Stableford Card

[JamesWA]

If you play an 18 hole stableford competition but have to withdraw injured after 16 holes, can you sign off on the points you have, or are you disqualified for failing to play all 18 ? 

[nsxguy]

34 minutes ago, JamesWA said:

If you play an 18 hole stableford competition but have to withdraw injured after 16 holes, can you sign off on the points you have, or are you disqualified for failing to play all 18 ? 

 

Here in the States, for handicap purposes, you would give yourself a net par for the last 2 holes and submit that score as your 18 hole score.

 

As for being DQ'd, I would think that would be up to the committee and their terms of the competition.

 

I would think, since it's Stableford, you'd be allowed to hand in your scorecard with whatever points you'd accumulated through the 16 holes, that's IT. i.e. you get 0 points for the last 2 holes.

 

In pure stroke play, not totally sure, but I would think you'd have to be DQ'd.

[Augster]

I’d say it depends on if there are negative points. If the lowest points you can get is zero, just zero out the last two holes and hand it in. 
 

If there are negative points, I’d say the same thing. Take the negative for the last two holes and hand it in. 
 

A DQ for not finishing a Stableford round seems silly and reaching IMO. 

[Mr. Bean]

You are not DQ'd in Stableford for not finishing holes, you just get zero points for those holes. That would apply to a competition as well in OP's case. You do not get any points on 17 and 18 if you withdraw after 16 holes but for handicap purposes you may get those 2 points per hole, depending in which country you are.

[Newby]

For competition and scoring purposes you will get zero stableford points for the unplayed holes.

 

For handicap purposes WHS rule 3.2 applies
 

Rule 3.2 When a Hole is Not Played

There are various circumstances that may result in a round not being completed
and some holes not being played. For example, due to  Player injury or illness,

 Notes:
1. The player’s full, unrestricted Course Handicap should be used for all
applications of net par. 

 

I believe the rule applies in all jurisdictions.

 

[North Butte]

Referring to a comp as "Stableford" when the scoring involves "negative points" is an abomination. 

[Mr. Bean]

1 hour ago, North Butte said:

Referring to a comp as "Stableford" when the scoring involves "negative points" is an abomination. 

 

Correct. Then it is not Stableford but something else. See Rule 21.1c last chapter.

[Newby]

21 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

See Rule 21.1c last chapter.

Paragraph ? 😉

[Mr. Bean]

52 minutes ago, Newby said:

Paragraph ? 😉

 

Whatever...

[Newby]

1 hour ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Whatever...

Generally Rules people tend to be pedants - just saying 😏

[nsxguy]

4 hours ago, North Butte said:

Referring to a comp as "Stableford" when the scoring involves "negative points" is an abomination. 

 

Would "Modified Stableford" be acceptable ?

 

And actually, I'd never given it much thought but if a NDB WAS -1, I wonder how much that would level the playing field for lower cappers against a field of higher cappers.

 

 

 

Edited April 30, 2023 by nsxguy

[Mr. Bean]

3 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

And actually, I'd never given it much thought but if a NDB WAS -1, I wonder how much that would level the playing field for lower cappers against a field of higher cappers.

 

 NDB -1..? Care to explain how? I have never seen a  negative gross score. Never.

[North Butte]

31 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Would "Modified Stableford" be acceptable ?

 

And actually, I'd never given it much thought but if a NDB WAS -1, I wonder how much that would level the playing field for lower cappers against a field of higher cappers.

 

 

 

There are an infinite variety of "points game" scoring schemes you can come up with, only one of them is called Stableford. To me the actual Stableford got it right the first time, not counting worse than NDB is just about the correct balance in my opinion.

 

A 20hcp playing against a bunch of lower 'cappers is already counting his all his doubles and a couple of his triples. Do you really want him counting all his triples and two of his quads? Is anyone really interested in watching a bogey golfer do the alignment line thing for the third time on the 14th green while he tries to grind out that four footer for a 3-putt triple bogey? 

Edited April 30, 2023 by North Butte

[nsxguy]

5 hours ago, North Butte said:

There are an infinite variety of "points game" scoring schemes you can come up with, only one of them is called Stableford. To me the actual Stableford got it right the first time, not counting worse than NDB is just about the correct balance in my opinion.

 

A 20hcp playing against a bunch of lower 'cappers is already counting his all his doubles and a couple of his triples. Do you really want him counting all his triples and two of his quads? Is anyone really interested in watching a bogey golfer do the alignment line thing for the third time on the 14th green while he tries to grind out that four footer for a 3-putt triple bogey? 

 

I don't care about the time it takes. That is a minor annoyance anyway. I'm thinking about the comp.

 

And if you think the guy is going to quickly abandon his search for his 2nd shot which went into the woods near the green and take a double (o points) when he might find his ball and make at least 1 point and possibly 2, I got a bridge to sell ya.

 

The 20 cappers in a net game, as a group, already have a much higher probability of cashing than the low cappers.

 

Allowing higher cappers to throw strokes away is simply widening their advantage and lowering the odds of a lower cap cashing.

[North Butte]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

I don't care about the time it takes. That is a minor annoyance anyway. I'm thinking about the comp.

 

And if you think the guy is going to quickly abandon his search for his 2nd shot which went into the woods near the green and take a double (o points) when he might find his ball and make at least 1 point and possibly 2, I got a bridge to sell ya.

 

The 20 cappers in a net game, as a group, already have a much higher probability of cashing than the low cappers.

 

Allowing higher cappers to throw strokes away is simply widening their advantage and lowering the odds of a lower cap cashing.

Like I say, there's plenty of points games being played. Only one of them is Stableford and it's my personal favorite. I think it strikes the correct balance.