Resolving stroke play ties

[Foxholer]

Calumny and defamation. ?. Slithering down from the regulatory high ground? Qui moi?
...

...
My contention is that a countback ain't the rules. By the rules you win a regular stroke play comp by taking the least number of strokes to go round. The only inference to draw from that is that if two or more take the same number of strokes, they are first equal.
...

Countback may not be part of The Rules. But, in this case, it's part of The Rules of the Competition, so just as valid - at least just as valid as DQ-ing a competitor who missed his time slot, if the Rules of the Competition stated that (s)he had to be on the 1st tee at the allotted time. And I'm pretty certain that the rules re countback would be included in The Rules of the Competition almost immediately after the (or equivalent ones) italicised from your post!

...
I'm confident, however, that protesting has as much value as letting off in a thunderstorm.

I agree. Just, like life, be content with how well you played - which was as good as the guy awarded the win!

FWIW. I've both won and lost comps on countback! The latter because, like the story above, because I was knackered - it was a 2-rounder.

 

[Colin L]

Dubious reasoning there. A countback is only in the Terms of the Competition if a club puts it there. It is there by choice not imposed upon us. A club could equally -and more fairly - put in the Terms of the Competition that in the event of a tie titles and prizes are shared equally. It is curious that this is done for sweeps but not for titles and prizes.

And why should I be content with playing as well as the other guy if I don't share the glory... and the goodies. The last time I lost a place in a seniors comp countback, I only got one golf ball while the other guy got two. There are serious issues involved in this.

 

[Foxholer]

Dubious reasoning there. A countback is only in the Terms of the Competition if a club puts it there. It is there by choice not imposed upon us....

Well that's where we disagree - as 'signing up' denotes agreement, either specifically, or by inference.

 

[Jason.H]

And the other guy is, of course, delighted for you.

Of course over time these count back results even out. Sometimes you get the win sometimes you don’t.

 

[salfordlad]

Agree, countback is utterly, utterly arbitrary. Anyone suggesting it is anything to do with the golfing performance is deluded. The golf score is just the total number and each stroke, be it the 2 inch tap in, the 300 yard drive (I wish) or the penalty stroke, count equally.
IMO, any divisible prize for positions 1, 2, etc, should be tallied and shared wherever possible. Any significant event needs a play off.
But the real world, much of the time, provides no opportunity for a non-arbitrary process for breaking ties. And if you have to go there - as do many events - countback is as good as any and some ways better than most - the information base for the utterly arbitrary decision is already there before the Committee, nothing new needs to happen beyond reading the numbers. And, if necessary, it is independently verifiable/auditable. Unlike scissors, paper, rock.

 

[rulie]

I preferred the countback method where, if there was a tie over 18 holes, the player that played the first 17 holes the best was declared the winner; then the last 16 holes etc.
But it's still only a method for breaking ties when the Committee decides that ties will be broken.

 

[jim8flog]

One of the problems is that it is written in to the software so it would take an agreement between every club using the same software to agree to a new system before it could be changed.

I have hated it (particularly when starting from a tee other then the first) and I have loved it - very recent trophy winner on countback.

I run a couple of swindles and will not use it - two players get the same score they share the prize money.

 

[Jason.H]

One of the problems is that it is written in to the software so it would take an agreement between every club using the same software to agree to a new system before it could be changed.

I have hated it (particularly when starting from a tee other then the first) and I have loved it - very recent trophy winner on countback.

I run a couple of swindles and will not use it - two players get the same score they share the prize money.

One of the problems is that it is written in to the software so it would take an agreement between every club using the same software to agree to a new system before it could be changed.

I have hated it (particularly when starting from a tee other then the first) and I have loved it - very recent trophy winner on countback.

I run a couple of swindles and will not use it - two players get the same score they share the prize money.

I prefer the 2,3 winners sharing 1st. But where a trophy is up for grabs there should only be one winner.

 

[Steve Wilkes]

I sense agreement here, that a count back is just one of a set of arbitrary ways of choosing a winner, of determining the outcome of a golf competition by lottery?

It's just like two players come in with same score , but this winner is decided by who has played the best 8 of his last 20 rounds the worst.

 

[Ethan]

Countback is no more than a random but easily applied way of splitting a tie. The coin toss is the same except looks more random (although it really isn't).

The logical way to split a strokeplay tie is to use exact handicap to more precisely compare scores.

 

[Deleted member 29109]

If it’s a nett score that’s tied give the prize to the player with the lowest gross. As that is actually the better score.

If it’s a scratch event with a tie. Then Rock Paper Scissors is the only real solution.

 

[Ethan]

If it’s a nett score that’s tied give the prize to the player with the lowest gross. As that is actually the better score.

If it’s a scratch event with a tie. Then Rock Paper Scissors is the only real solution.

You can't really use a scratch fix for a nett comp. Exact handicap. If a 7.4 ties a 6.7, the 7.4 should win. That is fair, just more precise application of the handicap.

 

[tobybarker]

How about the player with the oldest clubs wins?

Or the oldest golfer.....

 

[Jason.H]

Pistols at dawn.

 

[backwoodsman]

Easy. Player with the best trousers wins.

(And sorry ladies, you need to get trousers...)

 

[Voyager EMH]

For club nett comps I've always accepted the need for 1st place to be decided by best back nine or whatever
But I do not see a need for 2nd 3rd 4th etc to be separated and yet it is always done.
Whenever we get a new H&C chairman, I have to remind them that in the club championship we have a three-hole strokeplay playoff (not sudden death) for first place, but other ties remain ties in a scratch championship.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I guess I go with countback as it is at least indicative of the relative ability of players ability to 'hold it together' when pressure of competition increases...as it does as soon as a player finds or puts himself in a position of being at least potentially in contention...and that starts with a good front nine.

Doesn't change the fact and your argument that the whole point of strokeplay is the total number of shots over the totality of a round.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Still have cold sweats losing the GM Centenary final on countback. Not the first time I've been on the wrong end of countback but at club golf level what other way is there to satisfactorily sort it when one of the two best scores could have been posted early in the day. No way they would be coming back to a play off. As long as its in the comp rules and everyone knows about it then so be it

 

[chrisd]

I guess I go with countback as it is at least indicative of the relative ability of players ability to 'hold it together' when pressure of competition increases...as it does as soon as a player finds or puts himself in a position of being at least potentially in contention...and that starts with a good front nine.

Doesn't change the fact and your argument that the whole point of strokeplay is the total number of shots over the totality of a round.

What about courses , like mine, where we have a two tee start?

We are possibly comparing player ones back 9 against player twos front 9 if player one starts on the first and player 2 starts on the 10th.

 

[Ethan]

What about courses , like mine, where we have a two tee start?

We are possibly comparing player ones back 9 against player twos front 9 if player one starts on the first and player 2 starts on the 10th.

The countback has nothing to do with any subjective determination that playing better over the back nine is more worthy than playing better over the front nine. It is essentially arbitrary, and you could decide it by who played better on the odd vs even holes except that looks a bit stupid and is harder to work out. So since it is arbitrary, makes no difference what tee people start. You would settle a shotgun strokeplay the same way.