Texas Scramble Allowances

[Deleted member 30522]

You seem to be very confused. The PGA has nothing to do with handicaps.
But exactly what method and algorithm would you have developed? Why is 10% better than 7.3% or 5%?

Apologies, meant USGA as you stated the US has studied the data. What data?

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Anecdotally all the ones I’ve looked were won by low handicap teams with higher handicap teams just there for a day out.
If the new allowances give everybody a chance of winning then it must be an improvement- surely?

Used to be Dick, but everyone had the chance to win, now it's gone full circle and high handicaps are scooping everything with scores that are just not possible for lower handicapped teams.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Not sure about the rights and wrongs (was there much of a furore about the previous allowances being unfair? - I can’t remember it if there was).
However, played in a local Open scramble yesterday and it was won by a team receiving 13 shots, (so reasonably high‘ish handicappers) on a par 73 course with a net 47, 13 under gross.
My team with 4.5, 10.6, 11.4 and I think 20.0 had 8 shots. We would have needed to shoot 19 under gross to win, also needed to take 4 drives each.
Honestly no point in entering, we could never in a million years have scored that. Is it the allowances?, is it the new handicap indexes? is it good old fashioned banditry? No idea but we won’t be playing this format in an Open anytime soon.

It's the allowances.

 

[rulefan]

Used to be Dick, but everyone had the chance to win, now it's gone full circle and high handicaps are scooping everything with scores that are just not possible for lower handicapped teams.

Just how many results do you have from post WHS scrambles?

 

[rulefan]

the US has studied the data. What data?

As you are not satisfied with what you have been told, perhaps you should ask them.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

As you are not satisfied with what you have been told, perhaps you should ask them.

No I'm asking you as you claim to be ITK

 

[rulefan]

No I'm asking you as you claim to be ITK

It's not my job or my problem so you'll have to remain in ignorance.

 

[Old Skier]

No I'm asking you as you claim to be ITK

If you attend the many EG and county seminars you will be able to get the info first hand. It’s out there and since the introduction of CDH No and qualifying scores being uploaded for the last 10 odd years the relevant authorities have had data that allows for modeling to be carried out.

Is it an exact science- no - but it’s all we have.

 

[rulefan]

If you attend the many EG and county seminars you will be able to get the info first hand. It’s out there and since the introduction of CDH No and qualifying scores being uploaded for the last 10 odd years the relevant authorities have had data that allows for modeling to be carried out.

Is it an exact science- no - but it’s all we have.

BB is right though in that the old CDH data will not include any scramble scores.

 

[Swango1980]

They could remove the affiliation if it got that far and then see the exodus of members from the club. Would you remain a member?

Not suggesting clubs should just do as they like, and I've not yet had any personal experience on how the Texas Scramble Formats pan out.

However, I suspect a club could probably still get away with doing what they wish with handicap formats, especially if they assume it is simply a "fun unofficial competition"? Our club has a Mulligan competition, 3 Club Competition and Flag competition once a year. None follow the full rules of golf, but I am sure there wouldn't be an issue for the club, even if a member complained? We have competitions were there are gross prizes, so no handicap allowance at all. I have played in Opens were there is an upper handicap limit, or an additional % reduction, and those competition organisers do not seem to get in trouble with the authorities.

So, I personally cannot see the authorities threatening to take away a clubs affiliation because they use different handicaps to what WHS states? I suspect the only issue the club has is if members generally find the allowances unfair, many more members will simply not enter. I'm unsure how many higher handicap players never played in Texas Scramble before, as they felt they were at a disadvantage. I have no idea how many lower handicap players will no longer enter now as they feel they are at a disadvantage. The club will hopefully decide what is best for their members.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

If you attend the many EG and county seminars you will be able to get the info first hand. It’s out there and since the introduction of CDH No and qualifying scores being uploaded for the last 10 odd years the relevant authorities have had data that allows for modeling to be carried out.

Is it an exact science- no - but it’s all we have.

Well I'm not in England (clue is in the name), but there is no historical data on Texas Scrambles, until this winter the authorities didn't even rule on them, stated categorically they were "outside the rules of golf".

How exactly do the authorities model on data they don't have?

 

[Colin L]

Seriously, and not meaning to be provocative, but why don't you write to the R&A and ask? You're not going to get an answer here from people who don't know any more than you do.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Seriously, and not meaning to be provocative, but why don't you write to the R&A and ask? You're not going to get an answer here from people who don't know any more than you do.

Seriously, some on here keep saying there's data, I've asked them to show it. Of course they can't because there was no data on this.

but you in particular seem to have an objection to the fact that I did my own modelling, and it's come out exactly as predicted, but that's no use because of supposed imaginary research by golf's governing bodies.

 

[rulefan]

Seriously, some on here keep saying there's data, I've asked them to show it. Of course they can't because there was no data on this.

When and who did you ask? I do know that England Golf haven't collected data.
I can't produce any data as I wasn't involved with the research and haven't been given access to it. I can only believe the the authorities when they tell me they have data.
You may choose to believe that either I or they are lying.
I have nothing more to add.

 

[wjemather]

Seriously, some on here keep saying there's data, I've asked them to show it. Of course they can't because there was no data on this.

but you in particular seem to have an objection to the fact that I did my own modelling, and it's come out exactly as predicted, but that's no use because of supposed imaginary research by golf's governing bodies.

You have stated that have only looked at your own and winning scores, nothing more. That is not modelling, or anything close to it.

 

[D-S]

As there are now mandatory allowances for these competition, will there be a standardised set of rules? Every scramble seems to have different ones - e.g. dropping or placing in the rough or bunker, can you stand behind the line on a putt in this format, 6” or a clublength, does the person who hit the shot have to play the first shot or can you pick and place for the first shot etc. etc.
If there are mandatory allowances, it seems only sensible that there are at least ‘usual’ rules.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

You have stated that have only looked at your own and winning scores, nothing more. That is not modelling, or anything close to it.

It's a damned sight more than what the golf authorities have done.

 

[Old Skier]

It's a damned sight more than what the golf authorities have done.

Maybe your authority but we have been assured here that data has been used. I suspect that as America am golf is all about gimmies mulligans and I’ll give you five you could possibly be right as the data couldn’t be relied upon.

 

[rulefan]

It's a damned sight more than what the golf authorities have done.

Just who do you mean by 'the golf authorities' ?
How do you know what they have done?

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Just who do you mean by 'the golf authorities' ?
How do you know what they have done?

1. Scramble scores aren't tracked
2. Until Nov 2020 they didn't even acknowledge them as a valid form of golf

Yet now we're supposed to believe they have data to back up their farcical handicap allowances? Aye right