Ace Pot for the "Cali" player

[chevis]

Interesting side note for discussion, sorry for getting off topic but it brought this to my mind. A few weeks back we had junior playing a NON SANCTIONED solo league round. Despite the Tee/Pin/OB information being listed for everyone the group he was playing with had him tee off from the "short" pad on the final hole (an additional temp hole only used for league play and the only hole on the course with two "known" tee locations). The short pad had been deemed too easy long ago and league plays from the longer (although only 20 feet longer) pad that forces a shot shape instead of a wide open shot. Anyways, Junior player throws his tee shot from the short pad and Ace's it. This is observed by several other cards, including the TD hosting the league. How would you have handled this? Interested to see if the decision that was made that day would line up with everyone else on here.

misplay +2 = 3 on the hole.
now as for the acepot: not many juniors usually pay in, but supposing he did, i would not give the acepot to a misplay.

 

[Sewer bill]

Interesting side note for discussion, sorry for getting off topic but it brought this to my mind. A few weeks back we had junior playing a NON SANCTIONED solo league round. Despite the Tee/Pin/OB information being listed for everyone the group he was playing with had him tee off from the "short" pad on the final hole (an additional temp hole only used for league play and the only hole on the course with two "known" tee locations). The short pad had been deemed too easy long ago and league plays from the longer (although only 20 feet longer) pad that forces a shot shape instead of a wide open shot. Anyways, Junior player throws his tee shot from the short pad and Ace's it. This is observed by several other cards, including the TD hosting the league. How would you have handled this? Interested to see if the decision that was made that day would line up with everyone else on here.

Depends how junior we're talking and was this his first time playing this layout and was he prompted by the adults on the card to play that short tee?

Junior enough to not know better or feel comfortable speaking up to grown ups when prompted to play the short tee, club keeps the ace pot card pays out the junior or splits it with the club or something along those lines kid gets paid either way.

Junior but old enough for a regular ol lame life lesson, no payout and a stern talking to the adults of the card while including the junior and an apology to the junior with an explanation of why no payout.

I'd personally still pay him something.

 

[ru4por]

Interesting side note for discussion, sorry for getting off topic but it brought this to my mind. A few weeks back we had junior playing a NON SANCTIONED solo league round. Despite the Tee/Pin/OB information being listed for everyone the group he was playing with had him tee off from the "short" pad on the final hole (an additional temp hole only used for league play and the only hole on the course with two "known" tee locations). The short pad had been deemed too easy long ago and league plays from the longer (although only 20 feet longer) pad that forces a shot shape instead of a wide open shot. Anyways, Junior player throws his tee shot from the short pad and Ace's it. This is observed by several other cards, including the TD hosting the league. How would you have handled this? Interested to see if the decision that was made that day would line up with everyone else on here.

This year, our league discussed and passed a measure for "junior membership". (18 and under). They get a reduced membership rate and only received a shirt, disc and PDGA membership discount. Full membership offers a couple additional discounts and swag. The membership also allows access to all of our 5 leagues. Under 16 require a guardian to play on the card and they are excluded from all ace pool and CTP's.

 

[DanJon]

I like our Cali rules at our local private course.

You get any two shots, but you have to take the second shot result if you throw twice.

Makes for more psychological effects when you hit a tree halfway down the fairway and then throw again to end up hitting first available.

Anywho, we generally pay out for Cali Aces as is

 

[araytx]

We have a very casual social doubles league on a short course with many ace opportunities. Nearly everyone buys in to a $2 ace pot. If there is an odd number of people that show up someone ends up playing "Cali" (one mulligan per hole). The controversy is do you pay out the ace pot if the Cali hits an ace on the second tee shot? Seems like it gives the cali an unfair advantage.

ed, as you can see, there are as many philosophies as there are people. So whatever you guys decide to do, make that determination BEFORE the round, so everyone knows and understands. Nothing worse than having this same debate AFTER some cali aces and it hasn't been explicitly decided.

I'm guessing it's less about having a 2nd drive...and more about your ability to throw a shot, adjust, then throw another shot with that new information. That's a HUGE advantage...though to your point it's not like paying double the ace pot makes much sense either since you're not always going to use your mulligan on your drive.

