Who Else Hates Scrambles?

[KingSlender]

I know that every golf outing is always a scramble because of the varied skill levels, but my buddy thinks I'm a snob because I don't like to play our club's kickoff event, which is an A-B-C-D scramble. 

Yeah, I get the point of it to mix teams up and get to know other/new members, but I honestly can't be bothered.  Would much rather that they play it as a SWAT format - still A-B-C-D players, but you only count the lowest gross score (no gimmes).  

I just don't get the point of scrambles beyond people who love to booze it up and they are always rife with cheating. 

[DaveP043]

39 minutes ago, KingSlender said:

Yeah, I get the point of it to mix teams up and get to know other/new members, but I honestly can't be bothered.  Would much rather that they play it as a SWAT format - still A-B-C-D players, but you only count the lowest gross score (no gimmes).  

So you understand this format is intended to get as many people involved as possible, but you prefer a format where the only scores that are likely to count are those of the better players.  How often do you think the score of the D player would count?  And knowing his score won't count, why would be "be bothered" to play?  

I'm not a fan of scrambles, but I understand the reason to use the format.  I DO enjoy meeting club members, and I believe that my club's spring scramgle is relatively free of cheating, although there definitely ARE some players who overdo the libations.  If your club's scramble is rife with cheating, that's a problem with the culture of your club, not a problem with scrambles in general.  

[KingSlender]

2 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

So you understand this format is intended to get as many people involved as possible, but you prefer a format where the only scores that are likely to count are those of the better players.  How often do you think the score of the D player would count?  And knowing his score won't count, why would be "be bothered" to play?  

I'm not a fan of scrambles, but I understand the reason to use the format.  I DO enjoy meeting club members, and I believe that my club's spring scramgle is relatively free of cheating, although there definitely ARE some players who overdo the libations.  If your club's scramble is rife with cheating, that's a problem with the culture of your club, not a problem with scrambles in general.  

D players are just as sidelined in scrambles - maybe they hit one lucky shot or sink 1 long putt (putting first, always).  

 

[iacas]

8 minutes ago, KingSlender said:

D players are just as sidelined in scrambles - maybe they hit one lucky shot or sink 1 long putt (putting first, always).

They have the potential for every one of their shots to count, and thus feel involved. And I think a lot of people use the C and D player shots more often than they think, if only because if they hit a decent shot the B and A player can "go after it" a little (typically resulting in a worse shot overall).

When they're chipping for bogey and the A player has a 15 footer for birdie, they've been out of the hole for a little while already. They feel like they may as well not even be there.

That's a big difference.

I don't love scrambles, either, but they are what they are, and they do involve everyone more so than a SWAT.

[Ty_Webb]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

They have the potential for every one of their shots to count, and thus feel involved. And I think a lot of people use the C and D player shots more often than they think, if only because if they hit a decent shot the B and A player can "go after it" a little (typically resulting in a worse shot overall).

When they're chipping for bogey and the A player has a 15 footer for birdie, they've been out of the hole for a little while already. They feel like they may as well not even be there.

That's a big difference.

I don't love scrambles, either, but they are what they are, and they do involve everyone more so than a SWAT.

Aside from anything else, the D player gets to play their shot from the same place as the A/B/C player each time. SWAT (assuming it's what I think it is) the D player is playing from D player spots while everyone else is not. Hit one OB in a scramble and you get a go at the next shot. Hit one OB in SWAT and your next contribution will be the next hole.

[Shindig]

I don't dislike them, but I don't play in them enough to have a real feel for them.

I really don't like the SWAT format.  The D player is almost never going to have the low gross on a hole, almost certainly not the unique low score.  A net version of SWAT is something I could handle I think. 

A similar format that I came to really enjoy is a 1-2-3 tournament, which my club used to do once or twice a year at some city courses (might still do, I have been inactive in the club and am just getting back in now).  Each foursome is a team.  On hole 1, the best (net) score from the group counts for the "team" score.  On hole two, the two best count.  On hole three, the three best.  Then on hole four, we're back to the best one, and we repeat that pattern for all 18.   My first time playing in such an event, the tournament director and a few others were realizing they hadn't decided what the tiebreaker would be, as two teams had come in at 121.  While they were debating it, my team finished our round and posted a 120, which included my first ever sub-80 round.    Everyone gets a chance to feel like they're involved, although it probably isn't for the "few times a year" players that a scramble can get involved.   Some of my favorite not-involving-me stories from these events were the plus handicap players being the ones out for a hole -- if the #18 handicap hole number is a multiple of three, the rest of the team might have to carry the plus handicap.