PDA

View Full Version : Matchplay index



terryand
17th May 2005, 05:33 PM
Just thought I would bring this up after Nudgee's and Vegas' match on Sunday.

There game was played from the 10th tee and the match shot where taken on the holes as if they teed off the first.

My understanding of the matchplay index is that it is set up to be played from 1 to 18.Seeing as the index is an AGU one that works on spreading shot evenly and with no advantage to one player or the other.

So if we tee off the 1st no worries,but if we tee off the 10th do we use the match index fron 10 to 18 then 1 to 9 to follow the holes or do we use the match index fro 1 to 18,the way it is set up to be used.

To me I don't really care which way it is used.

Just an example of what I mean.....If I played Blakey,he has to give me one shot which i get on the 8th.So if we play from the 10th tee and I take the shot on hole number 8 and not the 8th hole played,I could lose 3/2 and not get the chance to use my shot.So I could birdie the last 2 holes and not have the chance to win.

Thoughts people....Like I said I really don't care,but the index is set up to be played in order for fairness.

Will it be too hard for a bunch of dumbies like us to work out.

AP, as we will be playing off the 10th at Bribie,which way would you like to play the index(seeing as you are the seeded player).

Or do we leave it to the people involved in the match if thay have to play off the 10th.

Or do we let the match and rules man make a rule.

Sory for the long way to get to the point.

Terry.

Courty
17th May 2005, 05:58 PM
I'm not particularly well-informed enough to make a call on this one, but it would make sense to me to play the match index from 1-18, regardless of which tee you start on. Like you say (and I did already know this much) the idea of the Match Index is to spread the holes fairly & evenly and was designed especially with that in mind. It would be like playing an 18 hole course in random order, or starting on the 7th hole. It just doesn't make sense...

IMHO. Smarter people than me may choose to disagree for reasons I can't think of up front. :roll:

markTHEblake
17th May 2005, 06:19 PM
If your looking for the short answer to the question,
Yes, you need to swap the nines on the matchplay index if you hit off the 10th.
Happy?  Press Alt +F4
Not Happy? you get to read below.

The AGU matchplay index is described by them as the "balanced distribution of shots".

The strokes are allocated to particular holes based on the order of play from 1-18, and nothing to do with anything else.

If you start on the 10th, and apply the index literally the handicap allocations become somewhat skewed.

Therefore it doesnt matter whether you tee off the 1st, 10th or a shotgun on a hole in between, the obvious intent is that the matchplay index applies to the order that you play the holes.  Ie the 1st hole on the matchplay index ( which is 18 ) is the first hole that you play.

Obviously there would be very little precedent here,  most clubs would allocate 1st tee time slots to matchplay events, so it probably wouldnt ever come up.

If you think it doesnt make a difference consider this.  If I have to give a golfer two strokes,  he gets them on the 8th and 12th.   However if we hit off the 10th and take the index literrally he gets the strokes on the 3rd and the 17th holes as we played them.

I can assure you the latter is a distinct advantage to me, as I could possibly win the game by the 17th and not have to give him that shot.

marcel
17th May 2005, 08:17 PM
wot mTb said, makes no sense to do otherwise

jimandr
17th May 2005, 09:16 PM
It's a good question, and I think mtb's solution should be offically placed in the Rules. At the moment, it says the AGU Matchplay Index should be used, but I agree that if we start on the 10th, the index is reversed.

More questions were raised in my mind, particularly in light of my matchplay game against Coffs_Hacker, where we did start off the 10th, but we didn't reverse the index.

I was giving him 5 shots, which in the end probably didn't favour either player. The way the index worked meant I gave him a shot on our very first hole (probably a disadvantage to me) and shots on two other par 5's, which were definitely a disadvantage to me, as he hits his driver 50m past me. I was very aware of the final shot I was giving him, which happened to be the 8th (our 17th), as I couldn't see myself winning that hole if it went that far. From memory the pattern was 8, 17, 4, 14, 10.

The emotions of Matchplay are definitely affected by where you get and give away your shots.

To this end, I have done some very brief and patchy research. I thought the MatchPlay Index was fairly standard, but it isn't. I had five cards from different courses in my loungeroom, and the index is different on each of them.

