# Change to US style slope system from current CSS



## freddielong (Nov 26, 2015)

This may already have been covered to death on here but it looks like this is going to be implemented over the next couple of years, I was wondering what everyone's views were.

I personally think it will be a massive improvement on the current system.


----------



## jdpjamesp (Nov 26, 2015)

For the benefit of the uninitiated, would you care to go over the pros and cons of each of the systems?


----------



## Spuddy (Nov 26, 2015)

jdpjamesp said:



			For the benefit of the uninitiated, would you care to go over the pros and cons of each of the systems?
		
Click to expand...

The slope system takes into account the difficulty of the course.  Under the current system you could have two courses with a SSS of 72 but one could be quite benign with wide fairways, short rough and just a few hazards whereas the other could have the opposite.  A player on the hrs course with a handicap of 10 would likely play better than that on the easy course whereas a player with a 10 handicap at the easy course would struggle to play to it on the hard course.  On paper they are of equal ability but in reality the player from the hard course is better and this is taken into account


----------



## Mark_Aged_42 (Nov 26, 2015)

For the confused (me!), why would these two courses have the same SSS?


----------



## Spuddy (Nov 26, 2015)

Mark_Aged_42 said:



			For the confused (me!), why would these two courses have the same SSS?
		
Click to expand...

as far as I understand it, the current system only takes the length into account.


----------



## MendieGK (Nov 26, 2015)

Spuddy said:



			as far as I understand it, the current system only takes the length into account.
		
Click to expand...

No this isnt true. Plenty of courses have a high CSS that are very short.


----------



## Foxholer (Nov 26, 2015)

Mark_Aged_42 said:



			For the confused (me!), why would these two courses have the same SSS?
		
Click to expand...

The 'easy' one might have a Par of 73, while the 'hard' one might have a Par of 70!

Congu course rating is *mainly* length based! 

In fact, the Course Rating of both would possibly/likely still be about 72. But that is what a Scratch player would be 'expected' to go round in. Recognising that more difficult courses create significantly greater challenges for higher handicappers, the Slope of the harder course would be greater (say 138 as opposed to 110, with a 'standard' course being 115) - that's where the 'Slope' tag comes from. Each player's handicap for the course (and set of tees) is calculated from the course rating plus the player's index point on the slope - for whichever set of tees are used. So an Congu 18-capper would probably get an additional 3 strokes (and be about a 15 index imo) or so for the tough course, but get 0 additional strokes for the 'easy' one.

There are lots of other differences - some better, some not imo - but that's what applies to 'course difficulty' aspect.


----------



## freddielong (Nov 26, 2015)

The EGU are expecting to start the process of rating every course in terms of difficulty from early next year. The system takes into account landing areas at average length drives, firmness and slope of the fairway, prevailing wind direction, size of the greens pace of the greens and even the depth and thickness of the rough, to produce a difficulty rating.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 26, 2015)

Don't expect it to be fully integrated until at least 2022 if it is  - so many issues surrounding it at the moment


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 26, 2015)

freddielong said:



			The EGU are expecting to start the process of rating every course in terms of difficulty from early next year. The system takes into account landing areas at average length drives, firmness and slope of the fairway, prevailing wind direction, size of the greens pace of the greens and even the depth and thickness of the rough, to produce a difficulty rating.
		
Click to expand...

Believe its already started, chap at ours is responsible for Shropshire/Herefordshire and started last February .


----------



## duncan mackie (Nov 26, 2015)

freddielong said:



			The EGU are expecting to start the process of rating every course in terms of difficulty from early next year. The system takes into account landing areas at average length drives, firmness and slope of the fairway, prevailing wind direction, size of the greens pace of the greens and even the depth and thickness of the rough, to produce a difficulty rating.
		
Click to expand...

New SSS has been established on USGA  rating system for some time now, as Foxy puts it the CONGU course rating had a greater focus on length than the USGA one, or as many highlight, it's really ore a case of the USGA system taking more account of other relevant factors.

Importantly a course rating under the USGA system includes a bogey index based on the nominal capabilities of a 20 handicapper as well as the standard scratch rating. This is then used in a course matrix to derive playing handicaps etc

From a purely personal opinion I would be amazed if more than 20% of courses end up with a revised rating that has any practical impact; and I wouldn't be surprised if it was less than 10%.

Put another way, it's not going to be the rating element that is going to make any noticable difference to people - it's the implementation (what and how) of a new handicapping system. Scheduled 2020 but I agree with Phil that 2022-2025 has to be more likely.


----------



## Birchy (Nov 26, 2015)

I still think people read too much into this sort of stuff.

At the end of the day you still need to get the ball in the hole.

Wont see much change imo and people will still moan.


----------



## fundy (Nov 26, 2015)

Birchy said:



			I still think people read too much into this sort of stuff.

At the end of the day you still need to get the ball in the hole.

Wont see much change imo and people will still moan.
		
Click to expand...

Agree to a point but there are definitely handicaps that travel well and ones that dont dependent on the SSS and actually how tough the course is to a handicap golfer

To compare say RickGs course at centurion which was SSS 72 off the silvers or purples? to playing our track off the fronts (yellows) SSS 72 is laughable yet that was how the current system had it earlier this year. At a guess Id expect the 2 courses are somewhere between 5-8 shots different and this has a vast impact on how well you fare playing a handicap golfer from the other venue. Now I know im picking 2 courses at opposite extremes (ours should be rated lower, Ricks higher) but SSS can be greatly flawed (especially as they seem loathe to rerate courses much once theyve been given a rating)


----------



## louise_a (Nov 26, 2015)

as an aside to this, I played in a tournament in Portugal with players from all over Europe, I don't know how they worked it out but I had my handicap increased.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Nov 27, 2015)

Can anyone explain why this is happening at all? I think the CONGU and CSS system seems to be working as well as any system can and brining it this will only add confusion surely


----------



## fundy (Nov 27, 2015)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Can anyone explain why this is happening at all? I think the CONGU and CSS system seems to be working as well as any system can and brining it this will only add confusion surely
		
Click to expand...

I expect the answer is to try and unify the approach to handicapping across the world but may be wrong. As for CSS working as well as any system youre just over 4 mths early Homer lol


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Nov 27, 2015)

fundy said:



			I expect the answer is to try and unify the approach to handicapping across the world but may be wrong. As for CSS working as well as any system youre just over 4 mths early Homer lol
		
Click to expand...

Well as the only method it has, it works as well as it can but I take the point!


----------



## patricks148 (Nov 27, 2015)

we have  a slope ready for the course, only thing is the half a dozen American and European golfers who come and spend the summers playing at Nairn still have to have two handicaps.


----------



## KenL (Nov 27, 2015)

I think our course is slope rated for American visitors.

Although length is a consideration it is not the only factor in setting a SSS.  Many course that are not that long have quite a high SSS depending on factors such as the size of the greens, the length the semi is cut to etc.

The US system is complicated.  In the late 90s I had a US handicap index, you had to multiply your index by the slope for the course/tees used to get your playing handicap.  I have no memory if there is any account of how difficult the weather is as I only played in society comps.


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 27, 2015)

KenL said:



			The US system is complicated.  In the late 90s I had a US handicap index, you had to multiply your index by the slope for the course/tees used to get your playing handicap.  I have no memory if there is any account of how difficult the weather is as I only played in society comps.
		
Click to expand...

Played under it in NZ for 5+ years and after initial misgivings found it to be an easy system to work with.

Most courses I played you had to enter your NZ golf number into computer and your scorecard was printed out with your handicap on it . Weather is not considered as part of the process.


----------



## duncan mackie (Nov 27, 2015)

KenL said:



			I think our course is slope rated for American visitors.

Although length is a consideration it is not the only factor in setting a SSS.  Many course that are not that long have quite a high SSS depending on factors such as the size of the greens, the length the semi is cut to etc.

The US system is complicated.  In the late 90s I had a US handicap index, you had to multiply your index by the slope for the course/tees used to get your playing handicap.  I have no memory if there is any account of how difficult the weather is as I only played in society comps.
		
Click to expand...

No weather factors in the USGA version but the Australians have modified it to include one...what the unified system does us anyone's guess!

In practice I accept the argument that for the  vast majority of golfers it doesn't need one because of the handicap calculation. Extremes of poor conditions will result in scores that will simply be discarded and never enter the average calculation, and when everything's onside the result is diluted by the averaging.
Add the inclusion of all rounds and the extremes.are even less relevant in themselves and as the system is designed to reflect form  (rather than class - or underlying capability) people's handicaps will move in tandem with others through the changing conditions.


----------



## KenL (Nov 27, 2015)

My worry is that if  a CSS style system is discarded a lot of players who are entered into a medal will just not play if there is any adverse weather.

Currently you can play and know that if it is pretty tough to score a rise in CSS will protect your hcp. I can see a lot of players avoiding comps if the scoring conditions are not optimum.


----------



## robert.redmile (Nov 28, 2015)

if you play at the same course all the time, and the majority of your fellow players at this course do the same then there's no issue.
however, my course has CSS of 72, versus Hotchin at Woodhall has 73 I think - to suggest there is only1 shot difference between the 2 tracks is simply wrong.
The Hotchin is a minimum of 5 shots harder.


----------



## rosecott (Nov 28, 2015)

robert.redmile said:



			if you play at the same course all the time, and the majority of your fellow players at this course do the same then there's no issue.
however, my course has CSS of 72, versus Hotchin at Woodhall has 73 I think - to suggest there is only1 shot difference between the 2 tracks is simply wrong.
The Hotchin is a minimum of 5 shots harder.
		
Click to expand...

The difference is 3 - the Hotchkin SSS is 75.


----------



## Bigfoot (Nov 28, 2015)

Having played comps in France at Belle Dune, I found it very easy to understand and to determine what my handicap would be.

It will mean a more even playing field at open comps for handicap golfers.


