3 player scramble handicaps - unequitable?

[AnthonyL]

I recently played a Texas scramble.  One of our team dropped out at the last minute and as a result the handicap calculations dropped us from 11 to 8 (we were playing stroke play).  The handicap system is supposed to provide a level playing field but in this case we lost a player so we lost the benefit of his drives, shots and perhaps most importantly, putts as well as losing three strokes. There was nothing special about the missing person's handicap, he was off 14, the others were 14, 15 and 20.  I cannot see the rationale for the handicap calculation.  Can anyone explain? 

 

[cnosil]

17 minutes ago, AnthonyL said:

I recently played a Texas scramble.  One of our team dropped out at the last minute and as a result the handicap calculations dropped us from 11 to 8 (we were playing stroke play).  The handicap system is supposed to provide a level playing field but in this case we lost a player so we lost the benefit of his drives, shots and perhaps most importantly, putts as well as losing three strokes. There was nothing special about the missing person's handicap, he was off 14, the others were 14, 15 and 20.  I cannot see the rationale for the handicap calculation.  Can anyone explain? 

 

You’d have to ask the handicap committee how they calculated the handicaps.   But here is a site that explains that they take a percentage of each golfer and since you only had 3 golfers the percentage is different than for 4   

https://goandgolf.co.uk/blog/what-is-texas-scramble/

[AnthonyL]

2 hours ago, cnosil said:

You’d have to ask the handicap committee how they calculated the handicaps.   But here is a site that explains that they take a percentage of each golfer and since you only had 3 golfers the percentage is different than for 4   

https://goandgolf.co.uk/blog/what-is-texas-scramble/

Yes I know how the handicap is calculated.  What I am saying is that the result seems inequitable as shown by the 3 stroke deficit we received as explained and that is what I'm trying to get my head around.  Have the WHS got it wrong?  I think they have because even if the fourth player had done nothing* we would have been 3 shots better off. 

*ok, we have to take 4 of his drives which wouldn't have been an issue.

[RickyBobby_PR]

46 minutes ago, AnthonyL said:

Yes I know how the handicap is calculated.  What I am saying is that the result seems inequitable as shown by the 3 stroke deficit we received as explained and that is what I'm trying to get my head around.  Have the WHS got it wrong?  I think they have because even if the fourth player had done nothing* we would have been 3 shots better off. 

*ok, we have to take 4 of his drives which wouldn't have been an issue.

Does the WHS even deal with scrambles. I’m not aware they do and that it’s on how the organizer chooses to do it.

As far as I know the USGA has suggestions but no rules for it

 

[cnosil]

15 minutes ago, AnthonyL said:

Yes I know how the handicap is calculated.  What I am saying is that the result seems inequitable as shown by the 3 stroke deficit we received as explained and that is what I'm trying to get my head around.  Have the WHS got it wrong?  I think they have because even if the fourth player had done nothing* we would have been 3 shots better off. 

*ok, we have to take 4 of his drives which wouldn't have been an issue.

Handicapping a scramble is a made up thing and done how the tournament wants to calculate.   Essentially you don’t follow the rules of golf so it isn’t something that you can officially handicap.   

[AnthonyL]

I've found what I believe is the answer to this issue.  There are handicaps for 4 player matches and handicaps for 3 player matches, but not for matches where there are mainly 4 player but some team arrives one player short. 

https://www.my-golf.uk/texas-scrambles/ gives an explanation and if I've read it correctly our team, the only one to have a player ill on the morning of the competition, was unfairly treated by using the 3 player handicap inappropriately.  Refer the following:

Quote

For example, in a 4-player Texas Scramble a team turns up one player short and therefore can only field a 3-player team.

In a 4-player Texas Scramble if a 3-player team is entered, the Handicap Allowance of 30%,20%,10% cannot be used, the allowance would be totally unfair compared to that given to a 4-player team.

There is no recommendation in the WHS as to how you should deal with this situation, and, as before Competition Committees are being left to their own devices to deal equitably with these situations.

I have contacted CONGU regarding this situation and am assured that they are looking into it.