At The Vintage, there is no index on the card. We asked the pro-shop guy, and he told us to use the strokeplay index. Grunt and Spiersy did exactly that, which meant it started 3, 9, 18, 6, 8, 16

At Kangaroo Valley, the index goes 6, 12, 4, 18, 10, 8
At Glenmore, it goes 6, 4, 13, 17, 14, 5. The first four are all par 5's
At Illawarra CC it goes 8, 12, 4, 16, 10, 6
At Camden Haven it's 18, 8, 16, 12, 1, 4. If you give away three shots, try to win by the 15th.
Coolongatta-Tweed River is 8, 12, 4, 16, 10, 6

That last pattern is the only one replicated twice.

What does it all mean?

I think I'll let Jono develop a formula :wink:

AndyP
18th May 2005, 07:51 AM
I'm guessing that Pacific has one of those little matchplay tables on the back of the card.  Some courses have the matchplay index listed with the stroke index on the scoring part of the card, which implies that the indexes are allocated to specific holes.

I believe there are matchplay guidelines in place, which allows for customisation for the course.
Nambour has 6 par 3's, so the matchplay index had to be adjusted, so there was less chance of too many shots being given on these holes.

If you start from the 10th, but play it with the index of hole 1, then that customisation of the indexes has been thrown out the window.

Some previous discussion here, with some guidelines from the English Golf Union:
http://ozgolf.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1184

markTHEblake
18th May 2005, 04:38 PM
Some courses use the same index and put it in a different format, and if your not thinkin straight you can stuff it up.

For example
Some courses list in order holes 1 to 18, andthen the index for each hole

Others list the strokes given from 1 to 18, and then which hole you take a stroke on for that handicap.

Jono
18th May 2005, 05:36 PM
Coolongatta-Tweed River is 8, 12, 4, 16, 10, 6

That last pattern is the only one replicated twice.

What does it all mean?  

I think I'll let Jono develop a formula :wink:

I'll take this as an invitation to jump in ... :)

The above index pattern is the same one used at Bayview (and New Brighton, from memory). I think it sucks because 8th hole is a short par 3, 12th is another par 3, 4th is yet another par 3. And guess what? 16th is a par 3 too. Anyone want to take a wild guess at what our 10th hole is? :wink: So, if you have to give someone 5 shots at Bayview, they will all be on par 3s. That makes it harder for the lower handicapper to defend these holes. The higher handicapper just needs a reasonable tee shot somewhere near the green to make it almost impossible for the lower marker to win the hole.

IMO, the matchplay index should be given on the hardest holes, irrespective of whether it is evenly spread or not. Say a hard 400 meter par 4. The lower marker will have a much better chance of defending this hole than on a par 3 hole.

I know it matters psychologically whether you are in front or behind in a match, but strictly speaking, it doesn't matter where you get your shots in the round. Let's say I was playing Blakey and he has to give me 3 shots. Let's say I get these shots in the last three holes (ie. 16, 17 and 18th). Say he beats me 4 and 3. Should I be crying foul because I didn't get to use any of my shots? Well, if I stuff up the other 15 holes, and lose 4 of these holes where I don't get a shot, I would have lost the match anyway, no matter where I got my 3 shots. If I got the shots on the first three holes and won these holes to go three up standing on the 4th tee, and then I lose 4 of the remaining holes, I would have lost 1 down. Perhaps 1 down sounds better than 4 and 3 ... but loss is a loss.

So WHERE you get your shots is mostly psychological. However, if you play hole by hole, it shouldn't affect who is the eventual winner. So I'm more in favour of the strokes being given on the harder holes than following some set order to spread the strokes out.

Jono
18th May 2005, 05:46 PM
If you think it doesnt make a difference consider this.  If I have to give a golfer two strokes,  he gets them on the 8th and 12th.   However if we hit off the 10th and take the index literrally he gets the strokes on the 3rd and the 17th holes as we played them.

I can assure you the latter is a distinct advantage to me, as I could possibly win the game by the 17th and not have to give him that shot.