----------



## duncan mackie (Nov 28, 2015)

KenL said:



			My worry is that if  a CSS style system is discarded a lot of players who are entered into a medal will just not play if there is any adverse weather.

Currently you can play and know that if it is pretty tough to score a rise in CSS will protect your hcp. I can see a lot of players avoiding comps if the scoring conditions are not optimum.
		
Click to expand...

All this will be irrelevant - every round played will count for handicap.


----------



## IanG (Nov 28, 2015)

duncan mackie said:



			All this will be irrelevant - every round played will count for handicap.
		
Click to expand...

This is something I don't understand, presumably this doesn't include matchplay rounds, 4BBB play, bounce game rounds. How does this pan out in practice?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 28, 2015)

duncan mackie said:



			All this will be irrelevant - every round played will count for handicap.
		
Click to expand...

Understand that more than likely won't happen in the UK


----------



## robert.redmile (Nov 29, 2015)

rosecott said:



			The difference is 3 - the Hotchkin SSS is 75.
		
Click to expand...

Lol. Well it should be 77!


----------



## MadAdey (Nov 29, 2015)

Having had the luxury of being over here for 18 months now I can clearly see how antiquated the SSS system is. The main benefit to me how people can play from different tee boxes, yet still be able to play against each other. There are 3 sets of tees that all have their own rating. This is how an average 14 handicap changes between each tee box where I normally play at, it's a par 72 course.

Gold: 69.2/121 gets 15 shots
White: 71.8/129 gets 16 shots
Blue: 75.4/140 gets 17 shots

To me this system gives everyone a level playing field. If you get your handicap from the back tees then it will get knocked down when you play from the front ones, as my example shows. It would hardly be fair if that 17 handicapper played off the front tees and still got his 17 shots.


----------



## TheCaddie (Nov 29, 2015)

MadAdey said:



			Having had the luxury of being over here for 18 months now I can clearly see how antiquated the SSS system is. The main benefit to me how people can play from different tee boxes, yet still be able to play against each other. There are 3 sets of tees that all have their own rating. This is how an average 14 handicap changes between each tee box where I normally play at, it's a par 72 course.

Gold: 69.2/121 gets 15 shots
White: 71.8/129 gets 16 shots
Blue: 75.4/140 gets 17 shots

To me this system gives everyone a level playing field. If you get your handicap from the back tees then it will get knocked down when you play from the front ones, as my example shows. It would hardly be fair if that 17 handicapper played off the front tees and still got his 17 shots.
		
Click to expand...

This is makes a lot of sense, and surely isn't that difficult to implement at a course?

Also, like the idea of Duncan's point where every round counts. Lots of people join courses and play there for different reasons, and it's a nice way of being able to maintain a handicap for yourself, without having to commit to playing competitions.


----------



## Old Skier (Nov 29, 2015)

duncan mackie said:



			New SSS has been established on USGA  rating system for some time now, as Foxy puts it the CONGU course rating had a greater focus on length than the USGA one, or as many highlight, it's really ore a case of the USGA system taking more account of other relevant factors.

Importantly a course rating under the USGA system includes a bogey index based on the nominal capabilities of a 20 handicapper as well as the standard scratch rating. This is then used in a course matrix to derive playing handicaps etc

From a purely personal opinion I would be amazed if more than 20% of courses end up with a revised rating that has any practical impact; and I wouldn't be surprised if it was less than 10%.

Put another way, it's not going to be the rating element that is going to make any noticable difference to people - it's the implementation (what and how) of a new handicapping system. Scheduled 2020 but I agree with Phil that 2022-2025 has to be more likely.
		
Click to expand...

Ive seen 3 courses re-assed in N Devon and the SSS has remained the same on all tees. As to taking wind in to account the assessers said that wind factors are only taken into account on links courses. Our course is nearly as high as the highest point on Exmoor and they were of the opinion that wind was not a factor :lol:.

If other counties are relying on the same amount of volunteers as ours 2025 for the completion of this exercise might be a tad optimistic.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Nov 29, 2015)

I'm sorry I'm not totaly up to speed on this at all and so asking as it's the best way to learn. Is this going to be optional or mandatory to be measured and have a slope rating and if so, will its implementation also then become compulsory. Duncan Mackie's post has confused me about on 20% having the a revised ranking and if it has a scheduled implementation date what happens to those without this other than the date clearly shifts. Will they have to fall into line eventually and will CONGU give them a final deadline. What happens after that


----------



## Old Skier (Nov 29, 2015)

HomerJSimpson said:



			I'm sorry I'm not totaly up to speed on this at all and so asking as it's the best way to learn. Is this going to be optional or mandatory to be measured and have a slope rating and if so, will its implementation also then become compulsory. Duncan Mackie's post has confused me about on 20% having the a revised ranking and if it has a scheduled implementation date what happens to those without this other than the date clearly shifts. Will they have to fall into line eventually and will CONGU give them a final deadline. What happens after that
		
Click to expand...

All courses are scheduled to be done in England, and I believe the rest of UK.


----------



## Fyldewhite (Nov 29, 2015)

Interested to know how the "every round counts" concept works in practice? Do players have to register like for a supplementary at present? What if they play great for 16 holes then walk off as it's slow and have to go home etc? Sure there are a lot of positives as any statistical based system will be more accurate with more data but doesn't it also mean less control for committees and more openness to manipulation (in both directions)?


----------



## delc (Nov 29, 2015)

Fyldewhite said:



			Interested to know how the "every round counts" concept works in practice? Do players have to register like for a supplementary at present? What if they play great for 16 holes then walk off as it's slow and have to go home etc? Sure there are a lot of positives as any statistical based system will be more accurate with more data but doesn't it also mean less control for committees and more openness to manipulation (in both directions)?
		
Click to expand...

Both CONGU and USGA handicap systems have good and bad points. Personally I like to play friendly rounds when I don't have to worry about my handicap (CONGU), but on the other hand many players don't play in enough qualifying competitions to give enough data for a statistically significant handicap. 3 a year is not enough! USGA is good in that it gathers more data and makes allowances for the effects of course difficulty on higher handicap players (slope).  On the other hand it is more complex and easier to cheat to manipulate handicaps.


----------



## Old Skier (Nov 29, 2015)

delc said:



			Both CONGU and USGA handicap systems have good and bad points. Personally I like to play friendly rounds when I don't have to worry about my handicap (CONGU), but on the other hand many players don't play in enough qualifying competitions to give enough data for a statistically significant handicap. 3 a year is not enough! USGA is good in that it gathers more data and makes allowances for the effects of course difficulty on higher handicap players (slope).  On the other hand it is more complex and easier to cheat to manipulate handicaps.
		
Click to expand...

I can honestly say that most of our club members play between 10-20 Qs in a year, it's a shame you don't get that kind of response at your club.

Not great that you feel that you have members who would cheat and manipulate a handicap system.


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 29, 2015)

delc said:



			Both CONGU and USGA handicap systems have good and bad points. Personally I like to play friendly rounds when I don't have to worry about my handicap (CONGU), but on the other hand many players don't play in enough qualifying competitions to give enough data for a statistically significant handicap. 3 a year is not enough! USGA is good in that it gathers more data and makes allowances for the effects of course difficulty on higher handicap players (slope).  On the other hand it is more complex and easier to cheat to manipulate handicaps.
		
Click to expand...


Both have their merits yes and both will have those who cheat the  system.
Once used to it i found the NZ version very easy to use.
In theory you are supposed to enter a card every time you play. in inter club match play matches we had to submit a card, if we finished early we marked the rest of the card as if we played to par for our handicaps .
As it's based on the best 10 of your last 20 ( All online so easy to check) there can be some pressure when you know you're about to lose a "good card"  
Below is a link to a 14 handicappers golf over the last 3 months under the NZ version of the USGA handicap system. You can see now to due his lack of form he has increased from 12 to 14.


----------



## MadAdey (Nov 29, 2015)

delc said:



			Both CONGU and USGA handicap systems have good and bad points. Personally I like to play friendly rounds when I don't have to worry about my handicap (CONGU), but on the other hand many players don't play in enough qualifying competitions to give enough data for a statistically significant handicap. 3 a year is not enough! USGA is good in that it gathers more data and makes allowances for the effects of course difficulty on higher handicap players (slope).  On the other hand it is more complex and easier to cheat to manipulate handicaps.
		
Click to expand...

Actually it is difficult to manipulate your handicap up. You are going to have to submit another 20 cards that are higher than your current handicap to remove the good ones that are being used to calculate your current one.

Also I have been told that there is something within the software to pick up on someone who is obviously trying to manipulate their handicap up.


----------



## delc (Nov 29, 2015)

MadAdey said:



			Actually it is difficult to manipulate your handicap up. You are going to have to submit another 20 cards that are higher than your current handicap to remove the good ones that are being used to calculate your current one.

Also I have been told that there is something within the software to pick up on someone who is obviously trying to manipulate their handicap up.
		
Click to expand...

Actually the USGA system is based on a rolling average of the best 10 out of your last 20 scores. So it should be quite easy to manipulate a handicap upwards. Also if players want to reduce their handicaps, they will only play on days with the most benign conditions, because there is no equivalent of CSS to adjust for the conditions.


----------



## Old Skier (Nov 29, 2015)

MadAdey said:



			Also I have been told that there is something within the software to pick up on someone who is obviously trying to manipulate their handicap up.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting, I've been using it for a number of years and not heard that one before.


----------



## Norrin Radd (Nov 29, 2015)

delc said:



			Actually the USGA system is based on a rolling average of the best 10 out of your last 20 scores. So it should be quite easy to manipulate a handicap upwards. Also if players want to reduce their handicaps, they will only play on days with the most benign conditions, because there is no equivalent of CSS to adjust for the conditions.
		
Click to expand...

Muldoon will be laughing all the way to Dubai.


----------



## delc (Nov 29, 2015)

Old Skier said:



			I can honestly say that most of our club members play between 10-20 Qs in a year, it's a shame you don't get that kind of response at your club.

Not great that you feel that you have members who would cheat and manipulate a handicap system.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that we have, but I have been beaten into 2nd place in a board comp by a regular player who had only played in the bare minimum of 3 qualifiers in the previous 12 months!  I had played in over 20 in the same period.


----------



## MadAdey (Nov 29, 2015)

Old Skier said:



			Interesting, I've been using it for a number of years and not heard that one before.
		
Click to expand...

I don't know if it's an old wife's tale, just something someone said when I was questioning how easy it would be to make your handicap go up.


----------



## MadAdey (Nov 29, 2015)

delc said:



			Actually the USGA system is based on a rolling average of the best 10 out of your last 20 scores. So it should be quite easy to manipulate a handicap upwards. Also if players want to reduce their handicaps, they will only play on days with the most benign conditions, because there is no equivalent of CSS to adjust for the conditions.
		
Click to expand...

But it will take more than 10 rounds, unless your best 10 where the last 10.

If someone wants an artificially low handicap for bragging rights then it is only themself it affects, nobody else.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Nov 29, 2015)

delc said:



			I'm not sure that we have, but I have been beaten into 2nd place in a board comp by a regular player who had only played in the bare minimum of 3 qualifiers in the previous 12 months!  I had played in over 20 in the same period.  

Click to expand...

That happens at a lot of places and we've had a player doing the same thing. While the rules are such and ptoviding they meet the competition criteria, not a lot you can do


----------



## Old Skier (Nov 29, 2015)

HomerJSimpson said:



			That happens at a lot of places and we've had a player doing the same thing. While the rules are such and ptoviding they meet the competition criteria, not a lot you can do
		
Click to expand...

If the comp committee are worried about it they can change the rules of entry.


----------



## delc (Nov 30, 2015)

MadAdey said:



			But it will take more than 10 rounds, unless your best 10 where the last 10.

If someone wants an artificially low handicap for bragging rights then it is only themself it affects, nobody else.
		
Click to expand...

Every time you play you drop your 20th oldest score and add one new one, whether the respective scores are good or bad. It can make a significant difference if you drop a particularly good score and add a poor one, or vice versa.  I believe that USGA are thinking of adding extra weighting to scores made in formal competitions.


----------



## Slab (Nov 30, 2015)

delc said:



			Every time you play you drop your 20th oldest score and add one new one, whether the respective scores are good or bad.* It can make a significant difference if you drop a particularly good score and add a poor one, or vice versa.*  I believe that USGA are thinking of adding extra weighting to scores made in formal competitions.
		
Click to expand...

I think this overstates it. Even if dropping a good one and adding a 'poor one' then the poor one is not likely to be one of your last 10 best of 20 therefore it'll be disregarded for handicap adjustment at that time

So a difference, yes (as it should) A significant difference, not likely


----------



## delc (Nov 30, 2015)

Slab said:



			I think this overstates it. Even if dropping a good one and adding a 'poor one' then the poor one is not likely to be one of your last 10 best of 20 therefore it'll be disregarded for handicap adjustment at that time

So a difference, yes (as it should) A significant difference, not likely
		
Click to expand...

What do you not understand about the rolling average of the best 10 results (times a factor) out of the last 20?  Sure using an average will smooth out any handicap changes, but not totally! One of the criticisms of USGA is that handicaps can reduce or increase quite rapidly under certain circumstances. Also it is possible for your handicap to go up after a better than handicap round, if you have to drop the score from an even better earlier round.


----------



## duncan mackie (Nov 30, 2015)

delc said:



			What do you not understand about the rolling average of the best 10 results (times a factor) out of the last 20?  Sure using an average will smooth out any handicap changes, but not totally! One of the criticisms of USGA is that handicaps can reduce or increase quite rapidly under certain circumstances. Also it is possible for your handicap to go up after a better than handicap round, if you have to drop the score from an even better earlier round.
		
Click to expand...

Slabs post was 100% accurate, as was Madadeys on the subject.

With a rolling average of a selective subset, whilst you will lose any selected score that was 20th ago there is no reason that the new score will form  part of the new average (and if it's particularly poor it simply won't).

It follows that substantial imediately change will only result from dropping an extraordinary good score - which was logically skewing you handicap anyway!)

Refreshing your entire 20 will of course have the potential to make a significant change - and it's likely that seniors will have the opportunity to do this more than others - would be interesting!

We will have to see what actually transpires.


----------



## duncan mackie (Nov 30, 2015)

IanG said:



			This is something I don't understand, presumably this doesn't include matchplay rounds, 4BBB play, bounce game rounds. How does this pan out in practice?
		
Click to expand...

Nope - everything counts (USGA). See Upsidedown's informative post.


----------



## Slab (Nov 30, 2015)

Cheers Duncan (not sure what I've done to upset Del)


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 30, 2015)

duncan mackie said:



			Nope - everything counts (USGA). See Upsidedown's informative post.
		
Click to expand...

Speaking to people in Congu whilst slope will be introduced over the next decade 

Don't expect to go the whole hog and have every round count


----------



## garyinderry (Nov 30, 2015)

How does it work with the us system if I head out late on a Saturday evening and play multiple balls around 6 holes.  

What if I decide I don't fancy putting as the greens are hollow tinned or I am just not fussed and would rather chip 10 balls to each hole?


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 30, 2015)

garyinderry said:



			How does it work with the us system if I head out late on a Saturday evening and play multiple balls around 6 holes.  

What if I decide I don't fancy putting as the greens are hollow tinned or I am just not fussed and would rather chip 10 balls to each hole?
		
Click to expand...

That's practice not a "round" :thup:


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 30, 2015)

delc said:



			What do you not understand about the rolling average of the best 10 results (times a factor) out of the last 20?  Sure using an average will smooth out any handicap changes, but not totally! One of the criticisms of USGA is that handicaps can reduce or increase quite rapidly under certain circumstances. Also it is possible for your handicap to go up after a better than handicap round, if you have to drop the score from an even better earlier round.
		
Click to expand...

Remember also your handicap index is for 14 days, so opportunity for your 20 averages to change in that timescale


----------



## Slab (Nov 30, 2015)

garyinderry said:



			How does it work with the us system if I head out late on a Saturday evening and play multiple balls around 6 holes.  

What if I decide I don't fancy putting as the greens are hollow tinned or I am just not fussed and would rather chip 10 balls to each hole?
		
Click to expand...

These aren't rounds of golf though it's just practice using some of the course 

I think there is a mechanism for an incomplete round within the slope system (a couple holes missed etc) but I'd need to go and read on it before suggesting what it is


edit: too slow


----------



## MadAdey (Nov 30, 2015)

delc said:



			Every time you play you drop your 20th oldest score and add one new one, whether the respective scores are good or bad. It can make a significant difference if you drop a particularly good score and add a poor one, or vice versa.  I believe that USGA are thinking of adding extra weighting to scores made in formal competitions.
		
Click to expand...

But the chances that dropping 1 score will make that much difference are very slim. 
So to par lets your last 20 rounds are like this in order they where played:

3,12,14,9,10,20,9,15,17,8,14,17,12,11,16,11,10,16,16,10. 

So that looks like a 9.3 handicap to me. So if this player went out and shot +20 to remove the good round his handicap would change to 10.2.

Is it that much of a change? He would really need to get of 5 scores to really make a difference. 

No system is perfect and will always be open to abuse. The USGA system be better at catching the rapidly improving player though.


----------



## IanG (Nov 30, 2015)

duncan mackie said:



			Nope - everything counts (USGA). See Upsidedown's informative post.
		
Click to expand...


So when everything counts, then either 

(i) all rounds must be played according to the RoG, (which bounce games right now are generally not, e.g. walking back for a lost ball etc) 
(ii) there is a mechanism in place to allow rounds which deviate from the RoG to still be included e.g. for any hole for which the RoG are not followed you simply enter you handicapped gross score - as you would if you didn't complete the round. 

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't think this has been explained.


----------



## garyinderry (Nov 30, 2015)

Fair enough.  I thought everything had to be recorded. 


Still have some reservations as I will play alot differently on the back 9 of a friendly game with my mate who is 3 up compared to how I would play on a normal comp day.   chances are my scores would be shocking.   I could be one under handicap and be 3 down and have to push to try and catch my mate.  This would lead also lead to poorer scores and false handicaps. 

This is just one example. I am sure there are many more.


----------



## the_coach (Nov 30, 2015)

http://www.usga.org/Handicapping/understanding-your-handicap-index.html

http://www.usga.org/videos/2013/05/31/math-behind-a-handicap-index-2424004729001.html

http://www.usga.org/articles/2015/11/key-changes-to-handicap-system-for-2016.html


----------



## duncan mackie (Nov 30, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Speaking to people in Congu whilst slope will be introduced over the next decade 

Don't expect to go the whole hog and have every round count
		
Click to expand...

My only expectations are that we will have a worldwide course rating system in place that theoretically enables players from any of the main handicapping systems to compete via a simple calculation. As this pretty much exists now, but most associations are over protective and fiddle things, this shouldn't be difficult!
However, the practical barriers to enabling a single handicap system within the current timescales for rating (in the UK) are less than being made out (IMO); technology is moving so fast that the concept of managing individual lifetime identities and logging people on and off courses anywhere in the world in real time simply won't be the issue it currently seems (in 10 years time).

Control and money will be the true barriers; with those impacted throwing up issues left right and centre!


----------



## IanG (Nov 30, 2015)

the_coach said:



http://www.usga.org/Handicapping/understanding-your-handicap-index.html

http://www.usga.org/videos/2013/05/31/math-behind-a-handicap-index-2424004729001.html

http://www.usga.org/articles/2015/11/key-changes-to-handicap-system-for-2016.html

Click to expand...


