# Handicap reduction... Think I have been done!!!



## joma1108 (Aug 3, 2013)

Wondering if anyone can help

Im playing of 13.2 and had a score of nett 59 (-9 to par of the course) this was as a supplementary score. 

I have been reduced to 11.5 however I think I should be lower around 11.2 

Anyone know how to work this out and put me out of my misery?

Not a bandit as had nett 62 two weeks in a row so just going through a very purple patch.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Aug 3, 2013)

joma1108 said:



			Wondering if anyone can help

Im playing of 13.2 and had a score of nett 59 (-9 to par of the course) this was as a supplementary score. 

I have been reduced to 11.5 however I think I should be lower around 11.2 

Anyone know how to work this out and put me out of my misery?

*Not a bandit as had nett 62 two weeks in a row* so just going through a very purple patch.
		
Click to expand...

Erm.....right, OK.

What is the SSS of your course? I believe that is what's used to calculate ESR scores rather than the par.


----------



## TheClaw (Aug 3, 2013)

joma1108 said:



			Wondering if anyone can help

Im playing of 13.2 and had a score of nett 59 (-9 to par of the course) this was as a supplementary score. 

I have been reduced to 11.5 however I think I should be lower around 11.2 

Anyone know how to work this out and put me out of my misery?

Not a bandit as had nett 62 two weeks in a row so just going through a very purple patch.
		
Click to expand...

Your handicap had a mixture of .3 and .2 reductions because you entered a lower category. Same thing happened with me last month.


----------



## duncan mackie (Aug 3, 2013)

drive4show said:



			Erm.....right, OK.

What is the SSS of your course? I believe that is what's used to calculate ESR scores rather than the par.
		
Click to expand...

yep - supplementary adjustments based on SSS (par has noting to do with handicaping)

and ESR's won't be a factor (yet!)


----------



## rosecott (Aug 3, 2013)

drive4show said:



			Erm.....right, OK.

What is the SSS of your course? I believe that is what's used to calculate ESR scores rather than the par.
		
Click to expand...

As said, we need to know SSS for the Supplementary and if the two 62s were in qualifiers (and CSS of course). Is ESR being used in Scotland?


----------



## joma1108 (Aug 3, 2013)

Yep I know about -3 and -2 between the categories. Where do I find out SSS of course and what is SSS I know CSS but never heard of SSS


----------



## joma1108 (Aug 3, 2013)

Website says SSS of 67 so -8 under par


----------



## duncan mackie (Aug 3, 2013)

rosecott said:



			As said, we need to know SSS for the Supplementary and if the two 62s were in qualifiers (and CSS of course). Is ESR being used in Scotland?
		
Click to expand...

no - good point.

but as it's only supposed to replicate what a handicap committee should be implementing.........it's probably the best llustration of why it would have been appropriate previously I have seen. What happens now is another thing!


----------



## rosecott (Aug 3, 2013)

joma1108 said:



			Yep I know about -3 and -2 between the categories. Where do I find out SSS of course and what is SSS I know CSS but never heard of SSS
		
Click to expand...

SSS should be printed on scorecard, CSS adjusts SSS according to performance of all Cat 3s and below in a qualifier.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Aug 3, 2013)

joma1108 said:



			Yep I know about -3 and -2 between the categories. Where do I find out SSS of course and what is SSS I know CSS but never heard of SSS
		
Click to expand...

The SSS will be on your scorecard, usually top right corner, it will say something like 

Par 71
SSS 72


----------



## joma1108 (Aug 3, 2013)

Website says SSS of 67


----------



## duncan mackie (Aug 3, 2013)

joma1108 said:



			Website says SSS of 67 so -8 under par
		
Click to expand...

explains that then :thup:


----------



## joma1108 (Aug 3, 2013)

duncan mackie said:



			no - good point.

but as it's only supposed to replicate what a handicap committee should be implementing.........it's probably the best llustration of why it would have been appropriate previously I have seen. What happens now is another thing!
		
Click to expand...

Duncan 62 were in club comps and I got the -3 per shot under CSS that is fine. 

SSS is 67 for the course par 68


----------



## joma1108 (Aug 3, 2013)

I would make my score at 11.4 then and not 11.5 

Initial calc were out as didn't know about SSS 

13.2 - 0.3 x2 = 12.6

That leaves 8 shots at 1.2 to take off meaning 11.4

Or am I wrong


----------



## duncan mackie (Aug 3, 2013)

joma1108 said:



			Duncan 62 were in club comps and I got the -3 per shot under CSS that is fine. 

