Autumn Meeting Scoring ...

[jimbob.someroo]

We had our Autumn Meeting this weekend, 36 hole medal over two days.

I shot 74 twice for two 69's ... I won't finish in the top 15.

There were guys yesterday with 62's / 63's and I'd heard at least one 36 hole score of 129 from someone who made no birdies all weekend ... I'd have had to have shot -2 gross over the two days (which ironically would have won our Scratch Open I think) to compete.

Usually, I'm pretty tolerant of handicaps and do believe that they make golf the only sport where 10 year olds can play against 90 year olds, men against women etc and all have close matches. But there needs to be a cut off.

A friend of mine off 4 shot 68 gross today, he won't even pick up the prize for the best score of the day! I know that it should be up to the club to make sure there are gross / nett prizes to suit, but mine certainly isn't great for that and I'm pretty sure others aren't fantastic too.

I know full well that the game needs to be inclusive, but to have competitions where single figure handicaps simply can't win seems a bit daft, and in our clubs' case, has only served to make the best players in the club think about joining somewhere else!

 

[srixon 1]

That is the way it is unfortunately. I remember scoring a gross 4 under few years ago (nett 61) and only came third, yet other times scores of nett par have won. You can only score your best on any given day and just have to hope that it will be good enough.

 

[bobmac]

Its the only sport that gets harder to win the better you get.

 

[pbrown7582]

Some cracking scores out there today then.

The 62/63 were only 1/2 better than your mate off 4, score of 64 so it maybe doesn't necessarily follow was all bandits work? Just the course playing straight forward due to being warm and firm?

 

[chellie]

Was Captains final this weekend at ours. 36 holes over two days. It was won by someone off 4, and 2nd place to joint 4th place were 4 to 7 handicappers.

 

[duncan mackie]

We had our Autumn Meeting this weekend, 36 hole medal over two days.

I shot 74 twice for two 69's ... I won't finish in the top 15.

....

I know full well that the game needs to be inclusive, but to have competitions where single figure handicaps simply can't win seems a bit daft,

I'm confused.

You played to your handicap and are surprised you didn't win........going on to conclude that you couldn't win either.

Strange.

I do agree that generally the more rounds played in a competition the greater the loading in favour of the lower handicap player but, especially at this time of year where improving golfers are blooming and course conditions are generally at their best for scoring (our Masters on Sat produced scores never previously seen in the event yet most of the players producing them have been playing at the club for many many years!) there will be scope for the consistent 18 handicapper to have a red letter day(s).

Look on the bright side, you were only a couple of shots away from going up 0.1

 

[dufferman]

I guess it's like a player on the PGA tour shooting a good -4 or -5 to learn that the likes of Rory or someone has shot -10. Different when handicaps are involved, but that's the nature of the game!!

 

[jimbob.someroo]

I'm confused.

You played to your handicap and are surprised you didn't win........going on to conclude that you couldn't win either.

I played under handicap twice, when shooting those gross scores in both the scratch / club champs would have seen me very close to the top of the field - and would have comfortable won me the nett prizes.

Agreed on the point that the silly scores were only a couple lower than my friends, but that was literally the round of his life and so to replicate it two days in a row is pretty tough. Especially as some of the ones ahead of him were getting an extra 20 shots!!

I'm not particularly fussed about the winning aspect, but feels unjust for the lower guys to beat people by upto 40 shots gross over the two days and still not pick up a prize.

 

[patricks148]

Very strange that your club doesn't have a lowest gross prize!!

 

[Foxholer]

In my experience, low guys do win their share of comps. There are just a lot fewer of them!

Many comps tend to be won by someone in the 10-14 range, not only because there are so many more of them, but because they are reasonable golfers who will score well on most holes but, on a good day, can easily have a further 6+ holes where they score well on.

But over 2 rounds, overall quality tends to show. It's probably just the weather, holiday period, course characteristics or some other 'quirk' that has thrown up the anomaly in this case.

 

[Fyldewhite]

Very strange that your club doesn't have a lowest gross prize!!

I agree with this. IMO there should ALWAYS be a gross prize in main comps and there certainly is at ours. It does soften the blow a little when this happens. As above, the course conditions are such that scoring will be very good and there's just more scope for mid/high handicappers (and more of them) to shoot the lights out.

 

[duncan mackie]

I played under handicap twice, ....

I only have access to one of the days results but that clearly shows you shooting = CSS which isn't under handicap

 

[jimbob.someroo]

I only have access to one of the days results but that clearly shows you shooting = CSS which isn't under handicap

lolz, under handicap but to the days CSS which went down as a result of the many many good scores from all handicappers on the day.

However, if you look at the below from the scratch open, yesterday's CSS was four shots lower, to give you an indication of the effect which the range of (particularly high) handicaps has on the CSS of our place.



