Multi tee starts

[Weemalkyp]

Hi, in a medal round does everyone have to start on the first hole or could some start on the 10th and play the back 9 first?

 

[NearHull]

Hi, in a medal round does everyone have to start on the first hole or could some start on the 10th and play the back 9 first?

Check your club’s Terms of Competition to see if it specifically allows it.

 

[nickjdavis]

Hi, in a medal round does everyone have to start on the first hole or could some start on the 10th and play the back 9 first?

It is a common occurrence at many clubs for there to be a 2-tee start.

 

[Weemalkyp]

Check your club’s Terms of Competition to see if it specifically allows it.

And if I’m match secretary I can make that part of the clubs terms and conditions, I imagine?

 

[Colin L]

And if I’m match secretary I can make that part of the clubs terms and conditions, I imagine?

If you have the delegated authority as match secretary to do so, then yes.

 

[Orikoru]

Our club has a three-tee start for non-drawn comps and usually two-tee, sometimes three-tee start for drawn comps as well.

 

[clubchamp98]

In a card play off is it still 3/6/9 on back nine holes if it’s a two tee start.
We had a big argument about this once.
So that needs writing in t&cs

 

[rulefan]

In a card play off is it still 3/6/9 on back nine holes if it’s a two tee start.
We had a big argument about this once.
So that needs writing in t&cs

The countback can only make sense if it only compares the same holes.

 

[backwoodsman]

In a card play off is it still 3/6/9 on back nine holes if it’s a two tee start.
We had a big argument about this once.
So that needs writing in t&cs

It does need writing into T&Cs/COCs. Otherwise, as suggested, it can/will lead to massive arguments. We used to have multi-tee starts and it was written that countback was always on the last 9/6/3 as given on the card. And there were still arguments ...

 

[Steven Rules]

Countback aramgements - including for a two tee start - are discussed in Committee Procedures 5A(6)d

 

[cliveb]

It does need writing into T&Cs/COCs. Otherwise, as suggested, it can/will lead to massive arguments. We used to have multi-tee starts and it was written that countback was always on the last 9/6/3 as given on the card. And there were still arguments ...

My old club (Orikoru's current club) used to use exact handicap instead of count back, which struck me as a fairer way to do it. But several years ago they switched to standard count back.

I guess under WHS perhaps one could use the unrounded PH to resolve ties? Or would that not be allowed under current rules?

 

[rulefan]

My old club (Orikoru's current club) used to use exact handicap instead of count back, which struck me as a fairer way to do it. But several years ago they switched to standard count back.

I guess under WHS perhaps one could use the unrounded PH to resolve ties? Or would that not be allowed under current rules?

Didn't/doesn't that always favour the lower handicapper?
I thought handicaps were supposed to give everyone and equal chance.

 

[D-S]

Didn't/doesn't that always favour the lower handicapper?
I thought handicaps were supposed to give everyone and equal chance.

Not necessarily as if both shot let’s say net 70 and one was off 10.2 (gross 80 -10) so in effect it’s was net 69.8 and the other was off 0.6 (1) they scored (gross 71 - 1) therefore net 70.4 so the higher handicapper wins.

 

[rulefan]

Not necessarily as if both shot let’s say net 70 and one was off 10.2 (gross 80 -10) so in effect it’s was net 69.8 and the other was off 0.6 (1) they scored (gross 71 - 1) therefore net 70.4 so the higher handicapper wins.

I thought cliveb's "My old club used to use exact handicap instead of count back" meant that the value of the exact handicap was actually used.
ie 0.6 is lower than 10.2 so would be the winning score.

 

[D-S]

I thought cliveb's "My old club used to use exact handicap instead of count back" meant that the value of the exact handicap was actually used.
ie 0.6 is lower than 10.2 so would be the winning score.

You could be right, but that was how I thought it would have worked, a bit like Texas Scramble use to be.

 

[cliveb]

I thought cliveb's "My old club used to use exact handicap instead of count back" meant that the value of the exact handicap was actually used.
ie 0.6 is lower than 10.2 so would be the winning score.

By "exact handicap" I mean that instead of deducting the rounded handicap from the total to arrive at the net score, the unrounded handicap is deducted.

For example, suppose you have two players with handicaps of 9.6 and 10.4 who both score a gross 80.
Rather than both having a net score of 70, they would have net scores of 70.4 and 69.6 respectively.

 

[rulefan]

By "exact handicap" I mean that instead of deducting the rounded handicap from the total to arrive at the net score, the unrounded handicap is deducted.

For example, suppose you have two players with handicaps of 9.6 and 10.4 who both score a gross 80.
Rather than both having a net score of 70, they would have net scores of 70.4 and 69.6 respectively.

Got it now but is that PH, CH or HI?

 

[cliveb]

Got it now but is that PH, CH or HI?

Back when it was used by that club, it was just the CONGU handicap. This was before WHS.

These days I guess it should be the unrounded PH if any club wanted to do it that way.