95% Calculation to go?

[Foxholer]

Many of DK's objections are rooted in an irrational hatred of "par", and have very little mathematical validity (I'd actually contest no validity given the margins for error inherent in the system).

Not irrational imo; quite reasonable in fact. But reflects the cultural difference between countries. US hardly uses Stableford system whereas UK Aus and others use it extensively. I agreee with his argument that Par is not a good measure of difficulty, so should not be a consideration for/component of handicapping.

 

[Swango1980]

Not irrational imo; quite reasonable in fact. But reflects the cultural difference between countries. US hardly uses Stableford system whereas UK Aus and others use it extensively. I agreee with his argument that Par is not a good measure of difficulty, so should not be a consideration for/component of handicapping.

Surely par IS a necessary component to gauge difficulty of a course? Absolute difficulty, rather than relative difficulty at least.

If I said Course A had a Course Rating of 72 and Course B a Course Rating of 69, then one might assume Course A is harder.

However, it is impossible to know without also knowing Par. Course A could have a Par of 73 (so CR is 1 under Par) while Course B could have a par of 66 (so CR is 3 over par). Therefore, knowing par as well, Course B is harder, not A. Furthermore, a scratch indexed in USA plays off -1 at Course A, 3 at Course B. This makes perfect sense based on both the Course Ratings and Pars of the courses.

I am assuming well over 90%, and very close to 100% of golfers will judge their performance against the par on the scorecard. So, why is it there are people out there that treat any mention of "Par" as a swear word? Genuinely, what is the problem of factoring CR-Par into the course handicap calculation like in the US?

 

[IanM]

I am assuming well over 90%, and very close to 100% of golfers will judge their performance against the par on the scorecard.

So, why is it there are people out there that treat any mention of "Par" as a swear word?

You have highlighted the difference between "golfers" and "well, you know!"

 

[Foxholer]

Surely par IS a necessary component to gauge difficulty of a course? Absolute difficulty, rather than relative difficulty at least.

If I said Course A had a Course Rating of 72 and Course B a Course Rating of 69, then one might assume Course A is harder.

However, it is impossible to know without also knowing Par. Course A could have a Par of 73 (so CR is 1 under Par) while Course B could have a par of 66 (so CR is 3 over par). Therefore, knowing par as well, Course B is harder, not A. Furthermore, a scratch indexed in USA plays off -1 at Course A, 3 at Course B. This makes perfect sense based on both the Course Ratings and Pars of the courses.

I am assuming well over 90%, and very close to 100% of golfers will judge their performance against the par on the scorecard. So, why is it there are people out there that treat any mention of "Par" as a swear word? Genuinely, what is the problem of factoring CR-Par into the course handicap calculation like in the US?

You still seem to have 1 foot in the old system!
Par is not a true reflection of difficulty. You must be aware of holes on your own, or other courses where it's either easy or difficult to make Par, yet, using Par as a metric, they are deemed equally difficult!
Including Par in any calc under Slope system is daft! And WHS is a Slope system.
The only 2 attributes needed are CR and Slope.
FWIW. In the old system, SSS was the indication of difficulty.

 

[Swango1980]

You still seem to have 1 foot in the old system!
Par is not a true reflection of difficulty. You must be aware of holes on your own, or other courses where it's either easy or difficult to make Par, yet, using Par as a metric, they are deemed equally difficult!
Including Par in any calc under Slope system is daft! And WHS is a Slope system.
The only 2 attributes needed are CR and Slope.

Firstly, I have zero feet in the old system. It didn't use par either, or the difference between SSS and Par.

Secondly, I never said Par is a true reflection of difficulty alone. I said it is, when factored in with Course Rating (and Slope to add in relative difficulty).

Neither the CR or Slope on their own tell you how difficult a course is, as per my example. You could have 18 holes at 460 yards. If they were all par 4's, then it is a difficult course. All par 5's, an easy course. However, course rating and slope would be identical, so would give no indication as to difficulty.

If par is not important, or part of the "expected" scoring and handicap calculation, why have it? Just erase it from golf completely

 

[rulefan]

Surely par IS a necessary component to gauge difficulty of a course? Absolute difficulty, rather than relative difficulty at least.

If I said Course A had a Course Rating of 72 and Course B a Course Rating of 69, then one might assume Course A is harder.

