In Match Play, Is Honors Actually a Disadvantage?

[MariahCarry]

Hi everyone

 

I have a question about match play, in particular honors after winning a hole.

 

Why is getting the honors in match play the result of winning a hole? If you win a hole, shouldn't you have earned the right to choose the playing order?

Here's the reasoning...

Pros:

• Getting honors is advantageous on the tee if you make a good shot to apply pressure onto your opponent, and that is all.

 

Cons:

• Your opponent gets free information from your shot, what the wind is doing down the fairway or around the green, the ball rollout, how the ball is reacting on the green, etc.
• You are essentially "showing your hand" to your opponent. The opponent gets to see what your shot was and can decide how to play their shot after knowing where your ball lies. Even if you apply pressure, they still know your shot result and can now choose how aggressive or conservative they wish to play their shot.

 

So is winning the hole seen as:

"you won the hole and played better, now you have to go first because it makes the match more fair to help your opponent reply back" ?

 

Or is it more of a pace of play point, where the hole winner goes first and avoids delay?

 

What about in an important formal competition, the pace of play isn't really a factor (as this could be governed with a shot clock and requiring winner to choose shot order within a time frame) In reality, this would be a pretty quick decision anyway, and players would likely have their preference the same for their entire match.

 

Or is this more from a traditional standpoint where it has been in use for so long that it's just how it is done?

 

I'm curious to know the reasoning for the winner going first istead of second, or having the choice, and your opinion on it?

 

Because if I win a hole and as a result it earned you the choice, I'm choosing to play second everytime...

 

 

[pkwilli1999]

Not sure at all from a historical standpoint, but I do think it helps to even the match. I'm with you in that I would choose to go 2nd every time

[RoyalMustang]

7 hours ago, pkwilli1999 said:

Not sure at all from a historical standpoint, but I do think it helps to even the match. I'm with you in that I would choose to go 2nd every time

 

Same! I've done one match play: the guy was 2 tees up from me but we were playing to the same handicap. He owed me 7 strokes due to the tee difference. If he hit a bad drive, I knew I just needed to play for par. On some holes, bogey, if he owed me a stroke. 

 

I don't see any advantage in going first.  

[caniac6]

It’s a huge advantage if you hit a good shot.

[mark m]

Most 18 hole courses have 4 or 5 par 3’s, and the remainder are obviously par 4’s and 5’s. So if you are the longer player, even if you have the honor on the tee box, you will likely be playing second on most of the approach shots. So the bottom line is you need to be prepared and strong mentally, and able to play (or respond) with good shots regardless of what your opponent(s) are doing. The goal should be to play well. Make him play well to beat you. 
 

But I definitely prefer matches at gross (no handicap). Because of what can happen in the handicap matches. A scratch/plus can actually play well and get smoked in a handicap match. It can be comical.

[Newby]

The theory:

 

By going first, the player with the honour also has the advantage of hitting their shot without any distractions or influence from the other players. They can focus solely on their own game and strategy, without being influenced by the shots of their fellow competitors.

In addition, having the honour often provides a psychological advantage. Being the first to tee off can boost confidence and create a sense of control over the game. It can also put pressure on the other players to match or surpass the initial shot, potentially affecting their performance.

[Mr. Bean]

3 hours ago, Newby said:

The theory:

 

By going first, the player with the honour also has the advantage of hitting their shot without any distractions or influence from the other players. They can focus solely on their own game and strategy, without being influenced by the shots of their fellow competitors.

In addition, having the honour often provides a psychological advantage. Being the first to tee off can boost confidence and create a sense of control over the game. It can also put pressure on the other players to match or surpass the initial shot, potentially affecting their performance.

 

Not to mention it tells the opponent who lost the previous hole.

[Augster]

To answer the OP, yes, honors is a disadvantage. The more information you have, the better decisions you’ll make in a match play situation. 

[Socrates]

7 hours ago, Newby said:

The theory:

 

By going first, the player with the honour also has the advantage of hitting their shot without any distractions or influence from the other players. They can focus solely on their own game and strategy, without being influenced by the shots of their fellow competitors.

In addition, having the honour often provides a psychological advantage. Being the first to tee off can boost confidence and create a sense of control over the game. It can also put pressure on the other players to match or surpass the initial shot, potentially affecting their performance.

This ^^^

 

I prefer to tee-off first any time I can.  Whether or not it is a match or stroke play.  I just do better if I hit first.

