The Death of Matchplay

[redanman (Guest)]

Surely the stymie will never return now.  The world's #2 and #3 are out and so is the deity.

How many days will we see the replays of His missed putts in a pathetic attempt to boost ratings?

Personally the only complaint I have is that the course at LaCosta was described as a good match play course, where it seems to me since it functioned for years very well as a stroke play course.

Are the two necessarily mutually exclusive?  Probably darned near.

Can anyone think of good match play courses that are good stroke play copurses without changing the setup?

Shinnecock comes to mind, maybe Pebble Beach, but most courses held in the highest regard here are probably better for match play.

As for the tone-a-mint? It should be more interesting than ever as a televised event. Less hype and more golf.  Maybe.

[THuckaby2]

As for the tone-a-mint? It should be more interesting than ever as a televised event. Less hype and more golf.  Maybe.

Perhaps for you, Bill - but ABC execs are committing mass hari-kari today.  I'm not exaggerating that these results might be the death of this event... it's results like these that killed match play in the PGA...

This is gonna get all-time low ratings, you watch.

Just today's reality....

TH

[Craig Van Egmond]

I agree, the execs must have cried as the top 3 seeds loss and the thoughts of another Maggert/Magee final is now a possibility. I'm sure the ratings will die an ugly death.

[Dan Kelly]

Questions, to the floor:

I've often heard it said that, if it's a proper test, a golf course will "identify" the best players over the course of a tournament -- a stroke-play tournament, that is.

Should a golf course "identify" the best player(s) in a match-play event?

If it fails to "identify" the best players, year after year, is that in any way an indictment of the golf course?

Year after year, this Match Play event is giving us less than the best: Maggert over Magee, Clarke over Woods, Stricker over Fulke.

This year: Flesch over Estes?

Did they pick the wrong site for this tournament?

[Bob_Huntley]

Best course for Match Play? Cypress Point. The '81 Walker Cup with Jodie Mudd, Hal Sutton et al was a feast.

[JakaB]

I really like you guys...but if this site starts blaming the course for Tiger playing like a three legged alley cat and getting his ass kicked...I will have to question your intelligence.  As for Floppy...he just couldn't wait to get home and breast feed his kids...how many times on the final day of a major does the Floppy have to choke when its basically match play to realize the guy is just a good range ball hitter.  I love this tournament and had a blast on Wednesday seeing Tiger and Floppy lose and don't care if they go picking petunias until April.

[John_Conley]

The powers that be are sticking to the notion that their should be a match-play event.  My guess?  It evolves into a mini-Western Amateur with stroke play whittling down the field to 8 and then matches from there.  Wed - 18, Th - 18 CUT  Fri - 1/4 finals  Sat - Semis  Sun - 36 hole final.

No doubt another Barry Lane as champion of this thing will call for changes, and that's sad for us golf fans.

I won't miss Tiger this week, but nearly everyone else will.
 

[THuckaby2]

I don't know, Dan - I think they could hold this on the best match play course on this earth (however that would be defined) and you'd still get results like what's occurred to date with the "Accenture" tourney.

It's just a function of golf at that high level:  over 18 holes, it's just who's hot.  These guys are all so good, and so relatively equal, that 18 holes is not enough to define the better player.  Seems to me whoever has the hot putter wins 95% of the time, no matter who the indivuals involved are.

It's just a function of 18 hole match play.

Over 36 holes, it works out better:  note how the World Match Play event in England churns out "quality" winners.  Of course they start with a smaller, higher quality field... but still, with their 36 hole matches, the better player is defined far more often.

TH

[Peter Galea]

Match play takes a different mindset then stroke competitions. Doesn't this event identify the best "match player?"

[THuckaby2]

Sure it does, Pete.

Then the next question is, what defines the best player PERIOD?  Match or stroke?

That might not be so obvious, or maybe it is.

I sure take a stand, don't I?

