woody69
Journeyman Pro
We played a comp at the weekend that was the player versus the course. The course always scores par, so a nett birdie (or better) is a win, a nett par is a half and anything else is a loss.
In the email for the draw, the comp secretary added the following text:
Please pick up your ball if you cannot score at least a nett par as you have already lost the hole. This will help speed up play, thank you!
A sensible suggestion and something I invoked far too many times.... Anyway results came out and I saw that the comp has counted towards handicaps (I got 0.1 back), but I thought that was perhaps a little odd because of the instruction to pick up if you can't score a nett par.
Take the following scenarios:
Player A has the equivalent of 36 pts over the past 17 holes and is on the 18th green. His nett par putt misses and settles a foot away. Knowing he has now 'lost' the hole he knocks the ball away in anger, even though that 1 pt (had he sunk the short putt back) would have meant he scored 37 pts as well as being 1dn against the course.
Conversely, same situation but the player is 1 pt outside buffer. He now gets a 0.1 back when he could have made buffer and stayed the same had he recorded a net bogey on his card rather than NR.
The handicap secretary said the handicap adjustment table shows that 2up is the same as 38 points and 7 down is the same as 29 points etc, so he uses that to adjust, rather than stableford, but I don't really understand how that is right based on the 2 scenarios I have described above?
Is that just how it is done in these comps or should they be NQ? A player could in theory score 27pts on the front 9 and be 9 up, lose the next 8 but not hole out even though he had 8 tap ins for a pt so is still on 27 pts by the 17th, then win the final hole with 4 pts. His actual stableford "score" based on his card is 31pts (27 + 8 NRs + 4). His match against the course has him on 2up and thus is recorded as the equivalent of 38 pts. However, if he had holed out all the short putts for the points as would be expected in a normal stableford round he'd actually be on 39pts (27 + 8 + 4).
Just seems odd to me.
In the email for the draw, the comp secretary added the following text:
Please pick up your ball if you cannot score at least a nett par as you have already lost the hole. This will help speed up play, thank you!
A sensible suggestion and something I invoked far too many times.... Anyway results came out and I saw that the comp has counted towards handicaps (I got 0.1 back), but I thought that was perhaps a little odd because of the instruction to pick up if you can't score a nett par.
Take the following scenarios:
Player A has the equivalent of 36 pts over the past 17 holes and is on the 18th green. His nett par putt misses and settles a foot away. Knowing he has now 'lost' the hole he knocks the ball away in anger, even though that 1 pt (had he sunk the short putt back) would have meant he scored 37 pts as well as being 1dn against the course.
Conversely, same situation but the player is 1 pt outside buffer. He now gets a 0.1 back when he could have made buffer and stayed the same had he recorded a net bogey on his card rather than NR.
The handicap secretary said the handicap adjustment table shows that 2up is the same as 38 points and 7 down is the same as 29 points etc, so he uses that to adjust, rather than stableford, but I don't really understand how that is right based on the 2 scenarios I have described above?
Is that just how it is done in these comps or should they be NQ? A player could in theory score 27pts on the front 9 and be 9 up, lose the next 8 but not hole out even though he had 8 tap ins for a pt so is still on 27 pts by the 17th, then win the final hole with 4 pts. His actual stableford "score" based on his card is 31pts (27 + 8 NRs + 4). His match against the course has him on 2up and thus is recorded as the equivalent of 38 pts. However, if he had holed out all the short putts for the points as would be expected in a normal stableford round he'd actually be on 39pts (27 + 8 + 4).
Just seems odd to me.
