[JLahrman]

One problem is that the final is always slow.  There is more drama at the RC or PC with several matches going on, or a regular tournament with a bunched field.

In the match play final, you see very little golf.  The consolation final is really just filler, and underscores how little action there is.

Totally agree with you. How could we make it more interesting?

In addition to playing the overall match, the players should be forced to make at least one side bet every hole. They would be playing for their own money. All bets between $20-$100. Players could be miked up to pick up the discussion. If Mickelson hits an approach to 10 feet and then bets Stricker $50 that he won't hit his closer, suddenly things get a lot more interesting. Or if they put $100 on Mickelson making his 8-foot putt. Now we're talking.

[Cliff Hamm]

I have gone to a few US Amateurs and have found them quite enjoyable.  Most recently. Tiger Woods vs Buddy Marucci at Newport.  Had never heard of Buddy.  Took Tiger to 36 holes, great match, although you always thought Tiger would win...

Jeff Quinney versus James Driscoll at Baltusrol.  Went extra holes.  Luke Donald among others were in the field.  No one would have picked Quinney or Driscoll but the golf was mesmerizing and tremendous.  Why should match play among professionals be any different?

[jeffwarne]

One problem is that the final is always slow.  There is more drama at the RC or PC with several matches going on, or a regular tournament with a bunched field.

In the match play final, you see very little golf.  The consolation final is really just filler, and underscores how little action there is.

Kalen,
Bob Hope or Accenture?
Phoenix or Accenture?

Final round of a stroke play event, I'm going to give you, but why would anyone watch the first or second round of an ordinary TOUR event?(unless it was played on an extremely compelling course)
At least every round's result is important in match play, although ironically every SHOT is important in stroke play.

Day one,two,or three can be quite interesting in match play

[Sean_A]

For sure matchplay produces just as worth a champion as medal - guys might get lucky for a match or two, but they still need to hit good shots to win and overcome bad luck or a hot hand.  Plus, it really is the format which takes the course relatively out of action - meaning there can be no mistake the game is against one guy rather than the field which is often seen as "play the course".  Any reasonable course can be exciting to see matchplay on if the viewer accepts the format. 

I have long wanted matchplay as a central focal point of a large festival of golf ala Wimbledon style.  Perhaps as a way to fill more airtime, women, seniors, ams and juniors could be added to the mix in these tournies.  Somehow, I think golf needs to create an all inclusive tournament or two which brings together all the stars of golf. 

Ciao 

[Tom_Doak]

I have long wanted matchplay as a central focal point of a large festival of golf ala Wimbledon style.  Perhaps as a way to fill more airtime, women, seniors, ams and juniors could be added to the mix in these tournies.  Somehow, I think golf needs to create an all inclusive tournament or two which brings together all the stars of golf. 
 

Sean:

There's a great idea in there somewhere.  There was some discussion around the Olympics of having a team event -- two men and two women from each country.  You could have them play round-robin nine-hole matches, where each played against the other, even the women head-to-head against the men.  THAT would be worth watching, and it would solve the problem of having too few matches for TV.

I got my idea for doing nine-hole matches by playing in a club championship that did it that way ... the top six teams by handicap were in the championship flight, and played nine-hole matches against the other five teams, for up to three points per match depending on the result.  I wonder if some similar format might work on the Tour.

[George Pazin]

C'mon, it's totally the same as powerball: in one case, a guy has to beat a half dozen other guys, all of whom have practiced their entire lives to get to this point, and in the other, you pick a few numbers. Same thing.

Anyway, Sean, I think I disagree somewhat that match play produces as worthy a champion. There's too much opportunity to have one guy benefit from the draw; for example, one guy plays lights out, takes out 2 really golfers also playing great, and then falls apart against a guy who's been eeking out wins against middling competition. At least in medal play, those other 2 guys are still alive to push things along. I would say a match play event produces a worthy champion, but not as worthy, if that makes any sense. I think 36 hole matches ala the other match play event on the Euro Tour helps to mitigate much of this, but still not all.

Then again, at least match play events largely eliminate the luck of the draw with respect to weather, hadn't really considered that before.

For sure, match play is a wonderful element of team play, ala the Ryder Cup, Walker Cup, etc, and I wouldn't for a second change those. And I'm happy with one match play event, I think it's a lot of fun, for all of the reasons mentioned. I just think I wouldn't want to see a lot of match play events at this level, and certainly not for a major. Thankfully, I don't see much clamor for that change, apart from a few crazy posters on here!

