95% allowance.
- Thread starter WGCRider
- Start date
Agreed but it has caused a deal of confusion and questions when people have now been travelling on golf trips to other jurisdictions . (e.g. “the course we played in Portugal was really hard as I got 3 shots more than my index and I only get one more off the whites at our place” etc. etc.)
When in Rome 
But what exactly was causing the confusion? CR, Slope, Par vs CR.
But IMO the(CR-Par) is only there because in Australia they only ever seem to play stableford.
But what exactly was causing the confusion? CR, Slope, Par vs CR.
But IMO the(CR-Par) is only there because in Australia they only ever seem to play stableford.
When in Rome
But what exactly was causing the confusion? CR, Slope, Par vs CR.
But IMO the(CR-Par) is only there because in Australia they only ever seem to play stableford.
But what exactly was causing the confusion? CR, Slope, Par vs CR.
But IMO the(CR-Par) is only there because in Australia they only ever seem to play stableford.
When in Rome
But what exactly was causing the confusion? CR, Slope, Par vs CR.
But IMO the(CR-Par) is only there because in Australia they only ever seem to play stableford.
But what exactly was causing the confusion? CR, Slope, Par vs CR.
But IMO the(CR-Par) is only there because in Australia they only ever seem to play stableford.
Players not realising this, of course, assumed that the greater difference meant the courses were unnaturally hard.
Must be the same issue for visiting foreign golfers in reverse.
No course is harder or easier than any other now. The Course Ratings and Slope Ratings are there to make them all the same degree of difficulty.
This perception (way of looking at it) is there for everyone to grasp, or choose to grasp, if you are prepared to consider your golf score and differential achieved.
If you choose to remain fixated on stableford, then the Australian system would suit you much better than the GB&I.
This perception (way of looking at it) is there for everyone to grasp, or choose to grasp, if you are prepared to consider your golf score and differential achieved.
If you choose to remain fixated on stableford, then the Australian system would suit you much better than the GB&I.
I wish we had gone for CR-Par as most of the rest of the world has, I feel it would give more meaning to the term Course Handicap i.e. the number of shots I need to play to my handicap round this course off these tees and that would have differentiated it more from H.I.
I think you are misunderstanding this a bit. Course Rating is the measure on which your handicap is based, not the par of a course. Your handicap index is calculated from the difference between your gross score (adjusted to a maximum of a net double bogey on any hole) and the course rating. The Course Rating is a fine measure to one decimal place, worked out in detail by a trained team which shows what a scratch golfer is expected to achieve over a full round in normal conditions. Take the difference between your net score and the course rating to get an accurate measure of whether you have played to handicap. Par is set by the club and gives an idea of what a scratch golfer is expected to score on individual holes. The length.of hole parameters for deciding par are laid down by the WHS but have broad overlaps and so you can find a Par 3 that could be a Par 4 or a Par 5 that could be a Par 4 for example depending entirely on the choice of the club. That sort of choice could make a 2 stroke difference between Par and Course Rating and if you go by the Par you will be 2 strokes out in your assessment of whether you have played to handicap.
I understand what you are saying but including the CR-Par calculation gives a far better guide to course difficLutyens than just using the slope element and as far as I can see has no downside. Perhaps the rest of the world considered moving to calculating CH as we do but opted not to for some reason.
Par has virtually nothing to do with difficulty. It is simply an arbitrary number assigned by the club from a range of values. eg a difference of 40 yards can allow the par to be 4 or 5.
Further, there are very few courses that I know of where the par varies depending on the tee colour but the CR almost certainly will.
Further, there are very few courses that I know of where the par varies depending on the tee colour but the CR almost certainly will.
I'm a little disconcerted that whatever pars the club chooses can affect players' handicaps.
For example, consider a ~450 yard hole on which I have one shot and happen to blow up. If the club has made it a par 4, it counts as a 7 for handicapping, but if they've made it a par 5, it counts as 8, which in turn affects the score differential.
For example, consider a ~450 yard hole on which I have one shot and happen to blow up. If the club has made it a par 4, it counts as a 7 for handicapping, but if they've made it a par 5, it counts as 8, which in turn affects the score differential.
I agree completely but neverthe less par is what most judge their round by. How many times will players say how many points they got - an arbitrary number admittedly. However I almost never have heard someone say “I shot x over the course rating”. CR-par in the calculation, if nothing else, puts some context into the “arbitrary” number, as not many people can instantly work out whether 34 points off the whites is better than 37 off the blues etc.
I realise that it’s irrelevant for handicapping but we have a rough idea that 32 points round Carnoustie off the yellows is probably a good score off handicap and 37 points off yellows at a local easyish pay and play probably isn’t but CR-par puts it into context and can’t see a downside in doing what the rest of the world do.
I realise that it’s irrelevant for handicapping but we have a rough idea that 32 points round Carnoustie off the yellows is probably a good score off handicap and 37 points off yellows at a local easyish pay and play probably isn’t but CR-par puts it into context and can’t see a downside in doing what the rest of the world do.
