4 - ball scrambles.

[Farmergeddon]

We played a Scramble at Saltburn, as usual everyone had to get 4 drives in, what was different was that one of the drives had to be a Par3, Now the 4th par3 at Saltburn is the 18th, 224 yds down hill, OB down the left in the car park.. Despite hitting 3 good shots on the others this final one was left to me.. I dont need to tell you the rest.

 

[duncan mackie]

Some fuzzy logic in posts here!

Firstly, mixed ability teams are definitely the fairest - to a degree these take care of the various additional rules bought in to counter 'extreme' teams.

On handicapping allowance, consider this. 2 x scr + 2 x 28. The team will have 8 sub optimal tee shots for their 5.6 strokes, and the other 56 strokes will be played by scratch golfers. Where the course has a few shorter par 4s there's no reason that the 5.6 strokes will cost 5.6 strokes over a team of 4 scr players at all - but on a 7100 yds course played from tournament tees they probably would!

So, enter the additional rules developed to make the handicaps a more representative element of the teams performance...(and speed up the round a little!)
1. Most will already include the need for each players tee shot to be used a minimum number of times - an inclusion step.
2. The player whose stroke is used does not play the next one - an exclusion step to minimise the effect of a single players performance on the teams result. Should take at least 20 mins of the round time too. This is probably an even more important 'rule' than 1 above in ensuring it's a team performance but rarely implemented - shame.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

LP - winning is not critical to me, I'm not good enough to be near the winners circle too often, but everyone starting a competition has to have a belief that they stand a chance or otherwise you are just handing over money. It's why I avoid longest drive pay ins but will do nearest the pin or 2's club. If you want plenty of people to pay into a competition you have to offer that hope or they won't take part.

Scrambles are meant to be light hearted and fun. You need to keep them that way by keeping the field relatively level. Let us make our mistakes and rule ourselves out by bad golf but we also need to know that once every so often it can come together and we stand a chance. That is what the OP is asking for and I'm with him.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

LP - winning is not critical to me, I'm not good enough to be near the winners circle too often, but everyone starting a competition has to have a belief that they stand a chance or otherwise you are just handing over money. It's why I avoid longest drive pay ins but will do nearest the pin or 2's club. If you want plenty of people to pay into a competition you have to offer that hope or they won't take part.

Scrambles are meant to be light hearted and fun. You need to keep them that way by keeping the field relatively level. Let us make our mistakes and rule ourselves out by bad golf but we also need to know that once every so often it can come together and we stand a chance. That is what the OP is asking for and I'm with him.

But plenty of people have shown that high HC do win scrambles with 10% HC

It's a team game where you get 4 chances at every single shot - a group of HC will get over 6-9 shots off their score straight away . Now considering that in scrambles every team will get birdies for a low HC team straight away they need to get 5/6 just to make up the difference in HC

Every time I do the results over the last 4 years I see the same thing

Low HC groups getting about 9-10 under par gross then having 2/3 shots coming off only to be beaten by a team shooting 7/8 under par but having 7-8 shots taken off the gross score - so the team playing the better golf doesn't win

Also let's look at if you extend it to say 20% - that means some teams start getting 18 shots off their team score straight away - low HC half that - can you see how hard it is then for the low HC to compete and how much of an advantage it is to the High HC

Scrambles are not a recognised form of golf - they are created with a bit of fun in mind , at ours if you win you get a bit of bragging rights maybe and maybe a tenner in a voucher. We just have a little comp between our swindle etc

But I have seen the results of our Scrambles and I can clearly see it's not the domain of the low HC - it's actually the domain of the mid and high HC and even more if they have a lady playing with a HC over 30. But not one person complains regardless who wins - they enjoy it for what it's worth

A lot of changes recently have come into force to help the higher HC - 4BBB 90% , full diff in singles KO so when someone comes in crying about scrambles being weighted towards low HC because they can't have their full 20 shots it annoys me a little because and trust me I'm not a "high HC shouldn't be allow to play" etc type of person but it does annoy me also when people complain they have been beaten by someone or a team that have played better than them

 

[chrisd]

Say what you like Phil but 10% of the combined handicap usually means that the "dream team" of 3 to 6 handicappers usually win at mine and if you pay to enter a comp you should stand the same chance of winning as every other team, and furthermore, wanting to win is not a crime

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Say what you like Phil but 10% of the combined handicap usually means that the "dream team" of 3 to 6 handicappers usually win at mine and if you pay to enter a comp you should stand the same chance of winning as every other team, and furthermore, wanting to win is not a crime

Ok how many shots would you like to be able to have so that you can compete and win against the better golfers within a team format where you get 4 goes per golfer ?

50% so that you can have about 20 shots per team more than the better players ?

Full HC ? 25% ?

What should it be if a format is weighted towards better players ? ( imagine the better players be begrudged winning something )

 

[chrisd]

Ok how many shots would you like to be able to have so that you can compete and win against the better golfers within a team format where you get 4 goes per golfer ?

50% so that you can have about 20 shots per team more than the better players ?

Full HC ? 25% ?

What should it be if a format is weighted towards better players ? ( imagine the better players be begrudged winning something )

Typical over reaction Phil. I'm not saying it should be adjusted so I (or Johnny's team) for that matter will win but I'd like the chance to win and 10% of combined doesn't do that in scrambles at my place. If there was a magic formula I'm sure we'd all know and use it but the fact is that most team games at mine are won by the low handicap guys and it's starting to mean a number of teams don't enter any more

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Typical over reaction Phil. I'm not saying it should be adjusted so I (or Johnny's team) for that matter will win but I'd like the chance to win and 10% of combined doesn't do that in scrambles at my place. If there was a magic formula I'm sure we'd all know and use it but the fact is that most team games at mine are won by the low handicap guys and it's starting to mean a number of teams don't enter any more

I'm with you and Johnny and it's a format I won't play regularly and find there are the same faces that'll win them on a regular basis. I find the handicap system in this format does favour the low guys and we're another club that is seeing participation numbers dropping

 

[User20205]

Can't believe there's been 47 replies in a thread whose subject is a regarding a trumped up society format.