I shot one better than the Scratch Open round yesterday, but received no cut and finished midway through the field. Yet, in a field of just single figure handicaps finished second and received a 0.3 cut.

 

[duncan mackie]

lolz, under handicap but to the days CSS which went down as a result of the many many good scores from all handicappers on the day.

However, if you look at the below from the scratch open, yesterday's CSS was four shots lower, to give you an indication of the effect which the range of (particularly high) handicaps has on the CSS of our place.

View attachment 12171

I shot one better than the Scratch Open round yesterday, but received no cut and finished midway through the field. Yet, in a field of just single figure handicaps finished second and received a 0.3 cut.

I had already looked at the other scores - interesting how we draw such different conclusions because my initial reaction was that the course must have been set up quite differently for the Scr event! You can see some excellent examples of how much impact greens and pin positions have on recent tour events where overnight downpours have changed the scoring by 3 shots!

 

[Foxholer]

lolz, under handicap but to the days CSS which went down as a result of the many many good scores from all handicappers on the day.

However, if you look at the below from the scratch open, yesterday's CSS was four shots lower, to give you an indication of the effect which the range of (particularly high) handicaps has on the CSS of our place.

View attachment 12171

I shot one better than the Scratch Open round yesterday, but received no cut and finished midway through the field. Yet, in a field of just single figure handicaps finished second and received a 0.3 cut.

What that indicates, to me, is that while you shot a particularly good score, compared to the rest of the field, in the Scratch Open, you only scored a reasonably good score, compared to the rest of the field, in the Autumn Meeting. That strikes me as exactly what the system is meant to do! The conditions/course set-up were probably much more difficult for the Scratch Open!

The 'mistake' you are making is using your actual score as the reference. The Handicap System calculates CSS as a 'more appropriate' reference. Though it would be interesting to see what CSS would be calculated if only the Single Figure handicap scores were used from the Autumn Meeting.

 

[jimbob.someroo]

I had already looked at the other scores - interesting how we draw such different conclusions because my initial reaction was that the course must have been set up quite differently for the Scr event! You can see some excellent examples of how much impact greens and pin positions have on recent tour events where overnight downpours have changed the scoring by 3 shots!

Indeedy, to be honest, the greens were quicker for the scratch and there were a couple of tricky pin placements, but it certainly wasn't playing four shots more difficult. Only thing which potentially helped this weekend was the greens being more receptive ... although I didn't hit all that many to reap the benefits of that!

I know that CSS is complicated enough as it is, but I do think that there should be a touch more allowance for those in the same handicap bracket, so that the actual difficulty of the day is more relevant to each handicap section

 

[jimbob.someroo]

Though it would be interesting to see what CSS would be calculated if only the Single Figure handicap scores were used from the Autumn Meeting.

I think that 100% this should be taken more into consideration.

From the first day category one players.

4 were 70 or better
8 were 72 or higher
(no 71's)

Yet CSS is 69. For me, if double the amount of people in your handicap range shoot over par to those who shoot par or better, then the CSS shouldn't be under par ... but I guess this is wavering into yet another conversation on CSS - which is the last thing everyone needs!

 

[duncan mackie]

Yet CSS is 69. For me, if double the amount of people in your handicap range shoot over par to those who shoot par or better, then the CSS shouldn't be under par ... but I guess this is wavering into yet another conversation on CSS - which is the last thing everyone needs!

I think you are confusing Par with SSS in your sweeping conclusion....

It's interesting that it went to 69 on both days - this would give me more confidence in it being a reasonable reflection. A quick and dirty calc suggests that it was probably one player scoring buffer or better that swung it the extra shot on each day - doing it on Cat 1 alone still gives 70 so it's still 3 shots 'easier' than the scr event.

 

[jimbob.someroo]

I think you are confusing Par with SSS in your sweeping conclusion....

It's interesting that it went to 69 on both days - this would give me more confidence in it being a reasonable reflection. A quick and dirty calc suggests that it was probably one player scoring buffer or better that swung it the extra shot on each day - doing it on Cat 1 alone still gives 70 so it's still 3 shots 'easier' than the scr event.

Potentially - I'm pretty rubbish at that stuff, although Par and SSS is the same at our place.

Just to clear up as well, yesterday's results have now come in an CSS was 70, which means that the winning score of 64+65 was essentially -10 to CSS over the two days. Not sure I had it in me to shoot -1 gross over the two!

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

Potentially - I'm pretty rubbish at that stuff, although Par and SSS is the same at our place.

Just to clear up as well, yesterday's results have now come in an CSS was 70, which means that the winning score of 64+65 was essentially -10 to CSS over the two days. Not sure I had it in me to shoot -1 gross over the two!

Would you have complained if your mate had won with his nett 64? It seems a little bit like standard low handicapper moaning, when you reference "40 shots gross". If i played to a consistent 22 all year round, and then had two really good days, I would be gutted to hear people moaning about high handicappers winning and getting too many shots!