 

TH

[JohnV]

At this level, it doesn't identify the best match play player, it identifies the player who had the best day(s).  If anyone acutally thinks that Peter O'Malley is better than Tiger in the long run, please speak up.  Yesterday, he was better yesterday because he played ok and Tiger played like a dog.  When was the last time Tiger went 15 holes without a birdie.  He has a problem with his putting and he is blaming it on the greens right now.  We'll see once he gets back to Florida.

If O'Malley hadn't made the putt on 17, Tiger might have still pulled that one out.  If Kevin Sutherland can birdie the last two to come back against Duval, Tiger could have birdied the last 3 and tied O'Malley.

[THuckaby2]

JV - that's exactly the point I made above, as it pertains to any one 18hole match.

But when Pete said "match play", I took it he meant the tournament as a whole, the format, if you will.  At the end of this tournament, I believe we will indeed have the best "match player" FOR THIS WEEK, at least as best as can be hoped for given 18hole matches (which don't do a very good job, as I say).

Obviously the only thing that determines "best player period'" is performance over time, for whatever time period you want.  I'm still defiantly saying Nicklaus is the best player ever, for example.  One could argue that the best player of 2002 to date is Chris DiMarco.... it all turns on one's definitions.

TH

[Scott_Burroughs]

Match play contains no element of stroke play?  I could have sworn that the lowest stroke score on each hole determines who wins the hole.  And if you do that often enough, you're going to win.  Sounds like an element of stroke play to me.

On a different note, whether or not match play determines the best players, granted Tiger has been playing mostly stroke play tournaments for the last 5.5 years, he did win 6 straight Amateur titles, where it's match play from a large field.  He probably didn't have to qualify in the stroke play competition for any of those, except maybe the first.  Look at the 2000 PGA.  It was basically match play with Bob May for the entire final 22 holes.  

I'm not even a Tiger "fan".  I deeply respect his talents, but I root against him most of the time.  I root for Floppy.

Lately, Tiger hasn't been playing well, and I think he overlooks early non-name competitors a little too much.

Personally, I love match play, because many of my scores are ruined by round-wrecking holes that bode well for match play.  I tend to win the hard holes and lose the easy ones.

[Gib_Papazian]

Tiger, Duval, Mickelson . . . . . out out out!  I love it!
Let the  games begin say I, and who cares  about star  power? Golf in its purest form, ratings  be damned. I am  more likely to watch it now because the last couple matches won't look like replays of Shell's WW of Golf.

Interesting thought -at least to me - on what might be a great match play venue.

Augusta National. Why not? It has been my experience that the  momentum of matches gets decided by a decisive blow on the middle holes. Where  better than  Augusta?

Quit trying to stretch the course out - in  fact shorten it a  bit - and  let it  rip.  Everybody is going  to have to take their shot at Amen corner.

Instead of having to wait until Sunday afternoon for  some drama, you would have it  every match every day.

Dry the heck out of NGLA, shorten a few holes, lengthen others, and that would be wild roller coaster for the pros. Score is meaningless! Swahbucking bravado will carry the day . . . . . or will it?

That is entertainment  .  .  .  .  and it matters not if Tiger and Mickelson are acting in the play or an unknown understudy.    

[Gib_Papazian]

Tiger, Duval, Mickelson . . . . . out out out!  I love it!
Let the  games begin say I, and who cares  about star  power? Golf in its purest form, ratings  be damned. I am  more likely to watch it now because the last couple matches won't look like replays of Shell's WW of Golf.

Interesting thought -at least to me - on what might be a great match play venue.

Augusta National. Why not? It has been my experience that the  momentum of matches gets decided by a decisive blow on the middle holes. Where  better than  Augusta?

Quit trying to stretch the course out - in  fact shorten it a  bit - and  let it  rip.  Everybody is going  to have to take their shot at Amen corner.

Instead of having to wait until Sunday afternoon for  some drama, you would have it  every match every day.

Dry the heck out of NGLA, shorten a few holes, lengthen others, and that would be wild roller coaster for the pros. Score is meaningless! Swahbucking bravado will carry the day . . . . . or will it?

