Random draws should be encouraged

When I joined Limuru Country Club in 2006, the golf captain, Joe Kihanya, was in favour of random draws. The good captain made newbies like myself feel at home.

We usually found ourselves playing with different members of the club. This meant that I met different people every so often.

This for me was part of the enjoyment. Golf for me became the easiest way to spend time with some great people.

I have played with farmers whose passion for cultivating land was infectious. I have also played a few rounds of golf with priests who sell celestial plots of land with ease and mastery.

I have played with a saxophonist who blows a horn for a living. I have also played with politicians who live to blow their own horns.

This system of random draws meant that new members of the club met with older members. Today, most clubs have draws with established four balls.

There are some four balls that are so entrenched that it would seem that they are etched in stone.

I have no problem with a member saying to another, “what about playing together in next Saturday’s monthly mug?” and upon agreement putting up their names to be drawn together.

The golf course is a great place to have a tête-à-tête. In fact a round of golf in bad company is like having ice cubes in a cup of tea.

The fixed four balls is becoming a source of muttering about alternative facts on how rounds were actually played. If winners are constantly coming from the same four balls, then it may be time to investigate.

There may be instances of inadvertent miscounting. There may be lack of willingness to challenge a mate who says, “it’s a bogey”, when you counted seven.

A golf captain recently told me of a fixed four ball at his club that constantly produced a winner during well-sponsored competitions.

When he was playing during such a competition, he observed the said four ball playing on an adjacent par four hole.

He watched as one of the players struggled to get out of a bunker and only managed to do so on the third shot. He did not see how the player completed the hole but needless to say, he expected the player to have a bad score on the particular hole.

After the round, when the scores were tallied, the winning card came from the golfer who the captain had observed playing three shots in a bunker.

The captain asked to see the scorecard. His interest was in the particular hole that he had witnessed. Even though he did not see how the entire hole was played, he was surprised to see that the player had actually signed for a four on the hole.

He first checked with the caddie who was with the player during the round. The caddie gave him a stroke-by-stroke account on how the player had completed the hole.

The caddie’s account was very credible as it included the three strokes in the bunker that the captain had witnessed.

According to the caddie, the player had an eight on the hole. The captain then approached the player who said that he played a five on the hole.

His marker on the other hand said that he had played a four.

The captain disqualified the player on the basis of signing for a score lower than he had played. That was after he told the player that he (the captain) had seen him playing three strokes in the bunker.

I thought that the captain had failed the golfing fraternity by not suspending the entire four ball for bringing the game of golf to disrepute.

If not the four ball, at least the player and his marker because surely it is not possible to mistake an eight for a four.

There are arguments for and against random draws. I am a supporter of the random draws especially if it is during major club competitions and sponsored competitions. Fixed four balls should only be allowed during club nights and friendly rounds.

If I were a captain, knowing what I know now, I would err on the side of caution to avoid grumbling.

[email protected]

The author is a KGU Executive