Threesome vs. Foursome - A Fair Game?

[DaveLeeNC]

I play in a group of about 12 guys and we almost always play four person team games, but the total # of players is not always evenly divisible by 4 (e.g., a foursome vs. a threesome). We have a number of ways of handling this and this is a new alternative that was just brought up. 

 

It is handicap adjusted scoring where only the high ball and low ball (net) count. The question is "is this a fair game between a threesome and a foursome". The foursome has one extra chance at a good low ball score and one extra chance at a bad high ball score. If this is not a fair game who has the advantage (for the case of Stableford scoring). For the case of stroke play scoring I would think that the threesome has the advantage as the downside of an extra player (blowup hole) is way bigger than the upside (exceptional score on a hole) - net 4 or 5 over on a hole is much more likely than net 4 or 5 under for about anybody.  

 

It is an interesting thought (if you like to think about things like this). 

 

dave

Edited September 24, 2022 by DaveLeeNC

[Colin L]

50 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

I play in a group of about 12 guys and we almost always play four person team games, but the total # of players is not always evenly divisible by 4 (e.g., a foursome vs. a threesome). We have a number of ways of handling this and this is a new alternative that was just brought up. 

 

It is handicap adjusted scoring where only the high ball and low ball (net) count. The question is "is this a fair game between a threesome and a foursome". The foursome has one extra chance at a good low ball score and one extra chance at a bad high ball score. If this is not a fair game who has the advantage (for the case of Stableford scoring). For the case of stroke play scoring I would think that the threesome has the advantage as the downside of an extra player (blowup hole) is way bigger than the upside (exceptional score on a hole) - net 4 or 5 over on a hole is much more likely than net 4 or 5 under for about anybody.  

 

It is an interesting thought (if you like to think about things like this). 

 

dave

I've thought for a moment as to whether I like to think about things like this and  I think I'd rather not at this time as my head was hurting just thinking about whether to think about it.  I do think, however, you might be overthinking it and that there is a simpler thought to come.

[DaveLeeNC]

Just to be clear here, the question is NOT about finding a fair game between threesomes and foursomes - we already have a couple of ways to do this. The question is simply 'is this game fair'. I find it an interesting question, but don't expect everyone to have that reaction. 

 

dave

[nitram]

It's a fair game Dave as long as the 3-some gets to take a 4th shot, that sequentially rotates among the three. 

[DaveLeeNC]

49 minutes ago, nitram said:

It's a fair game Dave as long as the 3-some gets to take a 4th shot, that sequentially rotates among the three. 

 

Definitely fair in that case, but a different question. We do play a "rotating blind" when playing 2 best balls of 4 where we rotate the guy whose score counts twice (he does not play an extra ball). 

 

For your suggestion we could start a new thread on how to post a score when you played 2 balls on 6 holes. That would be fun - maybe even worth posting. 

 

dave

 

ps. I am assuming that the suggestion is that only one player hits 2 balls on rotating holes - not a fourth ball where the 4th ball is played sequentially among the 3 golfers. THAT would be yet another thread on how to handicap the rotating ball 🙂

[SE Gamer]

I'd say it's fair-ish. But do agree that (for your average amateur groups) the threesome might have the slight advantage for the rationale you state. 

 

I'd think one of the fairest solutions would be a rotation in each group of 4; where one of their players scores won't count towards the game. 

[larrybud]

Going to depend on the players and handicaps. I could see it being an advantage and disadvantage depending on the skill level involved.

 

3 scratch players would have an advantage over 3 20 handicappers in this game, as one of the 20's has a pretty good chance at a really crappy net score on a hole.

 

Hmm, I might have to run some analysis on this. I have a database of a ton of scores...

 

[deadsolid...shank]

If we’re off on our groups like that, we throw all the names of the players in the foursomes in a hat. Then the threesome draws one name. That person’s score is the 4th score. You obviously have to go back through the scores and see where the additional one had an impact, but it really takes about 30 seconds to do so. 

[nitram]

On 9/24/2022 at 10:28 AM, DaveLeeNC said:

ps. I am assuming that the suggestion is that only one player hits 2 balls on rotating holes - not a fourth ball where the 4th ball is played sequentially among the 3 golfers. THAT would be yet another thread on how to handicap the rotating ball 🙂

Two ways to play it Dave and I've done it both ways more times than I care to remember.

 

First option is to say that you, me, and Smegma are a 3-some playing a 4-some. You would take the 4th tee shot on  holes 1,4,7,10,13, & 16. I would take the 2nd shot on your "extra" tee ball. Also, I would take the extra tee shot on 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, & 17. Smegma would take the 3rd shot on your extra tee ball, and take the extra tee shot on 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, & 18.

 

The second option is for one player in the above-described rotation play the extra ball from tee to cup, on each hole.

 

Either way, it's about handicapping the groups as equitable as possible.

[Golferpaul]

My favorite solution is to use a Stableford scoring system and then compute the average under or over quota for the team.

 

For example, assume these results.

 

Team 1 quota and achievement: 

 

Player a: quota 25, actual 22 for 3 under.

Player b: quota 26, actual 21 for 5 under

Player c: quota 28, actual 30 for 2 over

 

The average for the group is 2 under per player.

 

Team 2:

Player a: quota 25, actual 22 for 3 under.

Player b: quota 26, actual 21 for 5 under

Player c: quota 28, actual 30 for 2 over

Player d: quota 28, actual 30 for 1 over

 

The average for Team 2 is 1.25 under quota per player.

 

Team 2 wins.

[DaveLeeNC]

3 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

My favorite solution is to use a Stableford scoring system and then compute the average under or over quota for the team.

 

For example, assume these results.

 

Team 1 quota and achievement: 

 

Player a: quota 25, actual 22 for 3 under.

Player b: quota 26, actual 21 for 5 under

Player c: quota 28, actual 30 for 2 over

 

The average for the group is 2 under per player.

 

Team 2:

Player a: quota 25, actual 22 for 3 under.

Player b: quota 26, actual 21 for 5 under

Player c: quota 28, actual 30 for 2 over

Player d: quota 28, actual 30 for 1 over

 

The average for Team 2 is 1.25 under quota per player.

 

Team 2 wins.

 

We don't use quota but we do something similar. We just use Stableford scoring and the winning team is the team with the highest total team Stableford score divided by the # of players. Once we had a case where one player in the threesome got an emergency call on the 9th tee and had to leave. So in that case instead of dividing by the # of players we divided by the total # of "Player-Holes". A full foursome would be 72 player-holes. In the case of the threesome where one player only played 8 holes, the # of Player-Holes was 18*2 + 8 = 44. Fortunately most phones have calculators 🙂

 

dave

 

Edited October 1, 2022 by DaveLeeNC

[larrybud]

"Hey Bill, we won by 1.33333 average points!!!"

 

"Is that good??"

 

lol

 

 

[Krt22]

It depends on the index of the 4th player relative to the rest of the group. If everyone is around the same index, I would say the 4some is at an advantage. 

[nsxguy]

If everyone agrees it's fair, it's fair.

 

Personally I would never play in a game where the WORST ball counts.

 

I've played BEST ball, or best TWO balls, but never worst ball. And never would.

[DaveLeeNC]

8 hours ago, nsxguy said:

If everyone agrees it's fair, it's fair.

 

Personally I would never play in a game where the WORST ball counts.

 

I've played BEST ball, or best TWO balls, but never worst ball. And never would.

 

FWIW, in my mind there are two kinds of 'worst ball counts' team play scenarios. One is where actual golf scores count such that if you make an honest 11 on a hole, that is the score that goes against the team score (unless your buddy carded a 13 😀). That is not a fun game at typical 'club golf levels'. 

 

Another is where there is a score limit. The inherent max double bogey limit of Stableford scoring is kind of the poster child for that. My Friday Group would never play something like "High Score + Low Score" without a limit, but we routinely play (4 player teams) all balls count Stableford games and occasionally a Hi/Low game.  

 

dave

[North Butte]

On 10/1/2022 at 1:44 PM, Golferpaul said:

My favorite solution is to use a Stableford scoring system and then compute the average under or over quota for the team.

 

For example, assume these results.

 

Team 1 quota and achievement: 

 

Player a: quota 25, actual 22 for 3 under.

Player b: quota 26, actual 21 for 5 under

Player c: quota 28, actual 30 for 2 over

 

The average for the group is 2 under per player.

 

Team 2:

Player a: quota 25, actual 22 for 3 under.

Player b: quota 26, actual 21 for 5 under

Player c: quota 28, actual 30 for 2 over

Player d: quota 28, actual 30 for 1 over

 

The average for Team 2 is 1.25 under quota per player.

 

Team 2 wins.

In your example, the players all have very similar handicaps (ranging from 8-11) so that sort of points/quota game works out OK.

 

If you have a wider range, let's say 4hcp all the way up to 22hcp, then doing gross points and comparing them to a handicap-based quota after the fact does not work well at all.

 

A typical high handicapper can be in his pocket half a dozen holes and still make enough pars and bogeys to get to his quota. A mid-low single digit is playing something very close to stroke play in that game while the bogey-and-worse golfer gets to play a max-score-limited game to his benefit.

 

When there are both mid-single-digit and high teens/low twenties handicaps in the same game you absolutely must play off net points (like real Stableford) to keep from shortchanging the better players. 

[MountainKing]

On 9/24/2022 at 9:35 AM, nitram said:

It's a fair game Dave as long as the 3-some gets to take a 4th shot, that sequentially rotates among the three. 

 

Scramble or best ball, no way I'd play in any game where somebody gets an extra shot or plays an extra ball.  There's a slight upper hand in those scenarios, the player getting the extra shot/ball can make adjustments on the second ball/shot based on their other shot/ball.  On top of that, any decent golfer will generally have one playable shot if they have two opportunities.   

 

If everybody's handicaps are fairly similar, put the highest cap in the group of 4 and play straight up taking the two best scores each hole.