WHS - current GM article

[Voyager EMH]

That's really helpful, thanks.

I played 1st team league matches for about 40 years.
Are you setting yourself up as "First Team Selector"?
My advice would be don't do it.
You will find that there will always be some players who disagree with your choice no matter what you do.
If you leave someone out who they think you should have picked, then they will drop out of the team.
The player who you dropped will not want to play again until you are removed from the scene.
Be prepared for all this nonsense.
Whatever you do, you will receive no praise, thanks or admiration.

The only way that I found that produced little or no argument was to pick the lowest exact handicaps that are available.
This never happened and no one agreed with this method. First team was always selected by a person who desired the power and influence to do the selecting.
The team was never selected solely on merit - petty politics seemed to play a great part.
I always did my bit for the club by playing to the best of my ability when selected and available, which was an awful lot of times over many years.
Hardly ever did I agree with the team selector's method or reasoning.

 

[Swango1980]

I played 1st team league matches for about 40 years.
Are you setting yourself up as "First Team Selector"?
My advice would be don't do it.
You will find that there will always be some players who disagree with your choice no matter what you do.
If you leave someone out who they think you should have picked, then they will drop out of the team.
The player who you dropped will not want to play again until you are removed from the scene.
Be prepared for all this nonsense.
Whatever you do, you will receive no praise, thanks or admiration.

The only way that I found that produced little or no argument was to pick the lowest exact handicaps that are available.
This never happened and no one agreed with this method. First team was always selected by a person who desired the power and influence to do the selecting.
The team was never selected solely on merit - petty politics seemed to play a great part.
I always did my bit for the club by playing to the best of my ability when selected and available, which was an awful lot of times over many years.
Hardly ever did I agree with the team selector's method or reasoning.

This is pretty much true when you are responsible for picking ANY sort of team. As soon as you are in a position that requires picking players above others, the ones that don't get picked will often be upset about it.

If you were picking a team of 12, and your top 12 players had handicaps of less than 0.0 and your 13th player and above were over 10.0, it would be clear to all who should get picked. But, as that will never happen, there will always be reasons why some selected players are lucky to be there and dropped players should be there.

When I was captain I had to pick the side, albeit for handicap league (max 17 hcp). We had so many interested players, I created a separate friendly team and organised several matches for them through the year. I was able to play guys who would never get in league side (high hcps), guys who were on fringe and new golfers who could likely get into league side in future. Work really well, but even then there was at least 1 chap who spat his dummy out when he didn't get picked for 1 game in league.

 

[Voyager EMH]

This is pretty much true when you are responsible for picking ANY sort of team. As soon as you are in a position that requires picking players above others, the ones that don't get picked will often be upset about it.

If you were picking a team of 12, and your top 12 players had handicaps of less than 0.0 and your 13th player and above were over 10.0, it would be clear to all who should get picked. But, as that will never happen, there will always be reasons why some selected players are lucky to be there and dropped players should be there.

When I was captain I had to pick the side, albeit for handicap league (max 17 hcp). We had so many interested players, I created a separate friendly team and organised several matches for them through the year. I was able to play guys who would never get in league side (high hcps), guys who were on fringe and new golfers who could likely get into league side in future. Work really well, but even then there was at least 1 chap who spat his dummy out when he didn't get picked for 1 game in league.

One time I was not selected, I shot my life-time best ever competition round of 3-under par a few days before the match.
This was far better than "spitting the dummy" which I never did.
I offered to do the selecting for the rest of that year - my offer was declined. The self-appointed-with-the-approval-of-the-club-captain selector continued.

 

[Swango1980]

One time I was not selected, I shot my life-time best ever competition round of 3-under par a few days before the match.
This was far better than "spitting the dummy" which I never did.
I offered to do the selecting for the rest of that year - my offer was declined. The self-appointed-with-the-approval-of-the-club-captain selector continued.

So, a player who is dropped from the team (for reasons unknown), happens to go out and shoot a great score just after. Instead of hoping that score would highlight good form, and get them in for the next match, they approach the Committee and/or selector to say they will do their job for them.

Assuming there was no hint that the selector was wanting to step down, I'm sure that offer went down well......

It sure might have sounded like you were spitting your dummy out. You might as well have just said "you are rubbish at your job because you didn't pick me, let me do it instead so I can pick me" .

Given that this was the first time you were dropped, how long was the selector in place before that? Were you equally frustrated by their picks even when you were in side, and if so did you offer to do the job previous to this?

 

[Teebs]

I played 1st team league matches for about 40 years.
Are you setting yourself up as "First Team Selector"?
My advice would be don't do it.
You will find that there will always be some players who disagree with your choice no matter what you do.
If you leave someone out who they think you should have picked, then they will drop out of the team.
The player who you dropped will not want to play again until you are removed from the scene.
Be prepared for all this nonsense.
Whatever you do, you will receive no praise, thanks or admiration.

The only way that I found that produced little or no argument was to pick the lowest exact handicaps that are available.
This never happened and no one agreed with this method. First team was always selected by a person who desired the power and influence to do the selecting.
The team was never selected solely on merit - petty politics seemed to play a great part.
I always did my bit for the club by playing to the best of my ability when selected and available, which was an awful lot of times over many years.
Hardly ever did I agree with the team selector's method or reasoning.

At best I would be vice captain. Appreciate the points raised but we've been asked by the club GM to step in and help out. No doubt that issues will occur during the season but the previous captain/team selector had plenty of chances to get it right in previous years.

 

[Voyager EMH]

So, a player who is dropped from the team (for reasons unknown), happens to go out and shoot a great score just after. Instead of hoping that score would highlight good form, and get them in for the next match, they approach the Committee and/or selector to say they will do their job for them.

Assuming there was no hint that the selector was wanting to step down, I'm sure that offer went down well......

It sure might have sounded like you were spitting your dummy out. You might as well have just said "you are rubbish at your job because you didn't pick me, let me do it instead so I can pick me" .

Given that this was the first time you were dropped, how long was the selector in place before that? Were you equally frustrated by their picks even when you were in side, and if so did you offer to do the job previous to this?

You are not aware of the conversation that took place between me, the captain and the team selector.
This was very amicable - no animosity or any bad feeling expressed by anyone. I had known both chaps for a considerable time and am still on good terms to this day.
The main theme of the discussion was their apology to me.
Your attempt to besmirch me on this occasion have completely failed.

 

[Swango1980]

You are not aware of the conversation that took place between me, the captain and the team selector.
This was very amicable - no animosity or any bad feeling expressed by anyone. I had known both chaps for a considerable time and am still on good terms to this day.
Your attempt to besmirch me on this occasion have completely failed.

I wasn't. I was reacting the words you posted, it is what happens in forums. And you have the right to reply.

You posted some fairly negative comments about the types of people who become selectors, and how they come to be in that position. So, forgive me for not being aware that you were great pals with these people, and are still on good terms with them to this day.

Perhaps I just misread your post. Maybe you understood the reason why you were dropped, accepted is just fine and then simply played your way back into the team. And maybe it was just a coincidence that you happened to offer your services right after the 1st time you were dropped.

 

[Voyager EMH]

At best I would be vice captain. Appreciate the points raised but we've been asked by the club GM to step in and help out. No doubt that issues will occur during the season but the previous captain/team selector had plenty of chances to get it right in previous years.

There is no "getting it right".
It is a case of not being able to please all the people all of the time.

I wasn't. I was reacting the words you posted, it is what happens in forums. And you have the right to reply.

You posted some fairly negative comments about the types of people who become selectors, and how they come to be in that position. So, forgive me for not being aware that you were great pals with these people, and are still on good terms with them to this day.

Perhaps I just misread your post. Maybe you understood the reason why you were dropped, accepted is just fine and then simply played your way back into the team. And maybe it was just a coincidence that you happened to offer your services right after the 1st time you were dropped.

It was not the first time I was not selected and it was not the first time that I had offered to select the team.
I never complained about not being selected.
When I disagreed with other players being omitted, I said so plainly.
I never pointed out players who were selected who I thought should not have been. That would not be good for the team as a whole.
I once offered to stand down in favour of another who I said I viewed as better than me. In the end we both played.
I always viewed what was best for the team and the club.
But the role of selector is quite a thankless task. Choosing the lowest exact handicaps that are available is easy to do, however.

 

[AussieKB]

I was not selected at one club in England for a scratch match, though I was the Club Champion and lowest handicap by a long way, Club never even called me to say I was not playing.

When asked the reason, it was pitiful, "I was always returning to OZ at some stage".

I copped it sweet, never complained, but did enjoy going out the day before the match and winning the gross, half the team were going to pull out but I told them not too, it was not in the Club's or theirs best interest.

 

[patricks148]

This is pretty much true when you are responsible for picking ANY sort of team. As soon as you are in a position that requires picking players above others, the ones that don't get picked will often be upset about it.

If you were picking a team of 12, and your top 12 players had handicaps of less than 0.0 and your 13th player and above were over 10.0, it would be clear to all who should get picked. But, as that will never happen, there will always be reasons why some selected players are lucky to be there and dropped players should be there.

When I was captain I had to pick the side, albeit for handicap league (max 17 hcp). We had so many interested players, I created a separate friendly team and organised several matches for them through the year. I was able to play guys who would never get in league side (high hcps), guys who were on fringe and new golfers who could likely get into league side in future. Work really well, but even then there was at least 1 chap who spat his dummy out when he didn't get picked for 1 game in league.

in my first two years as a senior i was an automatic pick for our seniors scratch foursomes tournament off 2, but there been a few guys who have put in lots of supplementary cards and are now scratch, so automatic picks this year and will be again next. my fried who picks the team asked me last year if id played with them much, which i had before and both were steady 4 or 5 handicaps, but ive not seen either of them break 80 in the comps ive seen results for.

 

[Swango1980]

There is no "getting it right".
It is a case of not being able to please all the people all of the time.

It was not the first time I was not selected and it was not the first time that I had offered to select the team.
I never complained about not being selected.
When I disagreed with other players being omitted, I said so plainly.
I never pointed out players who were selected who I thought should not have been. That would not be good for the team as a whole.
I once offered to stand down in favour of another who I said I viewed as better than me. In the end we both played.
I always viewed what was best for the team and the club.
But the role of selector is quite a thankless task. Choosing the lowest exact handicaps that are available is easy to do, however.

Fair enough, apologies I read that wrong about thinking it was the first time you were not picked. Probably too early in the morning.

Any of these jobs are pretty much thankless tasks. I mean, every now and then someone might thank you in a speech, especially if the team do well. But generally it is a pain in the backside. Organising anything is, especially when other people and different personalities are involved.

If you are going to do the job, you need to be the sort of person who is, and enjoys being organised. You need a bit of time to focus on the job. It is a huge help if you are a good people person. And you need a thick skin at times.

The job is to pick the team, and hopefully pick a team that gives your club the best chance of winning. Simply picking lowest handicappers, in my view, is the easy way out that can be criticized anyway. Some of those reasons are obvious. Picking a 0.4 player over a 0.5 player is not a good idea if the 0.4 player is never seen to do well under pressure, many GP scores on record and a terrible match player. While the 0.5 player may be as steady as a rock, and a great match player. Also, they may be a great partner. Partnerships are huge. There are higher handicappers (even having to play off scratch) I'd much rather be partnered with because they have a really composed, relaxed and friendly personality, yet clearly give 100% on every shot. Whereas playing with an angry low handicapper who sprays the ball everywhere, and then is clearly disgusted when his partner hits a bad shot is a terrible partner. Nor are they a very good player to represent your Club. Furthermore, a selector may do better in selecting a player with a slightly higher handicapper who can commit themselves to the club matches nearly every time, and be less inclined to pick a lower guy simply for the one or 2 matches he is available for. Having a good core of committed players within the team, who know are trusted to play even after the odd bad performance, is important for giving them the confidence for future games.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Ah, the reasoning of one person to who feels that they can assess the 8 best singles scratch matchplayers to play against another club. - Has given me food for thought for a long time.
How many different permutations of 8 from about 15?
Would any of, say, 10 selectors choose the same 8?
Opinions, belief in special insight, an assessor of recent "form" and many other factors come into play for each notional selector.
We could have no one selector agreeing with another. Yet no way of proving which selector is the most "right".

"I'm the best man for the job." - No way of proving that either.

"I'm willing to do it, but will immediately step down if I feel that the players have lost faith in me." - Never heard any of them say anything remotely like this in over 40 years.
Mostly, they craved the power and influence over others. There were one or two exceptions to this.

 

[Swango1980]

Ah, the reasoning of one person to who feels that they can assess the 8 best singles scratch matchplayers to play against another club. - Has given me food for thought for a long time.
How many different permutations of 8 from about 15?
Would any of, say, 10 selectors choose the same 8?
Opinions, belief in special insight, an assessor of recent "form" and many other factors come into play for each notional selector.
We could have no one selector agreeing with another. Yet no way of proving which selector is the most "right".

"I'm the best man for the job." - No way of proving that either.

"I'm willing to do it, but will immediately step down if I feel that the players have lost faith in me." - Never heard any of them say anything remotely like this in over 40 years.
Mostly, they craved the power and influence over others. There were one or two exceptions to this.

Quite a negative way to look at it. You offered to do the job, I assume you didn't crave power and influence?? Or are you the exception to the rule? What about the guys that did do the role, the ones you say you are on friendly terms with. Are they the type of people that craved power and influence over others?

Once the selector is given the job, then you trust that they are a good person to do the role. Clearly, any individual doing that role will have different opinions on the team that should be selected compared to other individuals, and therefore the whole point in selecting a person to do the role is that you hopefully trust their judgment.

What is the alternative, where you find a methodology where ANY selector would consistently come up with the same 8 players? Handicap order. And we've discussed the big flaws in that. And if you did that, you wouldn't need to have a selector anyway. Just somebody to phone the 8 lowest handicaps and tell them where to be. The selector would simply become a Team Secretary.

