Inappropriate Action by the World Am Committee?

[Raymond Blank]

Welcome to my world my friend. 2 years ago I shot a 79 in the 3 rd round a guy with a higher shot a 81 and we both net 64. I got the same as you. The round of my life. Played this year with a 14 HC. Shot 91,91,91,98. Awesome. The last dat there were at least 6 or 8 players that shot under par. The winner and the 2 Nd place shot 80 and 81 and net 66,67. Ok I waited to see what was going to happen. NOTHING. So let’s just go play and let the cards fall as they may, have fun, meet new people, and thank the world AM for all the hard work they do every year and sweep that under the rug. Don’t know about everyone else but I love to go weather I play good or not it’s still a awesome place to play golf andI wish more people would think that way. Again thank’s Mr. Scott

[John Decatur]

My frustration is Scott and his committee refuse to address the cheaters that know what they are doing and have 5 birdies and a eagle in one round but then purposely miss short putts late in a round or do whatever it takes so they don’t show up on the alogrithm formula they use. I wish I was good enough of a player where I could beat the system and have 5 birdies and a eagle in one round. I can’t remember the last time I had a eagle let alone more than 2 or 3 birdies in one round let alone 5 which I never did. I had 2 eagles in one round once but that was 20 years ago when I could hit drives a long ways. I guess the only way to do that would be to inflate my handicap. Problem is I am too competitive and want to play my best. Since I have returned from Myrtle, I shake my head everyday how the guy that won my Flight #18 had to cheat the system to win $600.00 and a trophy. My only question is why? Did he not get enough love from his parents when he was a child. If it was for the money I would of given him the $600.00 just to not have him play in my flight. I was told he played as a 5 handicap previously and won his flight as a 5 handicap but skipped last years tournament and now he is a 10 handicap this year. I call BS on that and ask how Scott the master of statistics didn’t call him out or adjust him based on previous years handicaps. I am sick of reading people kissing Scott’s butt saying how wonderful he is. I have played in 12 world ams and a combined 13 fall handicaps/March Championship so a total of 25 of their events. Scott seems to DQ a lot of first timers but certain people win their flights many times and they aren’t ever DQ. What are the odds of that, I am sure Scott has statistics on that? Maybe the solution is suck up to Scott and I won’t get a DQ. I hate suck ups and refuse to drink the kool aid. It’s the same with his member clubs, pay your dues and we will let you host a round in the World Am. Maybe he should run statistics on how many years in a row certain golf courses haven’t lived up to par and make them sit out until they can show they have improved. He wants constructive criticism and ideas I offer that as a suggestion. Like others I miss honest comments that Jeff Barbas would provide. I may too get banned but at least it was for being honest. Cheaters never win and I hope karma gets Flight 18 winner and others like him. I played my first senior tournament at my club when I returned from Myrtle, shot a 99 in round one with 44 putts. The second day I shot 83 with 22 putts. Scott probably would of DQ me, I didn’t win any money but my point is the one day I couldn’t make a putt nor could the field and day 2 I played like I should and yes both scores were posted. I have over 100+ scores posted this year. Quite a range of scores. That is amateur golf.

[Tommy Briggs]

The formula the WA uses for “exceptional scores” was created by the USGA and is in their Rules of Golf manual. The WHS has expounded on those rules. In years past you had the average of twenty scores and a new HI revision on the 1st or 15th. You could easily manipulate those 20 scores to “hide” an exceptional score. Today an exceptional score immediately reduces your HI, and the twenty scores are no longer a factor, the exceptional score overrides the twenty score average. This means you could enter a tournament today with a 6 HI, shoot an exceptional round and immediately your HI drops to 2.0 and that 2.0 cannot be hidden by adding scores to create a higher HI.

It is very hard to identify someone who has cheated unless you examine every single scorecard. A “regular” or normal score is not going to raise any alarms so the only way to really do it would be to audit every single card. There may be a computer program you could use, but what would be the parameters? Everyone who shoots an exceptional score is mad when they are adjusted or DQ’d, every one who loses to someone who shoots an exceptional score cries foul.

This year is unique because the WA lost the ability to view an entire years worth of HI’s. If someone wants to manipulate their handicap for an entire year just to come to the WA with a higher handicap it is hard to stop them, THE FIRST TIME. Now after competing in the WA once, the next year regardless of the HI you submit, the WA has a prior tourney HI to use in lieu of the submitted HI.

Because flights ae carefully planned in advance one simple answer would be to move a player to the next flight down. But that would create a logistical nightmare for the WA staff. I personally feel the best and fairest way is to compare a players score to their flight. If the entire flight averages 80 over the four rounds and one player averages 76, those 16 shots I think imply something is amiss.

I do think the implication that Scott has done or is involved in anything unethical is insulting and simply wrong. But you are entitled to your opinion. I do wonder why if you feel such improprieties go on why you continue to come back. Personally I would not play in a tournament I felt was rigged and I had no chance of winning.