[JESII]

I don't think television conveys the differences between match play and stroke play very well. Match play really has an interpersonal dynamic that can make it very interesting. In medal play, even coming through the back nine of a major, the players are in their own worlds. I don't know that individual styles of play vary all that much, I think an aggressive guy is still going to play aggressive and a conservative guy still conservative...this touches on Tom's quote of Pete Day and making players uncomfortable. Match Play pushes them outside their comfort better than medal play because the opponent can force your hand.

[Tim Martin]

I think a lot of what dictates someone`s preference from a spectator`s standpoint is if they can relate to the matchplay format from personal experience. If you generally don`t play matchplay you probably don`t buy into it at the professional level either. I think it is great to watch if the match is close regardless of who is playing. Granted the networks want the marquis players in a showdown at the end but they want the same in a 4 round medal tournament as well. The David and Goliath scenario can be a great storyline.

[Jud_T]

It would be wonderful if they could find a way to make it work.  But just look at the Accenture.  Tiger's out and now the ratings will drop by 30% for the weekend...

[Jim_Kennedy]

George,
The road to winning the US AM:

Sectional qualifying, 36 holes at stroke play
Two 18 hole rounds on consecutive days to reach the 64 person field
Then six rounds of match play, as listed:

First round of match play (18 holes)
Second and third rounds of match play (18 holes each)
Quarterfinal round of match play (18 holes)
Semifinal round of match play (18 holes)
Aug. 19 (Sunday): Championship match (36 holes)


Random? Powerball? 

[George Pazin]

Totally powerball.

I will point out, the title of the thread is "Match play golf at the pro level - a discussion, please".

Just on the face of it, I will say that I think there is enough difference between individual amateurs that match play works well at that level. I just think the difference between tour pros is so slim that an 18 hole match places just a bit too much emphasis on luck - a lucky bounce, a lucky halve (or not), a lucky draw, etc. I think you need 72 holes, and the precision of counting every stroke, makes a difference at the pro level.

Just as an aside, I will also point out that I did not say the results were random, I said they border on random. I think in a 72 hole medal play event, the winner is almost always the guy who played best for 72 holes (duh), whereas with match play, it could (not is) just be the guy who had the luckiest draw.

Just look at last year's winner...   (<==== that's a joke, note the smiley)

[jeffwarne]

I do marvel at how often the announcers jump at the chance to say "it's match play now" when two players have seperated themselves from the field.

It's NEVER match play when they're playing stroke play as the strategies are entirely different, and a player could make up 1,2,3, or even four shots on ONE hole, and you still have to finish even when 5 shots up with 3 holes to play.
Van de Velde or Kyle Stanle could vouch for that.
Only at the last hole or in a sudden death playoff could it be the case that it was match play.

[George Pazin]

Only at the last hole or in a sudden death playoff could it be the case that it was match play.

And, as has been pointed out to me several times by rules officials, the rules are still different in some areas, even if the play is head to head.

[David Harshbarger]

I have long wanted matchplay as a central focal point of a large festival of golf ala Wimbledon style.  Perhaps as a way to fill more airtime, women, seniors, ams and juniors could be added to the mix in these tournies.  Somehow, I think golf needs to create an all inclusive tournament or two which brings together all the stars of golf. 

Ciao 

Maybe they could play foursomes or fourball in the early rounds, then have the winning teams go to match play (so there are two matches in play at once) to determine the winning team. That would at least get 2 matches on at the end of the day on Sunday.  Players could be free to make the partnerships they want entering the tournament.  

The Wimbledon style festival is interesting too.  If you could figure out how to have the singles and team events across divisions played at the same time on Sunday, all the better.

[Jim_Kennedy]

George,
It's not always the best 72 holes, you can play average golf for 54 holes and have one stellar day. There are many instances of come-from-behind victories on tour where that one final round has decided the outcome. Think Paul Lawrie at the 1999 British Open, he made up 10 strokes, or Stewart Cink, who made up 9 in 1994's MCI. There are at least 8 guys who came back from 8 shots, and many more who came back from 7, 6, or 5 shots back. 

The field for the Accenture consists of the top 64 players as listed in the world golf rankings. There's no randomness in deciding who gets to play, just as there was no randomness in deciding who would play in the PGA Championship when it was a match play format.

Winning a match play event produces a champion who is as as worthy of the victory as one who wins at stroke play, as all the tournament rounds in a match play event carry the same 'weight' as the final round of a stroke play event. 

