge between the region tournament and the state, but to have something different as well.  The kids loved it; but to them, it was like a match that just really didn't count.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you: It DIDN'T count -- right?

Why not play match-play team vs. team events that DO count? Wouldn't the kids love that, too? Wouldn't it be MORE fun for them, knowing that one bad hole isn't gonna kill the team?

[A.G._Crockett]

We just played a match play event on Monday with our archrival, who also qualified for the state tournament from our league.  We did it to keep some sort of competitive edge between the region tournament and the state, but to have something different as well.  The kids loved it; but to them, it was like a match that just really didn't count.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you: It DIDN'T count -- right?

Why not play match-play team vs. team events that DO count? Wouldn't the kids love that, too? Wouldn't it be MORE fun for them, knowing that one bad hole isn't gonna kill the team?

It counted as much as any other dual match; the region tournament is unseeded, so anything we do is for competitive experience and environment.  There was a very different air about it among the kids, though, especially given that it was against our biggest rival.
As to why we don't do more of it, we are limited to 12 playing dates (with 9 hole matches before DST counting as half a date) so we just try to max out the benefits as much as possible before the region tournament in late April.  Since its stroke play, we play stroke play.
I would also think that nine holes (which most spring HS golf is) of match play would really diminish the format, since you could be finished after 5 holes, AND have insufficient light for playoff holes to boot if the match was extended.

[Tags:]

Tags: