Sportsmanship - Running up the score and not conceding putts

[Tom Huckaby]

Tommy - that matching of you v. Gib was WHOLLY intentional, rest assured.  Though many accused me of rigging the overall Cup for my side, I swear to one and all that FUN was my goal.  And that was the highlight match of the day.  I was not surprised at all it turned out as it did.  As you'll recall the scoring was on holes won basis (gross, no net) and thus you were a hero to hang in as long as you did.

George:

You must not play many scrambles, and if Dave Pelz doubts this, then he must not either.  Sub-60 scores are commonplace.  I wholly believe it, as I have been on many teams that have produced these scores.  In fact give me Mucci, a healthy Tom Paul and long-hitting Gene Greco and I'd expect us to shoot no higher than 58 on an average course, 62 or so on a really hard one from the tips.   And notice while Pat and TEP would carry that group, Greco and I are relative stiffs... Put Jamie Slonis and Michael Wharton-Palmer with those two and if they shoot over 54 I'd be shocked.

I once had a team that shot 54... it was me, two 12s and a 14.  Short course, a few clutch putts, we had 3 eagles - all on par fives where we reached in two - 3 pars and the rest birdies.  Scrambles really do provide low scores.

And note all of the above refers to a no-mulligan situation... Most charity events allow one to buy mulligans, which of course everyone does, it goes to the cause and if you don't you're giving up shots to the field.  The scores get CRAZY when mulligans are involved - I once saw a winning score of 49!  That is not a misprint.  And I didn't doubt they achieved it, either... again it was a short course with reachable par fives and two reachable par fours from the tees we played... that same day my mediocre team shot 58 without hardly doing anything.

Now back to the match play discussion....

TH

[Rick Shefchik]

Huck --

Given the the pressure to birdie every hole in most scrambles to have a chance to win, coupled with the downward drift of competitiveness and honesty in all facets of American life, how long do you suppose it will be before even charity scrambles are forced to send out independent scorers with each group?

Or do they do that already in your neck of the woods?

[Mike Benham]

My wife and I play the occasional Sunday fourball vs a nice younger couple ...

The Golden's?

[Mike Benham]

Huck --

Given the the pressure to birdie every hole in most scrambles to have a chance to win, coupled with the downward drift of competitiveness and honesty in all facets of American life, how long do you suppose it will be before even charity scrambles are forced to send out independent scorers with each group?

Or do they do that already in your neck of the woods?

Most of the charity tournaments stopped giving "big prizes" to the "winners".  You usually get a cheesy trophy or plaque and a shirt or something of limited value.  They want you to buy raffle tickets for the really good prizes ... ask me how I know

[Tom Huckaby]

Huck --

Given the the pressure to birdie every hole in most scrambles to have a chance to win, coupled with the downward drift of competitiveness and honesty in all facets of American life, how long do you suppose it will be before even charity scrambles are forced to send out independent scorers with each group?

Or do they do that already in your neck of the woods?

Whoa.  I hadn't thought of that.  No, I haven't seen it occur yet, besides at qualifiers for the Oldsmobile Scramble or whatever the hell that nation-wide annual thing is called now.  The day they have to do that at charity events is the day armageddon is upon us.  The sad thing is, to make them "fair" they really do need that... but optomistically I continue to see, and believe, that "fairness" isn't really the point of those things.  That is, those of us who lose honestly give so much shit to the dishonest winners that we are better off in all conceivable ways.

And Mike Benham makes very good points there - the prizes typically aren't worth cheating for.  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

My wife and I play the occasional Sunday fourball vs a nice younger couple ...

The Golden's?

Benz, Exactly! That's who I thought he was talking about! If Mike Golden has turned to the use of a --AHEMMMM!--Distance Device, I'm going to have to have a word with him!

Pat, Nothing should ever stand in the way of reinstating the Stymie. NOTHING! Lets bring back some heart & soul to the game! Could you imagine laying up putts to get in another guys way?!?!?! (I could! It's called defensive golf!)

Tom, I sort of knew that was a planned match by the way Gib kept on saying, "It ain't right, pitting us two against one another!"

I wasn't buying into it!

My worse defeat however was one that finished me on team play for a long, long time.

My Mountain View Golf Club team was playing the dreaded Meadowlark team at Mountain View. I was team captain, and my opponent happened to be a man that had been battling brain cancer, and under his Panama hat, had a bandage wrapped around his head from a recent operation.