Thanks for that I found the answer to my questions in Section 4 which tells you what to do in various scenarios, rather that me paraphrasing, reading the USGA link below is the easiest way to get the right answer

http://www.usga.org/Handicapping/handicap-manual.html#!rule-14377


----------



## Fyldewhite (Nov 30, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			That's practice not a "round" :thup:
		
Click to expand...

So do a lot of "Rounds" turn into practice rounds after a 7, 6 start??  In my earlier post I was interested to find out how these are managed by the club but it got sidetracked. Do players have to register that they intend to do a "Round" before they set off (like our current supplementary system)? If not, then surely a lot of rounds that could/should be recorded won't be? Understand how the system is supposed to work but more interested in how it works at a more practical level.


----------



## MadAdey (Nov 30, 2015)

I don't know what goes into rating a course for the USGA system, but why will it take 10 years to implement? Surely they just need to get out there and sort it.

Once it's done, use the best 5 from the last 10 cards to work out new handicaps and then go from there.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 30, 2015)

MadAdey said:



			I don't know what goes into rating a course for the USGA system, but why will it take 10 years to implement? Surely they just need to get out there and sort it.

Once it's done, use the best 5 from the last 10 cards to work out new handicaps and then go from there.
		
Click to expand...

Who will pay for the rating to be done ? 

Some courses don't even have separate SSS for each tee at the moment and they need people to do the rating - it's not a process and I'm not sure if it's 100% going to happen - especially the HC effected on each round


----------



## garyinderry (Nov 30, 2015)

Fyldewhite said:



			So do a lot of "Rounds" turn into practice rounds after a 7, 6 start??  In my earlier post I was interested to find out how these are managed by the club but it got sidetracked. Do players have to register that they intend to do a "Round" before they set off (like our current supplementary system)? If not, then surely a lot of rounds that could/should be recorded won't be? Understand how the system is supposed to work but more interested in how it works at a more practical level.
		
Click to expand...

Good post.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Nov 30, 2015)

MadAdey said:



			Once it's done, use the best 5 from the last 10 cards to work out new handicaps and then go from there.
		
Click to expand...

Ooh, I'm 2.2 - bring it on!  I think!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 30, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			Ooh, I'm 2.2 - bring it on!  I think! 

Click to expand...

My best 5 from the last ten rounds

Relative to par 

1 under , 2 under level , 1 over , 1 over 

So by that system am I scratch ?!


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 30, 2015)

Fyldewhite said:



			So do a lot of "Rounds" turn into practice rounds after a 7, 6 start??  In my earlier post I was interested to find out how these are managed by the club but it got sidetracked. Do players have to register that they intend to do a "Round" before they set off (like our current supplementary system)? If not, then surely a lot of rounds that could/should be recorded won't be? Understand how the system is supposed to work but more interested in how it works at a more practical level.
		
Click to expand...

At my club in NZ we had a computer terminal outside the pro shop where you entered your id number and it then printed out your scorecard out so  presume there is a way that the club can check up that you actually returned that card, they are numbered. 
I used to play in Weds and weekend comps and those cards would be returned as normal. I also used to play a bounce game on a Monday morning with my mate and we'd both put our cards in for this.
However sometimes we didn't bother with cards if it was blowing a nor wester ( gale) / frosty or were only doing 9 . Was also the case when playing of an evening after work.

I suspect I was typical as I saw other players also returning cards on non comp days.


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 30, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			My best 5 from the last ten rounds

Relative to par 

1 under , 2 under level , 1 over , 1 over 

So by that system am I scratch ?! 

Click to expand...

Yup That'd be right  In my experience it is 2-3 shots lower than a CONGU handicap


----------



## MadAdey (Nov 30, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			My best 5 from the last ten rounds

Relative to par 

1 under , 2 under level , 1 over , 1 over 

So by that system am I scratch ?! 

Click to expand...

And that is why the USGA system is better IMO. It is a better reflection on how someone is currently playing. Not how they have been playing over the last year.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 30, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			Yup That'd be right  In my experience it is 2-3 shots lower than a CONGU handicap
		
Click to expand...

Well that will be interesting


----------



## FairwayDodger (Nov 30, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			Yup That'd be right  In my experience it is 2-3 shots lower than a CONGU handicap
		
Click to expand...

So is it just your score relative to par regardless of the course (and it's difficulty) you are playing?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 30, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			At my club in NZ we had a computer terminal outside the pro shop where you entered your id number and it then printed out your scorecard out so  presume there is a way that the club can check up that you actually returned that card, they are numbered. 
I used to play in Weds and weekend comps and those cards would be returned as normal. I also used to play a bounce game on a Monday morning with my mate and we'd both put our cards in for this.
However sometimes we didn't bother with cards if it was blowing a nor wester ( gale) / frosty or were only doing 9 . Was also the case when playing of an evening after work.

I suspect I was typical as I saw other players also returning cards on non comp days.
		
Click to expand...

What I have seen over the last couple of years is more and more people are more interested in just playing social golf - they aren't bothered about comps etc 

Add in every round effecting your HC and IMO it will have a detrimental effect to golf and participation.


----------



## MadAdey (Nov 30, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			Yup That'd be right  In my experience it is 2-3 shots lower than a CONGU handicap
		
Click to expand...

You are spot on there. If I was still in the UK my handicap would probably be around 5 or 6. But as a reflection on how I am playing then 3 is about correct.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 30, 2015)

MadAdey said:



			And that is why the USGA system is better IMO. It is a better reflection on how someone is currently playing. Not how they have been playing over the last year.
		
Click to expand...

But then because you have people knowing their HC will be effective every game because the same pace as a medal - poor


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 30, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			So is it just your score relative to par regardless of the course (and it's difficulty) you are playing?
		
Click to expand...

If I understand you correctly , yes it was relative to the slope of my home course . If my home course was more difficult I think it would be still 2-3 shots.


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 30, 2015)

MadAdey said:



			You are spot on there. If I was still in the UK my handicap would probably be around 5 or 6. But as a reflection on how I am playing then 3 is about correct.
		
Click to expand...

I was  3 in NZ , so yes


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 30, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			But then because you have people knowing their HC will be effective every game because the same pace as a medal - poor
		
Click to expand...

Your projected index will change every round played but playing index only changes every 14 days.


----------



## the_coach (Nov 30, 2015)

courses are rated by regional & state teams (usually 3 or 4 'qualified usga members)
holes are rated on a bunch of criteria included length (from different tee box areas) topography of the hole - elevation etc, hazards - water, trees, bunkers, desert, waste areas, rocks etc
the length & nature of the rough
the size, slopes & speed pf greens etc

usga pay for the cost - which then gets filtered through to the Clubs & folks playing

any answers to any of the questions can be found on the usga website  - also the changes that will be in place from January 2016

folks that are more interested in the minutia can find this in the drop down section under handicapping - 'usga handicap system manual'

http://www.usga.org/Handicapping/understanding-your-handicap-index.html

gives detail of how this all works over here

the final details in the UK will depend what exactly the system is that is adopted by the governing body as to whether it's taken on fully or in some kinda of hybrid form

those of us who have an index which are also closely monitored through State & National competition play in order to be eligible for representational teams don't possess index's that would be 2,3 or more higher in the UK


----------



## delc (Nov 30, 2015)

IanG said:



			So when everything counts, then either 

(i) all rounds must be played according to the RoG, (which bounce games right now are generally not, e.g. walking back for a lost ball etc) 
(ii) there is a mechanism in place to allow rounds which deviate from the RoG to still be included e.g. for any hole for which the RoG are not followed you simply enter you handicapped gross score - as you would if you didn't complete the round. 

Maybe I'm missing something but I don't think this has been explained.
		
Click to expand...

I personally hope we don't get the USGA system foisted on us, because it will take the fun out of bounce/friendly games if you have to treat them all as mini-medals, and how does it accommodate match play games when you are not playing to stroke play rules?


----------



## Old Skier (Nov 30, 2015)

MadAdey said:



			I don't know what goes into rating a course for the USGA system, but why will it take 10 years to implement? Surely they just need to get out there and sort it.
		
Click to expand...

Its being done by trained volunteers in each county, feel free to contact your county to volunteers. The more there are the quicker it's done.

There is no major cost implications.


----------



## duncan mackie (Nov 30, 2015)

Old Skier said:



			Its being done by trained volunteers in each county, feel free to contact your county to volunteers. The more there are the quicker it's done.

There is no major cost implications.
		
Click to expand...

Slight contradiction in the context of the point being made!

It will take as long as it takes the available volunteers - if it was being done to contract it could be done a lot faster, but would cost money that's not available!

The time it will take is a function of cost.


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 30, 2015)

delc said:



			I personally hope we don't get the USGA system foisted on us, because it will take the fun out of bounce/friendly games if you have to treat them all as mini-medals, and how does it accommodate match play games when you are not playing to stroke play rules?
		
Click to expand...

All the answers are in the links posted earlier.


----------



## delc (Nov 30, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			All the answers are in the links posted earlier.
		
Click to expand...

I still don't like the USGA system. The European Golf Association Handicapping System is a sort of halfway house between CONGU and USGA, and seems much better to me.

http://www.ega-golf.ch/content/ega-handicap-system


----------



## Foxholer (Nov 30, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			So is it just your score relative to par regardless of the course (and it's difficulty) you are playing?
		
Click to expand...

Not quite - and I think UpsideDown might have misunderstood you.

The (Strokeplay) score you record goes into the bucket of scores that might be considered. The Course Rating and Slope for the tees you played is also recorded and used as part of the calculation (which is basically 'what you scored compared with what you were expected to score'). So a Par 70, CR 73.6, Slope 140 that you scored 77 on would be considered ahead of (at least until it was aged off) a Par 72 CR 70.8 Slope 115 that you scored 75 on.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Nov 30, 2015)

Foxholer said:



			Not quite - and I think UpsideDown might have misunderstood you.