I await their decision, in time.

Had we had a handicap of 11 then the extra 3 strokes would have put us equal first.  Had the missing person done one stroke better somewhere on the round we would have been outright winners.  I'll bring this issue up to our club committee for reconsideration should the format be played again.

 

 

[RickyBobby_PR]

12 minutes ago, AnthonyL said:

I've found what I believe is the answer to this issue.  There are handicaps for 4 player matches and handicaps for 3 player matches, but not for matches where there are mainly 4 player but some team arrives one player short. 

https://www.my-golf.uk/texas-scrambles/ gives an explanation and if I've read it correctly our team, the only one to have a player ill on the morning of the competition, was unfairly treated by using the 3 player handicap inappropriately.  Refer the following:

Had we had a handicap of 11 then the extra 3 strokes would have put us equal first.  Had the missing person done one stroke better somewhere on the round we would have been outright winners.  I'll bring this issue up to our club committee for reconsideration should the format be played again.

 

 

I don’t think you were unfairly treated. It states there is no recommendation and its up to the committee. And it states you can’t use the formula for a 3 man event because it unfair and also you can’t use the 4 person one because you don’t have 4.

So other than being upset you had 3 strokes taken away and you didn’t finished tied for first you think it’s the committees fault and they should let you have the handicap of a non existent partner 

[AnthonyL]

7 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

I don’t think you were unfairly treated. It states there is no recommendation and its up to the committee. And it states you can’t use the formula for a 3 man event because it unfair and also you can’t use the 4 person one because you don’t have 4.

So other than being upset you had 3 strokes taken away and you didn’t finished tied for first you think it’s the committees fault and they should let you have the handicap of a non existent partner 

The quote:  "In a 4-player Texas Scramble if a 3-player team is entered, the Handicap Allowance of 30%,20%,10% cannot be used, the allowance would be totally unfair compared to that given to a 4-player team."

is from the article, and it is they that are raising it with Congu.  The committee used an inappropriate calculation that was not designed for this situation.  I don't understand why you are taking issue with that. 

 

 

[cnosil]

12 minutes ago, AnthonyL said:

The quote:  "In a 4-player Texas Scramble if a 3-player team is entered, the Handicap Allowance of 30%,20%,10% cannot be used, the allowance would be totally unfair compared to that given to a 4-player team."

is from the article, and it is they that are raising it with Congu.  The committee used an inappropriate calculation that was not designed for this situation.  I don't understand why you are taking issue with that. 

 

 

Generally in the US, these types of events are informal charity type outings and handicapping is for the most part meaningless and while people would/might gripe no one would really care.  
 

obviously in GB&I, these things are taken more serious as they have a WHS model for determining handicap and a group overseeing the formulas.   I’d personally just be happy that I got to play as some tournament committees eliminate the team of 3 based on the article. 

[AnthonyL]

7 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Generally in the US, these types of events are informal charity type outings and handicapping is for the most part meaningless and while people would/might gripe no one would really care.  
 

obviously in GB&I, these things are taken more serious as they have a WHS model for determining handicap and a group overseeing the formulas.   I’d personally just be happy that I got to play as some tournament committees eliminate the team of 3 based on the article. 

At our club we have regular weekly competitions where handicapping follows the recognised rules.  But on 3rd and 5th weeks we have team competitions, Stableford, Yellow Dot, Cha Cha Cha, and where a team ends up with three players there are accepted ways of dealing with the team handicaps and it causes no problem.  The team games are for fun but competition fees are paid and prizes awarded.  This is the first time the Texas Scramble has been introduced.  Based on what has happened here I would expect the committee to revise their application of handicaps so as to not penalise 3 player teams in a mixed 3/4 player format.  Clearly the 3 player handicap is NOT intended to be used in this situation and clearly the committee overlooked the implications.  They are in a position to apply whatever rules they wish and hopefully the handicaps will be made more equitable in future.  Anyhow I'm not here to argue with anyone I was just hoping for some reasoned input which I've found elsewhere.

