Changing stroke indexes

[USER1999]

But you will get a stroke on a hole you never had one before. Swings and roundabouts. You win one, you lose one.

Sure, but statistically, this is my worst hole, and it is for many others too.

 

[rulefan]

Sure, but statistically, this is my worst hole, and it is for many others too.

So you'll get a shot on your best hole to compensate. Seems fair

See the last point in post #12

 

[harpo_72]

They changed all of ours, I did not notice, for a long while,I just play the hole. It was only in discussion during a stableford round and then I changed my strategy on a hole that had higher index 😎. I just took the driver off the tee instead of playing for position with a 5 wood.
In the end the scores are the same the point distribution might have changed a bit but who looks ? It’s the number of putts and the GIR s that make the opportunities.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

How many of us who play our own course regularly have questioned the course SI and how one hole seems ranked far harder than another? There are definitely a couple of holes I'd swap, especially our current SI1 for the 16th (currently SI3) as statistically the 16th plays harder.

I am sure I'd get use to any new SI in time but I can imagine it'll take time and I'd be constantly checking the new scorecard to see if I got a shot now before teeing off. Sometimes knowing you have a shot can influence how you play the hole, and if you hit a good drive, could you then be more attacking knowing you have the shot in hand as a safety net? Hit a bad tee shot and use the shot to play the sensible shot back into position and aim to make bogey (net par)

 

[bobmac]

Sometimes knowing you have a shot can influence how you play the hole, and if you hit a good drive, could you then be more attacking knowing you have the shot in hand as a safety net? Hit a bad tee shot and use the shot to play the sensible shot back into position and aim to make bogey (net par)

Sorry Homer, I completely disagree.
Don't change the way you play a hole because you have a shot, play the hole the best you can.
The day you settle for a net par is the day your h/cap will never drop.

 

[Imurg]

How many of us who play our own course regularly have questioned the course SI and how one hole seems ranked far harder than another? There are definitely a couple of holes I'd swap, especially our current SI1 for the 16th (currently SI3) as statistically the 16th plays harder.

Don't forget, as Rosie alluded to earlier, SI shouldn't be determined just on difficulty of the hole.
It seems many are but in reality they should be evenly spaced as per the guidelines.
I don't know of many that follow them to the letter but the a fallacy to believe that SI 1 is always the hardest hole.
Having said that, there really should be 2 cards available. 1 for Matchplay (using the guidelines) and one for Stableford ( using difficulty)
It's always annoyed me that, more often than not, in Matchplay I'm giving a shot away at the hardest holes on the course, ones that I need a shot on.

 

[harpo_72]

Sorry Homer, I completely disagree.
Don't change the way you play a hole because you have a shot, play the hole the best you can.
The day you settle for a net par is the day your h/cap will never drop.

And if they say it’s easier grip it and rip it 🥳.. then 3 putt.

 

[rulefan]

Having said that, there really should be 2 cards available. 1 for Matchplay (using the guidelines) and one for Stableford ( using difficulty)

Exactly what England Golf and Golf Australia recommend. In fact some clubs do just that. GA have a template for match play. Certainly, many clubs have switched to the matchplay allocation.

 

[Orikoru]

Did they give a reason why they are changing them?

For me it wouldn't make much difference as there's only two holes I don't get a shot on anyway. I was quite sad to lose my shot on the 5th (SI 17) when I went down to 16 though - I usually needed that one to make up for the horrendous first four holes. Never mind, I'll have it back soon enough...

 

[bobmac]

Two sets of scorecards for different formats?
Bonkers.
So the rules have changed massively , the h/cap system is going to change, it's not a handicap any more, it will be an index, shots given are changing, each course needs a slope and now 2 sets of scorecards.
Mental
Whatever next. .

 

[rulefan]

Did they give a reason why they are changing them?

Probably as I have indicated before. Medal - irrelevant. Matchplay - significant. Stableford - swings and roundabouts.

 

[Orikoru]

Probably as I have indicated before. Medal - irrelevant. Matchplay - significant. Stableford - swings and roundabouts.

None of that is a reason to change it? Unless you're suggesting they've decided the old SI was incorrect for matchplay.

 

[Swango1980]

It's interesting that many people seem to think Stroke Indexes purely should represent hole difficulty in relation to par, where in fact the whole point of them was to be used in match play, to give a fair distribution of shots. Stableford just came along and made use of them.

I sometime try and use the following point. Imagine a 470 yard par 5, not overly hard. Often a hole that gets a few birdies, and relatively easy to get in 3 shots, if not 2. Some will see that as an easy hole, and should get a relatively high SI. Now, make it a par 4. All of a sudden, it may become the hardest hole on the course in terms of scoring to par. So, many will say it needs a low SI. However, in both cases, it makes no relative difference in match play whether it is a par 3 or par 6. For match play, it would probably end up being a low SI no matter the par, because it would be relatively more difficult for a higher handicapper in comparison to a lower handicapper, in general.

