Scoring 101: Don`t record a 35 on #18

[iacas]

Originally Posted by colin007

see, this is one of the things about competition golf that i dont like.  i know there will be purists here that will say that it was the kids fault (as it was, im not debating that), but the kid took a certain number of strokes, and in my mind thats what he shot.  its not the number written on the card, its the strokes he took.  the kid that went instead of him didnt play better, and thats not right in my book.

And yet if a baseball player runs OVER second base but doesn't actually touch it, he can be called out if they appeal the play and touch second base, even if he's hit a home run. That kind of rule exists in every sport and elsewhere in life, particularly in the law.

Originally Posted by ditchparrot19

The rule is archaic and way over the top. In what other sport are the participants charged with being the official recorders?

"In what other sport" analogies fail because there aren't other sports in which the competitors are alone and without a rules supervisor. And in SEVERAL sports players are taken at their honor not to cheat, and thus to be honest.

FWIW, I never write down my final scores. I write down my individual hole scores. I'm not responsible for adding the scores up, so I don't bother.

Originally Posted by ditchparrot19

Especially for youths. If we're talking legal minors here, their signatures are basically worthless on anything in society. It should be the same for a golf scorecard.

Oh brother. If that's the case then all of their scores are worthless, too, and we should just eliminate junior competitive golf because it's all worthless.

[wadesworld]

In thinking more about this case, I think the committee taking the effort to track down the kid and have him correct his score would actually have been more harmful than good.

Why?  Well first, it's unfair.  What if another kid failed to qualify for the tournament last week because he made the same mistake but in his case, nobody tracked him down and offered him the chance to change it? Or if another kid in the same tournament made a mistake but nobody tracked him down? It would be pretty unfair to them.  Thus, you need to have one iron-clad set of procedures and stick to it.

Second, he's going to learn a very important lesson about how scorecards work.  If he plays in the state championship or plays golf in college, or plays some level of professional golf, nobody is going to track him down to have him correct a scoring mistake.  Better for him to learn that lesson now, than later in his career when the stakes might be much, much higher.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by iacas

And yet if a baseball player runs OVER second base but doesn't actually touch it, he can be called out if they appeal the play and touch second base, even if he's hit a home run. That kind of rule exists in every sport and elsewhere in life, particularly in the law.

I agree that the player has to take some responsibility (and the under 18 issue is a non-starter) but you are using the wrong baseball analogy.  Touching all the bases is an ON FIELD requirement similar to how golf requires players to hole out 6 inch putts in stroke play.  Here is the better baseball analogy:

Suppose each manager was required to sign the official score card at the end of the game to verify the number of runs the other team scored each inning

Team A scored 4 runs total

Team B scored 3 runs total with 0 in the 9th

The official scorer wrote down all the inning scores correctly except for the 9th where they put a 3 for Team B instead of 0

Team A`s manager signed off on the official scorers card.

Team A is considered to have lost "6" to 4

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by wadesworld

In thinking more about this case, I think the committee taking the effort to track down the kid and have him correct his score would actually have been more harmful than good.

Why?  Well first, it's unfair.  What if another kid failed to qualify for the tournament last week because he made the same mistake but in his case, nobody tracked him down and offered him the chance to change it? Or if another kid in the same tournament made a mistake but nobody tracked him down? It would be pretty unfair to them.  Thus, you need to have one iron-clad set of procedures and stick to it.

Second, he's going to learn a very important lesson about how scorecards work.  If he plays in the state championship or plays golf in college, or plays some level of professional golf, nobody is going to track him down to have him correct a scoring mistake.  Better for him to learn that lesson now, than later in his career when the stakes might be much, much higher.

You know what?  You're right.  I was thinking because it's so obviously a mistake that it would be "fair" to him to get it fixed.  But if there are other kids with much less obvious mistakes (a 6 instead of a 5, for example) that aren't going to raise any red flags, then they are punished.

The main part of my original argument comes from me not understanding how tournaments really work.  I was kind of picturing a kid standing there turning in the card to somebody who looks at it and thinks to themselves "wow, this kid stinks ... he got a 35 on one hole.  Hmmm, that's funny, he didn't fill out the total for the back 9.  Oh, I get it, he wrote the total in the wrong column.  Well, sucks for him, he already signed it" all with the kid standing right there.  It seems to me that that would be a situation where somebody could simply say, "are you sure about that?" and show the 35 to him, get it fixed, and be done with it.

Sounds like, though, that isn't how it works, based on responses above.  You turn your card in, then leave, then somebody else at some other time reviews it?

[Audaxi]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

You know what?  You're right.  I was thinking because it's so obviously a mistake that it would be "fair" to him to get it fixed.  But if there are other kids with much less obvious mistakes (a 6 instead of a 5, for example) that aren't going to raise any red flags, then they are punished.

The main part of my original argument comes from me not understanding how tournaments really work.  I was kind of picturing a kid standing there turning in the card to somebody who looks at it and thinks to themselves "wow, this kid stinks ... he got a 35 on one hole.  Hmmm, that's funny, he didn't fill out the total for the back 9.  Oh, I get it, he wrote the total in the wrong column.  Well, sucks for him, he already signed it" all with the kid standing right there.  It seems to me that that would be a situation where somebody could simply say, "are you sure about that?" and show the 35 to him, get it fixed, and be done with it.

Sounds like, though, that isn't how it works, based on responses above.  You turn your card in, then leave, then somebody else at some other time reviews it?

No, they will score the cards while you watch, if you stay there. They sit at a table, and you turn in your scorecards as a group (usually a group of three) and they will get to them after they finish with the scorecards they are currently totaling. Still though, it doesn't really change the rule unfortunately.

[bplewis24]

It seems like everybody is arguing whether or not the kid was at fault and whether or not he should bear the consequences of that fault.  I think the focus should be on whether or not the punishment fits the crime and the social policy is enforced correctly.

Punishment: complete DQ for an administrative error.  IMO the punishment is too severe.  Punish a player with a loss of stroke for each error on the card or something.  But it's obvious he didn't shoot a 35 and eliminating any chance he has to advance because of it is definitely wrong.

Social policy: The person who played the best (or "best enough to qualify") doesn't advance, and not because of an unfair advantage, but because of an oversight which does not in any way pertain to his play.

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

It seems like everybody is arguing whether or not the kid was at fault and whether or not he should bear the consequences of that fault.  I think the focus should be on whether or not the punishment fits the crime and the social policy is enforced correctly.

Punishment: complete DQ for an administrative error.  IMO the punishment is too severe.  Punish a player with a loss of stroke for each error on the card or something.  But it's obvious he didn't shoot a 35 and eliminating any chance he has to advance because of it is definitely wrong.

Social policy: The person who played the best (or "best enough to qualify") doesn't advance, and not because of an unfair advantage, but because of an oversight which does not in any way pertain to his play.

What if he had a non-conforming club in his bag but didnt use it? He still played the best using conforming clubs. I don't know how I feel about the scorecard error / DQ. A 35 versus a 3, 4, or 5 seems extreme. What if it was an 8 instead of a sloppily written 3? Maybe just DQ the kid and if he's really all that he'll win something even bigger in the future.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by bplewis24

It seems like everybody is arguing whether or not the kid was at fault and whether or not he should bear the consequences of that fault.  I think the focus should be on whether or not the punishment fits the crime and the social policy is enforced correctly.

Punishment: complete DQ for an administrative error.  IMO the punishment is too severe.  Punish a player with a loss of stroke for each error on the card or something.  But it's obvious he didn't shoot a 35 and eliminating any chance he has to advance because of it is definitely wrong.

Social policy: The person who played the best (or "best enough to qualify") doesn't advance, and not because of an unfair advantage, but because of an oversight which does not in any way pertain to his play.

To clarify, I don`t think he was actually DQed...he would have been DQed had he posted a lower score on any single hole than he really made...when you mistakenly post a higher score, they just count the higher score.

I don`t remember if I already said this, but I am curious if it had any effect on his team...If 3 or 4 guys from a team qualify individually, the team qualifies...so if he would have been the 3rd qualifier for his team, then the team missed out also.

[wadesworld]

Originally Posted by Audaxi

No, they will score the cards while you watch, if you stay there. They sit at a table, and you turn in your scorecards as a group (usually a group of three) and they will get to them after they finish with the scorecards they are currently totaling. Still though, it doesn't really change the rule unfortunately.

I'd say that depends on the tournament.  I've seen tournaments where the committee is so far behind in getting cards done, you just turn them in and they don't get around to posting them until at least 30 minutes later.

[Mordan]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

The main part of my original argument comes from me not understanding how tournaments really work.  I was kind of picturing a kid standing there turning in the card to somebody who looks at it and thinks to themselves "wow, this kid stinks ... he got a 35 on one hole.  Hmmm, that's funny, he didn't fill out the total for the back 9.  Oh, I get it, he wrote the total in the wrong column.  Well, sucks for him, he already signed it" all with the kid standing right there.  It seems to me that that would be a situation where somebody could simply say, "are you sure about that?" and show the 35 to him, get it fixed, and be done with it.

Sounds like, though, that isn't how it works, based on responses above.  You turn your card in, then leave, then somebody else at some other time reviews it?

My understanding is that in one of these tournaments the card is considered returned to the committee once you've handed it over AND left the scoring area. So if he handed over the card, someone looked at it and queried him over the 35 on the 18th before he left the area then he would be allowed to amend his card to the correct score and all would be fine. But there's no obligation on the committee to review the card before he leaves the scoring area, although he's quite within his rights to ask any questions and get help resolving any issues he has but it's ultimately his own responsibility and I just can't see how the game would work if it wasn't. But yes, in this case a very unfortunate outcome for the lad.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by MEfree

I agree that the player has to take some responsibility (and the under 18 issue is a non-starter) but you are using the wrong baseball analogy.  Touching all the bases is an ON FIELD requirement similar to how golf requires players to hole out 6 inch putts in stroke play.  Here is the better baseball analogy:

Suppose each manager was required to sign the official score card at the end of the game to verify the number of runs the other team scored each inning

Team A scored 4 runs total

Team B scored 3 runs total with 0 in the 9th

The official scorer wrote down all the inning scores correctly except for the 9th where they put a 3 for Team B instead of 0

Team A`s manager signed off on the official scorers card.

Team A is considered to have lost "6" to 4

I think my analogy was fine.

The baseball example I gave was a similar offense: the player gained no real "advantage" because he still ran "over" second base, but the letter of the law says you have to TOUCH it, not just run OVER it, so he can be called out, even if he hit a home run (i.e. hit it in such a way that there was no time pressure, etc. to touch second base). In fact, you could argue that if you hit a home run why even run the bases just as you could argue that why sign a scorecard when we "know" what the player shot?

So I'm sticking with my analogy, thank you. All you did was apply a golf rule to a made-up baseball rule. Analogies are similar situations, not identical situations forced onto the comparison when it doesn't exist in real life. :P