[davep043]

16 hours ago, mark m said:

But I definitely prefer matches at gross (no handicap). Because of what can happen in the handicap matches. A scratch/plus can actually play well and get smoked in a handicap match. It can be comical.

Perhaps you're not aware, research has shown that the lower handicapper has the advantage, not a huge advantage, but he'll win something like 53% of the matches, while the higher handicapper will win 47%.  The greater the gap in handicaps, the greater the edge.  I might be off by a little, but that's pretty close.

10 minutes ago, Augster said:

To answer the OP, yes, honors is a disadvantage. The more information you have, the better decisions you’ll make in a match play situation. 

I'm not so sure.  Sure, knowing your Opponent is in trouble can change your strategy a little, but if he hits a good shot you'll be under more pressure.  I'd guess its pretty even, and will depend to a huge extent on the personality (and possible mental frailties) of the players.

[Hawkeye77]

Historically, it was never about creating any advantage - just to establish how things would proceed.  I assume the player winning the previous hole was chosen based on some sense it was a "reward" for winning the hole.

 

Tufts (and I think has been quoted on here before):

 

"The evidence back to the earliest rule makers was not that the honor was meant to convey an advantage to one player over an other in the play of the next hole but rather to establish a procedure so that the game could proceed without delay." 

Edited March 20 by Hawkeye77

[MariahCarry]

Great points from everyone.

 

I also think the tradition may have some weight on how this is done. Perhaps some pace of play is also involved as the hole winner might often be first in the hole and would be faster to proceed to the next tee and shoot first...

 

With that said, I totally understand putting pressure onto the opponent by shooting first and hitting a good shot, but there's just too much information you learn by going second to ever convince me that going first is an advantage.

 

For example,

 

• If you know the golfer shooing first hits their 8 iron 170 yards, they tee off and come up 5 yards short of the green, that wind is playing a little stronger than you think.

 

• If golfer shooting first drives one wide right into the trees, you can now take your iron out to put one on the fairway and not have to be so aggressive. etc. etc.

 

• Lastly, in the case the honouree pipes a driver down the middle, sure there may be pressure on you (but there's always pressure on you, it's a match!) then at least know that you should also pull driver and do the same rather than hitting conservative.

 

 

Edited March 20 by MariahCarry

[davep043]

1 hour ago, MariahCarry said:

If you know the golfer shooing first hits their 8 iron 170 yards, they tee off and come up 5 yards short of the green, that wind is playing a little stronger than you think.

Or they mis-hit it.  Or they intentionally hit it gently, instead of trying to kill a 9.  Or maybe they DID get a gust, but the wind might lay down when you hit.

1 hour ago, MariahCarry said:

If golfer shooting first drives one wide right into the trees, you can now take your iron out to put one on the fairway and not have to be so aggressive. etc. etc.

I love having my opponent "play for bogey", I don't know how many times he's done that and I've managed to make a par.  Or I've been able to chip out and make bogey for a half, because he gave away his potential advantage.

1 hour ago, MariahCarry said:

Lastly, in the case the honouree pipes a driver down the middle, sure there may be pressure on you (but there's always pressure on you, it's a match!) then at least know that you should also pull driver and do the same rather than hitting conservative.

I prefer to make my own decisions based on my own strengths and weaknesses, rather than having to react to the other player.  

1 hour ago, MariahCarry said:

but there's just too much information you learn by going second to ever convince me that going first is an advantage

Its fine with me to have a differing opinion.  

[MariahCarry]

2 minutes ago, davep043 said:

I love having my opponent "play for bogey", I don't know how many times he's done that and I've managed to make a par.  Or I've been able to chip out and make bogey for a half, because he gave away his potential advantage.

 

It's not playing for bogey, it's more about not playing for birdie.

Seeing your opponent in trouble off the tee means an easy breezy par is the statistical play. 👍

[davep043]

53 minutes ago, MariahCarry said:

 

It's not playing for bogey, it's more about not playing for birdie.

Seeing your opponent in trouble off the tee means an easy breezy par is the statistical play. 👍

I love folks who haven't learned the modern statistics.  Giving up yardage off the tee means a very small increase in fairways hit, but a significant reduction in percentage of greens hit.  But you be you.

[MariahCarry]

10 minutes ago, davep043 said:

I love folks who haven't learned the modern statistics.  Giving up yardage off the tee means a very small increase in fairways hit, but a significant reduction in percentage of greens hit.  But you be you.

