TheJezster
Tour Rookie
Don't really think about, I just play against whatever the opponent has. We had to give away 24 and 26 shots lasts weekend, we still won 6 & 5. No point in talking yourself out of the match before it starts
Bring back the old 3/4 difference in handicaps!
- Thread starter chimpo1
- Start date
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
I have been cat 1 for over 30 yrs but I don't bother with machplay now as I might win one now and again but when the change to full h/cap was brought in I was mauled by 12/15 h/clappers who are good golfers and know what they are doing while shooting sub par so don't bother now.
i think the biggest problem in winter is not length but preffered lies usually through the green .
the guy in the rough can get a better lie than the guy on the fairway. I.e set up on a tuft so he can hit 3 wood not just a wedge because rough is not there in winter.
but it's a bit of fun to win your xmas dinner ,but I have bought my own turkey for many years now.
i think the biggest problem in winter is not length but preffered lies usually through the green .
the guy in the rough can get a better lie than the guy on the fairway. I.e set up on a tuft so he can hit 3 wood not just a wedge because rough is not there in winter.
but it's a bit of fun to win your xmas dinner ,but I have bought my own turkey for many years now.
MadAdey
Money List Winner
That is one long course when the wind blows Steve, especially off the back tees. The 2nd can be almost impossible when the wind is in your face from the back tees, just like the 11th.
MadAdey
Money List Winner
Full handicap in 4BBB is ridiculous to me. Take a pair of average scratch golfers, their BB score is going to be around the -6 mark. A couple of average 18 handicappers are more than capable of shooting around +6 to +8 together. So with a full handicap allowance the scratch golfers IMO really do not have much chance. Make it 3/4 and it's game on.
Colin L
Tour Winner
CONGU certainly found in its analysis that full handicap in 4BBB would be too much, which is why the allowance isn't 100%.
The problem with individuals' perspectives on handicapping is that it is formed from a rather small number of generally local games whereas CONGU arrived at the 90% figure for better ball stroke play and match play from an analysis of thousands of rounds from all over.
If handicapping is reasonably effective, then, as has been pointed out, higher handicappers will win more often because there are more of them. In an analysis of the outcomes of handicap games, you have to adjust accordingly. More higher handicappers winning does not mean that the individual higher handicapper has a greater chance of winning a particular match against a lower handicapper.
And just to confirm with those who have mentioned it: the 90% 4BBB allowance is mandatory for affiliated clubs.
Last edited:
Typical low handicappers winging, as always they want everything there own way, well get over it, it's 90% so suck it up or don't play, simples.
At 3/4 difference a higher handicapper had to play better than buffer but a much lower handicap didn't, where was the fairness in that, expecting an inconsistent higher handicap player to play his Sunday best when his opponent didn't have to was a tough gig.
And all this about shorter holes/courses is a joke, high handicappers are high for a reason, they're inconsistent, quite the opposite of a much lower handicapper who by the same reasoning then should be on a birdie fest pin hunting in those same conditions, but they don't, do they?!
Whatever the length of a specific hole or overall course you've still got to play the shots and whilst there will be the odd casualty I find that lower handicappers are still picking up far more winnings than the higher handicappers and come through in the end.
I think the most dangerous handicap area is around 10-14, they only lose 1 shot but are in an area I think that they can play well below that without it being a Sunday best with a larger degree of consistently, but then your cat1's don't lose a shot at all, so talk about wanting everything your own way!
Bloody prima donnas 😡
At 3/4 difference a higher handicapper had to play better than buffer but a much lower handicap didn't, where was the fairness in that, expecting an inconsistent higher handicap player to play his Sunday best when his opponent didn't have to was a tough gig.
And all this about shorter holes/courses is a joke, high handicappers are high for a reason, they're inconsistent, quite the opposite of a much lower handicapper who by the same reasoning then should be on a birdie fest pin hunting in those same conditions, but they don't, do they?!
Whatever the length of a specific hole or overall course you've still got to play the shots and whilst there will be the odd casualty I find that lower handicappers are still picking up far more winnings than the higher handicappers and come through in the end.
I think the most dangerous handicap area is around 10-14, they only lose 1 shot but are in an area I think that they can play well below that without it being a Sunday best with a larger degree of consistently, but then your cat1's don't lose a shot at all, so talk about wanting everything your own way!
Bloody prima donnas 😡
bobmac
Major Champion
I don't think the OP is expecting to win every match he plays, he just wants to be competitive, he wants to have a chance.
If he gets a good thumping most times he plays then the playing field isn't level which defeats the whole object of the h/cap system.
If he gets a good thumping most times he plays then the playing field isn't level which defeats the whole object of the h/cap system.
hovis
Tour Winner
its like man city playing mk dons in a cup match but them getting a 4-0 start.
I'm not against high handicap golfers winning, just win in your own division.
if a low handicap golfer chooses to play in comps with open divisions then you cant moan.
I'm not against high handicap golfers winning, just win in your own division.
if a low handicap golfer chooses to play in comps with open divisions then you cant moan.
Last edited:
I think you are missing the point, this was matchplay. so buffer you mention is irrelevant so it that cat 1 don't lose a shot. They don't get any shots, its 90% of the Difference... so for instance, if you were playing someone off 5 and you were 20, its 90% of 15, so you only lose one shot 14 and the 5 handicap get no shots
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
One point - Congu did analysis thousands of rounds - but they were all individual rounds of medal or Stableford, I don't know how that can used to assess handicap allocation on matchplay situation
As for the change in HC - I honestly don't think it's made that much difference , the same people will still be dangerous and it's very rare for your 20 plus HC to have rounds of their lives every time
I got knocked out of our summer KO 3&2 even though at the time I was 1 under it happens and you just congratulate the winner
There will always be one low HC who will complain bitterly when they get beat by a High HC - sour grapes
Crazyface
Tour Winner
I know lets scrap handicaps altogether.
Wayman
Tour Winner
I agree. Rather play scratch golf every week
chrisd
Major Champion
Yep, fantastic idea!
Then you can wallop every golfer you play whose higher than you, without really having to compete.
Great idea, will get rid of all the bandits in a single swoop
chrisd
Major Champion
Yep, all comps will be won by someone of 3 handicap or less
chrisd
Major Champion
best player wins then, what wrong with that
Nothing at all :lol:
Final prize money for the winner £2.50 as only two players bothered to enter the knockout this year!
bobmac
Major Champion
Typical high handicappers winging, as always they want everything their own way, well get over it, it's scratch so suck it up or don't play, simples.
Old Skier
Tour Winner
Then the poor old low handicapper, the ones that aren't quite as good as they think, will have no one to blame when they find they still can't win.
Foxholer
Blackballed
Re the bold bits....Did they? Have you got a link to those stats? Or at least to a reference that that's what they did? I'm not sure where they would have obtained those stats! I'd be more inclined that they used the results of other countries experience (to 100%) but weren't prepared to go immediately to that! Happy to be corrected however!
I agree with the rest of your post (...-ed) btw!