The (Strokeplay) score you record goes into the bucket of scores that might be considered. The Course Rating and Slope for the tees you played is also recorded and used as part of the calculation (which is basically 'what you scored compared with what you were expected to score'). So a Par 70, CR 73.6, Slope 140 that you scored 77 on would be considered ahead of (at least until it was aged off) a Par 72 CR 70.8 Slope 115 that you scored 75 on.
		
Click to expand...

That makes more sense. I looked at my last ten scores and I played them on 7 different courses ranging from pretty easy to Carnoustie... would be daft to just take scores relative to par on them!


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 30, 2015)

Sorry , yes misunderstood the question and agree with Foxholer's post


----------



## Crow (Nov 30, 2015)

the_coach said:



			courses are rated by regional & state teams (usually 3 or 4 'qualified usga members)
holes are rated on a bunch of criteria included length (from different tee box areas) topography of the hole - elevation etc, hazards - water, trees, bunkers, desert, waste areas, rocks etc
the length & nature of the rough
the size, slopes & speed pf greens etc

usga pay for the cost - which then gets filtered through to the Clubs & folks playing

any answers to any of the questions can be found on the usga website  - also the changes that will be in place from January 2016

folks that are more interested in the minutia can find this in the drop down section under handicapping - 'usga handicap system manual'

http://www.usga.org/Handicapping/understanding-your-handicap-index.html

gives detail of how this all works over here

the final details in the UK will depend what exactly the system is that is adopted by the governing body as to whether it's taken on fully or in some kinda of hybrid form

*those of us who have an index which are also closely monitored through State & National competition play in order to be eligible for representational teams don't possess index's that would be 2,3 or more higher in the UK*

Click to expand...

To me that last line suggests a flaw in the system.


----------



## delc (Nov 30, 2015)

Crow said:



			To me that last line suggests a flaw in the system.
		
Click to expand...

A system that requires a return after every round, friendly or competition, and requires you to guess what score you would have made at any uncompleted holes is obviously flawed IMHO!


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 30, 2015)

delc said:



			A system that requires a return after every round, friendly or competition, and requires you to guess what score you would have made at any uncompleted holes is obviously flawed IMHO!  

Click to expand...

Really , here you are wanting it !!!!

http://forums.golf-monthly.co.uk/showthread.php?72287-Old-age-loss-of-distance-and-handicaps!



delc said:



			I am 68 years old. I reckon that I have lost 20 yards of driving distance since I was 65 and 50 yards since I was 50, so it's going down almost exponentially. I now stuggle to reach any par-4's that are more than about 360 yards long in regulation. I did get down to handicap 10.2 last year after a couple of exceptionally good/lucky rounds, but now generally struggle to score more than 30 points. My handicap has gone back up to 12.1 in increments of 0.1 per qualifying competition, but it really needs to be about 15. At the current rate of increase this will require another 30 Q comps! I play in about 12 comps per year, so 2.5 years maybe. *The USGA Handicapping system would be much fairer on old gents like me, as I could start dropping good scores made a couple of years ago much sooner!* 

Click to expand...


----------



## delc (Nov 30, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			Really , here you are wanting it !!!!

http://forums.golf-monthly.co.uk/showthread.php?72287-Old-age-loss-of-distance-and-handicaps!
		
Click to expand...

That's to address a flaw in the CONGU system, which is also less than perfect in my opinion!


----------



## Foxholer (Nov 30, 2015)

Crow said:



			To me that last line suggests a flaw in the system.
		
Click to expand...

Why?

the_coach is merely stating that at or around Scratch, Congu and the slope system are pretty close to each other (and congrats t_c on going further into the Plus category!).

For others, the Slope system adjusts expected score/handicap for the day along the lines of reality!

If you check out this document http://www.congu.com/faqs/old_site/Review of Handicaps.pdf
 you will note that the 'expected score' on any day is rather different from your Congu handicap! 

The USGA Index is exactly that - not a Handicap! Most courses are probably around 127-135, so there needs to be an adjustment (for Course Rating and along the slope) to that Index for 'handicap for the round' and the result is probably not all that far off what a Congu 'expected score' would end up with!


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 30, 2015)

delc said:



			That's to address a flaw in the CONGU system, which is also less than perfect in my opinion!
		
Click to expand...

Which is addressed under USGA as it's based on your current playing standards. Also can stop those who seem to always win in national pairs comps as those cards get counted , so no hiding your handicap by just playing Matchplay and 4BBB :thup:


----------



## delc (Nov 30, 2015)

Y



upsidedown said:



			Which is addressed under USGA as it's based on your current playing standards. Also can stop those who seem to always win in national pairs comps as those cards get counted , so no hiding your handicap by just playing Matchplay and 4BBB :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Some of the issues I have complained about in the past have been addressed in the 2016 version of CONGU, e.g. 7 consecutive failures to make buffer will trigger an automatic handicap review. I would just like to see the minimum number of returns (competition or supplementary cards) increased to to at least 10 per year. This would leave most golfers the opportunity to play plenty of bounce/friendly games without worrying about handicaps and all the bureaucracy the USGA system seems to entail.


----------



## upsidedown (Nov 30, 2015)

delc said:



			Y
Some of the issues I have complained about in the past have been addressed in the 2016 version of CONGU, e.g. 7 consecutive failures to make buffer will trigger an automatic handicap review. I would just like to see the minimum number of returns (competition or supplementary cards) increased to to at least 10 per year. This would leave most golfers the opportunity to play plenty of bounce/friendly games without worrying about handicaps and all the *bureaucracy the USGA system seems to entail*.
		
Click to expand...

What bureaucracy is that then? From my experience you get a card printed out with your handicap on it including the holes where you get shots, really good for when playing a new course. You place your completed card inn the box provided or hand back to competition organisers and your projected index is updated and then every 14 days you get an e-mail/text informing you of your new handicap index.

What's not to like?


----------



## delc (Nov 30, 2015)

G



upsidedown said:



			What bureaucracy is that then? From my experience you get a card printed out with your handicap on it including the holes where you get shots, really good for when playing a new course. You place your completed card inn the box provided or hand back to competition organisers and your projected index is updated and then every 14 days you get an e-mail/text informing you of your new handicap index.

What's not to like?
		
Click to expand...

If I am playing in a 4BBB match my approach to the game may be somewhat different to playing in a medal, e.g. one player goes for a safe par (or in the case of seniors matches a safe bogey) for a half, while the other tries for a nett birdie for a win. In a singles medal I am just trying to keep the ball in play and avoiding any big numbers.  The two forms of golf are just not compatible!

P.S. It sounds as though most clubs will need a new computer system and someone to administer all the card entries, which will add to the cost of my membership!


----------



## IanG (Nov 30, 2015)

delc said:



			G
If I am playing in a 4BBB match my approach to the game may be somewhat different to playing in a medal, e.g. one player goes for a safe par (or in the case of seniors matches a safe bogey) for a half, while the other tries for a nett birdie for a win. In a singles medal I am just trying to keep the ball in play and avoiding any big numbers.  *The two forms of golf are just not compatible!*

Click to expand...

And yet in CONGU we use the same handicap for both .....


----------



## delc (Nov 30, 2015)

IanG said:



			And yet in CONGU we use the same handicap for both .....
		
Click to expand...

Your handicap gained in qualifying stroke play competitions should be a reasonable measure of your golfing ability for matchplay. However you will probably just pick your ball up at some holes in matchplay, because you have already lost the hole, or a partner has got a better score for a win or a half. Matchplay is not a good basis for assessing a handicap.


----------



## Crow (Nov 30, 2015)

Foxholer said:



			Why?

the_coach is merely stating that at or around Scratch, Congu and the slope system are pretty close to each other (and congrats t_c on going further into the Plus category!).

For others, the Slope system adjusts expected score/handicap for the day along the lines of reality!

If you check out this document http://www.congu.com/faqs/old_site/Review of Handicaps.pdf
 you will note that the 'expected score' on any day is rather different from your Congu handicap! 

The USGA Index is exactly that - not a Handicap! Most courses are probably around 127-135, so there needs to be an adjustment (for Course Rating and along the slope) to that Index for 'handicap for the round' and the result is probably not all that far off what a Congu 'expected score' would end up with!
		
Click to expand...

The way I read it is that if you want to be eligible for representational teams (whatever they are) then you must be closely monitored through State & National competition play and as a result your "handicap" more closely resembles that of the UK or, more to the point, is higher than if using the standard USGA system.

To me that means that the USGA system doesn't work correctly and therefore it's flawed.
Either that or there's some serious sandbagging going on!


----------



## daverollo (Nov 30, 2015)

All the courses in Scotland were rated a number of years ago. Although I am sure some will need revisiting to take account of different tee positions

http://www.popeofslope.com/scotland/courseratings.html


----------



## Foxholer (Nov 30, 2015)

Crow said:



			The way I read it is that if you want to be eligible for representational teams (whatever they are) then you must be closely monitored through State & National competition play...
		
Click to expand...

This part I agree with.



Crow said:



			...as a result your "handicap" more closely resembles that of the UK or, more to the point, is higher than if using the standard USGA system.

To me that means that the USGA system doesn't work correctly and therefore it's flawed.
Either that or there's some serious sandbagging going on!  

Click to expand...

But you have drawn the wrong conclusion!

The whole gist of the Slope system is that there is a 'Slope' of an additional allowance required from Scratch (starting at zero, so pretty much equivalent - as t_c seems to me to be suggesting - in both countries!) to 20+ 'Index'. The angle of the slope depends on the difficulty of the course and the allowance required is governed by the Index.


----------



## Old Skier (Nov 30, 2015)

daverollo said:



			All the courses in Scotland were rated a number of years ago. Although I am sure some will need revisiting to take account of different tee positions

http://www.popeofslope.com/scotland/courseratings.html

Click to expand...

My understanding is all courses will be re-done to take account of the changes that occurred in the ladies handicap system a few years back.