 

[George Pazin]

George,
It's not always the best 72 holes, you can play average golf for 54 holes and have one stellar day. There are many instances of come-from-behind victories on tour where that one final round has decided the outcome. Think Paul Lawrie at the 1999 British Open, he made up 10 strokes, or Stewart Cink, who made up 9 in 1994's MCI. There are at least 8 guys who came back from 8 shots, and many more who came back from 7, 6, or 5 shots back. 

The field for the Accenture consists of the top 64 players as listed in the world golf rankings. There's no randomness in deciding who gets to play, just as there was no randomness in deciding who would play in the PGA Championship when it was a match play format.

Winning a match play event produces a champion who is as as worthy of the victory as one who wins at stroke play, as all the tournament rounds in a match play event carry the same 'weight' as the final round of a stroke play event. 

 

Of course you can play 3 average ones and 1 stellar one and win, but you can rarely play one bad round and win, as you can in match play. It's interesting you chose the 99 Open as an example - if that's match play, Van de Velde would've closed everyone else out well before the craziness of the 19th. Would he have been more worthy than Lawrie? Hard to say, neither has done much since.

There's no randomness in choosing the players, but what I am referring to is the randomness of when you face each other in the draw. It's very possible to play 2 average rounds and win, while another guy can play a great round and lose. I'm not saying this happens all the time, or even most of the time, I'm simply saying it does make me feel as confident that the winner was the best golfer that week, which to me, should be the goal each week.

I still haven't decided definitively one way or the other. As I said, I enjoy the unique nature of this event, I just don't think I'd want to see it more frequently (actually, who am I kidding, I don't even watch pro golf anymore unless it's a major, so it wouldn't matter to me at all), or deciding something more important than a (yawn) World Golf event...

[Carl Nichols]

I don't think television conveys the differences between match play and stroke play very well. Match play really has an interpersonal dynamic that can make it very interesting. In medal play, even coming through the back nine of a major, the players are in their own worlds. I don't know that individual styles of play vary all that much, I think an aggressive guy is still going to play aggressive and a conservative guy still conservative...this touches on Tom's quote of Pete Day and making players uncomfortable. Match Play pushes them outside their comfort better than medal play because the opponent can force your hand.

Bubba Watson talked about the interpersonal issue this week because he played Ben Crane in the first round.  I'm paraphrasing, but he said it was a lot harder to play against his very good friend and mentor (with whom he had gone to Bible study the night before) in match play because someone was going home, than to be paired with the same person in stroke play in 1 of 4 rounds. 

[Jim_Kennedy]

George,
Van de Velde had a triple on the last hole, for a 77. Lawrie had a 67 that day. Jean would have been gone long before he ever reached 18.  

I chose Lawrie as his is the lone 10 stroke comeback.  

[George Pazin]

Well, you're certainly right about the '99 Open, I didn't really think that one through.

I do recall Ian Poulter (reasonably certain it was him) last year saying the Match Play was the easiest event to win, because you only had to beat 6 guys, whereas other weeks you had to beat 100+.

Still undecided...

[Matthew Petersen]

As to the random issue, the winners list is pretty impressive:

1999   Jeff Maggert      
2000   Darren Clarke   
2001   Steve Stricker   
2002   Kevin Sutherland   
2003   Tiger Woods
2004  Tiger Woods
2005   David Toms   
2006   Geoff Ogilvy
2007   Henrik Stenson   
2008   Tiger Woods   
2009   Geoff Ogilvy   
2010   Ian Poulter   
2011   Luke Donald

nuff said

Pick any major or any tour event and see if the list is more impressive
I'd say match play might even be a better way to deterine the better player
It's not like we don't have fluke winners in stroke play events

Limiting the field to the top 64 in the world guarantees a good champion before the event even begins. Sorry...that's a result of the field, not the format.

You all pretty much got to the first point I would have made. We tend to think of a #1 falling to a #16 as a big upset, but really we're talking about the 64th best golfer in the wolrd beating the #1 guy. That could happen any given day in a medal round tournament, as well, because all of these guys are insanely good and really close.

[Jim_Kennedy]

George,
Poulter's remark has some truth to it, but in those 'other weeks' you can lose to everbody for one day, 69 others on the second day, 69 others on the third day, a few guys on the fourth day and still win.  

[David Harshbarger]

Well, you're certainly right about the '99 Open, I didn't really think that one through.

I do recall Ian Poulter (reasonably certain it was him) last year saying the Match Play was the easiest event to win, because you only had to beat 6 guys, whereas other weeks you had to beat 100+.

Still undecided...

Too bad that holds for the other 63 players, too.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()