However, it is impossible to know without also knowing Par. Course A could have a Par of 73 (so CR is 1 under Par) while Course B could have a par of 66 (so CR is 3 over par). Therefore, knowing par as well, Course B is harder, not A. Furthermore, a scratch indexed in USA plays off -1 at Course A, 3 at Course B. This makes perfect sense based on both the Course Ratings and Pars of the courses.

I am assuming well over 90%, and very close to 100% of golfers will judge their performance against the par on the scorecard. So, why is it there are people out there that treat any mention of "Par" as a swear word? Genuinely, what is the problem of factoring CR-Par into the course handicap calculation like in the US?

Course A. 18 holes @ 300 yards all par 4. Course Par = 72
Course B. 18 holes @ 460 yards all par 4. Course Par = 72
Course C. 18 holes @ 460 yards all par 5. Course Par = 90
I go round A in 72
You go round B in 72
Ian goes round C in 72
Who has the better performance?

 

[Foxholer]

Firstly, I have zero feet in the old system. It didn't use par either, or the difference between SSS and Par.

Secondly, I never said Par is a true reflection of difficulty alone. I said it is, when factored in with Course Rating (and Slope to add in relative difficulty).

Neither the CR or Slope on their own tell you how difficult a course is, as per my example. You could have 18 holes at 460 yards. If they were all par 4's, then it is a difficult course. All par 5's, an easy course. However, course rating and slope would be identical, so would give no indication as to difficulty.

If par is not important, or part of the "expected" scoring and handicap calculation, why have it? Just erase it from golf completely

Your concept of 'difficult' is different to mine (and Congu's and WHS's)!
Course difficulty is measured by CR in Slope systems. It was measured by SSS in the Congu system.
Edit: In the course you use as a model, CR and Slope would be the same over both (all Par 4s and all Par 5s) courses. Par would be irrelevant.

 

[Swango1980]

Course A. 18 holes @ 300 yards all par 4. Course Par = 72
Course B. 18 holes @ 460 yards all par 4. Course Par = 72
Course C. 18 holes @ 460 yards all par 5. Course Par = 90
I go round A in 72
You go round B in 72
Ian goes round C in 72
Who has the better performance?

You also missed out on the fact I never said Course Par is the ONLY factor in course difficulty

 

[Foxholer]

...
If par is not important, or part of the "expected" scoring and handicap calculation, why have it? Just erase it from golf completely

Par only entered into Golf around the turn of the 20th Century, so was irrelevant for almost 400 years!
It's a required attribute for Stableford scoring now though.

 

[Swango1980]

Your concept of 'difficult' is different to mine (and Congu's and WHS's)!
Course difficulty is measured by CR in Slope systems. It was measured by SSS in the Congu system.

It is. If I play a 250 yard par 3, I perceive that as difficult. I play a 250 yard par 4, I perceive it as easy.

But, I'm only a golfer, so my opinion is invalid.

I accept not including CR-Par is not a showstopper, as it is the same for everyone. However, had it been included it would make things much simpler for golfers, if that matters. At my course the slope of our yellow tees is marginally higher than whites, yet whites course rating is 2 higher. So, most golfers have same course handicap, some higher off yellows than whites. It makes a mockery of the handicap system to many club golfers, who mock the fact they get more shots on an easier course. Had CR-Par been included, not a problem, everyone would have a higher handicap on the harder course.

But, I guess if we have it so wrong, we just need to continue to tell club golfers to not try and use logic, and either study the system or just accept it is correct. And we should also tell the Americans (and if I remember rightly the Australians and perhaps other national authorities) they have it wrong.

As I said in my first post, some people just can't stand the mention of "Par", and I think the discussion since proves it.

 

[rulefan]

You also missed out on the fact I never said Course Par is the ONLY factor in course difficulty

Course Par is only (loosely) related to length. The theory being that the longer the more difficult
Course Rating embraces playing (ie shot) length as major element but also includes obstacles, terrain etc.
Associating Par and CR into one factor is double counting.

The only useful thing about par is relating it to 36 stableford points.

 

[Foxholer]

...
As I said in my first post, some people just can't stand the mention of "Par", and I think the discussion since proves it.

I trust you don't include me in the above. I'm happy to have the concept of Par. Just not as the only metric of difficulty. And pretty much irrelevant to the Slope system.

 

[rulefan]

An extreme example.

18 holes @ 460 yards all par 4. Course Par = 72
New committee. Course now.
18 holes @ 460 yards all par 5. Course Par = 90

Which is the more difficult?

