Lessons from the Barbasol Championship Playoff

[Jim Hoak]

A couple of hours ago, I watched another boring, tedious PGA Tour playoff.  It was a 90-minute, 6-hole, sudden-death playoff for the Barbasol Championship, an event in Lexington, Kentucky, for US PGA players not at the Open.  This is the third multi-hole playoff on the PGA Tour in the past few weeks.  While there were highlights to the playoff, and of course I could just have turned it off, it got me thinking about golf tournament playoffs and whether there are alternatives to how they are now run and whether there are golf course architecture implications to these playoffs.


After one of the last playoffs a few weeks ago, I asked on here if tournaments were choosing the wrong holes for the playoffs—and whether half-par holes would produce more excitement and a speedier conclusion to the playoff.  I’m not sure that was the problem at the Barbasol.  But something about it left me cold.


I know that majors generally avoid sudden-death playoffs, but regular events have settled into what we now have.


What do you think?  Or are playoffs ok as they now are?  I guess you could argue that long, drawn-out playoffs are exciting in some ways.  But I think there have to be good improvements to what now exists.

[Kalen Braley]

Jim,

What format would you propose? 

In my view, if the generally accepted 72 holes are enough to determine a winner, then why not 73 or 74?  At the end of the tournament they've already had 260+ strokes and 16-20 hours of play to differentiate themselves from their competitors, so an additional 3 or 4 shots on a par 4 seems just as arbitrary.

P.S.  If you're one back in stroke play the 72nd hole already becomes sudden death.

[Jim Hoak]

Kalen, I don’t know if I have any solution to propose.  But to see a playoff drag on for 6+ holes is tedious and boring in my opinion.  But the implications of wining versus coming in second—financial and perks—are so great, I don’t want to trivialize it either.  What do you think?


I had thought that picking playoff holes with more outcome variables would make things better—not just boring pars after boring pars.  Maybe holes with more risk-reward outcomes would liven things up.

[Matt_Cohn]

There are certainly some alternatives: for example, a penalty kick-style thing with 5-10 footers. Or starting them 50 yards away instead of 450. Or maybe you go to one of those things after three playoff holes. I think the last few weeks have been outliers, but tedious ones!

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Play from the Forward tees !

[Peter Flory]

That was a very boring playoff indeed.  In these regular tournaments, the 18th holes tend to be water holes and the players just play target golf.


My preference would be for them to just start on 1 and play the holes in order.  I'd also let the crowd swarm behind them in the fairways like old timey golf. 

[Mark Kiely]

The easiest solution is to hit RECORD on your DVR and come back and watch it later so you don't have to wait between shots.


Barring that, to avoid reducing it to a "skills competition" as some suggested above, what if both players played multiple balls on each hole and the scoring was aggregate? One hole would take longer but may possibly reach an outcome in fewer holes. Would be sorta fun to watch and maintains the integrity of playing the hole.


Example: Player A holes out 3 balls in 11 strokes. Player B holes out 3 balls in 12 shots. Player A wins.

[Kalen Braley]

Jim,

The only other alternative I can think of is to make em both putt from 50 feet on the 18th green.  Closest to to the hole is the winner.   Not sure how well that would go over, but it would sure as hell be a lot quicker outcome...

But I understand why these guys play it safe in the playoff where the strategy probably is "let the other guy make a mistake"

[Tim Leahy]

If tied in reg then play the18th hole again. If still tied go to a chip off, closest to the hole on 18th green.

[David_Elvins]

The biggest problem with PGA tour playoffs is that they are often between players i don't care about playing for a prize they don't care about played on a course no one cares about broadcast by a network that doesn't care for any of the above either.

[Ronald Montesano]

Penalty kicks?

Competition in televised sport is constrained by television. Television is constrained by finance. The audience matters not a shred.

[jeffwarne]

Am I the only one that enjoyed the playoffs?
To be fair, that's the only part I've been able to watch, but isn't win or lose every hole better than watching a rank and file event where few shots are actually live on usually water strewn TPC lite ordinary courses.
I didn't watch the Barbasol, but the two previous were pretty exciting and many clutch putts were holed.


I've always thought sudden death was the best format.
All other formats are anti-climatic,cumbersome logistically and no less arbitrary than sudden death.

[JMEvensky]

Am I the only one that enjoyed the playoffs?
To be fair, that's the only part I've been able to watch, but isn't win or lose every hole better than watching a rank and file event where few shots are actually live on usually water strewn TPC lite ordinary courses.
I didn't watch the Barbasol, but the two previous were pretty exciting and many clutch putts were holed.


I've always thought sudden death was the best format.
All other formats are anti-climatic,cumbersome logistically and no less arbitrary than sudden death.

No, you're not. And definitely agree sudden death is the best format. These guys are playing for their livelihoods--it's not a mixed couples scramble. I doubt the players spend a lot of time thinking about if the weekend chops are being entertained.