I quickly jumped out to the lead by four in the first six holes, and at #9, I was six up. #10 he kerplucked one into the water and I was 7 up with 8 to play. On the tee at #11, he came-up to me and complimented me on how competitive I was as a golfer (Probably the only person who has ever complimented me on that, and it just isn't true) but also added, "You know, it's great just to be alive and out here" and at that point, I didn't really know of the extent of his health problems--brain cancer. His partner then chimed in and said, You don't kow exactly what he has been through in the last year. It's a miracle he is alive, let alone playing golf" which of course instantly finished me.

I lost that 7 hole lead with 8 to play on the 17th, and then lost outright at the 18th when I four-putted from a pretty difficult spot.

I simply felt so bad for the guy and let my sentiments get the best of me. To make matters worse, he had to come-up to me at the end of the round and tell me how sorry he was that he had even mentioned his health problems to me. My lost points even ended up costing us the team match!

I've never been the same at Match Play since!

[Kevin_Reilly]

Fairly common to see lopsided results in rugby matches, particularly at the highest levels.  Players don't stop giving full effort just because they are ahead.  Guiding rationale is that your opponent might be more insulted by a "laydown" approach than full effort that produces a lopsided score.  

Who would want to play a competitive match (rugby or golf) where the opponent is not playing to win...at all times?  

How would you rather lose (using rugby as an example) -
76-3 where opponent never relents
50-6 or thereabouts where the opponent uses second-line players in the second half and plays a plodding game.

When you're playing something in a competitive environment, you should want your opponent to play hard - if not, maybe you should find another competitive outlet.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Given the the pressure to birdie every hole in most scrambles to have a chance to win, coupled with the downward drift of competitiveness and honesty in all facets of American life, how long do you suppose it will be before even charity scrambles are forced to send out independent scorers with each group?

Rick,

Because of that environment, a charity tournament that I'm involved with decided to give away terrific favors to EVERY contestant, and so-so prizes to low net and low gross winners.

We de-emphasized the significance of winning and accentuated the importance of attending.

Now, everybody wins.

And for those who want to use the best club in their bag, the pencil, it's a hollow victory.

[Doug Siebert]

Does anyone believe it when a 4 man scramble produces a sub 60 round to win?

IMHO, it would take 4 damn good golfers to produce such a score. If you believe Dave Pelz's stats, it's almost impossible.

I'd believe a gca'er who told me a 58 was possible - share your story with me, assuage my fears.

You are woefully overestimating what it takes for four people to shoot in the 50s.  I don't play in a whole lot of scrambles, but I can't even count the number of times my teams have been in the 50s, and I'm only mid single digits myself and almost always play with people from worse to much worse than I.

Just as one example, I played in one this summer with my dad, age 71 off about 18, his friend Hank, age 75 off about 18, his other friend Dee, age 83 off about 25.  Course was 6600 yards, 72.1/132.  We got four mulligans, but they didn't end up helping us, and shot 58.  I had us on/near all the par 5s (but no par 4s are driveable on this course) and helped with some good drives on some holes, but where I drove into the trees we'd either have to play mine from amongst the trees or play one of their 180 yard drives.  But Hank was deadly from 115-140 (which just happens to be my worst distance because I hate my PW) that day which really helped.

Seems like the times I'm in the 50s someone got a hot hand from whatever range you seem to leave yourself with on the par 4s.  Everyone thinks the par 5s are the key to scrambles, but especially when you got groups like mine where I have to hit both shots to put us in eagle position, you won't get a lot.  Just average birdie on the 5s are you are fine.  The 3s just depend on how long they are, 200 yard par 3s aren't conducive to birdies even with four good players on a team.  That leaves the 4s, and since the difference between leaving a 20 foot and 10 foot putt is huge, you gotta step up and hit it in makeable range.  Usually it works out that someone does, and usually it works out that someone wasn't me, but that's fine because its usually my drive that got 'em there.

[A.G._Crockett]

I agree with Doug Seibert; a gross score in the 50's in a 4-man scramble is not uncommon, and without any type of cheating.  Naturally, a lot of it depends on the par 5's on the particular course, but if you hit it close enough often enough with 4 decent putters, 13 or 14 under just isn't that hard.  I've been in the same group in a Rotary Club scramble for years with a scratch, a 2, a 7 (me) and a 20, and we've gone as low as 17 under gross, and never less than 13 that I remember.  Granted, we always place, but we don't always win even with those scores.  I play a fair number of charity scrambles, and I always assume that it'll take something in the 50's to even be in the hunt for gross.

