Match Play Thoughts

« **on:** February 23, 2006, 02:59:16 PM »

With the tournament going on - a few random thoughts about the format:

1. Many of the golden age architects railed against stroke play as hurting the game. For me, in casual play, I don't find all that much difference, especially because I usually pick up if I have hit one out of bounds and am headed for a number above my max. Is there really much difference in the mentality with respect to casual play?

2. In tournament play, is there a big difference in the mentality depending on handicap. I'm an eight and find that against most opponants if I just try and play my game and force the opponent to do what he should do on a particular shot, he usually makes enough mistakes for me to win. Does that change at higher level competitive matches. Do those players feel a need to be more aggressive to win a match?

3. In competitive play, I find I on average play a couple of strokes better than normal if in a match, but a couple of strokes worse than normal if in a stroke play tournament. I attribute the difference to three things: 1) I'm more aggressive with putts in match play because a missed comeback usually just means a tied or lost hole; 2) I don't worry about hazards and OB as much in a match for the same reason; and 3) I do a much better job of staying in the present mentally in a match. There is also the factor of actually having to make all of your putts, but I think that impact is relatively minimal.

Is my experience similar to yours? I think I should pretend I am in a match when playing a stroke play tournament, but am not sure I can trick myself that well.

« **Reply #1 on:** February 23, 2006, 04:13:27 PM »

Quote from: Jason Topp on February 23, 2006, 02:59:16 PM

1. Many of the golden age architects railed against stroke play as hurting the game. For me, in casual play, I don't find all that much difference, especially because I usually pick up if I have hit one out of bounds and am headed for a number above my max. Is there really much difference in the mentality with respect to casual play?

In all seriousness, they weren't railing against "pick up after double bogey". They were railing against stroke play.

The principle they were concerned about was that on every hole play must be continued until the ball is holed out, no picking up, no gimmes. In that case (somewhat depending on the skill level of the golfers) there may be all kinds of design features that are deemed "unfair" because they offer the opporunity for a disaster that renders ones stroke-play score on the hole rather silly.

So in deciding not to follow that principle, we have rendered the old architect's point moot. I like playing the same way you do. Strict medal play on a tough golf course is good for one thing only--separating the best players from the rest of the field. When I'm not out trying to do that one thing, I think a Stableford type approach is much more sensible.

« **Reply #2 on:** February 23, 2006, 10:06:17 PM »

Match play is golf at its best. I would watch the tour almost every weekend, sameness of the course or not if they played match play. Match play on classic courses is so hot, it is almost better than great porn.

« **Reply #3 on:** February 23, 2006, 11:14:31 PM »

Post of the month, flat out!

In fact and imagination.

Well said.

« **Reply #4 on:** February 24, 2006, 08:06:58 PM »

If we see a Zach Johnson vs. David Howell final it might be the end of match play professional golf for eternity.

Is it possible for a network to get negative ratings?

« **Reply #5 on:** February 25, 2006, 09:35:41 AM »

TV and individual match play just don't work very well but Ryder Cup style team match play is very exciting often more so than stroke play. Team match play assures the Tiger's and Phil's don't get eliminated on Friday killing the weekend TV ratings.

Instead of this silly year end Nascar type series why not a Ryder Cup team format. Top 96 players on eight 12 man teams in two brackets over three consecutive weekends. Let the top 4 players draft teams and serve as captain. Think Elite Eight, Final Four, Championship Match since we are nearing March.

In fact even one match like this (Tiger's Team vs. Phil's Team e.g.) would be way more exciting over TG weekend than the old and tired and boring skins game.

« **Reply #6 on:** February 25, 2006, 09:55:11 AM »

Jason:

To me match play competition was always a lot more relaxing than stroke play competition. As match play is more or less 18 little "mini-matches" I felt I could relax from time to time. Not so in stroke play---it's basically 4-5 hours of constant concentration, not to mention the fact you really are playing against the golf course all day long unlike match play.

« **Reply #7 on:** February 25, 2006, 10:09:27 AM »

I too enjoy match play. "Mano y mano" brings out so much more strategy, daring, and creative thought than stroke play.