[Mike Cheeseman]

Well said Tommy

[John Decatur]

Let me begin by saying Tommy, I never said or alleged that Scott was involved in anything unethical and once again Tommy you are being corrected by another person on these forums. Do you think it is odd that numerous people correct your inaccurate comments and you are the only one that is corrected constantly I talk facts the guy that won my flight this year in 2017 won his flight by 11 shots that year and wasn’t DQ then either. He led every round, the facts are their for you to see. You constantly spew crap about the USGA that’s great. I play in the tournament because I have met many friends over the years and I enjoy seeing them and I love the area as I graduated from Coastal Carolina University in 1992 and spent 4 years of my life in Myrtle Beach.
Looking at past results you have won more than once is that why you chose to attack me with inaccurate statements.
I have made my point clear Scott has chosen not to respond which is typical when he can’t stand the heat or knows the truth.

[Scott T. – World Am]

John – I’ve never said the system is perfect. No need to suck up to me. Based on your words to me the past few weeks I know you don’t intend to which is not an issue. I just ask you be courteous.

Anyways, we have a committee for all decisions. Me nor any one person is wielding any executive power.

I want to reiterate — each time we make the decision to remove (or not to remove) someone from the event there is a corresponding debate because it’s a difficult call to make. The mindset – keep it objective. Don’t take it lightly. Do the best with the info we have. We don’t look at past participant or not. I’ve made phone calls to 20+ year players way more often than I’d like.

In situations you bring up the issue is that a handicap is comprised of an adjusted gross score (with ESC). If I don’t require ESC it’s technically irrelevant if I had 9 birdies & 9 doubles. Exaggerated for effect.

Maybe there is a way to find those that fly under the radar but we’ve yet to determine a method that makes sense. Most are more subjective than we are comfortable with. We aren’t pro golfers. We’re bound to miss. If I’m careering it– did I make double on the last because I caved? Or because I was going to get adjusted? I tend to lean the former but that is an obvious debate.

Someone taking a few years off is not fair to use as a case. The handicap index only goes back 1 year itself for Low HI. People get older, worse, shorter in distance. To clarify some misinformation, that player who you mention was a 9 in their ghin, we just placed them at a 7 the year after winning their flight as an 8.6 (not a 5). FWIW he also finished in near last place that year we made him a 7 based on data we had. To be a 10 this year is no big deal even if we did look at that data. For everyone’s sake we, and fellow players shouldn’t assume wrongdoing by a person.

I guess the overall point being we look at a LOT of data and utilize a lot of data. But some things aren’t able to be dissected properly without making assumptions, like ‘throwing shots’.

Lastly, the only people who ever get banned from this Board are for misuse, not a poor opinion of the event. We can handle differing opinions. Sorry for the lengthy post just writing out thoughts as they came to my head.

[Tommy Briggs]

“”My frustration is Scott and his committee refuse to address the cheaters””

“”Maybe the solution is suck up to Scott and I won’t get a DQ””

John the two comments above are the exact word for word statements you made that I took as an implication of Scott doing something unethical. I apologize if you did not intend them that way but I do not see how to interpret them otherwise.

I am unaware of anyone “correcting me”, or any “inaccurate statements” I made, perhaps you could point them out to me, thanks.

Lastly I did not challenge any specific situation that occurred in your flight. I did not bring up any specific situation that occurred at the WA period. I merely stated that there are rules in the USGA Rule Book that address exceptional scores and that the WA did not invent them.

You seem awful mad at me, I do not know you so I am not sure why, but Peace Brother and god Bless.

[Mike Cheeseman]

Get together next year and have a beer together then agree to disagree.

[William Aleshire Jr.]

The below statement seems to be the appropriate way to do things:

HANDICAP MONITORING
Any participant found, at any time, to be using a fraudulent handicap will be expelled from the tournament and all fees will be forfeited.

In addition, players who score exceptionally low scores will have their handicap reviewed and adjusted if necessary on a daily basis. Any player who scores exceptionally low scores after being adjusted may be disqualified. Any players disqualified will forfeit all paid tournament fees. All decisions of the Tournament Committee are final.
The player should have been able to play the final day then reviewed and then disqualified at that point if necessary.

I myself have shot a 102 then turned around and shot a an 85. (It happens)

[Tommy Briggs]

The “review” has to take place after each round, any adjustments have to be made after each round. I do agree everyone should be allowed to play all four rounds.

A player who is “in the hunt” wants to know where they stand going into each round, and even as the round is progressing. If you wait till all rounds are complete, a player in contention might take some chances he would not normally because he thinks he needed to gain some shots on the leader. Those risk / reward shots could cost him a couple of shots. Meanwhile Player C comes from behind and overtakes them both after the adjustments and the lost shots.

Frequently when I am in contention at a tournament I base shot decisions on whether I am protecting a lead or trying to gain on the leader. I won my flight last year and I played on the final day with the person who was in second place, throughout the round I adjusted my shot selection based on what the other player did.

In addition If I am in contention and I am going to be adjusted I want to know immediately so I know how to play the remaining rounds, and where I actually stand not where I think I stand.

[Author]

Posts