is this score reasonable in a 4 man team?

[milesgiles]

format 2-3-4, ie first six best two scores, second six best three, last six all 4. Stableford. 'Par'' would a little better than (6*2*2 )+(6*2*3) +( 6 *2*4) =108... at my club I suppose 118 ish would win..

 

team yesterday, longish handicaps.. 136 total. Average 7.5 points per hole, 45 points each (ish.. will obviously be slightly less with not all scores counting)..

 

mmm. My instinct is that is beyond reasonable. No idea what they won but were fairly shameless about it. Second place was 120..

[Abh159]

Tough to answer your question because there is A LOT going on there. Unusual format (2-3-4), even more unusual scores (stableford), addition of handicaps, and etc....

 

If it were me I'd take a look at how the winning team did on the last 6 holes where they were taking all 4 scores. That would be the best sample size to determine how "good" they really played. 

[ArtMBgolf]

You would have to play this often to have a good feel for expected score 
ranges.   Also note if easy conditions.  
 
If nobody is giving back points, the more scores counting, the more 
points.    They could also have some sandbaggers, but doesn't the UK

only count tournaments for Hdc scores?  

[PorkChopExpress]

Longish handicaps being 10+?
 

All 4 scores counting for 6 holes?

would not believe the score

 

sure there’ll be pars but birdies aren’t common and bogies are expected 

Which would be net pars

 

 

[Mudguard]

I must admit I hate playing in formats like this, where the winning score could really be anything. So you have no idea how well you're going. 

We played in a format recently that was a disaster. It was a pairs stableford event. Multiply your stablefords each hole by your partner's score.

Problem was as soon as one made a zero there was no point finishing the hole. We have had a few strange formats like that of late. Better to just skip the comp for that day. 

[elwhippy]

Sounds like some slightly dubious handicaps. In the past year we have seen a nett 50 on a tough par 72 links, a 56 points in a 4bbb at a tricky fellside venue, nett 57s of 21 and 24 in our club medals.....something is afoot...and some of the newer intake seem to have no qualms about bending the rules..

[larrybud]

On 9/24/2021 at 10:29 AM, milesgiles said:

format 2-3-4, ie first six best two scores, second six best three, last six all 4. Stableford. 'Par'' would a little better than (6*2*2 )+(6*2*3) +( 6 *2*4) =108... at my club I suppose 118 ish would win..

 

team yesterday, longish handicaps.. 136 total. Average 7.5 points per hole, 45 points each (ish.. will obviously be slightly less with not all scores counting)..

 

mmm. My instinct is that is beyond reasonable. No idea what they won but were fairly shameless about it. Second place was 120..

 

What kind of net scores did each guy shoot? Much easier to determine how "good" these rounds were.

[milesgiles]

4 minutes ago, larrybud said:

 

What kind of net scores did each guy shoot? Much easier to determine how "good" these rounds were.

 

 

honestly i dont know, but they must have averaged well over 40 each to get to that total..

 

Ive had 44 once in my life..

[milesgiles]

5 hours ago, elwhippy said:

Sounds like some slightly dubious handicaps. In the past year we have seen a nett 50 on a tough par 72 links, a 56 points in a 4bbb at a tricky fellside venue, nett 57s of 21 and 24 in our club medals.....something is afoot...and some of the newer intake seem to have no qualms about bending the rules..

 

i think its always been like this to an extent.. but in this day and age surely its easy enough to verify handicaps?

 

I really dont like 4 man comps, you are just marking your own card with no marker at the end of the day

[Newby]

14 hours ago, ArtMBgolf said:

doesn't the UK only count tournaments for Hdc scores?  

Correct (called competitions over here). Plus individual 'casual' predeclared and attested rounds

[Shilgy]

Using standard Stableford points that would be the equivalent of -28. Correct?  
Weird things happen in golf sometimes so it’s not necessarily shady. I can recall being -27 one time in a two best ball of four team event with ABCD teams and handicaps from scratch to 18. We were -18 on the front. Add in the ability to make more points on some of the 3 and 4 ball holes and I can see it happening occasionally.

[Newby]

3 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Using standard Stableford points that would be the equivalent of -28. Correct?  
Weird things happen in golf sometimes so it’s not necessarily shady. I can recall being -27 one time in a two best ball of four team event with ABCD teams and handicaps from scratch to 18. We were -18 on the front. Add in the ability to make more points on some of the 3 and 4 ball holes and I can see it happening occasionally.

Why minus 28?

[Shilgy]

1 minute ago, Newby said:

Why minus 28?

Here in the US we typically score by over or under par. If using the standard Stableford of 0-1-2-3-4 and his statement of 108 being level par wouldn’t 136 be -28?

[DaveLeeNC]

OOPS - this is posted in the wrong thread - sorry.

 

dave

 

We play a lot of four person team games. For the case of mixed threesomes and foursomes we prefer some kind of Stableford with the winning team being the team with the highest average score per player (divide team score by 3 for a threesome and 4 for a foursome). 

 

But if you want/need to stay with the 1BB format, you could consider having one player from each foursome 'sit out' WRT to the team score (his score would not count against the team score on a give hole), and just rotate through by hole. Player #1 on the card 'sits out' hole #2, player #2 on the card 'sits out' hole #2, etc. 

 

dave

Edited September 26, 2021 by DaveLeeNC