SSS is 67 for the course par 68
		
Click to expand...

understand that - we are just pointing out the discrepency between the SGU approach and all the other Golf Unions over ESR's.

you would have been reduced an additional shot (recommended and implemented at most clubs) after your second 62 (haven't checked if it would be more) and your supplemental card would have given you a further 2 shots (probably).

sounds like things are going well - good luck for the future.


----------



## rosecott (Aug 3, 2013)

joma1108 said:



			I would make my score at 11.4 then and not 11.5 

Initial calc were out as didn't know about SSS 

13.2 - 0.3 x2 = 12.6

That leaves 8 shots at 1.2 to take off meaning 11.4

Or am I wrong
		
Click to expand...

What we need to know is:

Exact handicap prior to the two nett 62s.
The CSS for those 2 qualifiers.
Any intervening qualifiers/Supplementaries (Oh, and anything else your Handicap Committee might have/should have done).

Then we're in business.


----------



## duncan mackie (Aug 3, 2013)

joma1108 said:



			I would make my score at 11.4 then and not 11.5 

Initial calc were out as didn't know about SSS 

13.2 - 0.3 x2 = 12.6

That leaves 8 shots at 1.2 to take off meaning 11.4

Or am I wrong
		
Click to expand...

11.5 is consistent with -7 (3x.3 + 4x.2) from 13.2

was 67 definitely the SSS of the tees you played from (and indicated on your card)? Are you sure you added the card up right?


----------



## joma1108 (Aug 3, 2013)

Thanks for all the help guys greatly appreciated


----------



## rosecott (Aug 4, 2013)

joma1108 said:



			Not a bandit as had nett 62 two weeks in a row so just going through a very purple patch.
		
Click to expand...

Three successive rounds of nett 62, 62, 59 and you claim *not* to be a bandit.

Some might disagree!


----------



## Stuey01 (Aug 4, 2013)

rosecott said:



			Three successive rounds of nett 62, 62, 59 and you claim *not* to be a bandit.

Some might disagree!
		
Click to expand...

He's playing in comps, submitting supplementary cards, and he's on here trying to work out why his handicap has not been cut more than it has.
What more can he do?

These are not the actions of a bandit.


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 4, 2013)

Stuey01 said:



			He's playing in comps, submitting supplementary cards, and he's on here trying to work out why his handicap has not been cut more than it has.
What more can he do?

These are not the actions of a bandit.
		
Click to expand...

if he is playing in his clubs qualifiers I am not sure why he is also doing supplementary cards as the idea was for supps to be submitted by those not able to take part in club qualys. Providing his cards are going through the clubs handicap system which I presume is one of the approved software systems and it has been set up correctly everything should be in order.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 4, 2013)

Old Skier said:



			if he is playing in his clubs qualifiers I am not sure why he is also doing supplementary cards as the idea was for supps to be submitted by those not able to take part in club qualys. Providing his cards are going through the clubs handicap system which I presume is one of the approved software systems and it has been set up correctly everything should be in order.
		
Click to expand...

H'mm. Here's the early part of the 'Objectives' according to SGU - though there is the 'who cannot play in Qualys etc after'

"To provide additional opportunities for members to return qualifying scores to maintain a handicap that reasonably reflects their current ability..."

The SGU has taken a rather slightly view of Supplementaries from what is in the UHS - that uses the words 'and the like' which could include players who feel they are at the wrong level. As the SGU hasn't implemented ESRs, it's up to the Club Handicap Sec'y whether to  apply a GPA - and some are rather reluctant - which is a major part of why ESR's were introduced!

So are you saying he should keep his handicap at a falsely high level?

If so, how would you reconcile Rosecott's 'possible Bandit' observation? 

@Joma. Can you identify the particular reason for such good scores? Are you playing/practicing a huge amount? Were there other scores in between the 3 low ones?


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 4, 2013)

And here lies some of the problems with handicaps. Nobody wants to follow the same objectives in achieving the same level playing field.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 4, 2013)

Old Skier said:



			And here lies some of the problems with handicaps. Nobody wants to follow the same objectives in achieving the same level playing field.
		
Click to expand...

And what makes you think that?

Or are you going to avoid answering that question too?


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 4, 2013)

Not sure what the question is. Are you saying should he play off a false handicap then the answer is no. However I will say that the conditions in the SW have been exceptional with some cracking scores being posted by players who under normal conditions would not be scoring anywhere near what the are currently producing. They will be paying for it in the future when conditions return to normal.