----------



## Crow (Nov 30, 2015)

Reading the_coach's post through a couple more times I think I did misread it.

if I now understand it correctly the "representational teams" are teams to play internationally and this process is to even out the recognised discrepancies between two different country's systems such as the US and the UK where the UK's handicaps are higher.

The close monitoring through State & National competition play thereby provides a handicap adjusted depending on the overseas country they're playing.

(At least this is what I hope it's saying, otherwise my original view still stands.)


----------



## the_coach (Nov 30, 2015)

Crow said:



			The way I read it is that if you want to be eligible  for representational teams (whatever they are) then you must be closely  monitored through State & National competition play..
		
Click to expand...




Foxholer said:



			This part I agree with.
		
Click to expand...




Crow said:



			and as a result  your "handicap" more closely resembles that of the UK or, more to the  point, is higher than if using the standard USGA system.

To me that means that the USGA system doesn't work correctly and therefore it's flawed.
Either that or there's some serious sandbagging going on!  

Click to expand...




Foxholer said:



			But you have drawn the wrong conclusion!

The whole gist of the Slope system is that there is a 'Slope' of an additional allowance required from Scratch (starting at zero, so pretty much equivalent - as t_c seems to me to be suggesting - in both countries!) to 20+ 'Index'. The angle of the slope depends on the difficulty of the course and the allowance required is governed by the Index.
		
Click to expand...

would think that maybes you not really gone into how the system works - the index is a ways to work out a course handicap for the course to be played - don't really see how you can interpret that the system doesn't work correctly and is flawed .... seems a pretty big conclusion clouded perhaps by some misconceptions.

"Fox" has outlined a pretty fair precis of how it all fits together & understood my perhaps less than clearly put points 

all kinda 'elite' representational team events have 'committees' in charge of 'picking' the best team squads possible they naturally monitor current successive scores in larger state/national & open competitions (rather than home course play) (bunch of these are played 'flat' at scratch some to index (course handicap)  all from the pool of elite ams that could make up the squads 

not all are solely arrived at through just national or world rankings

even the biggest the walker cup team is not that transparent in how the team is arrived at it isn't solely down to world ranking places or the bigger competition winners - take this years losing side when two places were curiously given to couple of mid am winners - guessing given this years outcome how this side is arrived at could well be getting overhauled ......

as at the sharp end of usga handicap calculations is a system based around the score of a scratch player on a course so why there is no real difference at this end of the spectrum to our relative systems handicaps/index's at around scratch level & further up the plus ladder

to my mind, although nothing is perfect, our system seems to give a mark of the current up to date standard of play of folks at around bogey level & above, therefore play between folks across the index spectrum is more equitable


----------



## Crow (Nov 30, 2015)

Eh? 

Now you are talking smoke and mirrors.


----------



## MadAdey (Dec 1, 2015)

the_coach said:



			to my mind, although nothing is perfect, our system seems to give a mark of the current up to date standard of play of folks at around bogey level & above, therefore play between folks across the index spectrum is more equitable
		
Click to expand...

Personally after seeing both systems in person I am leaning towards the USGA system. The bottom line is both systems work in their own way. 

CONGU makes it difficult to make your handicap go up, but on the other side of things it is far harder to drop your handicap fast as a rapidly improving golfer. Also with the way the system is it is easier to be a bandit as you do not have to submit all your cards.

USGA is a marker as to how your currently playing. It is easy for your handicap to tumble as a rapidly improving golfer, but likewise you can make it go up, even though it does take a lot of effort to do it.

To me it is all about which system is better at stopping people that sandbag their handicap for when a big comp comes up. I play nomadic golf so have played with dozens of different players of all abilities over the last 18 months and not once have I played with someone who I would consider better than what their handicap says. If I was still in the UK I think I would have played with a few in that time period, not just bandits, but also improving players that the system can't cut quick enough.


----------



## delc (Dec 1, 2015)

MadAdey said:



			Personally after seeing both systems in person I am leaning towards the USGA system. The bottom line is both systems work in their own way. 

CONGU makes it difficult to make your handicap go up, but on the other side of things it is far harder to drop your handicap fast as a rapidly improving golfer. Also with the way the system is it is easier to be a bandit as you do not have to submit all your cards.

USGA is a marker as to how your currently playing. It is easy for your handicap to tumble as a rapidly improving golfer, but likewise you can make it go up, even though it does take a lot of effort to do it.

To me it is all about which system is better at stopping people that sandbag their handicap for when a big comp comes up. I play nomadic golf so have played with dozens of different players of all abilities over the last 18 months and not once have I played with someone who I would consider better than what their handicap says.* If I was still in the UK I think I would have played with a few in that time period, not just bandits, but also improving players that the system can't cut quick enough*.
		
Click to expand...

The CONGU system works well provided players play in enough formal competitions, and/or submit enough supplementary cards. There are Exceptional Score Reductions (ESR's) to catch rapidly improving golfers, except for some strange reason in Scotland. As they only play comps for about 6 months a year in the Summer, I would have thought that they need ESR's more than most, as a player could practice hard over the Winter and then clean up up the first few comps the following Summer!

The other advantage of CONGU in comps is the CSS adjustment for the conditions, so your handicap won't necessarily go up just because you play in awful conditions. I understand that USGA has no such provision, but maybe the weather is a bit kinder over in the States?


----------



## Imurg (Dec 1, 2015)

I can see the merits of both systems.
I think the biggest stumbling block to many over here is the notion that their handicap can change, sometimes pretty quickly.
Under CONGU, you're unlikely to start the season on 10 and finish it on 16.
That's entirely possible if you suffer a prolonged dip in form with the USGA method
And some/many/most don't like the idea of being a 10 in March but a 16 in September.
On the down side, a run of poor form could see your number rise a few shots. Then the form returns and you play well. OK your handicap comes back down but those 2 or 3 extra shots mean you win, possibly a big trophy, solely due to those 2 or 3 shots that wouldn't have been there via CONGU.


----------



## Slab (Dec 1, 2015)

I think for players happy just being on their own course the Congu system covers most players handicap requirements quite well but if you like to play other courses (especially competitively) then if there's variances in course difficulty its probably beyond the UK system to still deliver the original purpose of using a handicap 

Without blowing any trumpet I'm pretty sure my handicap would be several shots lower if I returned to the course I seriously started playing golf on which was pretty benign and a under 6,000yrds and even as a newish player I got to a PB of 93 

Swap to longer, much tougher courses and 4 yrs on my PB is still only 90 but I feel i've made a huge leap from the player I was 

The slope system would show a (guesstimated) rating difference of perhaps 90 on one course to 135 on another and then adjust my handicap whichever way round I play them which might mean a 4 or 5 shot difference for me in playing handicap

So maybe the UK wont end up with a full bells & whistles USGA system but a national course rating seems a minimum step in the right direction


----------



## delc (Dec 1, 2015)

Slab said:



			I think for players happy just being on their own course the Congu system covers most players handicap requirements quite well but if you like to play other courses (especially competitively) then if there's variances in course difficulty its probably beyond the UK system to still deliver the original purpose of using a handicap 

Without blowing any trumpet I'm pretty sure my handicap would be several shots lower if I returned to the course I seriously started playing golf on which was pretty benign and a under 6,000yrds and even as a newish player I got to a PB of 93 

Swap to longer, much tougher courses and 4 yrs on my PB is still only 90 but I feel i've made a huge leap from the player I was 

The slope system would show a (guesstimated) rating difference of perhaps 90 on one course to 135 on another and then adjust my handicap whichever way round I play them which might mean a 4 or 5 shot difference for me in playing handicap

So maybe the UK wont end up with a full bells & whistles USGA system but a national course rating seems a minimum step in the right direction
		
Click to expand...

Your short easy course is likely to have a much lower SSS than the longer more difficult one, so it's all relative. The only advantage of a slope rating is that it also looks at the course from the point of view of a short hitting 20 handicapper, who is more likely to fall foul of the hazards than a competent scratch player. However this adds complications to the handicapping system,


----------



## FairwayDodger (Dec 1, 2015)

The real implementation problem is going to be educating people about the new system and convincing them of its merits. On here we're fairly self-selecting as some of the keenest golf nerds in the country and yet we're (I think) still undecided if this will be a good change or not. I think the average club golfer will be bemused by it, to be honest.

I've recently read about the furore because USGA have changed the rules so solo rounds no longer count for handicap. My instinct is that must be the right decision and yet golfers on the other side of the pond are up in arms about it. Canada has even stuck two fingers up and announced they're going to ignore that change. I think that just shows what a different attitude to handicapping we have. I see trouble ahead, frankly.


----------



## garyinderry (Dec 1, 2015)

We can't agree on the rules of golf never mind get our heads around a raft of new measures. 

Our method is pretty simple. Play well get cut.  Play poorly go up 0.1 . 

The amount of people who won't know their handicap from one week to the next will be crazy.  

I can't see too many putting in cards when they played 13 holes, it raining, cold their car is right there and the club house is over there.


----------



## Slab (Dec 1, 2015)

delc said:



			Your short easy course is likely to have a much lower SSS than the longer more difficult one, so it's all relative. The only advantage of a slope rating is that it also looks at the course from the point of view of a short hitting 20 handicapper, who is more likely to fall foul of the hazards than a competent scratch player. However this adds complications to the handicapping system,
		
Click to expand...