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2019
- Messages
- 5,212
I appreciate par has nothing to do with handicapping (except for nett double bogey adjustments), and Course Rating is key.
However, to simply say "Par has virtually nothing to do with difficulty" can cause misunderstanding. Length of a hole almost certainly factors into difficulty, thus it is significant in course rating. A player arrives at a 460 yard par 4, I can almost certainly guess that they'll determine this as a difficult hole. More precisely, a difficult par 4. If the same hole was a par 5, there is a good chance they'll call it an easy par 5. Maybe even get excited about an opportunity to give themselves an eagle putt. Same hole, but different perception on difficulty, where par has a direct impact on that perception.
Courses in which CR is a lot higher than Par would generally be considered very tough and difficult courses (absolute difficulty at least, not necessarily relative difficulty between low and high handicappers). Courses were CR is much lower than Par would generally be considered easier courses. Difficulty is subjective to the person thinking something is difficult or not. Furthermore, Par isn't an arbitrary number, as it is clearly not based on random choice or personal whim. There are still general guidelines as to how par is set, and you would hope the group of people setting the par for each hole are competent and able enough to determine reasonable Pars on each hole. I have yet to play a 120 yard par 5 or a 600 yard par 3.
However, to simply say "Par has virtually nothing to do with difficulty" can cause misunderstanding. Length of a hole almost certainly factors into difficulty, thus it is significant in course rating. A player arrives at a 460 yard par 4, I can almost certainly guess that they'll determine this as a difficult hole. More precisely, a difficult par 4. If the same hole was a par 5, there is a good chance they'll call it an easy par 5. Maybe even get excited about an opportunity to give themselves an eagle putt. Same hole, but different perception on difficulty, where par has a direct impact on that perception.
Courses in which CR is a lot higher than Par would generally be considered very tough and difficult courses (absolute difficulty at least, not necessarily relative difficulty between low and high handicappers). Courses were CR is much lower than Par would generally be considered easier courses. Difficulty is subjective to the person thinking something is difficult or not. Furthermore, Par isn't an arbitrary number, as it is clearly not based on random choice or personal whim. There are still general guidelines as to how par is set, and you would hope the group of people setting the par for each hole are competent and able enough to determine reasonable Pars on each hole. I have yet to play a 120 yard par 5 or a 600 yard par 3.
Good point.
We have one such hole which has been changed on various occasions, once a par 4 then a par 5 now back to a par 4. Stroke index 1 and hardest hole on the course to par as a par 4 particularly when played off the whites.
We have one such hole which has been changed on various occasions, once a par 4 then a par 5 now back to a par 4. Stroke index 1 and hardest hole on the course to par as a par 4 particularly when played off the whites.
It may be worth noting that CR has a significant proportion of its value specifically related to length. It doesn't need to be 'accounted' for twice.
But I suspect that players will start to get more aware of their performance related to CR. Now that all scores are entered as gross hole scores the comparison is obvious.
But I suspect that players will start to get more aware of their performance related to CR. Now that all scores are entered as gross hole scores the comparison is obvious.
There are, of course, a small proportion of players who judge their performance vs Course Rating but in reality the vast majority do not.
As a typical example I asked today someone who had played in away day who won - they said it was Paddy and he had 39 points (what a bandit etc.etc.). I have no idea about his performance whatsoever without questioning the slope and CR of the tees at the course which they played (I’m sure they wouldn’t have known anyway). So I have no clue as to whether Paddy’s round was good vs. his HI or not and whether he had played above expectation or every else had played below.
Simply add CR- par to his CH and it is suddenly obvious - probably a minor one of the reasons why the rest of the world does it.
As a typical example I asked today someone who had played in away day who won - they said it was Paddy and he had 39 points (what a bandit etc.etc.). I have no idea about his performance whatsoever without questioning the slope and CR of the tees at the course which they played (I’m sure they wouldn’t have known anyway). So I have no clue as to whether Paddy’s round was good vs. his HI or not and whether he had played above expectation or every else had played below.
Simply add CR- par to his CH and it is suddenly obvious - probably a minor one of the reasons why the rest of the world does it.
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2019
- Messages
- 5,212
I know how CR is calculated (in that length is the significant part of its calculation), and never said it needs to be accounted for twice. And, if CR-Par was included within the course handicap calculation, it is not double counted. Other countries do it just fine.
Stableford or medal play, it doesn't matter. Virtually everyone uses par. Whether it be comparing to 36 points, or to nett par. I have never met one person in the real world that compares their performance to CR. Even those that know full well how handicapping works.
The only people that insist on ignoring par when people perceive difficulty are a few within this forum.
Stableford or medal play, it doesn't matter. Virtually everyone uses par. Whether it be comparing to 36 points, or to nett par. I have never met one person in the real world that compares their performance to CR. Even those that know full well how handicapping works.
The only people that insist on ignoring par when people perceive difficulty are a few within this forum.
Can't say I've said to anyone that I shot 10.2 over CR when asked what I scored .
.
You haven't met me. I do exist in the real world.