Conference 7.286::golf

    i think you should give a low gross prize in the dec league tourneys
    but during league play everything should be net scores.

I think there should be a low gross prize.

Mike

    Depends on how much $$ money there is to go around. A low gross
    prize WILL BE WON by one of the top five, amybe ten golfers. If
    the handicaps are correct, the low handicappers should be able to
    compete with the high handicappers.
    
    I realize, that this is not usually the case. I also play in a hndicap
    league, and usually a high nadicapper hits a 'career' round to win
    it. 
    
    I feel there should NOT be a low gross prize... (certainly NOT the
    # 1 prize anyway).
    
    Smitty
    

    
    Yes, definately a low gross prize and equal to the low net prize...!

    I think  that a substantial low gross prize defits the purpose of the
    handicap system.
    
    BUT...  I definitely  support  to  give that  golfer  something  that
    tells him he/she is the best in the league.
    
    Tavo

    The way the Maynard DEC league tournaments are run, they have a
    low gross prize and low-net prize both equal. They also have long
    drive and closest to the pin... which may seem to favor the low
    handicappers, but I bet the winners have been pretty much evenly
    distributed. I think this format works well.
    
    	When it comes to league play the lower your handicap gets, the
    least likely your chances of winning. I feel the league should
    implement some insentives to lowering your cap, such as maybe,
    not giving strokes on par threes or never giving more than one 
    stroke a hole... How many other sports do you get penalized for
    getting better? When you play a better basketabll player and loose
    you'll head for the court and practice, work on parts of your game
    that caused you to loose... but with golf, if you play bad and loose
    you'll benefit by being rewarded with a higher cap. Maybe by making
    it more difficult to raise a handicap, the player will be forced
    to fix whatever it is that raised his/her score. Something should
    definitely be done to at least make winning easier as you get
    better, as with most every other sport.
    
    What do you think?  
    Is there maybe other methods of league match play that prove to
    encourage lowering your cap?
    
    Walt 

>In most amateur tournaments, they always pay a low gross, usually 2 places, 
>and more low net prizes, usually 6 places, and to top it off, the low
>net prize is usually more money, or a better prize.

    Hmmmm. I just happen to be running a tournament that has 3 low net
    prizes and two low gross prizes.  The big prize in the tournament
    will go to the low net winner.  2nd and 3rd place net prizes correspond
    to the 1st and 2nd place gross awards.  The reason for that
    distribution is fairly obvious.  You want everyone that participates
    in the tournament to have an equal shot at winning the "big" prize.
    The low handicappers have a shot at winning any of the prizes set
    up for the tourney. The high handicappers realistically, only have
    the net categories and a lucky closest to the pin to shoot for.
    I do feel that there always should be a low gross category to reward
    the best round of the day.  Should that prize be equal to the net
    prize?  Definitely not.
    
    -rick

    I raised this issue in another note. Interesting to hear how many
    of you feel that the gross prize should be lower.
    
    A couple notes back somebody mentioned that one should not be penalized
    for lowering his/her handicap, the penalty being that he/she
    has to give out more strokes. If you're playing by the USGA
    handicapping system, this is not a penalty but merely a way to
    even things out. How many of you lower handicap golfers would be
    challenged by playing a higher handicap golfer when you didn't have
    to give any strokes? Most golfers who go into a match with a
    defeatist attitude will probably beat themselves (high and low
    handicaps alike).
    
    Patti 

    Reply .8
    
    	The handicap system works well when the strokes being given
    are kept to a reasonable number. In the Digital league the divisions
    A,B,C keep a limit to the highest your handicap can get per division.
    If someone in the C division (C allows upto a 24 cap) plays really
    well and say gets his/her cap down to a 12... this person will be
    giving strokes on every hole with three 2 stroke holes. What this
    does is "break" the fairness of the handicap system. It is fair
    to give strokes on difficult holes... when the strokes givin exceed
    the amount of tough holes and enter into short par threes etc. the
    advantage swings unfairly to the high cap. I believe it would be
    better to encourage the C player to go down to a 0 cap by setting
    a stroke limit in BOTH directions ... now if the C player plays
    well he/she will have an advantage because he/she will never give
    more than a stroke on every par 4/5. Seems that would make more
    sense, rather than have the advantage go to the higher handicap
    player. I have heard more people syched that their cap was going
    up, or equally pleased their opponents handicap was going down             
    ... than vice versa. To me that seems backwards ??
    
    Walt

    	If you don't mind playing scrambles, have the league officers
    pick the teams according to handicap and you don't have to worry
    about gross vs net prises.
    	If you want everyone to play their own ball, theres a type of
    tournament, I forget what it's called, but it's similar to the pros
    tournament where they get points for birdies and eagles, that allows
    everyone to play their own ball, but be grouped in teams of 4 by
    the league officers, according to handicap.  If a golfer has say
    an 18 handicap, then if he/she makes a gross bogey, it's a net par.
    You might try setting up the scoring as 3 points for a birdie, 1
    point for a par, 0 for a bogey, and minus 1 for a double bogey or
    worse.  The points would be scored on the net score for each golfer
    on each team.  At the end of the tourney, the team with the most
    points wins, etc.  Every team would be as equal as possible, because
    they were selected by league officials according to handicaps, with
    say an A a B a C and a D handicap on each team.  This way too, you
    avoid having to split gross from net prises.  Their are many ways
    to run a tournament without having to use gross and net prises,
    but in the event you decide to run a tournament that has those 2
    categories, I think their should be an equal number of prises and
    of equal value for both categories.
    
    Beak

>    to run a tournament without having to use gross and net prises,
>    but in the event you decide to run a tournament that has those 2
>    categories, I think their should be an equal number of prises and
>    of equal value for both categories.
    
        Everyone has to pay the same entrance fee.  How fair is it for
      the high handicappers to subsidize(sp?) prize categories that
      they have no shot at winning?  
    
        These events are for fun, right?  
    
    -rick    

    
    I think ANY tournament that plays an individual format should have
    at least one prize for low gross, after all the idea of golf is to
    get the lowest possible score (isn't it, some people think the idea
    of golf is to get their handicap has high as possible for the biggest
    tourneys...!).
    
    The format that was mentioned in one of the other replies where you get
    points for pars, birds, etc. is called point quota. Generally you
    get -1 for tripple or over, 0 for a double, 1 for bogie, 2 for par,
    4 for bird, 8 for eagle, 16 for double eagle. Quota for a scratch
    player for 18 holes is 36 (2 per hole). If you have say a 10 handicap
    then you quota is 26 (36-10), if you have a 16 handicap your quota
    is 20 (36-16)...
    
    Gene

    The only fair way I've seen (yet) is to partition the tournament
    by handicap. The actual ranges depend on the range of participants
    (you want roughly the same number of players in each flight). Thus
    0-10, 11-15, 16-20, 20+ or whatever compete only against each other.
    You may have both net and gross - it doesn't matter as much if the
    flight ranges are not too large.
    
    Point quota systems are pretty good. However, the lower handicappers
    are more likely to make birdies than the higher handicappers. Since
    there is a premium for birds (4 points) this gives them an edge.
    
    I do not believe the problem with handicaps is one of inflating
    scores or "shades of honesty". The problem is inherent in the way
    strokes are given and in the game itself!
    
    For one, it is a whole lot easier to improve by several shots if you
    start in the 90's than it is if you normally shoot in the 70's.
    The low net score of the high handicap winner at Marlboro is always
    phenomenal.
    
    Also, I am convinced that the higher handicap plays smarter when
    competing against low handicaps. In essence, plays a different game
    than the one which established the handicap in the first place.
    I've seen golfers suddenly play for bogey and sometimes doubles
    knowing that their strokes will save them. Instead of their usual
    hero shots, they punch to the front of the green. All of a sudden
    they no longer make big numbers or find themselves in wierdo situations
    on the course. I have given a stroke on a 330 yard par 4 and was
    cold meat. Low handicaps also have to be overly aggressive to
    compensate. During the DECleague playoffs a few years back I got a
    stroke on #4 South - the opponents tried driving the hole as their
    only chance. I hit 2 iron, wedge. We closed them out on #7!
    
    IT is real tough to be fair to everyone. Try breaking into flights
    so that everyone competes against golfers of similar ability.
            
