If you pop into the clubhouse at any golf club on a competition day, you will almost certainly here a few strong remarks about scoring, handicap indexes and in some cases, accusations of outright cheating.
Stableford competitions tend to draw this range of opinions out of members, as the format is generally considered to be more forgiving than a strokeplay medal, but what is an 'acceptable' winning score?
I have a strong opinion on this question, but to provide a little balance I decide to ask three of my colleagues to weigh in on the debate...
What Is An 'Acceptable' Winning Score In A Stableford Competition?
I'll start off by saying my piece, before I move on to share the wisdom of my colleagues at Golf Monthly HQ.
It goes without saying that you can also get involved in this conversation, especially if you strong agree or disagree with something we have said on this debate, so drop us a comment in the box at the bottom of this article.
As a high-handicap golfer, I sometimes get a little bit annoyed when I hear good golfers complaining that they can't win competitions due to scoring in competitions and the role that the handicap system has to play in that.
I should not be made to feel guilty because once in my life I posted 42 points in a Stableford and won.
I would do almost anything to be good at this infuriating game, which is one of the reasons I am putting myself through an expert winter golf rebuild, so you'll forgive me if my sympathy is limited.
Therefore, my answer to the question above is that there is no set 'acceptable' score, providing everyone has a bit of common decency and plays the game in the spirit it was intended.
Ultimately, as long as everyone puts a card in regularly, they are entitled to shoot whatever they are able to. If you are suggesting foul play, which is a different story altogether, then I am totally against that - but shooting an awesome round should always be celebrated.
The problem comes when people don't put a card in regularly, or they bend the rules and play the system, because the issue is then with integrity rather than scoring and handicaps.
Golf is a game designed to be played by everyone. A 28-handicap golfer has just as much of a right to win a Stableford as anyone else, but if you are really opposed to this notion I would suggest raising with your competitions committee about having varied competitions for different handicap bands.
One prize for best gross, one for best nett under a 15-handicap and one for best nett over a 15-handicap. Job done - let's move on to bigger issues that need addressing... like dress code or slow play.
As a general rule – and obviously this depends on the nature of the course, the conditions on the day and the size of field – I have no problem if 38 or 39 points wins a competition.
For me, things start to change a bit when the winning score begins with a 4. If I come in with 36 or 37 points, I've had a very solid round, but I'd expect at least one other person in the field to beat me.
If I sign for 39 points and don't go home with the trophy, I'd find it slightly galling. It also depends on who's won. If it's a 10- or 5-handicapper having the round of their life, I wouldn't mind losing out to a score in the very early 40s.
If it's someone off 36 who's shot 100 and come away with 48 points, I'd find that harder to take. This debate highlights how impossible the task of appropriate handicapping is, though.
For a start, improving golfers are far more likely to play significantly under their handicap than single-figure players.
You'll also generally find far more high- and mid-range players in any given tournament given there are simply more of them – it's proportional.
I don't know what the answer is and it's a complex issue, but I wonder if there's a way of capping Stableford scores at 40 points in competitions.
I think an ‘acceptable’ maximum winning score in a Stableford is in the 42-43 range.
That does sound high, but I think it’s a doable score for anyone having their best round of the year. It also means the golfer will likely get a two-shot handicap cut, I would imagine.
Once you start getting to 44 points and above, it starts to look a bit like something has gone wrong and the player’s handicap index is too high.
Sadly a score of 38 or 39 points has no chance at winning in most instances these days, but I don’t think we should begrudge genuine club golfers who have had a great round, perhaps including a chip-in, an amazing day on the greens and one or two lucky breaks, and come in with 42 points - we’ve all had rounds like it.
For me, I'd say 40 points and below is an acceptable score for a win. The way I look at it is if a category one player, which I regard as five and below, has to shoot under-par to have a chance, then the winning score is too high.
In this day and age, a score of 40 points doesn't even guarantee a podium position, such is the severe nature of the new World Handicap System.
Obviously, if a player is regularly shooting that, getting better and getting their handicap lower in the process, then they must be applauded.
If, however, it's a player who is clearly sandbagging and saving their best rounds for the big club events, then there should be a way in which it's penalized.