There is a course near us who changed all their SI values based on the average score over par. Their SI values are: 11 5 12 14 17 15 10 1 9 3 4 8 7 2 16 18 13 6. So, a player getting 10 shots will have 8 consecutive shot holes. I know it may all balance out, but can be quite intense depending on how the opening holes go for either player.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

We are doing a lot of work re-configuring the fairway and greenside bunkering on four of our holes. What that will do is make the holes more risky for the low handicapper - new fairway bunkers to introduce more risk for low handicapper tee shots and creating tougher pin positions for their approach; and for the higher handicapper - more visual 'peril' looking from the tee to the fairway and from the fairway to the green - and positioned to capture really poor tee or approach shots that previously we 'got away with'. The changes will almost certainly increase the average score on these holes - but not I think enough to require adjustment to SI.

There are some SIs on my track where I think that I could do with a shot in stableford or matchplay (specifically the SI 11 and SI 13 holes - statistically 7th and 8th hardest respectively - and I am off 8 at the moment). These holes are not long and for a SF h/capper should be straightforward - but for me it is the risk if something goes wrong on these holes as it often does that causes me the problems But I know that I am better able to cope with the risk and recover when things go wrong than most higher handicappers - so I just get on with it and don't moan about the SIs being as they are. I get the logic and why they are as they are.

 

[Orikoru]

It's interesting that many people seem to think Stroke Indexes purely should represent hole difficulty in relation to par, where in fact the whole point of them was to be used in match play, to give a fair distribution of shots. Stableford just came along and made use of them.

I sometime try and use the following point. Imagine a 470 yard par 5, not overly hard. Often a hole that gets a few birdies, and relatively easy to get in 3 shots, if not 2. Some will see that as an easy hole, and should get a relatively high SI. Now, make it a par 4. All of a sudden, it may become the hardest hole on the course in terms of scoring to par. So, many will say it needs a low SI. However, in both cases, it makes no relative difference in match play whether it is a par 3 or par 6. For match play, it would probably end up being a low SI no matter the par, because it would be relatively more difficult for a higher handicapper in comparison to a lower handicapper, in general.

There is a course near us who changed all their SI values based on the average score over par. Their SI values are: 11 5 12 14 17 15 10 1 9 3 4 8 7 2 16 18 13 6. So, a player getting 10 shots will have 8 consecutive shot holes. I know it may all balance out, but can be quite intense depending on how the opening holes go for either player.

There is still correlation though surely. As in, the holes that higher handicappers are more likely to struggle on will be the more difficult holes anyway. So not really a huge distinction.

SI 4 at our place is a relatively straightforward par 4, 350y off the whites, fairly wide, OOB on the left but only a big hook is in danger there. I always wondered why it was SI 4, until one of the older members told me the tee box used to be tucked away on the back left, with trees partially blocking the fairway. So at some point they moved the tee out from the trees and into the middle, making it a fair bit easier, but the SI was never changed.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

SI 1 and 2 at my place are undoubtedly the 2 hardest holes on the course, 1 on each 9. After that whoever set the SI used the guidelines and some common sense as ours are well spread in terms of matchplay and fit pretty well the misconception behind difficulty of holes. They could change a number of the SI and we would grumble and soon get used to it. Change 1 & 2 however and there would be some very grumpy and annoyed faces.

 

[Swango1980]

There is still correlation though surely. As in, the holes that higher handicappers are more likely to struggle on will be the more difficult holes anyway. So not really a huge distinction.

SI 4 at our place is a relatively straightforward par 4, 350y off the whites, fairly wide, OOB on the left but only a big hook is in danger there. I always wondered why it was SI 4, until one of the older members told me the tee box used to be tucked away on the back left, with trees partially blocking the fairway. So at some point they moved the tee out from the trees and into the middle, making it a fair bit easier, but the SI was never changed.

Absolutely, it is very true that in most cases, the harder holes in scoring to par will also be relatively harder for the higher handicapper to the lower. So yes, you should still find a reasonable correlation between low SI and harder holes scored to par in stroke play comps.

But, it is also why you will often see par 5 holes with low stroke indexes, yet in competitions you will probably find that the hole plays easier relative to par than some particularly tricky par 4's. The par 5 may be easier to score in in Stableford, but for lower handicappers they may, in general, have a much better chance of making the green in 2, or getting to within pitching distance, in comparison to higher handicapper, and so the handicapper will often more likely get a shot on that hole.

Also, it is advised that not only are stoke indexes reasonably spread out to ensure that there isn't a long run of holes with or without a shot in matchplay, other recommendations come into play, such as try to avoid making stroke index 1 the first hole, as if match play goes to a play off the higher handicapper will immediately get that shot (might seem unfair if there is only 1 shot difference between the 2 players). Likewise, not recommended to have SI1 last, as the match could very likely be over before a slightly higher handicapper gets the benefit of that shot.

 

[rulefan]

Have a look at the approach in Oz.

https://www.golf.org.au/newsdisplay/the-whys-and-wherefores-of-handicap-stroke-index/93290