What DOES bother me is losing to a group that shoots in the 50's gross and is getting a ton of shots; my objection is NOT questions about their gross score, but the handicaps they brought to event.

As to conceding putts, I can't ever remember being mad that my opponent didn't give me a putt; I'm just relieved when they do.    Certainly, I don't feel "entitled" to a concession of ANY putt, and don't think anybody else should either.  My assumption is that the more it matters in the match, the more missable the putt is for any golfer (see Scott Hoch, Doug Sanders, Stewart Cink, DL III, et. al.) so concessions tend to come early in the match.

[Kelly Blake Moran]

Tech played an easy schedule and struggled against some very mediocre teams, and when they played a solid fooball team they got their ass handed to them.  If they ever have the fortitude to make a nonconference schedule like Notre Dame we'll see how brilliant this guy is and how often he gets the opportunity to score touchdowns.  Unfortunately, Tech has always been second rate in the state, probably due in part to chumps like this guy.

Being so far removed from competition it is hard for me to think of any situation where I would not concede a reasonable putt.  JSlonis probably has the right perspective for a competitive player, for me I think the various challenges and turns the match take is far more important than the ultimate outcome.

[Mike Hendren]

Four of us partnered with Vince Gill in a five-man charity scramble.  Our handicaps ranged from 8 to 16 with Gill a scratch.  We par the first two holes at Mr. Brauer's Springhouse Golf Club at Opryland, then go 17 under on the final 16 holes to shoot 55.  Don't recall any mulligans, but I have never seen so many putts holed.  It was absurd.

Partnered with Lou Graham the next year and we shoot 67

Mike

[Brian Noser]

When playing match play which is rare, I tend to forget or not pay attention to giving putts late in the round.

As for the scramble my buddies and I play in a 27 hole scramble(all day) and we typicly shoot 20-26 under. rather short course with all par 5's reachable. That is with handis of 3-5-6-9, par 108  so scores in the 50's are not uncommon to attain in 18 holes.

[Jason Topp]

Echo the 58 is very possible.  I once had a team that consisted of my brother, who does not play golf, my father who hits it 150 yards, a long hitting guy and me, an 8.  The result:



The prize - a trophy, a Sherman Williams tee shirt and my Son and nephew feeling like we won the Masters.

[Tom Huckaby]

OK guys, I doubt we've ever had an occurrence of a statement made by a regular poster that is so obviously wrong as George's take about sub-60 rounds in scrambles.  The evidence continues to pour in.

Many have said a weakness of this forum is that no one ever admits he's wrong.

Come on George - take one for the team here!

TH

ps Jason - great pic.

[JohnV]

My favorite week of the year is when I get to referee matches at the US Mid-Amateur and watch those guys play.

My favorite match was between Jeff Wilson and Tim Hogarth at Stanwitch in 2002.  Both are great players and they are good friends.  For the first 6 or 7 holes they were giving each other putts that were well outside the normal range (and not just for halves).

They saw me looking kind of funny at one of them and Tim just said, "We're notorious for giving each other long putts."

Well, they came of #13 all square.  From there on, there was none of that.  Tim birdied 2 of the next 4 holes and lost 2 & 1 when Jeff birdied them all.  Sometimes I think that they just wanted to get to a point in the match where everything was tied and then get it on.

I refereed a few matches at the Women's Am in '03 and '04 and they definitely don't concede putts as readily as the average male player, let alone Jeff and Tim.

[Tom Huckaby]

shivas - oh hell yes - many times 63 is a pretty piss-poor score in a scramble.  I've had plenty of those also.

So where's George?

 

[Mike Benham]

 Unfortunately, Tech has always been second rate in the state, probably due in part to chumps like this guy.

Kelly -

I think you are missing or ignoring a critical element about "this guy".  Yes, his beside manner may not be the best but his innovation on how the game can be played is refreshing (ignore the man, think of the process).  He runs plays to see how the defense reacts, the wide splits by the O line, the pressure offense.  He is using a different strategy than the tried and tired off-tackle and student-body right of the mainstream coaches.

He is the equivalent to Stranz, maybe C&C or Doak in GCA world.  

So you have Coach Leach, Stranz, C&C, Doak vs. Woody Hayes, Tom Fazio, Rees Jones ... and you would choose?