    Fore!
    
    Eric

    The point quota system is one individual format although I think Beak
    was referring to what is known as "Chicago".  In a Chicago-style format
    (assuming 18 holes here, it works for 9 holes as well), the player's
    handicap is applied "against the course".  Say the course is a par 72
    and the player's handicap is 21.  The player gets a stroke per hole
    plus an extra stroke on the three toughest holes.  The player gets 1
    point for net bogey, 2 pts for net birdie, 4 pts for net eagle, 8
    points for net double eagle, etc.  No points are scored or subtracted
    for bogey or worse.  In this type of tournament everyone has a chance
    to do well in their own flights, teams, or however the tournament is
    set up.  Prizes may be given for as many people as funds allow.
    A prize for low gross is not usually given in these tournaments.
    
    
    
    						Mike

       There are clearly lots of formulas for awarding prizes, and
       different people have different ideas about what is or isn't fair.
       (For me, the prize awards are fair if I win, unfair if I don't.)
       
       I think that they key is to announce your plans for prizes at the
       time that people are given the opportunity to sign up. If half of
       the prizes are awarded for low gross, then a 22-handicap player
       ought to know that before being asked to fork over the entry
       money; if all the prizes are based on net scores and handicaps
       come from a variety of sources (including the players'
       imaginations), then that information might be useful to the low
       handicappers.  
       
       --Mr Topaz

RE: .15

>>if all the prizes are based on net scores and handicaps
>>       come from a variety of sources (including the players'
>>       imaginations), then that information might be useful to the low
>>       handicappers.  

Indeed, if the prizes are basically 'hacker of the day award'
I'd rather spend my money at the bar.  


					KO

    
       In the recently concluded tournament I just ran using the blind
     callaway, the low handicappers ran away with almost all the prizes.
     Of the top ten low net finishers all but one shot 90 or lower which
     ranked them in the top 12 as far as low gross finishers.  Low
     handicappers took all the closest to the pin and long drive prizes.
     The team low net winner was a team of all low handicappers.  If
     I didn't include prizes for highest gross and highest net, then
     the high handicappers would have got shut out.  
        This pattern is not new this year.  Most tournaments that I've
     seen, the low handicapper invariably does well in the prizes. Reward
     the better player?  No problem in that, but I'm trying to get many
     folks to sign up for a charity tournament as possible. What incentive
     is there for the high handicappers to play?  So you low handicappers
     out there, quit your moaning and groaning.

    -rick

    RE .11 	
    	Rick,
    	     I could answer you by saying why should low handicappers
    subsidize prize categories that they have little chance of winning
    also?  I mean after all, if a 4 handicapper and a 20 handicapper
    each perform about the same, say to 75% of their handicap, the 4
    handicapper scores a net -1 and the 20 handicapper scores a net
    -5.  How much chance does the low handicapper have to get a low
    net prize?  Think about it.  Low net is simply an award given to
    allow higher handicap golfers a chance to compete and still have
    an equal chance of winning a prize with a low handicapper.  But
    it's only equal, if their are an equal # of net and gross prizes
    and they are of equal value.
    
    Beak

    
       Beak,
    
          You're talking USGA handicap or league handicap events
       and I'm talking about tournaments where you have to handicap
       a pool of players with unknown handicaps.  Apples and oranges.
       However, in the context you were talking about, I would agree
       that it is much easier for a high handicapper to shoot a low
       net than a low handicapper.  I'll check .0 again to see which
       type of event he had the gripe with.
    
    -rick

    	Actually, I wouldn't consider myself a low handicapper, nor
    a high handicapper.  My 18 hole handicap is a 13.  The last calloway
    tournament I played in, (July), I ended up in a tie for 1st place
    with a guy who had a 6 handicap for 18 holes.  And there were about
    80 golfers in the tournament.  I don't know the handicaps of all
    the prize winners, (6 of them), but I do know another guy in my
    foursome won 4th prize, and he was a 24 handicap.  And the guy who
    won the long drive, (295 yards) was a 17 handicap for 18 holes.
    There were a lot of golfers, (approx. 15) who had handicaps in the
    single digits too.  By the way, the winning scores were par 71 after
    the calloway was applied.
    