I love when folks think going into the trees is excluded from modern statistics, as if playing for an easy par is too risky when your opponent is already 1 shot behind punching back out onto the fairway.

But you be you.

 

[Hawkeye77]

38 minutes ago, MariahCarry said:

I love when folks think going into the trees is excluded from modern statistics, as if playing for an easy par is too risky when your opponent is already 1 shot behind punching back out onto the fairway.

But you be you.

 

The rules say you win the hole you go first. 
 

This whole going second is an advantage thing (which is what you really keep on about) is too personal and situational to make much of it.  
 

“I lost that hole now I’ve got him right where I want him - but if I win this hole …….” 

 

[naval2006]

Honors is often a psychological advantage in serious competitive golf. There’s a long tradition of connecting honors to better players so not getting the honors after a handful of holes means you’re in trouble and you start to feel the weight of pressure. 

[MariahCarry]

8 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

The rules say you win the hole you go first. 
 

This whole going second is an advantage thing (which is what you really keep on about) is too personal and situational to make much of it.  
 

“I lost that hole now I’ve got him right where I want him - but if I win this hole …….” 

 

 

Yep this is just it, if the rules were that you are awarded the choice from winning the hole then it promotes a winning strategy.

Obviously you'll want to win every hole, but if you are awarded the choice from your great play from winning holes, it furthermore enables you to have a golfs version of a 9-ball "ball in hand" which allows you to see your opponent shoot first and give advantage to your strategy

 

But perhaps this is seen as "the rich get richer" when you win holes, you get to choose who shoots first and continue to see your opponents first move before you shoot.

 

Now comes the question, should you be awarded the choice from your great playing, or should you have to shoot first and help even out the playing field and allow the opponent to see your first move...

 

 

 

[rogolf]

See Hawkeye's post above, the Rules say the winner of the hole will play first.  Whether it's seen by someone as an advantage or not doesn't matter.  Tufts said it correctly, get on with the game.

Edited March 20 by rogolf

[Hawkeye77]

13 minutes ago, MariahCarry said:

 

Yep this is just it, if the rules were that you are awarded the choice from winning the hole then it promotes a winning strategy.

Obviously you'll want to win every hole, but if you are awarded the choice from your great play from winning holes, it furthermore enables you to have a golfs version of a 9-ball "ball in hand" which allows you to see your opponent shoot first and give advantage to your strategy

 

But perhaps this is seen as "the rich get richer" when you win holes, you get to choose who shoots first and continue to see your opponents first move before you shoot.

 

Now comes the question, should you be awarded the choice from your great playing, or should you have to shoot first and help even out the playing field and allow the opponent to see your first move...

 

 

 

I don't have any idea what you are talking about.

 

Tell yourself whatever you need to tell yourself to play.

[betarhoalphadelta]

8 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Historically, it was never about creating any advantage - just to establish how things would proceed.  I assume the player winning the previous hole was chosen based on some sense it was a "reward" for winning the hole.

 

Tufts (and I think has been quoted on here before):

 

"The evidence back to the earliest rule makers was not that the honor was meant to convey an advantage to one player over an other in the play of the next hole but rather to establish a procedure so that the game could proceed without delay." 

 

This makes sense. Especially since it is called "the honor" (or "honour" given where it originated 😂). You did better than the other golfers, therefore they must defer to you to hit before them. 

 

I understand OP's point... From a gamesmanship perspective, the winner of the hole having the choice of strategy makes some sense, like winning the coin toss in a football game. You can receive the ball or defer to the 2nd half. Some teams like the ball. Most defer. Some players might want to pipe one down the middle and put the pressure on their opponent. Some may prefer to watch their opponent hit first.  

 

It's one of those rules that in match play I don't think needs to be changed, but I also wouldn't be offended by the change where the player with the honor gets to select tee order. Just like some people use conceding / not conceding putts as gamesmanship, I would think that the decision that you can use the honor to force your opponent to hit first to try to get into their head (or try to gain information informing your own strategy) being a thing...

 

[MariahCarry]

1 hour ago, Hawkeye77 said:

I don't have any idea what you are talking about.

 

Tell yourself whatever you need to tell yourself to play.

 

I'm sorry that you misunderstood. It's just some barstool type banter of the rule

(barstool type banter as in, sitting at a bar and riffing with your buddies about it)

(riffing as in, making ideas up on the spot)

 

if you win the hole = you earned the right to choose going first or second

but alternatively, if you win the hole = you're playing better so the loser of the hole gets the advantage by seeing your shot.