Blakey,

Read my post above, but other than a psychological advantage, it doesn't really matter where you give him those shots. If you win the game before coming to the 17th, that means you have won enough of the holes where you DON'T give him a shot to block him out. So, even if he won the holes where he got the shots, you would have been the eventual winner.

Now, an interesting point this raises is what happens when you finish all square and have to play sudden death? I faced such situation in the first round of our fourball match play. Gary and I finished all square with another pair after 18 holes. We were the low markers so we had to give these guys some shots. We were supposed to go to the 1st to play our sudden death, but there were some 4 groups of pennents matches to tee off. Our club pro suggested that we start on the 12th where the tee was vacant. Now, if we teed off the 1st, we wouldn't have given either of them a shot. Off the 12th, we had to give BOTH of them a shot. Despite the fact that Gary could only stay for another 30 minutes, I decided to wait for the pennents teams to tee off and play off the 1st, by myself. I thought this gave us a better chance than playing off the 12th with Gary. As it turned out, I made the right decision.

BrisVegas
18th May 2005, 07:26 PM
Just thought I would bring this up after Nudgee's and Vegas' match on Sunday.

There game was played from the 10th tee and the match shot where taken on the holes as if they teed off the first.

My understanding of the matchplay index is that it is set up to be played from 1 to 18.Seeing as the index is  an AGU one that works on spreading shot evenly and with no advantage to one player or the other.

Terry.

Would have preferred not to have given Nudgee that shot on the 17th hole (8th).  I conceded the hole after making a bogey, with him 8 feet away, putting for par.  He had 2 more putts to win the hole...  Funny that he 4-putted, after it was conceded. :lol:  :roll:

markTHEblake
18th May 2005, 09:11 PM
I know it matters psychologically whether you are in front or behind in a match, but strictly speaking, it doesn't matter where you get your shots in the round.

nothing to do with psychological, its all about a balanced distribution of the shots. though unbalanced would certainly become psychological.

In my example, taking two shots, on the 3rd and 17th is not balanced, and neither is your example.


So, if you have to give someone 5 shots at Bayview, they will all be on par 3s.... That makes it harder for the lower handicapper to defend these holes. .

It doesnt matter, becuase there is 13 other holes to be played off scratch which make it easier for him to win those holes, and there is no instance where he has to give a stroke on consective holes, and without referring to the index, its going to be roughly every 3rd hole.

and in your 4B matchplay the club made a pretty poor decision.
1. they should have been aware of the need for playoffs when schedulling such events becuase they will happen.
2. the 12th hole is not the 12th hole, its the 1st hole accordiing to the match play index.
3. its not necessarily against the rules to not recommence on the original 1st hole (see rules of golf stipulated round definitions) but its pretty dumb.

markTHEblake
18th May 2005, 09:46 PM
Before we get too complicated here (too late maybe?), I would like to point out one obvious thing.

Many of the rules variations regarding matchplay are there becuase its One v One, not One v the Field. It doesnt really matter what happens as the result only affects two people.

In other words when we Ozgolfers are playing our matches it doesnt really matter if you dont play implicitly by the rules, as long as you both are happy.

Nobody is going to care if you decide to playoff by doing a nudey run around the clubhouse. (now would that be described in the Golf or Equipment forums?)

But the reason we have some 'conditions' in place is for when people are not sure what to do, and to avoid 'discussions' should one party not wanting to do the nudey run ( inferior equipment maybe?).

As I am sure everyone has experinced that lack of defined rules, regulations etc often leads to pretty messy situations, whether that be at work or play.

marcel
19th May 2005, 06:39 AM
So, if you have to give someone 5 shots at Bayview, they will all be on par 3s.  That makes it harder for the lower handicapper to defend these holes.  The higher handicapper just needs a reasonable tee shot somewhere near the green to make it almost impossible for the lower marker to win the hole.



Jono,

the matchplay index is not designed so that the low handicapper can win the hole, just to try and even things up, and to spread the shots throughout the course. As mTb says, go win your match on the other 13 holes, it is possible to win a match evn though you lose an occasional hole or five.