Not so much as you'd think, if I recall correctly the easy course was 71 SSS so prob only a couple of strokes while the reality is very different

Yes it'll be a more complicated piece of software but thankfully the players don't have to build it, you still just get 18 little boxes to write down your score on each hole


----------



## duncan mackie (Dec 1, 2015)

Slab said:



			I think for players happy just being on their own course the Congu system covers most players handicap requirements quite well but if you like to play other courses (especially competitively) then if there's variances in course difficulty its probably beyond the UK system to still deliver the original purpose of using a handicap 

Without blowing any trumpet I'm pretty sure my handicap would be several shots lower if I returned to the course I seriously started playing golf on which was pretty benign and a under 6,000yrds and even as a newish player I got to a PB of 93 

Swap to longer, much tougher courses and 4 yrs on my PB is still only 90 but I feel i've made a huge leap from the player I was 

The slope system would show a (guesstimated) rating difference of perhaps 90 on one course to 135 on another and then adjust my handicap whichever way round I play them which might mean a 4 or 5 shot difference for me in playing handicap

So maybe the UK wont end up with a full bells & whistles USGA system but a national course rating seems a minimum step in the right direction
		
Click to expand...

As ive already said I don't expect much change in the ratings of such courses - but what will change is that you will have a playing handicap of (probably) 4 shots more when teeing up on the second course you reference. 

Threads/posts on here highlight over and over again that people have no inherent recognition of SSS and constantly reference irrelevant data such as scores relative to par and stableford points when discussing performance. When you have a playing handicap of (say) 8 at your home course and stand on the tee as a visitor somewhere with a playing handicap of 4 there's no hiding from the easier nature of the challenge to par you face.


----------



## duncan mackie (Dec 1, 2015)

MadAdey said:



			Personally after seeing both systems in person I am leaning towards the USGA system. The bottom line is both systems work in their own way. 

CONGU makes it difficult to make your handicap go up, but on the other side of things it is far harder to drop your handicap fast as a rapidly improving golfer. Also with the way the system is it is easier to be a bandit as you do not have to submit all your cards.

USGA is a marker as to how your currently playing. It is easy for your handicap to tumble as a rapidly improving golfer, but likewise you can make it go up, even though it does take a lot of effort to do it.

To me it is all about which system is better at stopping people that sandbag their handicap for when a big comp comes up. I play nomadic golf so have played with dozens of different players of all abilities over the last 18 months and not once have I played with someone who I would consider better than what their handicap says. If I was still in the UK I think I would have played with a few in that time period, not just bandits, but also improving players that the system can't cut quick enough.
		
Click to expand...

There's extremely little between them on reductions now, although the change to ESRs next year will v slightly slow extreme cases. I've run various scores through both systems over the last few years and there aren't major differences in the system output. Where they fundamentally differ is obviously in the scores counted. 
The revisions to upward reviews won't get close to the USGA system for increases in the case of a loss of form for a frequent player. I'm personally not a fan of handicapping for form in the short term and would be extremely embarrassed to have a handicap index of 19 currently (which I would have under the USGA system). However,  for Joe average  it really won't make much difference (except when they meet me in competition returning to form!)


----------



## delc (Dec 1, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			The real implementation problem is going to be educating people about the new system and convincing them of its merits. On here we're fairly self-selecting as some of the keenest golf nerds in the country and yet we're (I think) still undecided if this will be a good change or not. I think the average club golfer will be bemused by it, to be honest.

I've recently read about the furore because USGA have changed the rules so solo rounds no longer count for handicap. My instinct is that must be the right decision and yet golfers on the other side of the pond are up in arms about it. Canada has even stuck two fingers up and announced they're going to ignore that change. I think that just shows what a different attitude to handicapping we have. I see trouble ahead, frankly.
		
Click to expand...

I can't believe that the Americans think it's OK to enter the score from a solo round into the handicapping system with no-one to validate the score! That seems absolutely open to abuse and handicap manipulation. If we are looking towards a Worldwide handicapping system, surely the European Golf Association Handicapping system also has to come into it. The EGA system seems more sensible than both CONGU and USGA to me.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Dec 1, 2015)

delc said:



			I can't believe that the Americans think it's OK to enter the score from a solo round into the handicapping system with no-one to validate the score! That seems absolutely open to abuse and handicap manipulation. If we are looking towards a Worldwide handicapping system, surely the European Golf Association Handicapping system also has to come into it. The EGA system seems more sensible than both CONGU and USGA to me.
		
Click to expand...

Del, it's not just that they think it's OK, they are outraged that it's been changed.


----------



## delc (Dec 1, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			Del, it's not just that they think it's OK, they are outraged that it's been changed.
		
Click to expand...

I occasionally play 9 holes of solo golf in the summer evenings for practise, but I don't strictly follow the rules of golf, often hitting more than one ball, or practising chipping around the greens. Surely I would not be expected to input my scores from these onto the handicapping system?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 1, 2015)

That won't happen in the UK - taking on the way the US handicaps work won't happen belts and braces for the UK


----------



## garyinderry (Dec 1, 2015)

Is there more risk of freak scores like net -10 or more with the US system.  

Example someone suffering with hook driving posting 10 really poor scores and their handicap flying up then a simple grip change allows them to shoot even well below where their handicap originally was.


----------



## upsidedown (Dec 1, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			That won't happen in the UK - taking on the way the US handicaps work won't happen belts and braces for the UK
		
Click to expand...

I'd like to think one day there would be an unified World Handicapping system. 
Our game is fairly unique in having handicaps yet it's bizarre we have rules that apply worldwide but  not handicapping.
An amalgamation of the three main systems would seem sensible maybe with 10 best of your last  20 from any measured tee,4BBB with most likely scores counting but no match play rounds where gimmies are an integral part of the game.


----------



## upsidedown (Dec 1, 2015)

garyinderry said:



			Is there more risk of freak scores like net -10 or more with the US system.  

Example someone suffering with hook driving posting 10 really poor scores and their handicap flying up then a simple grip change allows them to shoot even well below where their 
handicap originally was.
		
Click to expand...

Yes I've seen scores of 46 win individual stableford comps indeed won one myself with 44 playing off 8, in NZ.
However have also seen it here but. Never been close to my 44 here tho &#128513;


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 1, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			I'd like to think one day there would be an unified World Handicapping system. 
Our game is fairly unique in having handicaps yet it's bizarre we have rules that apply worldwide but  not handicapping.
An amalgamation of the three main systems would seem sensible maybe with 10 best of your last  20 from any measured tee,4BBB with most likely scores counting but no match play rounds where gimmies are an integral part of the game.
		
Click to expand...

I think it will be using the slope index but only qualifying rounds to count plus supplemental cards 

But all players to put in supplementary cards

Right now cat 1 can't and I would have loved to have been able to put them in throughout the year


----------



## MadAdey (Dec 1, 2015)

People mention the ESR, but I have seen it fail miserably regarding 2 different players in the same season.

A few formers played with my old golfing buddy pete, so saw him in all his glory, playing well below his handicap.

In an 18 month period he won 2 winter leagues, the match play singles, the foursomes, multiple medals and got enough in pro shop vouchers to buy a TM driver and a couple if VOKEY wedges. He went from 25 to 12 in that period, by getting ESR,s. They still don't cut people quick enough as there was another player in a similar position at the same time doing the same.


----------



## upsidedown (Dec 1, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Right now cat 1 can't and I would have loved to have been able to put them in throughout the year
		
Click to expand...

Agree that's what frustrates me too when playing for club or County and missing qualifier's at Home course. The good rounds I have had would have counted in NZ


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 1, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			Agree that's what frustrates me too when playing for club or County and missing qualifier's at Home course. The good rounds I have had would have counted in NZ
		
Click to expand...

Using the US system though would have me being a scratch golfer - I don't think I'm a scratch golfer though


----------



## upsidedown (Dec 1, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Using the US system though would have me being a scratch golfer - I don't think I'm a scratch golfer though
		
Click to expand...

No I'd say youre nearer a 2 on their system , what are your last 10 rounds to sss ?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 1, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			No I'd say youre nearer a 2 on their system , what are your last 10 rounds to sss ?
		
Click to expand...

Including non qualifiers and 4BBB ?

To par 

+1
Level
-2
-1
Level
NR ( 34 points stableford)
3 over
3 over 
Level
+1


----------



## EuanRoss (Dec 1, 2015)

I see some major issues. Namely weather not being a factor. My course has wildly varying CSS based on weather conditions. I've mentioned elsewhere that a 77 in a howling gale at my place is tougher to shoot than 74 in a flat calm. Also what if the course is set up tough for an event, say club champ, all back tees, pins tucked away, fairways narrowed.  

This is why I like CSS.


----------



## upsidedown (Dec 1, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Including non qualifiers and 4BBB ?

To par 

+1
Level
-2
-1
Level
NR ( 34 points stableford)
3 over
3 over 
Level
+1
		
Click to expand...

Yup assuming those are non qualifiers and 4BBB you'd have a handicap index of 1.1 at my course in NZ. Obviously arbitrary figures as don't have slope for yours :thup: But as were similar standard seemed a good starting point


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 1, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			Yup assuming those are non qualifiers and 4BBB you'd have a handicap index of 1.1 at my course in NZ. Obviously arbitrary figures as don't have slope for yours :thup: But as were similar standard seemed a good starting point  

Click to expand...

Three of them were qualifiers - bogey comp and couple medals


----------



## upsidedown (Dec 1, 2015)

EuanRoss said:



			I see some major issues. Namely weather not being a factor. My course has wildly varying CSS based on weather conditions. I've mentioned elsewhere that a 77 in a howling gale at my place is tougher to shoot than 74 in a flat calm. Also what if the course is set up tough for an event, say club champ, all back tees, pins tucked away, fairways narrowed.  

This is why I like CSS.
		
Click to expand...

But those are only 2 rounds out of the 20 that count towards your handicap index  I believe the OZ version has scope for very adverse weather.


----------



## upsidedown (Dec 1, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Three of them were qualifiers - bogey comp and couple medals
		
Click to expand...

So 3 off whites and rest off yellows? Maybe a small drop in index but probably still off 1


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 1, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			So 3 off whites and rest off yellows? Maybe a small drop in index but probably still off 1 

Click to expand...