But it should definitely be much more advantageous to get to throw 2 drives on 9 holes than it is to simply be the 2nd partner to tee off on 9 holes.

what dmoore is talking about is something our local rules were adjusted to handle. We didn't let the Cali do the back-to-back thing. The group that had the Cali always alternated teams throwing -- Player 1, then Cali 1, then Player 2, then Cali 2, (if it were 3 in the group; if 5 adjust accordingly). The reason is many complained especially when the Cali player was putting. He'd putt make a miss, never leave the mark or spot with his bag close enough to just grab the other putter and putt again, "adjusting" to his miss. After that happened enough times, we just made the Cali HAVE to either allow the other team to throw in between or if that was not possible, he'd be required to step off his mark for 5 seconds before retuning and making the next throw/shot.

Though there is some merit in the ability to adjust, I'd stop short of "much more advantageous". The biggest advantage, in either case, is the freedom to run at the basket without consequences of a bad throw. Additionally, while the ability to adjust on a 2nd shot is valuable on a long putt, I'd imagine it's less so on a drive -- particularly on a familiar course, which is where I imagine this most often arises.

Depending on the course, the cali player may use his mulligans on fewer than 9 drives, and many of those may be to recover from bad drives. I'd imagine the main exception is on pitch-and-putt courses, where baskets are frequently parked, freeing the player for a free-run 2nd shot.

As you noticed later, the course matters in this case. On a short, "very-aceable-most-holes"-type course the Cali is RARELY using the mull to putt, and most likely going to intentionally use it to run at aces, This is especially true (and becomes truer) the higher the ace pot gets. Our club has ace pot restrictions and relative caps as well, to remedy this.

It's a tough call. My first thought was that the 'Cali/Solo/Sven/whatever' person should put in double for the ace pot if they want a second tee shot to count. But then I thought about it some more.....depending on the rules the Cali/Solo/Sven/whatever person is playing by, they may not be taking a second tee shot on every hole. Most 'Cali' players usually only get one extra throw per hole and they have to decide when to use it. So, it wouldn't be beneficial/fair to them if they had to pay double for the ace pot, but couldn't throw two on every tee pad AND have a second shot elsewhere. And being Cali/Solo/Sven/whatever isn't a choice....it's usually how the doubles selection happens. So that person is being punished by only having one extra throw per hole, when every other team gets two tries for every throw.

I think it just comes down to what your group/league decides BEFORE play happens. In my opinion, I think it should just be the first throw counts for everyone. The Cali/Solo/Sven/whatever player may take two shots off the tee...but they are still ONE person and each person only gets one try off of each tee pad. For example: Player Dan and John are a team, player Chuck is a 'Cali/Solo/Sven/whatever'. Dan only gets one try for an ace off each tee pad, John only gets one try off each tee pad, and Chuck only gets one try off each tee pad (his first throw). If Chuck throws a second off a tee pad and gets it in the basket....it's a 1, but not eligible for the Ace Pot.

We've played where if they want two throws at the ace pot, the Cali pays in twice, but then he gets two throws on every shot.

And I've seen it a few many other ways. as well. As stated above, the course matters. Some players, on a decent sized ace pot aren't even trying to get the lowest score, they'd just want 18 runs at the ace pot regardless of what happened. I've seen it.

 

[Hampstead]

Locally, the Mulligan player can get paid if ace is hit on second throw. I have benefited from this.

 

[GripEnemy]

If "both players" bought in then yes second shot should count. If that person only paid for "one of them" then I agree it shouldn't count.

Side note, I'll play Cali 100% of the time in doubles if I'm allowed lol (regardless of an ace pot)

 

[Mike C]

Y'all are too harsh…. The throw counts so the ace counts.

Yeah I can't see any argument otherwise. Shot counts as a 1 on the scorecard so it should count as an ace in this context.

Now calling it a cubby ace wouldn't be wrong, but when it comes to doubles it should count for the pot.

If I was playing cali in a league and nailed an ace and didn't get the pot, I'd find a different league.

 

[ThrowaEnvy]

So if it's a cubby it's still an ace/ hole in one?

Maybe it's an ace hole in 2... is there a term for this... calicubby? Grim-ace? Contentsh-ace?

(Playoff ctps we have Cali throw first and last)

 

[wolfhaley]

*All I've ever heard in SoCal is "Sven" for the odd man out. I mean, true Californians don't call California "Cali". That was rappers and mid-westerners.

Pretty sure some psychic spies from China stole your mind's elation.