 

Not trying to change the rule, just chopping it up...

(chopping it up as in, having a conversation.)

 

Hope the brackets help add clarification 😊

 

 

 

[Hawkeye77]

Just now, MariahCarry said:

 

I'm sorry that you misunderstood. It's just some barstool type banter of the rule

(barstool type banter as in, sitting at a bar and riffing with your buddies about it)

(riffing as in, making ideas up on the spot)

 

if you win the hole = you earned the right to choose going first or second

but alternatively, if you win the hole = you're playing better so the loser of the hole gets the advantage by seeing your shot.

 

Not trying to change the rule, just chopping it up...

(chopping it up as in, having a conversation.)

 

Hope the brackets help add clarification 😊

 

 

 

Now it get it - riffing, chopping, trolling.  Enjoy.

[MariahCarry]

1 hour ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

It's one of those rules that in match play I don't think needs to be changed, but I also wouldn't be offended by the change where the player with the honor gets to select tee order. Just like some people use conceding / not conceding putts as gamesmanship, I would think that the decision that you can use the honor to force your opponent to hit first to try to get into their head (or try to gain information informing your own strategy) being a thing...

 

For sure, rule doesn't need to be changed but it would be interesting to see how the dynamics of the choice would play out.

Let's imagine a random scenario where Tiger Woods and Rory McIlroy were... I dunno... playing in some indoor simulator team league in a dome or something (so random, I know 🥴)

And then when team A wins the hole, they choose first or second off the tee, would be interesting to see how they would react.

But all of this is hypothetical of course and slim chances any of this would ever happen.

[MariahCarry]

3 minutes ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Now it get it - riffing, chopping, trolling.  Enjoy.

 

Yep, like when you say to someone "I don't have any idea what you are talking about. Tell yourself whatever you need to tell yourself to play."

 

Totally doesn't come off as condescending at all... 🙄

[mark m]

[MariahCarry]

2 hours ago, mark m said:

 

Heath Wedger

 

 

[Mudguard]

I feel like this is overthinking it too much. At the end of the day, some of your golf is influenced by your opponent's shots. But generally you're better off trying to play as well as you can and either ignore, or try and play your own game.

I can guarantee if my opponent piped one OB off the tee on a long par four, I'm not pulling out a four iron. I'm just as liable to hit it rank 160m into the rough and maybe fight to make a bogey with my own ball. 

Has the OP played much competitive matchplay? I'd much rather go first all day long, I've made up my mind what shot I'm going to hit (who am I kidding, the only thing I'm certain about is the club I've chosen) and knowing you have the honour brings an extra element to it. Nothing like depriving an opponent of an honour. 

 

Edit. How much faff would it cause while the winner of the previous hole is trying to decide whether to go first or not. Currently, roll your winning putt in, stride to the next tee and pipe one down the middle while your opponent is still getting over the previous hole. 

Edited March 21 by Mudguard

[Long_Left]

90ish% of my golf is match play, if you think playing "chess" against what your opponent is doing is the way to go you're losing more than you're winning. Taking an iron off the tee because your opponent hit it into thick rough or into trees is a terrible decision. You're allowing them the option of the smart play to wedge it out and make an "easy bogey" and increasing your odds of making bogey at the same time. (There are certainly situations this isn't true, drivable or very short par 4 with OB or PAs close etc.)  Hitting the driver into a playable area forces them to try the hero shot unless they are super disciplined. Worst case scenario you follow them into the trees and you're still at even odds on the hole. 

 

Playing first is only a disadvantage if you're "playing to not lose." Set the tone, force their hand. If you find it easier to hit an 8i to the middle of the green on a par 3 because your opponent missed in a bunker, you're paying WAY too much attention to them and a bunker shot to 3 feet will break your heart, especially if your first putt is a 35 footer "I just need a 2 putt here." I play 2 guys in these matches 30+ times per year, one plays safe when I hit something less than ideal, the other plays "head down" golf at all times, king of the grinders. I beat the "safe" guy 80% of the time and he complains about my handicap constantly because he melts down the stretch when you rope a drive or hit an approach to 10 feet, the other guy and I track our matches, usually with $20 on the line ($5 nassau, $5 skunk clause) and we finished last year with him winning the grand sum of $10. I can't rattle him off his strategy.

 

A bad shot by the guy with honors is an opportunity to rub his face in it, a timid shot by the 2nd guy is the same opportunity.