 

[Imurg]

Course: 18 holes @ 460 yards all par 4. Course Par = 72
New Committee
Course now: 18 holes @ 460 yards all par 5. Course Par = 90

Which is the more difficult?

The new Committee?

 

[rulefan]

The new Committee?

 

[Swango1980]

An extreme example.

18 holes @ 460 yards all par 4. Course Par = 72
New committee. Course now.
18 holes @ 460 yards all par 5. Course Par = 90

Which is the more difficult?

Easy. Most golfers would consider the original course more difficult. Many golfers possibly complained it was far top difficult to have 18 460 yard par 4's. So, new Committee make them par 5's. Now the course feels so much easier to golfers. Sure, technically they should go round in the same score, but the card now tells them they have 18 easy par 5's to play.

At my previous course, we extended two tees to make the two holes about 440 to 450 yards. However, they require 220 carry to clear water, otherwise it is a lay up and 280+ yards to green. Based on yardage, we made them par 4's. They are very tough par 4's, and every golfer at the club, and visitor accept that. We considered calling them par 5's, as 90% plus golfers at the club had no chance to get on in 2. However calling them par 5's would gave felt relatively easy to all golfers, and ridiculously easy to longer hitters.

Remember, we are talking about difficulty here. Slope DOES give us an indication on relative difficulty between low and high handicappers, but nothing about absolute difficulty of the course. Course Rating tells us nothing about difficulty either, not on it's own. It is just a number. I could say a course has a course rating of 72, you could give me no concept on difficulty based on that. If I gave you par as well, you could.

 

[Foxholer]

...
Remember, we are talking about difficulty here. Slope DOES give us an indication on relative difficulty between low and high handicappers, but nothing about absolute difficulty of the course. Course Rating tells us nothing about difficulty either, not on it's own. It is just a number. I could say a course has a course rating of 72, you could give me no concept on difficulty based on that. If I gave you par as well, you could.

Between the 2 attributes - CR and Slope. I can certainly perceive the difficulty! In fact, Slope alone normally gives me enough info about whether a course will be difficult for me or not.

 

[Swango1980]

Between the 2 attributes - CR and Slope. I can certainly perceive the difficulty! In fact, Slope alone normally fgives me enough info about whether a course will be difficult for me or not.

Yet Slope only represents relative difficulty to other golfers. A low slope could indicate an easy course for all, but it could also indicate a very tough course for scratch golfers but not as relatively hard for higher handicappers (e.g tough links courses, but with few trees or hazards to catch out high handicappers).

And we all hopefully know Slope does not represent course difficulty, as we've heard the many many erroneous arguments by club golfers complaining about the slope of one course compared to another because it does not correlate with the difficulty of each course. This needs to then be explained by the fact that, although the harder course has a lower slope, the CR is higher relative to par than the easier course with the higher slope.

 

[Foxholer]

Yet Slope only represents relative difficulty to other golfers. A low slope could indicate an easy course for all, but it could also indicate a very tough course for scratch golfers but not as relatively hard for higher handicappers (e.g tough links courses, but with few trees or hazards to catch out high handicappers).

And we all hopefully know Slope does not represent course difficulty, as we've heard the many many erroneous arguments by club golfers complaining about the slope of one course compared to another because it does not correlate with the difficulty of each course. This needs to then be explained by the fact that, although the harder course has a lower slope, the CR is higher relative to par than the easier course with the higher slope.

See post 157. Par is irrelevant - as you've already demonstrated with your 18 Par 4s v 18 Par5s 'example'.
Your whole misconception is because you are measuring course difficulty using Par - again as demonstrated by your 18 Par 4s v 18 Par 5s. SSS (same for both) would be a much better measurement.
Slope systems simply use CR and Slope! No need for Par to be used - and should not be.

 

[AussieKB]

Please explain why.

Though I have my suspicions...their consistency gives them a number that means they often find it difficult to compete with inconsistent high-cappers.

When first introduced, winning scores were high 40's and some in the 50's stable-ford, they then changed from best 10 cards out of last 20 games to 8 cards, then they added the cap (can only go out 5 shots in a calendar year) and then the multiply handicap by .93 , then came the soft cap of handicap increase, am sure I have missed a couple, winning scores have come down but still the handicap can be manipulated quite easily.

So when the Open or gold letter events roll round out come the bandits and scores back in the middle to high 40's, single figure has no chance, I shot 2 under off a 5 handicap and came no where, great day out but thanks for making up the numbers.