As the original Q was about a correct handicap calculation my response was that if the correct software was being used by the club then it should be.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 4, 2013)

Foxholer said:



			And what makes you think that?

Or are you going to avoid answering that question too?
		
Click to expand...




Old Skier said:



			Not sure what the question is
		
Click to expand...

That'll be a 'Yes' then! 

From Post 22:

So are you saying he should keep his handicap at a falsely high level?

If so, how would you reconcile Rosecott's 'possible Bandit' observation?


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 4, 2013)

Fat fingers, you responded before I completed the answer.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 4, 2013)

Old Skier said:



			I will say that the conditions in the SW have been exceptional with some cracking scores being posted by players who under normal conditions would not be scoring anywhere near what the are currently producing. They will be paying for it in the future when conditions return to normal.
		
Click to expand...

I don't think the OP is in the SW! Would still be interested in the reason for the 'Exceptional Scores' - though, with an SSS of 67, they are not as 'exceptional' as they may seem at first glance. They'd still qualify for an ESR in England.


----------



## rosecott (Aug 4, 2013)

Foxholer said:



			I don't think the OP is in the SW! Would still be interested in the reason for the 'Exceptional Scores' - though, with an SSS of 67, they are not as 'exceptional' as they may seem at first glance. They'd still qualify for an ESR in England.
		
Click to expand...

The recommended reduction for the two nett 62s would have triggered a 1 stroke reduction if he had been in the Golf England jursdiction. CONGU doesn't make it quite clear what effect the third round of nett 59 would have as ESR is based on 2 rounds better than Nett Differential of -4. I imagine it would be based on the second and third round and would be a further 2-stroke reduction if the sequence was 4 or less.

My "bandit" comment was not an implied slur but rounds of -5, -5 and -7  would certainly merit that description based on his handicap level before the start of his purple patch.


----------



## joma1108 (Aug 7, 2013)

Folks, apologies i was away for a few days and no chance to respond ....now if i may.

I have been playing for about 4 years, and during that time my handicap has reduced significantly startedat 26, i have been working extremely hard on my short game and putting so much so that scrambling stats are about 50% slightly higher round to round.

When i hit GIR i dont tend to three putt so walk off usually with a par (net birdie) where applicable, the occasional birdie (although they are becoming more frequent)

What has really helped me this patch is getting the run of 6s off the card and not having to chase.

My understanding of course management has increase also as playing with scratch players and the like noticing that if they are out of position it isnt always prudent to go for the green, maybe a lay up and pitch and putt to save par.

Im certainly not a bandit as despite shooting the three good scores i have yet to win any competition (saying that im not fussed about winning comps), even with the -5 etc my best finish is 3rd.

the reason for the supplementary was to try to get mey handicap down before the end of the season, i knew i was striking the ball well and had a target of 12 for my handicap and thought i could get maybe .6 off my Handicap, never did i think i would shoot a scratch +4 

Now that i have i have re evaluated my target and im looking to get to 11 and possibly 10 with single figures being the target next season.

I track all my stats and know exactly what my Farways Hit, GIR, Scrambling Sand saves etc are and work hard on the aspects where i see a pattern of failing, right now its getting out of bunkers is my nemesis.

Appreciate the comments but a bandit i most certainly am not.

and i saw tiger woods shoot a 61 last weekend......bit of a bandit


----------



## joma1108 (Aug 7, 2013)

rosecott said:



			What we need to know is:

Exact handicap prior to the two nett 62s.
The CSS for those 2 qualifiers.
Any intervening qualifiers/Supplementaries (Oh, and anything else your Handicap Committee might have/should have done).

Then we're in business.
		
Click to expand...

Just to clarify things my last 6 scores are as the below, it was a bit up and down

29/6/13 - Start HC 15.3 CSS 67 Gross score - 78 Nett 63 - HC reduction down 1.4  to 13.9
6/7/13 - Start HC - 13.9 - CSS 67 - Gross Score - 91 - HC increase 0.1 to 14
13/7/13 - Start HC 14 - CSS 67 - Gross Score - 78 - Nett 64 - HC Reduction 0.9 to 13.1
20/7/13 - Start HC 13.1 - CSS 67 - Gross Score - 99 - Nett 86 - HC Increase 0.1 to 13.2
27/7/13 - Start HC 13.2 - CSS 66 - Gross Score - 83 - Nett 70 - HC stays same (Stableford Adjustment)
28/7/13 - Start HC 13.2 - SSS 65 - Gross Score 72 - Nett Nett 59 - HC Reduction 1.7 to 11.5