[Jim Hoak]

Jeff and JM--Do you at least agree that more thought should be given to which holes are chosen for the sudden death playoff, so the standard two-shot par 4 isn't the norm?  It seems to me that having playoff holes be reachable par 5's--or drivable par 4's--or very difficult 3's or 4's--would add excitement and a quicker conclusion.  Otherwise, it gets to be as Kalen said just a "play it safe" style, waiting for the other guy to make a mistake--and it goes on far too long.

[JMEvensky]

Jeff and JM--Do you at least agree that more thought should be given to which holes are chosen for the sudden death playoff, so the standard two-shot par 4 isn't the norm?  It seems to me that having playoff holes be reachable par 5's--or drivable par 4's--or very difficult 3's or 4's--would add excitement and a quicker conclusion.  Otherwise, it gets to be as Kalen said just a "play it safe" style, waiting for the other guy to make a mistake--and it goes on far too long.

John VDB would know better than I, but playoffs would seem to be mostly driven by logistics. If you schlepped the players out to the middle of the golf course, how would the fans get there? I concede COVID has changed the fans' part of the equation.


I think in a perfect world, administrators would always start a playoff on the hardest hole--best chance for a bogey or worse.


But you keep looking at it from a TV viewer's perspective. Those 2 guys Sunday were more concerned with earning/keeping a PGAT card. I doubt either one thought to himself "man, a driveable par 4 would really have TV viewers on the edge of the couch".

[Wayne_Kozun]

The easiest solution is to hit RECORD on your DVR and come back and watch it later so you don't have to wait between shots.

This is what I do for all sporting events.  The problem with golf playoffs is that when the playoff goes too long you may have the main network dropping coverage at 7 pm and you have to go to the Golf Channel to watch the end of the playoff.  It is less of an issue if the entire coverage is in the Golf Channel, which may have been the case with the Barbasol.

[Lou_Duran]

As a player, I would like a format which increases my chances of winning.  A sum total of 3 holes might reward the best player.  As a volunteer official for all-day qualifying events often running into the late afternoon, I’d be good with a scorecard playoff using pre-determined holes either for a three-hole total or by individual holes.  The contestants would know ahead of their rounds the priority of holes and the method of determining the winner.  Not that my mouse trap improves on the present methods.

[David_Tepper]

The reasons why most televised golf tournaments have playoffs on the 18th hole are pretty simple.

a) That is where the spectators & sponsor's tents are located
b) That is where most of the TV personnel & equipment is located
c) That is where the trophy and winner's check is located 

If you expect otherwise you are kidding yourself.

 

[jeffwarne]

Jeff and JM--Do you at least agree that more thought should be given to which holes are chosen for the sudden death playoff, so the standard two-shot par 4 isn't the norm?

No, the logistical factors are far larger priorities.
David T correctly sums it up.


Given I enjoy watching playoffs, I'm still not certain why we'd try to shorten them for viewers;)
(of course the event organizers and volunteers would appreciate a short playoff)


We've had a several recent events with long playoffs, but that's really not the norm.
It's like those who try to lobby for certain holes to be a certain handicap index,but then those strokes end up being irrelevant on the hole anyway.


The real answer, and back on topic, and a win-win...could be to stop having such formulaic repetitive finishing holes.

[Pete_Pittock]

1. Replay the 18th hole. if tied then:
2. Play the 18h hole from the next tee forward. If tied, then:
3. repeat 2.


OR
1. Replay the 18th hole. If tied then:
2. Cut a new hole on the 18th hole and play the 18th to the new hole. If tied, then:
3. repeat 2.


Playoffs interrupt regular programing.
Hockey goes to 3 on 3 immediately after regulation tie
Baseball starts the 10th inning with a runner on 2nd base.
Hail, Heidi.

[Matt_Cohn]

Reflecting more, I think the problem is often not the action or the golf holes themselves. It's that there's nothing to watch between shots because there are only 2 or 3 golfers on the course. When players are walking to their tee shots or up to the green, or being carted to the next playoff hole, TV can either cut to commercial or babble for three minutes.


That's not going to change as long as they play regular golf holes. Only short game, closest to pin, "penalty kicks," etc. will eliminate the waiting time and provide near-continuous action.

[Jim_Coleman]

   Play 2 playoff holes sudden death.  Then play closest to the pin on a convenient par 3. Better than a putt or chip off, I’d say.

[Jason Thurman]

Out of curiosity, what holes did they play? I've played Champion Trace and watched a bit of the final round but didn't stick around long enough to see the finish...


I do like the idea of shortening holes to encourage more aggressive play.

[mike_beene]

First get them quickly to the tee. They can sign after if need be. Play 18 from the 150 plate.

[Jim Hoak]

Jason, they played 18 and 9, I believe.  A standard par 4 and a middle-length par 3.
I know it was done--as several people have said--because of convenience to the on-site crowd and others there.  But in doing so, they had a poor show for the TV audience--and the playoff went on for far too long.
If this were an unusual occurrence, I would ignore it.  But we've had 3 long playoffs in the last few weeks.  I think it is a problem.