18-Hole Playoffs

[iacas]

I like it. I think it's the fairest of any system, and since only true golf fans care who wins anyway, they'll watch or find out while everyone else is off the hook.

[cold]

I like the sudden death playoffs

I didn't find the LPGA playoff on any channels I have
I don't care to wait another day for results
I'm usually busier on Mondays
I find it's boring - too long, loses excitment (especially when one takes off with a lead)

Sudden death: you still have the energy from the 18th hole finish, not a memory of it, and players have to perform immediately. There's no room for error; every shot is more critical than in any full round. It seems to be the most logical progression off of a round, too.

I suppose the other side might say it's unfair, but there is no true 'fairness' (if such a thing really existed) in any sport, much less golf. If you want to judge a player's ability to perform under pressure, immediatly, where they cannot reason away a bad shot with a half-assed disappointment, an almost mulligan mentality, sudden death style is the more obvious answer.

[iacas]

Sudden death: you still have the energy from the 18th hole finish, not a memory of it, and players have to perform immediately. There's no room for error; every shot is more critical than in any full round. It seems to be the most logical progression off of a round, too.

I suppose the other side might say it's unfair, but there is no true 'fairness' (if such a thing really existed) in any sport, much less golf. If you want to judge a player's ability to perform under pressure, immediatly, where they cannot reason away a bad shot with a half-assed disappointment, an almost mulligan mentality, sudden death style is the more obvious answer.

I disagree. I could beat Tiger Woods in one hole of golf (not often, but I could). But over 18 there's no way in hell. Not even if he played left-handed, probably.

So I like 18 because, like Tatum said, "we're trying to identify the best golfer."

Not the one who gets the lucky bounce or roll in a hole or two of sudden death.

[cold]

Yeah that's a good point.

[ragontona]

I don't like the 18 hole playoff at all. True, it does decide who's the best golfer -- but I think it decides who's the best golfer on that particular Monday. All of the momentum a player has built up on Sunday afternoon can disappear overnight, or it gives a limping horse a chance to catch its breath and regroup. I think that after 72, they should get right back out there and finish up. Not to mention the logistical nightmare for the fans... and let's face it; there are a lot of true golf fans that just can't swing it in their schedules to watch an 18-hole playoff.

I don't agree with sudden death playoffs because it feels like they're nullifying the 72 holes that led up to it. It's like an OT game in the NFL -- whoever wins the coin toss only has to drive it to the 35 to end the game. A lot of the time, it's anticlimatic. Also, say someone goes low in the final round, and has to play the waiting game for all the other players to come in. That guy's momentum has been halted with only one hole to regain it.

But the sudden death playoff still has a place in golf though (see below).

I prefer the three or four hole playoff; it gives the players a chance to continue (or change) momentum. A player can recover from a bogey, a player can still get sloppy on the last hole. There could be multiple lead changes. A three or four hole playoff can be completed in less than one hour. It'd be compelling television, and great for the gallery in attendance.

And should the tournament still not be decided after the three or four hole playoff, THEN go to sudden death.

Then if that doesn't work... chicken with golf carts.

[Thrash13]

I'm not a big fan of the 18-hole playoff. Like the guy above me said, the tournament should be determined on Sunday (weather and daylight permitting of course).

I don't like the one-hole playoff either. Like Erik said, any golfer can get a lucky bounce and win any given hole.

I like the three-hole playoff or four-hole playoff. They give golfers plenty of chances to hit great shots and plenty of chances to hit bad shots.

It's just better to find out who your champion is an hour after they finish 72 holes instead of having to wait until the next day. And besides, I always have to work on Monday and end up hearing the results before getting the chance to watch it for myself. That sucks.

[cmarkmyers]

I think it is the most legitamate way to find the best golfer. But from a viewers standpoint it stinks to have to wait another day to find out who the winner is; especially if I am unable to watch on Monday.

So a 3 or 4 hole playoff that would move to sudden death if still tied would work well enough for me.

However, if things had been a bit different on the 18th of the Men's Open we would have had a Phil - Monty - Ogilvy - Furyk - Harrington match. Now we all know that didn't happen, and the odds against something like that happening are astronomical, but that would have been a hell of a thing to see. I would have called in sick :)

[tpgolf]

For a major I think the 18 hole playoff is the best way to determine the winner. During a 4 hole playoff anyone can get real hot over a short span. In a one hole playoff the winner rarely wins becasue they played better, it's because the runner hit one marginal or bad shot. Len Mattiace in 2003, Raymond Floyd vs Faldo, and Scott Hoch missing a short putt vs Faldo. For a major the true test is 18 holes. I know the Masters will never change because it is a made for tv major now. They know they would never have the ratings on a Monday

[ragontona]

Nice article on the subject at SI.