What I Learned from the Clash of Colors

One of the things I enjoy most about running Broken Joe Golf is experimenting with new ideas. Some become traditions. Others simply teach us something that makes the league better.

The Clash of Colors was one of those experiments.

For the first time, tee boxes were assigned using a combination of Driving Distance, Handicap Index, and Average Score. The original idea came from the USGA's Tee It Forward recommendations, but I also wanted to account for each golfer's overall playing ability.

Overall, I thought the experiment was a success.

More importantly, I think it taught us a few valuable lessons.

Lesson #1 – Every Golf Course Is Different

One thing became obvious almost immediately.

Tee assignments shouldn't necessarily stay the same from course to course.

BJG plays 16 different golf courses each season. A "Back Tee" at one course might actually be the same yardage as a "Middle Tee" somewhere else.

For example, Westover's Back Tees measure just over 7,000 yards, while Edgewood's Back Tees measure approximately 6,465 yards — more than 500 yards shorter.

The name on the tee marker doesn't matter nearly as much as the yardage you're actually playing.

Lesson #2 – Consistency Matters

Looking back, I also realized I wasn't completely consistent in how I assigned tee boxes.

Instead of following one method from start to finish, I blended three different pieces of information:

• Driving Distance

• Handicap Index

• Average Score

There was good reasoning behind that approach. A golfer who drives the ball 215 yards but consistently shoots in the mid-90s may not need as much help as another golfer with the same driving distance who averages over 110.

However, if the goal is to evaluate a system, the system has to be applied consistently.

That's on me.

If I were doing it again, I would probably begin with driving distance as the foundation and then make only a few common-sense adjustments where a golfer's overall game clearly supports a different assignment.

Lesson #3 – The Results Were Encouraging

Looking back at the scores, I think the experiment did what it was designed to do.

The longer hitters who played farther back stayed competitive. The shorter hitters / higher handicappers generally scored lower than their season averages. Nobody looked overmatched by the tee box they played.

That doesn't mean every assignment was perfect — a couple of golfers would probably be reassigned if we ran it again. But that's exactly why experiments are useful: they hand you information you didn't have before.

Lesson #4 – Course Handicaps May Be the Bigger Story

The biggest surprise wasn't actually the tee assignments.

It was what happened when I recalculated our upcoming Match Play event using USGA Course Handicaps instead of our BJG Handicap Indexes.

With JT unfortunately expected to miss the Match Play event and maybe even the remainder of the season, it appears our remaining twelve golfers have essentially secured playoff spots. First and foremost, I hope JT has a speedy recovery and is back with us soon.

Since the playoff picture is largely set, I became curious about what Match Play would look like if we applied Course Handicaps exactly as the USGA intended. We would then assign Tee Boxes so that we would have the fewest strokes given.

The following is an analytical exercise based on the Edgewood Golf Course scorecard — not the official Match Play bracket or a proposed rule change.

After recalculating each golfer's Course Handicap from the tee box that best matched their driving distance, here's what the pairings would look like.

Calculated Match Play

Instead of several matches requiring three or four strokes, the recalculated pairings produced:

• Three even matches

• Two one-stroke matches

• One two-stroke match

I honestly didn't expect the matches to balance out this well.

It tells me the USGA's Course Handicap system deserves a closer look this offseason — not that BJG should adopt it tomorrow, but that it's worth understanding better. It appears to balance competition well while still letting golfers play tees that fit their games.

What I Took Away

The Clash of Colors wasn't about proving one system is better than another.

It was about learning.

I learned that course yardage matters.

I learned that assigning tee boxes is more complicated than simply looking at one statistic.

And I learned that Course Handicaps may do a better job balancing competition than I originally expected.

Most importantly, I learned that we have a league willing to try something different.

For that, I sincerely thank all of you.

As Commissioner, my job isn't to make changes for the sake of change. My job is to keep looking for ways to make Broken Joe Golf as competitive, fair, and enjoyable as possible.

Whether we eventually adopt any of these ideas is a conversation for all of us during the offseason. If we do, it will be because the numbers support the change and because, after listening to the league's thoughts and feedback, I believe it is the right direction for BJG. That's how I've always tried to lead Broken Joe Golf, and I don't expect that to change.

If nothing else, the Clash of Colors accomplished exactly what I hoped it would.

It gave us a great day of golf, and it gave us a few new ideas that may help make BJG even better in the years ahead.

Let's get ready to play our next round of golf.

The Victory or Valhalla – Match Play 2026 blog should be out on Thursday. We will be playing at Edgewood Golf Course in Southwick, and the first tee time is at 8:30.

Respectfully,

Broken Joe

Commissioner