[Kelly Blake Moran]

Mike,

I didn't read the article so yes I am probably missing the point and it may be really inventive and the wave of the future, but Tech has been running and gunning for several years now, and if you ask alumini, 4 of whom are in my immdeiate family, you might hear, yea, so what, we play a real team like Texas, not sam houston or texas st.,  and we get our ass kicked.  I think the kind of offense I see Texas running is far more substantial then what little I have seen of Tech.  I bet you can't recruit a major running back at Tech because Tech doesn't run the ball.  Same with the Eagles, and I'm not jumping on them now because of what has happened, but the Eagles heavy reliance on passing has not resulted in a juggernaut offense, it has often sputtered even last year in the big games.  

When you have big time money flowing into college sports, and players being more athletes than students then I think as an alumini you expect wins, and even though the guy at Tech may have some wins and big time stats you can discount about 70% of the games because they play undermanned teams, when they face a Texas or Oklahoma, a few years back, they get killed, so refreshing is nice but I would rather have victories over big time schools, with a more balanced offense.  Recruiting and execution are far more important than innovative plays.  Texas could  line up and play the wishbone every play and beat Tech 20 times out of 20.

As far as your analogy I'll take Belichick, and I'll put my money on a Woody hayes team vs. a Leach team any day.

[Keith Williams]

Not to stray too far off topic but...

the mention of women golfers (not conceding putts) and scrambles reminded me of what I have discovered as the genuine golden ticket when it comes to competing in a scramble...

A woman on the team.  My little sister plays college golf and while she won't have a career on the LPGA tour (or Futures tour for that matter) she can consistently hit it 230-260 yards.  Put that distance playing from the women's tees on the average scramble course and you won't believe the kind of places you will be playing your approach shots from.  Its absurd (what is also absurd is the pure number of scrambles she gets invited to).  I am sure around our club now, that if scramble teams were chosen like pickup basketball games, she would always be "first pick".

Sorry for the stray, back to relevant discussion like when is someone going to invite George to a scramble so he can help shoot a 58?

Keith.

[Tom Huckaby]

Keith:

Having discovered the great worth of long-hitting young female golfers long ago after getting my ass kicked in a two-person scramble once by a team featuring such, I have long searched for such golden ticket for a scramble team I makeup.  Sadly I know of no such golden tickets.  Or maybe happily, for the sake of my marriage.

And yes, my new goal in life is to get two decent players and have the three of us show George in person a 58 or so.

 

[Craig Van Egmond]

 
Kelly,

         I would like to take this time to thank Tech for allowing OSU not to be shutout in Big 12 wins this year.  

[Mickey Boland]

Re:  Scramble scores.  I agree that sub-60 scores are the norm for winning scores.  Does cheating go on?  Yeah, and I've posted before about my direct experience in that regard.  Some of the scramble events down here are going to 3-man teams, with two teams grouped together for the round.  I guess the theory is that 4 people might cheat but 6 probably won't.

Re:  Sportsmanship.  I feel like I strike a pretty good balance between conceding putts and having them holed.  But there is one event that has nagged me.  In an annual match play tournament in which I participate, I won the first 5 holes against my opponent.  On our sixth hole, I was in for bogey and he had a 4-footer for bogey.  I made him putt it, which he did and made.  I won the match handily, but later on regretted not conceding that putt.  He was a fine gentleman who was just having a bad day.  Maybe if he had come back and made it a match, I wouldn't have felt so bad.  I don't know what I will do if faced with a similar situation again.  I like to think I'm a sportsman, but 6-up is 6-up.

[George Pazin]

shivas - oh hell yes - many times 63 is a pretty piss-poor score in a scramble.  I've had plenty of those also.

So where's George?

 

Sorry, today was a daddy & Jason day, and our phone service is out, so I couldn't log on while he was napping.

I feel better now that so many honorable folks have shared their stories. I guess the fact that I'm usually the best golfer in my foursome colored my views.

Huck, I admit I'm wrong almost every time I am. I guess it's just so rare that it must seem like I never do admit it.

[Tom Huckaby]

Good man, George.  And yes, I know you are not one of the "never admitting he's wrong" types, far from it.  This was just such a perfect chance to flaunt the naysayers, I had to call you out.

Well done.  Even the last part.  

BTW, don't know if you saw, but it's now my life mission to play a scramble with you and make sure we have two great players along with us so we can shoot that sub-60 round.  It does never get old.

TH