 

[PastorofMuppets]

Depends how junior we're talking and was this his first time playing this layout and was he prompted by the adults on the card to play that short tee?

Junior enough to not know better or feel comfortable speaking up to grown ups when prompted to play the short tee, club keeps the ace pot card pays out the junior or splits it with the club or something along those lines kid gets paid either way.

Junior but old enough for a regular ol lame life lesson, no payout and a stern talking to the adults of the card while including the junior and an apology to the junior with an explanation of why no payout.

I'd personally still pay him something.

He just turned 14 y/o but also has been playing only a couple month, and was brought to the event by a friend. He had never played the course before (as that league rotates area courses every month). It wasn't my league (meaning I wasn't running the event), but I think they did alright by him. Since it was non-sanctioned he was allowed to re-tee from the correct tee pad with no penalty, the Ace did not count towards the event, but since it was his first ever "ace" they still took his picture and made him feel great about it. The card members all gave him $5 each and the TD added a $20 from himself. The Ace Pot was not paid out. Plus he got a valuable lesson out of it.

 

[glassila]

A Cali player is playing as a 2 person team, but only pays 1/2 as much so I say they need to hit an ace on their first shot to win the ace pool.
It's like if only 1 player on a 2 person team paid into the ace pool.

(I could see if the Cali player gets 1/2 the pot if they hit an ace on their second shot)

 

[biscoe]

A Cali player is playing as a 2 person team, but only pays 1/2 as much so I say they need to hit an ace on their first shot to win the ace pool.
It's like if only 1 player on a 2 person team paid into the ace pool.

(I could see if the Cali player gets 1/2 the pot if they hit an ace on their second shot)

We give Cali the option of paying once and getting one extra shot per hole or paying double and getting 2 shots on everything.

 

[dmoore1998]

A Cali player is playing as a 2 person team, but only pays 1/2 as much so I say they need to hit an ace on their first shot to win the ace pool.
It's like if only 1 player on a 2 person team paid into the ace pool.

(I could see if the Cali player gets 1/2 the pot if they hit an ace on their second shot)

They're not really playing like a 2 person team though, just to be clear...because they only get 1 additional shot per hole instead of 2 throws on every shot. They're playing somewhere between 1 and 2 people.

 

[glassila]

They're not really playing like a 2 person team though, just to be clear...because they only get 1 additional shot per hole instead of 2 throws on every shot. They're playing somewhere between 1 and 2 people.

But they're paying 1/2 as much as a 2 person team which is why I don't think they should get the full pot if they hit with their cali throw. Just my opinion.

 

[dmoore1998]

But they're paying 1/2 as much as a 2 person team which is why I don't think they should get the full pot if they hit with their cali throw. Just my opinion.

I think that's fair. I was mostly pointing out that paying double the ace entry isn't necessarily fair either since they don't actually get 2 tee-offs on all holes. They're somewhere between 1 and 2 people...I think there are a lot of fair answers to this question, and the important part is to make sure it's decided before someone hits that cali ace.

 

[Hampstead]

But they're paying 1/2 as much as a 2 person team which is why I don't think they should get the full pot if they hit with their cali throw. Just my opinion.

Some places split the ace pot between partners and some don't. There's no standard for any of this.

 

[BillFleming]

Some places split the ace pot between partners and some don't. There's no standard for any of this.

I've heard of that being done and the reasoning is....the first player gets it close so their partner can 'run it'.

 

[Doofenshmirtz]

The biggest advantage, in either case, is the freedom to run at the basket without consequences of a bad throw.

The second doubles player has this same advantage when his partner parks a drive.

Life would be ever so slightly nicer if the only thing people would call an "ace" is a drive that legitimately results in a "1" being entered as the score for that hole and if, as long as the rules were followed, no one griped about the consequences of that score. If its an "ace pot," it should pay out for an ace.

 

[coupe]

I've heard of that being done and the reasoning is....the first player gets it close so their partner can 'run it'.

Completely BS reasoning.

What happens if the first player aces? Does their partner still throw?
What happens if the first player aces but didn't buy into the ace pot but their partner did? Does their partner still get half the pot?
What about if the first player bought in but thier partner didnt? Does thier partner still get half the pot?

Ace pots should be paid to the player(s) who aced. Period. Whether or not a team splits the pot is strictly a matter between the players.