Golfing with three people betting

Foursomes (aka Alternate Shot): Make two teams of two players, and each team decides which player tees off on even holes and which on odds. Golfing with three people betting then take turns. In this game, points are divided based on each player's finishing position on the hole. If you beat the remaining three members of your group. Banker is a golf betting game that can be played with at least three players. There is a minimum bet on each hole and the banker on each hole. Your answer to the above question informs whether you should participate in this week's golf gambling game, Defender. This three-person golf.

Sports Betting News

Golfer C plays one match against A and another against B. Each won hole gives one point, so if player A has a net 3 and B has a 4 and C has a 4, player A gets 2 points, one for winning against B and one for winning against C. With the Teams options, in every hole, there is a three-way team match where each player belongs to two teams.

The members of the team with the lowest aggregate score each get a point and the player with the most points at the end of the round wins the match bet. The team with the lowest net aggregate score wins the hole and each member gets one point. No points are awarded for ties.

Team 1 wins the hole, so Player A and Player B get one point each. Email Us : [email protected]. All Rights Reserved Games Three Ball. What I came up with for was Three Man Wolf. It is simultaneously simple, in that in mirrors a traditional Wolf game in style and rotating-captain format, and devilishly complex, putting players to tough decisions based a number of factors beyond their own score on each individual hole.

The games makes players much more like a baseball manager or football couch trying to account for score, time, and situation, rather than a simple golf wager. In our game of Three Man Wolf, every hole is worth six points. On every hole, the game is a 2-vs-1 Best Ball competition where if the Wolf, or solo player, wins, he gets all six points, while if the team of two players wins the hole, they split the points three points each.

If no one wins the hole outright, everyone gets two points. Scenario 1: Player 1 hits his shot and must decide if he wants to go Lone Wolf against the other two competitors as a team. Player 1 must decide before Player 2 hits; if he does not declare going Lone Wolf before the Player 2 hits, Player 1 forfeits his opportunity to be a Lone Wolf.

If Player 1 goes Lone Wolf and wins the hole, meaning his individual hole score is better than either of the other two players, he gets six points for that hole. If the score of either Player 2 or Player 3 bests Player 1, then Players 2 and 3 split the points three apiece. If Player 1 and either Player 2 or Player 3 tie for the best score on the hole, they all get two points for that hole.

Scenario 2: Player 1 hits his shot and does not declare Lone Wolf, which means he is committed to accepting a teammate, and can, at best, win three points for that hole. Golfing with three people betting After Player 2 hits his shot, but before Player 3 hits his shot, Player 1 must decide if he wants Player 2 as his teammate against yet-to-hit Player 3.

If Player 1 chooses Player 2, then they are teammates, eligible of splitting the 6 points three per person, against a solo Player 3, who will have the opportunity to win all 6 possible points. Scenario 3: Player 1 hits his shot and does not declare Lone Wolf, and after Player 2 hits his shot, Player 1 rejects Player 2 as a teammate.

They are teammates, eligible of splitting the 6 points three per person, against a solo Player 2, who will have the opportunity to win all 6 possible points. Thus, we played Three Man Wolf as a net game only. I might not make Three Man Wolf a winner-take-all game next time around. The allocation of strokes to the lesser skilled players adds an additional factor to the selection of teammates, as a higher handicap player receiving strokes against one or two of the other players is certainly an attractive theoretical option on any hole, but especially so on a par 3 hole.

The order on the tee remains on a fixed rotation in a normal Wolf game, with players changing the order of who tees off first, second, third and last on each successive hole in a consistent rotation. One issue we found was that any given routing could produce an inequitable distribution of holes on any given nine or 18 holes.

For instance, we played this game on the back nine at Pine Needles G. Player 2 was the hole captain on three par fours, while Player 3 got two par fours and a par five on which to be the decision maker. In the future, I would consider arbitrarily assigning hole captains irrespective of the sequential order to try to mix up the distribution of hole types to create more equity and interest, i.

The greatest variation of them all was something I added to specifically encourage reckless risk-taking and additional excitement: the Blind Wolf option. On each hole, the hole captain Player 1 had the election to go Wolf, playing his own ball against the team of his two competitors before hitting his own shot, a move known as going Blind Wolf for players of the Spades card game, this is essentially going blind nil.

Why would anyone engage in this kind of insanity. Because it was worth triple points. The allure of accumulating 18 points in one fell swoop was too exciting for some golf degenerates to pass up, adding an extra layer of intrigue to the decision making, allowing for wild swings in scoring, strategy, and momentum. However, if you think through the base statistical probabilities, if a player were to successfully pull off the Blind Wolf challenge one out of three times or two out of six is playing a full 18 hole match , they would break even with their competitors.

Thus, if can win a Blind Wolf option two of three times for nine holes, or simply 3 times of 6 possible in an hole match, he will have gain a significant point advantage over the other two competitors, assuming they have not engaged in the same all-or-nothing strategy. Especially if playing a net game with accurate stroke allocations, the opportunity costs of NOT going Blind Wolf are pretty high.

Part of the beauty of our Three Man Wolf match was playing it later in the week within a larger team competition. By the time we engaged in the Wolf matches, we knew roughly that our three-team competition had become a two-team race. That kind of secondary motivation, the constant, fluid score-keeping calculus is the real joy, for me, of this Wolf game.

There was an added level of pressure created within the game because of what the results meant to the larger competition outcome. For example, had I been able to amass a small lead within our match, I could have chosen to play defense with partner selections. Three Man Wolf also adds intrigue to whomever ends up being eliminated from winning first.