A Sad Day for Golf, No More Stableford
in [Golf in UK]
|
From: Paul Schmitz-Josten on 15 Feb 2007 02:07 Ron Todd in <1171496340.274196.251510(a)s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com>: >> I witnessed a prize ceremony last year where a guy (HCP 54) won, having >> played a gross score of 90, 18 gross points (4 pars, 10 bogeys, 3 double >> and 1 triple bogey), equalling 77 Stableford. > >Surely a mere 72 points? No: 77, for sure. I can provide the link to his scorecard if you want. It's a Par 71 course, CR 71.6, Slope 130, and thus he was given 60 strokes. His "Par" was 131... Ciao, Paul
From: Simon on 15 Feb 2007 02:37 Normal Stableford isn't worth playing for expert players, as their disaster holes are so rare that they don't affect the result of a competion, so I can see why a modified Stableford may enourage them to play in a more aggressive manner. However, I can't see the point of modified Stableford for handicap players. Our skill level isn't high enough for us to take advantage of the bonuses for good sores. Standard Stableford is probably the best kind of scoring, especially for higher handicap players. Also, it's quite easy to use standard Stableford scores for handicap purposes (that's how the UK handicap system works!) > I've played modified Stableford net tournaments (of variety used by > The International). Trouble is with the Modified Stableford is that > any score better than Double eagle is undefined. > > But a high handicap player can hit a hole-in-one with two strokes. (I > had a hole-in-one when my handicap was that high - but not playing > Modified Stableford). It didn't happen during the tournament - but > what score would you give for a triple Eagle? > > =========================== > Fromhttp://golf.about.com/od/beginners/a/stablefordintro.htm > > The International on the PGA Tour and ANZ Championship on the > European Tour use a Modified Stableford format (so-called because its > points are awarded on a different scale from that described in the > rule book). > > Both pro tournaments use the same points scale: > > · Double bogey or worse - minus-3 points > · Bogey - minus-1 point > · Par - 0 points > · Birdie - 2 points > · Eagle - 5 points > · Double eagle - 8 points
From: bill-o on 15 Feb 2007 09:59 On 13-Feb-2007, Colin Wilson <publish(a)removethis.kyneton.net.au> wrote: > John van der Pflum wrote: > > > How would you apply it for a handicapped tournament where there are > > scratch golfers and 30 handicappers? Would the score on each hole be > > net score for calculating the Stableford points? > > Yes. That's the whole idea of Stableford. > > Points are: > Worse than net bogey 0 points > Net bogey 1 point > Net par 2 points > Net birdie 3 points > Net eagle 4 points > > So a 30 handicapper who has 2 strokes on a par-4 hole would get two > points for a 6, whereas a scratch player would need a 4 for the same > points score. We call that Stableford Net over here (USA). Another popular way of Stableford with handicaps is the Chicago or quota method. Your course handicap is multiplied by 2 then that is your quota (as a ten I would get 20pts). Points are distributed as follows: double or worse: 0 bogey: 1 par: 2 birdie: 4 eagle 8 double eagle 16 The player with the most points relative to his quota wins! -- bill-o A "gimme" can best be defined as an agreement between two golfers neither of whom can putt very well.
From: bill-o on 15 Feb 2007 10:03 On 13-Feb-2007, "annika1980" <annika1980(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Feb 12, 12:04 pm, "sfb" <s...(a)spam.net> wrote: > > > > There's no evidence that Stableford was the reason the International > > folded. > > I thought it was all Tiger's fault? No, I'm sure it was George Herbert Walker's grandson's fault! ;-) -- bill-o A "gimme" can best be defined as an agreement between two golfers neither of whom can putt very well.
From: Bobby Knight on 15 Feb 2007 10:31
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 15:03:17 GMT, "bill-o" <assimilate(a)borg.org> wrote: > >On 13-Feb-2007, "annika1980" <annika1980(a)aol.com> wrote: > >> On Feb 12, 12:04 pm, "sfb" <s...(a)spam.net> wrote: >> > >> > There's no evidence that Stableford was the reason the International >> > folded. >> >> I thought it was all Tiger's fault? > >No, I'm sure it was George Herbert Walker's grandson's fault! ;-) Well, he was just following Cheney's orders! :-) -- ___, \o | / \ . "Someone likes every shot"! bk |