If I was going to give a serious answer I'd say that the impact of shots received in a scramble is huge. Every hole should be a guaranteed par minimum so even receiving 0.5 of a shot is an advantage. Therefore a team getting 2-3 shots over 18 has a massive advantage, especially when these are played, in my experience, mainly early/late in the season when the greens are poor.

all the above is supposition because no one records the winners of these things and studies the impact of the handicap allowance...because it's not proper golf!!!

It's a fun, filler of a comp, in lieu of anything else to do. Those who don't enter because they can't win a sleeve of DTS solos need to have a lie down

If you care that much, use it as a motivation to get lower then you can take advantage of this perceived imbalance.
I look forward to that post in the '2017 Goals' thead.
'

 

[Crow]

I'm with therod; it's a fun format and not something to lose sleep over, like 99.9% of golf for that matter.

We have two or three scrambles a year, at the start and end of the season.

They're mixed and groups are drawn by first putting handicaps into low, medium and high for men and women and then picking one from each hat to give an even balance across all teams.

(We still get whingers and moaners though, like 99.9% of golf for that matter.)

 

[MadAdey]

After all that has been said they did not even use handicaps. They used some wierd system that eliminates what people have been saying about low handicappers having the advantage.

My team came in second out of 12 teams so it was a good day😊

 

[Imurg]

I'm with therod; it's a fun format and not something to lose sleep over, like 99.9% of golf for that matter.

We have two or three scrambles a year, at the start and end of the season.

They're mixed and groups are drawn by first putting handicaps into low, medium and high for men and women and then picking one from each hat to give an even balance across all teams.

(We still get whingers and moaners though, like 99.9% of golf for that matter.)

Done like this, with a spread of abilities, the winners will be those who play best...and that's fair.
I think the problem comes in where you get a team of low singles who, given 4 attempts at every shot, should be coming in with a football score rather than a cricket score...

 

[chrisd]

Done like this, with a spread of abilities, the winners will be those who play best...and that's fair.
I think the problem comes in where you get a team of low singles who, given 4 attempts at every shot, should be coming in with a football score rather than a cricket score...

Spot on Ian, where 4 different handicappers are drawn the comparison is chalk and cheese to 4 guys all 5 h/c or under cleaning up in most scrambles. Also, at mine, the prizes can be quite decent and not just a 3 pack of DST solo's.

 

[Smiffy]

I remember playing in a Texas scramble at Breadsall Priory (Derbyshire) once.
The organiser had put all the lower handicappers at the front of the field to keep the speed of play up, with the higher handicappers in the last few groups.
As my group were walking up one hole, we saw what we presumed were the last group out playing an adjacent hole.
They had obviously just decided what was their best drive and were taking it in turns to drop their own ball to play their second shots...... right at the base of a massive great gorse bush
That was the best drive of the four!!
I don't think they scored many points that day....

 

[User20205]

Spot on Ian, where 4 different handicappers are drawn the comparison is chalk and cheese to 4 guys all 5 h/c or under cleaning up in most scrambles. Also, at mine, the prizes can be quite decent and not just a 3 pack of DST solo's.

Not 6 pinnacle extremes

 

[JohnnyDee]

Done like this, with a spread of abilities, the winners will be those who play best...and that's fair.
I think the problem comes in where you get a team of low singles who, given 4 attempts at every shot, should be coming in with a football score rather than a cricket score...

That's it exactly. 👍

 

[Deleted member 21258]

Never done one at the golf club and really love texas scramble, love it as a team game so relaxing and fun. Personally I do not think any game should include all players being on the same team, so think 2 ball texas is more suitable. Means you can have a little bet between pairs that are playing together, extra competition and stops possible cheating(when all players are on the same team).

I did do 4 ball scrambles originally and I always found off the 10% allowance you ended up with silly handicaps sometimes, for example when you have four high handicappers play together. As a result, I then used to amend the handicaps to make them more sensible.

I have found that the winners are always a group of low handicappers or a mix of handicappers(including at least one low handicapper) and then normally the group that putted the best out of those, won. Don't think I have ever had a group of 20 plus handicappers win 4 ball or the 2 ball texas scramble over probably 40 odd golf days(even after increasing those teams handicaps by a few shots)

 

[williamalex1]

Really enjoy playing in them except when I'm left to drive at the last hole , there's OOB all the way on the right and trees on the left .

 

[fundy]

Scramble at ours today. Winning team had combined handicaps of 72 ie an average of 18 handicap. Once again the low handicappers were nowhere

 

[FourPutt]

Haven't played a scramble at my new club yet, but at the previous we did quite a few; the usual 1/10th with a minimum of 4 drives taken per person. The winners seemed to vary quite a lot on the ones where we picked our own groups, but my favourite scramble was the one where we had a shotgun start and teams were drawn out of a hat.

I'm not sure that there is a 100% fair way of using handicaps on a scramble, but equally not sure I can think of fairer than 10%. We also used to use the exact 10% (e.g. combined handicap is 38, so 3.8 shots are received rather than 4). We generally found that the competition was won by .1 or .2 rather than a large number of shots.