Sorry the NR was off whites as well 

1 is what I play to in both swindles 

Maybe it is a fair reflection


----------



## delc (Dec 1, 2015)

EuanRoss said:



			I see some major issues. Namely weather not being a factor. My course has wildly varying CSS based on weather conditions. I've mentioned elsewhere that a 77 in a howling gale at my place is tougher to shoot than 74 in a flat calm. Also what if the course is set up tough for an event, say club champ, all back tees, pins tucked away, fairways narrowed.  

This is why I like CSS.
		
Click to expand...

Our course is also pretty exposed and windy, so I would also like to keep CSS, or some equivalent, for qualifying competitions.  Also if we must have something like USGA, then I would like formal competitions to be given a greater weighting than bounce/friendly rounds with my mates.


----------



## delc (Dec 1, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			But those are only 2 rounds out of the 20 that count towards your handicap index  I believe the OZ version has scope for very adverse weather.
		
Click to expand...

I can't think of many rounds of golf I have played this year that haven't been played in at least moderately windy conditions, so you can't say that the conditions will balance out over a 20 round period!


----------



## upsidedown (Dec 1, 2015)

delc said:



			I can't think of many rounds of golf I have played this year that haven't been played in at least moderately windy conditions, so you can't say that the conditions will balance out over a 20 round period!
		
Click to expand...

At best that is 20 days of howling gales then ?
Moderately windy conditions shouldn't effect a well struck golf shot  I for one cant think of 20 consecutive rounds where the weather has adversely affected my scoring . If it really is that bad at your place you need to adapt your game for the conditions :thup:


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 1, 2015)

upsidedown said:



			At best that is 20 days of howling gales then ?
Moderately windy conditions shouldn't effect a well struck golf shot  I for one cant think of 20 consecutive rounds where the weather has adversely affected my scoring . If it really is that bad at your place you need to adapt your game for the conditions :thup:
		
Click to expand...

I agree. I can't see how you'd get twenty consecutive rounds where weather will be an major contribution


----------



## garyinderry (Dec 1, 2015)

HomerJSimpson said:



			I agree. I can't see how you'd get twenty consecutive rounds where weather will be an major contribution
		
Click to expand...

Ever played golf in Ireland? :rofl:


----------



## Deleted member 3432 (Dec 1, 2015)

HomerJSimpson said:



			I agree. I can't see how you'd get twenty consecutive rounds where weather will be an major contribution
		
Click to expand...

That can be the norm up here on the north west coast, I can vaguely remember a flat calm day a couple of years ago! I think I had two rounds this year when I didn't have some sort of jacket on, mainly to keep warm in the cold wind.


----------



## delc (Dec 1, 2015)

About the only good thing about the USGA handicapping system is that it would allow the handicaps of senior golfers with declining abilities to increase a bit more rapidly than the drip feed of 0.1 increases under the CONGU system!


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 1, 2015)

saving_par said:



			That can be the norm up here on the north west coast, I can vaguely remember a flat calm day a couple of years ago! I think I had two rounds this year when I didn't have some sort of jacket on, mainly to keep warm in the cold wind.
		
Click to expand...

Really? To the point where it makes a huge difference to the scoring? I'm not doubting you, just surprised. Clearly off your level you've learned to deal with it. However based on the slope system what effect do you think it'll have on your handicap given normal weather conditions including the wind


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 1, 2015)

delc said:



			About the only good thing about the USGA handicapping system is that it would allow the handicaps of senior golfers with declining abilities to increase a bit more rapidly than the drip feed of 0.1 increases under the CONGU system!
		
Click to expand...

It does now and you have annual review.


----------



## delc (Dec 1, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It does now and you have annual review.
		
Click to expand...

You still have to clock up 7 consecutive failures to make the buffer zone before anything is flagged up!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 1, 2015)

delc said:



			You still have to clock up 7 consecutive failures to make the buffer zone before anything is flagged up!
		
Click to expand...

And ? Do you think it should be less than that ?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 1, 2015)

delc said:



			You still have to clock up 7 consecutive failures to make the buffer zone before anything is flagged up!
		
Click to expand...

Fail to see the point. If you need a helping hand, then surely the system is designed to do it under the annual review. Personally I'm very wary about this slope system


----------



## upsidedown (Dec 1, 2015)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Fail to see the point. If you need a helping hand, then surely the system is designed to do it under the annual review. Personally I'm very wary about this slope system
		
Click to expand...

That's the problem though an annual review is well annual . As I highlighted earlier guy from my old NZ club was struggling with form so under their system gained two shots in 20 rounds, he did briefly gain 3 .


----------



## Deleted member 3432 (Dec 1, 2015)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Really? To the point where it makes a huge difference to the scoring? I'm not doubting you, just surprised. Clearly off your level you've learned to deal with it. However based on the slope system what effect do you think it'll have on your handicap given normal weather conditions including the wind
		
Click to expand...

Generally worth a couple of shots  compared to the odd calm day. It's a case of having to deal with it for all of the field but it would be nice to play in warm weather with little breeze just occasionally during the summer!

Personally I'm happy with the system we have in place now, I think CSS  going up to +3 or reduction only factors in tough conditions on the day.

As for the slope system I don't fancy the idea of going somewhere and playing off a different handicap. I've played a fair few times at Southernness which I believe has a slope of 148 making it one of the highest rated courses in Scotland. It's a very difficult course BUT the sss is 73 against par of 69 off the whites (sss 74 off blues) and so the course plays par 73 in my eyes so that is my mindset and 9 over par makes buffer for me.

No need to play off a different handicap in this case.

Ultimately it doesn't matter what system we have it will have its flaws and won't suit everyone. For the social golfer it shouldn't be anything to worry about and competitive golfers should play a few away comps each season, it helps you be a more rounded golfer as it makes you think your way around an unfamiliar track. Or it should!


----------



## delc (Dec 1, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			And ? Do you think it should be less than that ?
		
Click to expand...

Probably not, but it might take several months to play in 7 qualifiers. USGA is likely to be much quicker if all rounds count!


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 1, 2015)

delc said:



			Probably not, but it might take several months to play in 7 qualifiers. USGA is likely to be much quicker if all rounds count!
		
Click to expand...

In the season we have a weekend medal and stableford, midweek equivalents and usually at least one other comp per month so that's a minimum of five. Can't see how it'll take several months providing you are playing as often as possible


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 1, 2015)

delc said:



			Probably not, but it might take several months to play in 7 qualifiers. USGA is likely to be much quicker if all rounds count!
		
Click to expand...

Well thats not the systems fault - the person can always put in supplementary cards


----------



## garyinderry (Dec 1, 2015)

Seniors should be able to play more golf than anyone else.   jammy old dodgers.


----------



## delc (Dec 1, 2015)

HomerJSimpson said:



			In the season we have a weekend medal and stableford, midweek equivalents and usually at least one other comp per month so that's a minimum of five. Can't see how it'll take several months providing you are playing as often as possible
		
Click to expand...

Our 5-day member seniors only have 1, or very occasionally 2, qualifiers available to them per month, and most of them wouldn't put in a supplementary card. They are generally the preserve of keen young members who are trying to get their handicaps down!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 1, 2015)

delc said:



			Our 5-day member seniors only have 1, or very occasionally 2, qualifiers available to them per month, and most of them wouldn't put in a supplementary card. They are generally the preserve of keen young members who are trying to get their handicaps down!
		
Click to expand...

Then it's their own fault - system is there for them to use - it's their choice


----------



## delc (Dec 2, 2015)

EuanRoss said:



			I see some major issues. Namely weather not being a factor. My course has wildly varying CSS based on weather conditions. I've mentioned elsewhere that a 77 in a howling gale at my place is tougher to shoot than 74 in a flat calm. Also what if the course is set up tough for an event, say club champ, all back tees, pins tucked away, fairways narrowed.  

This is why I like CSS.
		
Click to expand...

Only three problems with playing in wind:

1) Playing into wind you can't make the distance.
2) Playing downwind you can't stop the ball on the green.
3 Playing cross wind the ball goes sideways. *

* If you allow for the wind the ball goes straight. If you don't it curves wickedly.


----------



## 3565 (Dec 3, 2015)

A friend of mine lives in California and had a left wrist problem that made it hard for him to swing a club. But he still wanted to play and he continued to do so, right arm only, he plays of +1, and after putting the rounds in (under the USGA system) got his hc to 12 which he then played in his club championship and other competitive comps. He's now back to playing off scratch. 

Would Congu system allow an exceptional circumstance above to happen? 

I honestly dont know cos I can't be bothered to read and understand the blurb.


----------



## Fyldewhite (Dec 3, 2015)

delc said:



			Our 5-day member seniors only have 1, or very occasionally 2, qualifiers available to them per month, and most of them wouldn't put in a supplementary card. They are generally the preserve of keen young members who are trying to get their handicaps down!
		
Click to expand...

In contrast, our seniors have a comp every Tuesday which is qualifying approx Apr-Oct. The club has a Wednesday Comp May-Sep......around 45-50 rounds in total available. The seniors day is very well supported with anywhere between 20-70 playing depending on conditions and time of year (probably >50 most weeks in summer). Surely there's an appetite at most clubs for a similar calendar? Why don't the seniors get together and sort something? May be surprised how popular it is.


----------



## delc (Dec 3, 2015)

Fyldewhite said:



			In contrast, our seniors have a comp every Tuesday which is qualifying approx Apr-Oct. The club has a Wednesday Comp May-Sep......around 45-50 rounds in total available. The seniors day is very well supported with anywhere between 20-70 playing depending on conditions and time of year (probably >50 most weeks in summer). Surely there's an appetite at most clubs for a similar calendar? Why don't the seniors get together and sort something? May be surprised how popular it is.
		
Click to expand...

We have a seniors comp of some sort every Thursday which often attracts 60-70 players. However normally only one of these comps per month is a qualifier, and unfortunately the general club midweek medal or Stableford seems to have died a death due to lack of entries!


----------