That is entertainment  .  .  .  .  and it matters not if Tiger and Mickelson are acting in the play or an unknown understudy.    

[THuckaby2]

Sure YOU feel that way Gib, as would a lot of frequent participants here on GCA... let's just hope the Nielsen folks call on you come the weekend!

Unfortunately, star power does drive ratings, and that's why we better hope Sergio, Els, or someone else charismatic holds on or this will indeed be the death of this event.  The have only a little competion on the athletic stage this week... a tiny event in Utah, college hoops boiling over....

TH

[JohnV]

Scott, I guarantee you that Tiger did have to qualify in stroke play for the match play at the US Juniors and US Amateurs that he won.  As a matter of fact, I have the score sheet from 36 hole qualifier at the 1996 US Amateur where he was the medalist on my wall.

What he didn't have to do is go through the local qualifiers because of his previous results, but neither did a lot of others who didn't win.

At the amateur level, Tiger definitely intimidated a lot of his opponents and he had the remarkable ability to come back from way down, which he didn't have yesterday because his opponent didn't let him.  He was something like 4 down with 5 to play against Buddy Alexander in his first Amateur and won, he was 5 down with 8 to play against Steve Scott in the finals of the last one.

[Gib_Papazian]

Huckster,

You may be right, but the average viewer might get past this focus on the individual player instead of the game if we  set up golf courses to encourage excitement.

Is there anything  - anything! - about that booch track that inspires you? Does it introduce a lot of options - force choices? Test the mind instead of the body? No.

The tuna-mint organizers would be better to focus on setting up the course to encourage wild finishes and crazy reversals than pray Tiger and the  rest of the prima-donnas don't get booted early.

[Scott_Burroughs]

Thanks for the clarification, John.  I mistakenly thought that past champions exempted to the match play rounds, not just to the stroke play part.

[THuckaby2]

GREAT points, Gib.  Given the very vanilla course, it's the players that drive the ratings.  I'd be interested how last year's did... very unique, not-seen-very-often course, blah players... Perhaps that would help.  I know it would make me watch more.  But if it's Gogel-O'Malley on Sunday, no way I watch, no matter how much I'd want the cool Irishman to win!

And I'm of the "purist, watch any golf" ilk far more than the average golf fan....

Yep, we need a new course for this.  That's answer #1.

TH

[Brian Phillips]

One thing that matchplay does that strokeplay doesn't do and that is BOTH players play the hole at the same time....

have any of you thought about that ...?

Tiger got his butt whipped as he usually does by anyone that isn't American (Darren Clarke...Rocca..) at matchplay because he is not very good at it.

With matchplay there is no difference of conditions...there is no comparing a 69 that occured in no wind to a 69 that occured in a hurricane...

Tiger cannot compete in matchplay (to the same standard as he does in strokeplay) as he should do with his talent....

There is always a bit more luck in matchplay though....

[Dan Kelly]

Tom IV --

Bobby Jones, for one, agreed with your take on things, in regard to 18- and 36-hole matches.

Seems to me that in "Down the Fairway," he says something quite definitive -- to the effect of: 18-hole matches should NEVER be used, because there's too much luck involved in golf for it to even out over just 18 holes.

What chance is there of getting these spoiled Boys of the Tour to play 36-hole matches? I think I've answered my own question.

[THuckaby2]

DK - I am certainly VERY glad to hear that I have somehow channelled the thoughts of the GREAT Bobby Jones... I didn't know he had said such.

But you did indeed answer your own question.  They play 36 at the World Match Play, but that's a small field with guarantees.  Nope, won't happen for a World Tour event.  But dare to dream....

TH

[Ken_Cotner]

How about a round robin format to determine the final 8 (or 4 or 6 or whatever) a la Olympic hockey/football and the October matches between nations at St. Andrews; then single elimination?

Keeps the fun of match play but does a better job of identifying the "best" player that week.  Might also decrease the probability of players skipping the event because they know they might be done after one match.

KC

[Dan Kelly]

Tom IV --

You need to read "Down the Fairway." It's a wonderful golf book.