[cnosil]

55 minutes ago, AnthonyL said:

 Anyhow I'm not here to argue with anyone I was just hoping for some reasoned input which I've found elsewhere.

Not trying to argue,  just explaining that in the US scrambles really aren't serious competitions and the effort you are going through wouldn't happen since they aren't really official handicap events. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

2 hours ago, AnthonyL said:

The quote:  "In a 4-player Texas Scramble if a 3-player team is entered, the Handicap Allowance of 30%,20%,10% cannot be used, the allowance would be totally unfair compared to that given to a 4-player team."

is from the article, and it is they that are raising it with Congu.  The committee used an inappropriate calculation that was not designed for this situation.  I don't understand why you are taking issue with that. 

 

 

They didn’t use an inappropriate calculation. You are ignoring the part of the article about a 3 man team that entered as a 4 man team and didn’t have the 4th person. There is no rule for how to do handicap on that situation so they are at liberty to do what they want. What they chose was at their discretion and that’s really it

[MmmmmmBuddy]

I have questions...

 

• Did your team only hit 3 shots from each position? Or, did you have 1 player take a 2nd shot from each location?
• If your team only played 3 shots from each location, you are at more of a disadvantage than just the handicap reduction.

It seems slightly unfair to penalize a team because a player dropped.  The way we would handle this type of situation at my club would be to allow 4 shots from each position, rotating the player that is taking the extra shot. Figuring the handicap is the difficult part.  I'm not a huge fan of how your club is calculating. I prefer 20% of A, 15% of B, 10% of C and 5% of D.  This is 50% of combined handicaps.  I would manually calculate the average index of the 3 players and use that as the 4th player....  

 

I hope this helps.

[funkyjudge]

10 hours ago, AnthonyL said:

I recently played a Texas scramble.  One of our team dropped out at the last minute and as a result the handicap calculations dropped us from 11 to 8 (we were playing stroke play).  The handicap system is supposed to provide a level playing field but in this case we lost a player so we lost the benefit of his drives, shots and perhaps most importantly, putts as well as losing three strokes. There was nothing special about the missing person's handicap, he was off 14, the others were 14, 15 and 20.  I cannot see the rationale for the handicap calculation.  Can anyone explain? 

 

Does anyone actually give a crap about a scramble and how it is scored?

[RickyBobby_PR]

21 minutes ago, funkyjudge said:

Does anyone actually give a crap about a scramble and how it is scored?

I don’t. 

[AnthonyL]

On 5/18/2023 at 1:31 AM, MmmmmmBuddy said:

I have questions...

 

• Did your team only hit 3 shots from each position? Or, did you have 1 player take a 2nd shot from each location?
• If your team only played 3 shots from each location, you are at more of a disadvantage than just the handicap reduction.

It seems slightly unfair to penalize a team because a player dropped.  The way we would handle this type of situation at my club would be to allow 4 shots from each position, rotating the player that is taking the extra shot. Figuring the handicap is the difficult part.  I'm not a huge fan of how your club is calculating. I prefer 20% of A, 15% of B, 10% of C and 5% of D.  This is 50% of combined handicaps.  I would manually calculate the average index of the 3 players and use that as the 4th player....  

 

I hope this helps.

Thank you for your reasoned response.  Yes indeed we only hit 3 shots and as I said we had a double whammy of having a handicap hit and the loss of the 4th player's shots.  Following further investigation the WHS 3 player handicapping appears to be intended for when the scramble is a 3 player event and is NOT designed for use with mixed 4 player and 3 player teams.  Our committee had simply looked up the 3 player handicap calculations for those who were a player short and are now in the process of reviewing how this is handled and now agree that it was unfair.  The 3 shot handicap difference alone would have put us equal first and in a share of the prize money.  It is the first time the scramble has been used in our club so just a bit of a learning curve for the future.

PS To those that don't care about scramble please just ignore the posts, no need to read or comment.  The subject line is well clear enough for you to not read the posts.  Others may however find the discussion of use and may take a more adult view on how the WHS handicap system works and should be applied.