Greensomes handicapping

[cliveb]

I've recently played in quite a few greensomes competitions, and it got me thinking about the 60%/40% handicap allowance.

In foursomes you get 50% of the combined, which seems entirely appropriate. In greensomes you're basically receiving just as many shots as in foursomes, despite having two chances to get in a good tee shot. That seems a bit generous.

Is there any official explanation or rationale from CONGU for this overly generous allowance? (I seem to recall that some years ago it was 3/8th combined, which feels more appropriate).

 

[Swango1980]

I've recently played in quite a few greensomes competitions, and it got me thinking about the 60%/40% handicap allowance.

In foursomes you get 50% of the combined, which seems entirely appropriate. In greensomes you're basically receiving just as many shots as in foursomes, despite having two chances to get in a good tee shot. That seems a bit generous.

Is there any official explanation or rationale from CONGU for this overly generous allowance? (I seem to recall that some years ago it was 3/8th combined, which feels more appropriate).

I'd have assumed the 60/40 split, rather than 50/50, was to account for fact that you get 2 chances off tee, and to slightly reduce the impact of the higher handicappers player on the overall team handicap.

Not really evaluated it in detail, to know what that impact is.

I suppose a 0 and 30 handicap player would be off 15 in foursomes, 12 in greensomes.

Fairly extreme example, and I suppose the difference will usually be less. The advantage in greensomes could be that you could end up having nearly all the drives of the scratch player if the 30 handicapper is rubbish. But, even in that scenario, the downside is the 30 handicapper has to play nearly all the second shots.

 

[cliveb]

I'd have assumed the 60/40 split, rather than 50/50, was to account for fact that you get 2 chances off tee, and to slightly reduce the impact of the higher handicappers player on the overall team handicap.

Not really evaluated it in detail, to know what that impact is.

I suppose a 0 and 30 handicap player would be off 15 in foursomes, 12 in greensomes.

Fairly extreme example, and I suppose the difference will usually be less. The advantage in greensomes could be that you could end up having nearly all the drives of the scratch player if the 30 handicapper is rubbish. But, even in that scenario, the downside is the 30 handicapper has to play nearly all the second shots.

My thinking was based on the other "extreme" example of a pair with the same handicap. A pair of 10 handicappers will get 10 shots in both foursomes and greensomes, even though in the latter they get two chances on every tee shot. Just doesn't feel right.

 

[Voyager EMH]

I'd have assumed the 60/40 split, rather than 50/50, was to account for fact that you get 2 chances off tee, and to slightly reduce the impact of the higher handicappers player on the overall team handicap.

Not really evaluated it in detail, to know what that impact is.

I suppose a 0 and 30 handicap player would be off 15 in foursomes, 12 in greensomes.

Fairly extreme example, and I suppose the difference will usually be less. The advantage in greensomes could be that you could end up having nearly all the drives of the scratch player if the 30 handicapper is rubbish. But, even in that scenario, the downside is the 30 handicapper has to play nearly all the second shots.

Interesting.
I am thinking that the best combination for greensomes is for the two players to have the same handicap. Second shot is always played by equal ability player.
And they get to play off their natural handicap.
Not played greensomes very much so never thought about it much.

 

[rulefan]

I assume the authorities have sifted all their volumes of data and come up those figures. Presumably it was finger in the air previously.

 

[Backache]

My thinking was based on the other "extreme" example of a pair with the same handicap. A pair of 10 handicappers will get 10 shots in both foursomes and greensomes, even though in the latter they get two chances on every tee shot. Just doesn't feel right.

That should not matter it just means everyone's score is a bit better, the question is does it equalise the chances of the 30/scratch against the two 10's?

 

[Backache]

Interesting.
I am thinking that the best combination for greensomes is for the two players to have the same handicap. Second shot is always played by equal ability player.
And they get to play off their natural handicap.
Not played greensomes very much so never thought about it much.

I suspect the best combination is a talent differential relative to handicap rather than particular handicap combos. You want one person who is a strong driver relative to handicap and one who is a decent iron player relative to handicap. Even better if the drivers skill is lag putts and chips and the iron players is holding out from eight feet and in.

 

[wjemather]

I've recently played in quite a few greensomes competitions, and it got me thinking about the 60%/40% handicap allowance.

In foursomes you get 50% of the combined, which seems entirely appropriate. In greensomes you're basically receiving just as many shots as in foursomes, despite having two chances to get in a good tee shot. That seems a bit generous.

Is there any official explanation or rationale from CONGU for this overly generous allowance? (I seem to recall that some years ago it was 3/8th combined, which feels more appropriate).

The only real goal is to have equitable competition among pairs playing the same format.
Pairs playing different formats are not competing against each other; the competition would not be equitable if they did as the expected 'play-to-handicap' score in different formats with different allowances will not be the same (even though most people will always look at 36 points).

There is an argument that in foursomes/greensomes stroke play comps, allowances should also be subject to the 95% allowance (applied after calculating the 50% combined/60%+40%) in order to provide better equity in medium-large fields.

Edit to add: the recommended allowance for greensomes has been 60/40 since at least the 1970s. However, as allowances weren't mandatory, many/most clubs used something more easily calculated by hand, such as 50% combined. ⅜ was the foursomes matchplay allowance until the mid-1980s.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

I assume the authorities have sifted all their volumes of data and come up those figures. Presumably it was finger in the air previously.

Would be interesting to see how they worked out lots of the team allowances and also how much “team data” they used

 

[Voyager EMH]

I very much doubt that the result of extensive analysis came to such a neat solution as 60%/40%.
It might be that something near to that was disregarded in favour of something "easier" to apply.

I have similar doubts with the 95%, 90%, 85% allowances appearing so neatly convenient.

We used to use an 87.5% allowance.
But the inventor of Stableford came up with that for his own reasons.

 

[Swango1980]

My thinking was based on the other "extreme" example of a pair with the same handicap. A pair of 10 handicappers will get 10 shots in both foursomes and greensomes, even though in the latter they get two chances on every tee shot. Just doesn't feel right.

However, it should also be remembered it is the same for every side of similar matched players, so there shouldn't really be an advantage gained

I think the biggest advantage gained is player style. Get someone who is very strong off the tee, and another good ball striker off fairways (even if not long), you could have a really good pair

 

[Swango1980]

I very much doubt that the result of extensive analysis came to such a neat solution as 60%/40%.
It might be that something near to that was disregarded in favour of something "easier" to apply.

I have similar doubts with the 95%, 90%, 85% allowances appearing so neatly convenient.

We used to use an 87.5% allowance.
But the inventor of Stableford came up with that for his own reasons.

If the data analysis came out with a split of 58.765965% and 41.234035%, I won't be starting any protests because they settled on 60/40