I recall playing a best ball match when I was 14 with my friend Bob Short (yes, we were the team of Short and Sweet) and we found ourselves on the 13th hole down by 2 or 3 holes when I noticed one of the guys we were playing against had like 18 or 19 clubs in his bag. He was old enough to be my father, and I couldn't remember what the penelty was, but I called him on it. Oh boy! The poop hit the fan big time, but Bob and I stood our ground. They bullied us the rest of the way in and beat us 1 up. When we walked off the course the guy went straight to the parking lot and removed the extra clubs from his bag and put them in his trunk. Bob went and got the pro and brought him out to the parking lot and he made the guy open the trunk....when the pro say the extra clubs, the guy admitted he had broken the rules...needless to say...we won the match.

« **Reply #8 on:** February 25, 2006, 10:33:15 AM »

From Concerning Golf by John L. Low

“The natural egotism of men and nations joining in the game made popular, however, for a long time the single form of the sport. The beginner wished to know his own worth as a player day by day, and conceived the plan of writing his autobiography on small pieces of paper planned for the purpose. Golf became for him of interest only so far as his own total of hits and misses was concerned. The battle proper was of small account; even victory and defeat were terms of mild comparison. The one and only interest lay in the daily attempts to reduce the total strokes which were required to compass a given number of holes. In this selfish struggle it is little wonder that the position and very life of the game was for a time assailed. It became no longer a friendly affair of the skill of one man as compared to another, or of two men compared to two, but rather an individual attempt to perform some feat irrespective of rivalry or contest. “

He thought two against two was the best game.

« **Reply #9 on:** February 25, 2006, 12:31:44 PM »

Quote from: Craig Sweet on February 25, 2006, 10:09:27 AM

"Mano y mano"

That means hand and hand.

mano a mano means (idiomatically) one on one or face to face

Montana, right?

« **Reply #10 on:** February 25, 2006, 01:41:27 PM »

Yeah, we play golf out here mano y mano...its fun! We don't walk, we skip

« **Reply #11 on:** February 25, 2006, 01:41:55 PM »

Mike,
Foursomes is still viewed as a higher level of match play in some corners of the golf world.

Concerning Golf is such a great read. It should be read alongside books like The Links.

« **Reply #12 on:** February 25, 2006, 02:48:33 PM »

Ralph-

I wished we played more foursomes in the US. For me the only time is ryder cup tournaments and our state father-son.

Everyone is so worried about what they shot, its kinda sad. Even in fourball - after the match you hear someone say - well i shot 75 and my partner only helped me on one hole.

In a normal foursomes how do you handicap and what determines who tees off on a given hole?

« **Reply #13 on:** February 25, 2006, 03:35:32 PM »

Mike,
I am like you in that I don't get to play foursomes very often. The last time might have been at Muirfield.
One of the Hickory tournments has a foursomes event on the "practice" day and it is always full. I haven't been involved in setting it up, but I assume it is the difference between the combined total of the handicaps. It might be half the difference of the combined handicaps. I'll have to ask the organizer what he does.

« **Reply #14 on:** February 25, 2006, 06:41:59 PM »

Incidentally, I'm in 3rd place on the Golfweek bracket challenge but can get no more points. Go Geoff Ogilvy! I could walk away with 12 golf balls. A dream come true!

« **Reply #15 on:** February 25, 2006, 10:36:35 PM »

As an example of why the various networks will not allow more Matchplay tournaments I present exhibit A.

I seetled down to watch what I think was the seconde round. I think the last 6-7 groups were on the course. In fact at the time Tiger was just in the process of closing out Allenby. So the number of groups on the course continually dwindles. All the groups contain either A) an American or B) a big name (i.e Singh). except for one group. Ogilvy v O'Hern. Naturally as an Australian I am pretty interested in the grouping. especially as they are thru 16 or so holes and either AS or 1up. I watch for 15 minutes. Not one of either of their shots is played or even discussed.

I watch for approx 30mins and I eventually actually see they are still on the course. One of the commentators might have even mentioned their names.

I watch for an hour. EVERY other group is off the course and they still do not show one shot of Ogilvy or O'hern. They have 5-10 minutes of the telecast left and they spend it recapping all the shots from the name groups. Telecast ends and I still don't know the result of this last match.

Now we see that Ogilvy after 4 days of very tight and (from what I saw against Lehman today) very good play. Ogilvy had played 80holes in the first four rounds and battled out wins in every match. Yet I'm sure when he plays the final and in the final wash-up he will be described as a battler or no name who was lucky to make the final ahead of stars like Woods or Michelson.