There is nothing on the card for SSS however the handicap convener told me 65 is sss

As you can see a bit up and down but im getting much more consistent and finding considerably more greens
last year i averaged 2 greens per round now im closer to 7 best so far this season is 12 GIR

And when i score i really score,


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 7, 2013)

Well the reduction from 13.2 to 11.5 is spot on (3 * 0.3 + 4*0.2)

But the first score, 15.3 to 13.9, does not compute - reduction should have bee 1.5, not 1.4. I would expect there's another +0.1 in there.

Good scoring btw.


----------



## joma1108 (Aug 7, 2013)

Foxholer said:



			Well the reduction from 13.2 to 11.5 is spot on (3 * 0.3 + 4*0.2)

But the first score, 15.3 to 13.9, does not compute - reduction should have bee 1.5, not 1.4. I would expect there's another +0.1 in there.

Good scoring btw.
		
Click to expand...

i never noticed that before but is that 3 shots at 0.4 and one at 0.3? not sure where the change from Cat 3 to Cat 2 is

Thanks for the Good scoring comment, im playing well and this time unlike the last few years im not fighting to stay down i just keep seeming to be going down and long may it continue


----------



## rosecott (Aug 7, 2013)

joma1108 said:



			i never noticed that before but is that 3 shots at 0.4 and one at 0.3? not sure where the change from Cat 3 to Cat 2 is
		
Click to expand...

The change is at 12.4, so, as Foxholer said, the reduction should have been 1.5.

Just to clarify, I wasn't labelling you as a bandit. What I was trying to express was that as a 15 handicapper, who shortly after played to 7 against SSS, you could have been retrospectively called a bandit when you were off 15.


----------



## joma1108 (Aug 7, 2013)

rosecott said:



			The change is at 12.4, so, as Foxholer said, the reduction should have been 1.5.

Just to clarify, I wasn't labelling you as a bandit. What I was trying to express was that as a 15 handicapper, who shortly after played to 7 against SSS, you could have been retrospectively called a bandit when you were off 15.
		
Click to expand...

Dont Worry Im thick skinned and dont offend easily, however over the last 4 years i have had scores that would label me a bandit that i agree but its just down to consistency, when i played off 21 handicap it was because i was going for everything rather than using my shots, i thenpracticed my short game and putting and i went around in two bounce games in the sweep of the blue tees (practice white medal tees) and shot scratch 5 over and scratch 7 over par, but then i struggled the remainder of the season

my playing handicap was 21 and my sweep handicap was 7 lol

On average im dropping around 4 shots a season however i think next year will be the toughest...but we will see

i can think of nothing worse than handing a card in such as a 59 or lower (as the lowest i have seen this season was a 55) knowing that you can play considerably better than your handicap and winning a comp.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 7, 2013)

Seems like you are the 'Wild Willie' to others (mine normally) 'Steady Eddie'!

That's normally a pretty good combination in 4BBB.


----------



## duncan mackie (Aug 7, 2013)

Foxholer said:



			Well the reduction from 13.2 to 11.5 is spot on (3 * 0.3 + 4*0.2)

But the first score, 15.3 to 13.9, does not compute - reduction should have bee 1.5, not 1.4. I would expect there's another +0.1 in there.

Good scoring btw.
		
Click to expand...

but he shot a nett 59 against the 65 which is only -6.........the missing link must be a stableford adjustment in there somewhere too!


----------



## joma1108 (Aug 8, 2013)

duncan mackie said:



			but he shot a nett 59 against the 65 which is only -6.........the missing link must be a stableford adjustment in there somewhere too!



Click to expand...

There is another option and that SSS is actually 66 and secretary has got it wrong. 

He told me he enters it into the computer And let's it calculate. 

I'm not sure about SSS but 3 below par seems a lot?


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 8, 2013)

joma1108 said:



			There is another option and that SSS is actually 66 and secretary has got it wrong. 

He told me he enters it into the computer And let's it calculate. 

I'm not sure about SSS but 3 below par seems a lot?
		
Click to expand...

A 1 shot reduction for the reduced length of course of the Yellows would be about right.


----------



## duncan mackie (Aug 8, 2013)

joma1108 said:



			I'm not sure about SSS but 3 below par seems a lot?
		
Click to expand...

not really


----------