    Beak

    
       .0  mentions DEC league *or* DEC tournaments which could include
           any format.  

    	
    
    	I have called around to several courses and found that in all
    tournaments where and individual score can be extracted that they do
    pay for low gross along with low net. They said it was normal to do
    this to keep the interest of the golfers with low handicaps.(I agree)
    They normally pay 9 places for low net and 3 places for low gross.
    	They also said that they do not pay for low gross in best ball or other
    like style tournaments. At our End of Season tournament here at CXO 
    (4 player -best ball)  the teams that won the low net had 43 and
    44 for 18 holes. I believe that there should be some low gross prizes.
    There is no way that a low to middle handicap team can compete against
    a high handicap team with these scores.
    
    	I am a 22 handicapper for 18 holes so its not because I would
    have anything to gain.
    

    
    A little off the subject, but a lot of the replies here use the terms low,
    mid, and high handicaps... What handicap range to you associate with a low
    handicapper, mid handicapper, and a high handicapper...?
    
    
    Curious
    Gene

    
     Low Handicapper      scratch - 15         (shoots 70 - 87)
     Mid                  16      - 30         (shoots 88 - 100)
     High                 31 >                 (shoots 101 > )
    
                     * or *
    
       Low handicapper      0 - 20
       High handicapper     > 20
    
-rick     

    
    	My thought on the matter are as follows (I have always thought of
    	a low handicapper as a person having a single digit handicap, but
    	my thoughts on what denotes a high handicapper has changed in the
    	last two years)...
    
    	Low handicapper = single digit handicap
    
    	Mid handicapper = 10 to 19 handicap
    
    	High handicapper = 20 and over
    
 ************************************************************************

	If you were to divide it up evenly and considering that the
	maximum handicap allowed by the USGA is 36 then it would be


	0 - 12	low
	13 - 24 mid
	25 - 36 high    
    
    	Gene

    Rick,
    	On the Blind Draw Calloway you just had.  Since I know you like
    figures perhaps you would like to try some other draws to see how
    the same tournament might have been won by a different level of
    handicap (net prize).  It might have been that the draw just happened
    to favor the low capper THIS TIME but a different draw may have
    had results on favor of the higher handicaps.
    
    	My one comment is that tournements originally were "open" and
    handicaps were instituted for obvious reasons.  Although I have
    never seriously thought I would contend for a low gross I would
    always want to see that prize equal to the low net prize.
    
    bb

    re: < Note 776.23 by MSEE::KELLEY "Custom clubs/club repair" >
                      -< what is a low/mid/high handicapper...? >-
      
    Gene,
    
    I believe that low handicappers carry handicaps in the range 1-12;
    scratch handicappers carry handicaps <1; middle handicappers carry
    handicaps in the range 13-24; and high handicappers carry handicaps
    in the range 25-36.  36 is the USGA maximum for men.  40 is the
    maximum handicap for women.
    
    
    					Mike 

    
    Mike,
    
    I didn't mean to be chauvanistic by just stating mens max. If my
    wife saw this though she would show me what a handicap is... And just
    as an FYI in the slope sytem max index for men is 36.4 and FOR
    WOMEN IT IS 40.4...
    
    Gene

     Bill, you got me working again you sly dog you.  I did the
  analysis and here is what the top 9 looks like using the straight
  Callaway system.  The kick in the pants Bill, is that you would
  have finished 2nd in the tourney, heh heh.

        Rank      Net Score       Low/High handicapper
   
         1          70            High
         2          72            Low  (Bill Breen)
         3          73            Low
         4          73            Low
         5          73            Low
         6          73            Low
         7          73            Low
         8          73            Low
         9          73            Low


-rick

Personally I feel that a low handicapper is one with single digits (or 
negative).  Middle handicappers are better than 20.  Between 20-36 is
definitely a high handicap.

However I remember reading the following statistics.  Something like
more than 1/2 the golfers out there don't break 100.  So if you break 100
you're better than average.  If you can break 90 you are in the top third.
If you can break 80 you are in the top 10%.  If you can break 70 you are in
the top 1%.

Larry