AndyP
19th May 2005, 07:18 AM
So, if we are swapping indexes, how is it practical to do that on the following scorecard?
http://www.nambourgolfclub.com.au/scorecard.htm

marcel
19th May 2005, 08:21 AM
AndyP,

It'd be messy but do-able. If you were starting at #10 for (an easy) example the Match Index would be; 18, 8, 12, 3, 6, 14 etc.

I imagine it is fairly rare for matchplay to start on other than the 1st hole, but either way probably a good argument for having it printed on the back of the card instead. I guess the other issue is that with matchplay so rare nowadays should its index be on the main part of the card where it may confuse some?

markTHEblake
19th May 2005, 08:31 AM
So, if we are swapping indexes, how is it practical to do that on the following scorecard?
http://www.nambourgolfclub.com.au/scorecard.htm

are you asking because nambour use a different index than the AGU one?

then dont use that index, or dont hit off the 10th, or dont play at nambour.

I'll restate what the AGU says about 'their' index, which is the one we are supposed to be using.  Take carefull note of words in bold.

"This method provides for a fairly even distribution throughout the round. It also disregards hole difficulties, is fair to players on all handicap levels and has proved satisfactory in use"

markTHEblake
19th May 2005, 08:55 AM
Poor Andy is confused,  still doesnt know that his avatar doesnt look like him.

Ok,  you asked for it, you got it.   Here is the OFFICIAL Ozgolf Matchplay Scorecard.  www.theblake.net/ftp/MatchplayIndex.pdf

Forget the hole numbers on the course you are playing.  Just look at the official scorecard and you start from Hole #1.

Sudden death will also always start on Hole #1 irrespective of anything else.

If your a slow thinker (like engineers), then print out the card the night before. Check off the holes where you will give or receive strokes.  Confirm this with your partner before you tee off.

take a pencil or crayon (no biro's or textas), and mark it after each hole that you play.   There is a +/- section for you to track your progress

AndyP
19th May 2005, 10:04 AM
Who's confused?  Took you two posts to give an answer to something that marcel answered better.

I understand what has been said. I'm trying to determine why I should be doing something different to what is written on the scorecard.

We've already established that different courses use a different order of matchplay indexes, so why should we use this standardised one?
Are all these courses that deviate from this order wrong?

markTHEblake
19th May 2005, 11:37 AM
so why should we use this standardised one?

2 reasons.

1. its in the rules of our tournament
2. I'll take the recommendation of the AGU over a fuddy duddy group of old men on a match committee any day.

If you want to do it different in your own match, who cares. But if the two of you cant agree then you play by our rules.

Jono
20th May 2005, 09:42 PM
Jono,

the matchplay index is not designed so that the low handicapper can win the hole, just to try and even things up, and to spread the shots throughout the course. As mTb says, go win your match on the other 13 holes, it is possible to win a match evn though you lose an occasional hole or five.

I don't agree that spreading the shots out "throughout the course" is the best way to go. At Bayview, where first 5 holes in the matchplay index are par 3 holes, it gives the advantage to the higher marker.

Let's ignore the psychological factors involved in matchplay for the time being. When two players with different handicaps play each other in matchplay, they are essentially playing off their STROKE play handicaps. ie. if you are a genuine 5 handicap, then you should average around 5 over, and if you are a genuine 21 handicap, then you should average around 21 over. If these two played against each other in matchplay, then the 5 marker has to give 16 shots to the 21 marker OVER 16 DIFFERENT HOLES (whereas in strokeplay, the 5 marker would give 16 shots over the whole round). The 21 marker might have 1 or 2 really bad holes a round where he gets triple or quadruple bogey. This is in his favour because he is using his stroke handicap, which accounts for these "horror holes", to get the same amount of shots spread out over different holes in matchplay. So if he loses a hole by 2 or 3 shots to the lower marker, he only loses that hole ... he doesn't lose 2 or 3 shots as he would have in stroke play.

Anyway, if you look at it purely from mathematical point of view, using strokeplay handicap for matchplay gives advantage to the higher marker. The way to minimize this is to give the shots on the hardest holes, not the easier ones. Of course, psychological factors come into play in matchplay ... However, I believe shots should be given on the harder holes as opposed to just spreading it out throughout the course.