 

[D-S]

In Bristol our scratch league is all foursomes which makes selecting a team slightly more difficult as a few decimal points differences in HI doesn’t always reflect either way in foursomes performance. We have 8 divisions with 6 teams in each so quite a few people manage to do the job.

 

[clubchamp98]

in my first two years as a senior i was an automatic pick for our seniors scratch foursomes tournament off 2, but there been a few guys who have put in lots of supplementary cards and are now scratch, so automatic picks this year and will be again next. my fried who picks the team asked me last year if id played with them much, which i had before and both were steady 4 or 5 handicaps, but ive not seen either of them break 80 in the comps ive seen results for.

Yes seen this happen at ours.
I do wonder what these players exact would be if the top 8 comp cards were used and not GP cards.

Maybe this needs to be the criteria in selection scenarios.

 

[patricks148]

Yes seen this happen at ours.
I do wonder what these players exact would be if the top 8 comp cards were used and not GP cards.

Maybe this needs to be the criteria in selection scenarios.

the selector didn't want to pick them, but how do you justify that leaving 2 scratch player out for a 2 and 3 handicap. i understood the predicament he was in, even though me and my partner got to the finals of both greensomes and foursomes comps and i made the finals of 2 of the handicap individual matchplays. this years Norther Counties was at Cruden Bay, so they got 2 nights away and meals and 3 rounds there.

 

[Swango1980]

the selector didn't want to pick them, but how do you justify that leaving 2 scratch player out for a 2 and 3 handicap. i understood the predicament he was in, even though me and my partner got to the finals of both greensomes and foursomes comps and i made the finals of 2 of the handicap individual matchplays. this years Norther Counties was at Cruden Bay, so they got 2 nights away and meals and 3 rounds there.

I think in your brief posts you've done a very good job of justifying leaving out 2 scratch players for a 2 and 3 handicap.

The 2 and 3 handicap have a body of evidence behind them that they can compete at the level required. The scratch players who have suddenly submitted a lot of GP scores are essentially unproven. Even if you rely on their integrity of submitting those scores, they were done under a very different pressure.

Another example. A 2 handicapper has played the first 7 scratch league matches, and win every single time. You then arrive at the final league match of the season, to decide the Championship. Before the game, a player who has not been involved in any matches has submitted a few GP scores, and suddenly his index gets to 2.4. Meanwhile, the 2 handicapper has just played in a competition, posted an OK score but his Index creeps up to 2.5. Should the selector automatically pick the new guy off 2.4, and say thanks but no thanks to the guy off 2.5, who has won every game?

 

[Voyager EMH]

Quite a negative way to look at it. You offered to do the job, I assume you didn't crave power and influence?? Or are you the exception to the rule? What about the guys that did do the role, the ones you say you are on friendly terms with. Are they the type of people that craved power and influence over others?

Once the selector is given the job, then you trust that they are a good person to do the role. Clearly, any individual doing that role will have different opinions on the team that should be selected compared to other individuals, and therefore the whole point in selecting a person to do the role is that you hopefully trust their judgment.

What is the alternative, where you find a methodology where ANY selector would consistently come up with the same 8 players? Handicap order. And we've discussed the big flaws in that. And if you did that, you wouldn't need to have a selector anyway. Just somebody to phone the 8 lowest handicaps and tell them where to be. The selector would simply become a Team Secretary.

Hmmm.
You are correct in that assumption.
Mostly, I kept my thoughts to myself, my gob shut and got on with the job of playing.
If I was not chosen, it really didn't bother me very much, there were no prizes for winning and little or no recognition.
There were always plenty of others shooting their gobs off - I had little desire to compete with them.
I offered to do the job for the remainder of that year only, because the captain and selector felt embarrassed that they had made a mistake and that the rest of the team would be aware of this and I had been playing first team golf for 20 years and they had not. We discussed what would be best for the team.

 

[Steve Wilkes]

Ah, the reasoning of one person to who feels that they can assess the 8 best singles scratch matchplayers to play against another club. - Has given me food for thought for a long time.
How many different permutations of 8 from about 15?
Would any of, say, 10 selectors choose the same 8?
Opinions, belief in special insight, an assessor of recent "form" and many other factors come into play for each notional selector.
We could have no one selector agreeing with another. Yet no way of proving which selector is the most "right".

"I'm the best man for the job." - No way of proving that either.

"I'm willing to do it, but will immediately step down if I feel that the players have lost faith in me." - Never heard any of them say anything remotely like this in over 40 years.
Mostly, they craved the power and influence over others. There were one or two exceptions to this.

6,435

 

[Voyager EMH]

6,435

(9x10x11x12x13x14x15) divided by (2x3x4x5x6x7) if I remember correctly. But my Casio Fx29 does it for me, if I input the two defining numbers.