7 players broke par (nett) out of 152 golfers and . . . . .

[Junior]

standard scratch for the competition was par. Granted 1 cat one guy shot the lights out of the course (65 gross) and there were circa 40 NR's, but conditions were tough...... the rough was lush and the wind brutal.

I've looked up the calculation for CSS and whilst I understand the principle, it got me thinking is it fair ????

what do you think ?

 

[Imurg]

MMMMM...MMMMM.....MMMMMMM...MMMMMMMM..........

My lips are sealed.........:whoo:

 

[pbrown7582]

MMMMM...MMMMM.....MMMMMMM...MMMMMMMM..........

My lips are sealed.........:whoo:

Ate you sure you don't wish to let us know what you think of CSS...... :lol:

 

[Foxholer]

CSS is not based on how many break net Par, nor by how much it might be broken by.

It's what percentage play to their buffer.

And Par is not relevant to CSS. It's SSS that matters. It certainly seems to have gone up - by at least 1.

 

[pbrown7582]

standard scratch for the competition was par. Granted 1 cat one guy shot the lights out of the course (65 gross) and there were circa 40 NR's, but conditions were tough...... the rough was lush and the wind brutal.

I've looked up the calculation for CSS and whilst I understand the principle, it got me thinking is it fair ????

what do you think ?

The amount of NR will have affected the calcs, are players encouraged to carry on scoring despite NR?
Lots of returned cards in buffer.

 

[Foxholer]

The amount of NR will have affected the calcs, are players encouraged to carry on scoring despite NR?
Lots of returned cards in buffer.

NRs simply count as a score outside buffer - which is probably what the NR is about anyway.

A large number of DQs from buffered or better might affect it, but that would be unlikely.

 

[brendy]

Similar weather here too, 20 broke par, 240 cards or so with around 55 N/rs, our css went up one from 71 to 72. meant a whole shot cut for my 76 though so not complaining

 

[One Planer]

I get the feeling this could be a re-occuring theme with the weather we've had this weekend.

I was caught up in it too during yesterdays medal.

Started off sunny with little wind. Then the wind picked up, then it lashed it down from the 4th 'til about the 14th. Wind was horrendous all way round, not to links levels, but easy 2 clubs at times. Not conducive to good golf at all.

I played to 13 so I'm hoping CSS does me a favor for a change and goes up after it robbed me earlier in the season (Missed buffer by 1 shot thanks to CSS) :thup:

 

[JustOne]

Always good fun in the wind when the course is already set up tougher than the US Open!

We now appear to have shrinking greens too... just to separate the men from the mice. Even the pros don't play the course off the very tips when the wind is up. Still, I guess the whole field has to put up with the same......

Looks like I'll be going up to 6.5 now..... always wanted to be a 7 h/cap!! :whoo:

 

[chrisd]

85 players yesterday in our 36 hole championship spread over 2 days. 6 under par nett and 4 level par yet CSS is only +1 over the norm. Someone must understand it....... But not me?

 

[Foxholer]

85 players yesterday in our 36 hole championship spread over 2 days. 6 under par nett and 4 level par yet CSS is only +1 over the norm. Someone must understand it....... But not me?

Appendix B of this: http://www.englandgolf.org/e-brochure/index.html

Page 53 on.

 

[duncan mackie]

85 players yesterday in our 36 hole championship spread over 2 days. 6 under par nett and 4 level par yet CSS is only +1 over the norm. Someone must understand it....... But not me?

you are looking at the wrong things, in the wrong way...

there were 71 cat 1, 2 & 3 players in the event
of these 17 played to their buffer (to handicap) or better (based on as SSS of 70)
this represents 23.9%
this is just below the norm (about 25-45%) so the CSS goes up 1

so nearly a quarter of the players playing to their handicaps and you think the CSS should be even higher??? I don't understand that

 

[MashieNiblick]

Results fom our comp on Saturday just posted.

Par 70, SSS 71
Best net was 71 (guy playing off 4).
22 NRs
CSS up 3 to 74
Not RO's though so my net 79 (9 over the last 4 into the wind when the weather turned icky) for 31st place (out of 80) got me .1.

As I see it, the thing to remember about stableford adjustments, CSS, NRs, etc, for hadicap purposes, is that a handicap is essentially a relative measure of ability rather than an absolute measure. The aim is to allow us to compete against other golfers of different ability. So any marginal differences made to handicaps from allowing for these adjustments doesn't matter in that respect, as we are all rated using the same system.

 

[cookelad]

Played in <10 handicap 36 hole medal at Canterbury yesterday, and one person hit under his handicap, he was also the only person in the buffer zone got my fingers crossed it'll come in as reductions only, as it was cat's 1&2 only!

 

[rosecott]

Played in <10 handicap 36 hole medal at Canterbury yesterday, and one person hit under his handicap, he was also the only person in the buffer zone got my fingers crossed it'll come in as reductions only, as it was cat's 1&2 only!

If that one player represented less than 6% of the total entrants, then Reduction Only it will be.

 

[Foxholer]

Results fom our comp on Saturday just posted.

Par 70, SSS 71
Best net was 71 (guy playing off 4).
22 NRs
CSS up 3 to 74
Not RO's though so my net 79 (9 over the last 4 into the wind when the weather turned icky) for 31st place (out of 80) got me .1.

Another Cat 1 Winner.

What's gone wrong with the system? :rofl: