Cats and buffer zones

[scubascuba3]

I wondered whether anyone knows statistically the probability of cat 1, cat 2, cat 3, cat 4 making buffer? I know they analyse 1000s of rounds. I haven't seen anything in the CONGU doc yet.

 

[KenL]

I don't know any stats for others, but for me I make way more buffers off a 6 hcp than when off 5.

i have gone between 5 and 6 for the last few years. When in Cat 1, the buffer of only 1 makes a massive difference to me. Consequently I have not been able to stay at 5 for a long spell.

 

[scubascuba3]

I don't know any stats for others, but for me I make way more buffers off a 6 hcp than when off 5.

i have gone between 5 and 6 for the last few years. When in Cat 1, the buffer of only 1 makes a massive difference to me. Consequently I have not been able to stay at 5 for a long spell.

I agree, i find 5 harder than 6, 25% lower score required to keep in buffer.

The reason I'm asking is my club is full of cat 2,3 and 4s and very rarely go up to sss+1, and maybe once a year go to sss-1

 

[SammmeBee]

I agree, i find 5 harder than 6, 25% lower score required to keep in buffer.

The reason I'm asking is my club is full of cat 2,3 and 4s and very rarely go up to sss+1, and maybe once a year go to sss-1

Sounds like most people's handicaps at your club are correct then!! Easy course?

 

[scubascuba3]

Sounds like most people's handicaps at your club are correct then!! Easy course?

Its pretty hard, most visitors struggle, a sss 69 would be fairer. No par 5s. I find courses with par 5s easier, easier birdie eagle chances.

 

[rosecott]

I wondered whether anyone knows statistically the probability of cat 1, cat 2, cat 3, cat 4 making buffer? I know they analyse 1000s of rounds. I haven't seen anything in the CONGU doc yet.

CONGU gives a little hint in the manual:

Table A, Appendix B is based on the expectation of players returning nett scores within their respective Buffer Zones. In ‘normal’ playing conditions, for example, 30-57% of participating Category 1 players are expected to return nett scores within their Buffer Zone or better (SSS+1), In contrast, in the same conditions only 23-45% of Category 3 players are expected to return nett scores within their Buffer Zone or better (SSS+3),

 

[scubascuba3]

CONGU gives a little hint in the manual:

Table A, Appendix B is based on the expectation of players returning nett scores within their respective Buffer Zones. In ‘normal’ playing conditions, for example, 30-57% of participating Category 1 players are expected to return nett scores within their Buffer Zone or better (SSS+1), In contrast, in the same conditions only 23-45% of Category 3 players are expected to return nett scores within their Buffer Zone or better (SSS+3),

Yes you are right, i assume Its based on thousands of rounds but in poor conditions I'd expect it to be easier for a say 20 HC to get on a par 4 green in the usual 3 shots vs a cat 1 or 2 needing to get there in 2 with a strong wind against with rain. Backed up by no evidence, it just feels logical.

 

[louise_a]

I don't know any stats for others, but for me I make way more buffers off a 6 hcp than when off 5.

i have gone between 5 and 6 for the last few years. When in Cat 1, the buffer of only 1 makes a massive difference to me. Consequently I have not been able to stay at 5 for a long spell.

WE have one 1 cat 1 player and she does just the same, bounces between 5 and 6 all season.

Personallly I have found cat 2 a lot harder to buffer than cat 3, I had 13 0.1s last year.

 

[Old Skier]

WE have one 1 cat 1 player and she does just the same, bounces between 5 and 6 all season.

Personallly I have found cat 2 a lot harder to buffer than cat 3, I had 13 0.1s last year.

Didn't you get reviewed in the annual review. Sounds like it was required.

 

[rosecott]

Yes you are right, i assume Its based on thousands of rounds but in poor conditions I'd expect it to be easier for a say 20 HC to get on a par 4 green in the usual 3 shots vs a cat 1 or 2 needing to get there in 2 with a strong wind against with rain. Backed up by no evidence, it just feels logical.

And that's why we have CSS - waits for Imurg to bite.

 

[louise_a]

Didn't you get reviewed in the annual review. Sounds like it was required.

NO, because despite all the 0.1s I did come down by 1.9. I just found it a lot harder to buffer.

 

[patricks148]

i tend to agree with those who said its harder to buffer off cat 1, when i was off 6/7 i tended to buffer far more than i went up 0.1.

now i hardly ever buffer its either a cut or up 0.1