Love III v. Ogilvy is hardly going to impress the networks or their advertisers.

So I would say little hope of any expanding of the Matchplay schedule.

« **Reply #16 on:** February 25, 2006, 10:49:03 PM »

If Geoff wins tomorrow, there might be more comments like this:

Quote

Q. How do you like the whole World Golf Championship series, and do you think these events have accomplished what they were set up to do, put the best players in the world in different spots around the world?

GEOFF OGILVY: I don't have anything good to say about it. No, to be honest with you.

Having heard second-hand some of his thoughts about architecture, technology and the Tour, he'd be an excellent Feature Interview.

« **Reply #17 on:** February 26, 2006, 12:33:57 AM »

Chris,

He would be a fantastic interview - assuming he repeats his private thoughts on a public forum.
I have no evidence to suggest he would be less than forthright.
He grew up playing at Victoria right across the street from Royal Melbourne and he has always studied architecture and what works and what does not.

I have said for years now that Ogilvy is going to be one of the best players out there. He is taking a while to figure it all out but this week has shown his potential to compete.

« **Reply #18 on:** February 26, 2006, 04:03:59 AM »

He's also a top bloke.

« **Reply #19 on:** February 26, 2006, 04:21:32 AM »

If he wins tomorrow Mike, how much longer do you give the trees on the rhs of 8 at Victoria?

He certainly looks like the real deal - hits it better than any of the Australians except perhaps Adam Scott. Finally his head is catching up with the rest of his game.

« **Reply #20 on:** February 26, 2006, 08:40:33 AM »

Quote from: Sean Walsh on February 25, 2006, 10:36:35 PM

As an example of why the various networks will not allow more Matchplay tournaments I present exhibit A.

I seetled down to watch what I think was the seconde round. I think the last 6-7 groups were on the course. In fact at the time Tiger was just in the process of closing out Allenby. So the number of groups on the course continually dwindles. All the groups contain either A) an American or B) a big name (i.e Singh). except for one group. Ogilvy v O'Hern. Naturally as an Australian I am pretty interested in the grouping. especially as they are thru 16 or so holes and either AS or 1up. I watch for 15 minutes. Not one of either of their shots is played or even discussed.

I watch for approx 30mins and I eventually actually see they are still on the course. One of the commentators might have even mentioned their names.

I watch for an hour. EVERY other group is off the course and they still do not show one shot of Ogilvy or O'hern. They have 5-10 minutes of the telecast left and they spend it recapping all the shots from the name groups. Telecast ends and I still don't know the result of this last match.

Now we see that Ogilvy after 4 days of very tight and (from what I saw against Lehman today) very good play. Ogilvy had played 80holes in the first four rounds and battled out wins in every match. Yet I'm sure when he plays the final and in the final wash-up he will be described as a battler or no name who was lucky to make the final ahead of stars like Woods or Michelson.

Love III v. Ogilvy is hardly going to impress the networks or their advertisers.

So I would say little hope of any expanding of the Matchplay schedule.

I thought the telecast of the quarterfinal round was the most compelling portion of the competition. It seems that four matches is about the limit of what television can cover and allow the viewer to reasonably follow all of the action. When it gets down to two matches, the pace is slowed pretty dramatically and the time that the matches end can vary by about two hours.

It will be interesting to see whether the continued evolution of the internet and the use of television spectrum will allow for multiple channels to cover an event such as this in the early rounds.

I also think it might help to throw in a simultaneous women's event to increase interest in the last couple of rounds and limit the risk of an unattractive pairing hurting ratings. Imagine a final day with Sorenstam against one of the young women, playing at the same time as the men's event. I would think it would allow the networks to hedge their bets a bit. Add an interesting golf course, and you could have a more entertaining final day.

News:

Jason Topp

Brent Hutto

Tiger_Bernhardt

JESII

Joel_Stewart

Dan Moore

TEPaul

Craig Sweet

Mike McGuire

redanman

Craig Sweet

RSLivingston_III

Mike McGuire

RSLivingston_III

Jason Topp

Sean Walsh

Chris Kane

Mike_Clayton

Mark_F

Chris Kane

Jason Topp