course handicap calculation

[wjemather]

The majority of golf I play is casual 4BBB matchplay, as such we DO need to calculate the (90%) Playing Handicaps on the 1st tee. I don't know of any convenient App or table (in Scotland) that would allow us do avoid doing it by hand.
(The SG App only gives the calculation for stroke play (95%) )

I'll be delighted if someone could point me to one.

I can't comment on what Scottish Golf provide through their app/portal, but CONGU provided a simple spreadsheet that does all necessary calculations, including mixed tee adjustments.

The England Golf WHS portal provides clubs with all necessary % tables. We have the them printed out, with copies held in the pro shop and the most commonly used ones posted on noticeboards.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Plenty of other issues with that document!
FWIW, England Wales and Ireland uses Rounded CH, whele Scotlnd uses unrounded CH to calc PH. As I'm in England, it's what EG does that's importnt to me.
You should point out the deficiencies of that doc to SG - rather than just moaning about it (to folk to whom it's irrelevant)!

My apologies, now that you understand what I was referring to (as you say, you literally haven't got a clue what's going on in Scotland), you've found something else to be sarcastic about? Tremendous. There's a reason I have you blocked, and it's being an erse like this that is typical.

And it has been brought up with SG, along with many many other issues

 

[Deleted member 30522]

It's the sort of thing that SHOULD be available either in Pro Shop/Clubhouse or 1st Tee.
Should be a quite simple task for anyone with a bit of spreadsheet knowledge, even if not as an App.

It's the sort of thing that should have been suplied by SG in the first place, instead they gave us the English version. Anyway, it's Scottish Golf, no interest to you you said, so off you pop

 

[IanG]

I can't comment on what Scottish Golf provide through their app/portal, but CONGU provided a simple spreadsheet that does all necessary calculations, including mixed tee adjustments.

The England Golf WHS portal provides clubs with all necessary % tables. We have the them printed out, with copies held in the pro shop and the most commonly used ones posted on noticeboards.

Yes, the Congu mixed tee spreadsheet is great but not usable on the tee without a laptop.

Maybe I should agitate at the club for them to put up more tables on the wall.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Course Handicap is given as an integer, both for handicapping purposes and what is needed on the scorecard (Rule 3.3b (4)/1). As such, the boards are correct and provide all the information that is needed.

Players should not be calculating Playing Handicaps manually - there are apps and other lookup charts for this - so should never have any requirement to know the exact unrounded Course Handicap. Anyone wanting boards with Course Handicaps to 10 decimal places (e.g. 12.8123893805) on them, is completely missing the point.

And here's the other hero getting it all wrong. The boards are WRONG.

Tell me, what are the "other lookup charts for this"? We spent money on boards specifically for this task, provided by SG, and they are incorrect. But I'm sure Mr-know-it-all will have yet another stroke of genius to impart?

 

[Foxholer]

...as you say, you literally haven't got a clue what's going on in Scotland...

Er...Where did I state that?

However the part above that says his course handicap would be 13, that is not the case as the course handicap isn't rounded before calculating the playing handicap, but if you were to *only* use the course marker boards, they are all showing rounded course handicap figures at every course I've been to, because those figures were what was supplied by SG themselves. It has been an almighty cock-up by Scottish Golf

That was one of the issues I referred to when I stated that other issues existed in the doc. The subsequent paragraph states that 13 is the handicap that should appear on the scorecard, but doesn't explain the rounding and going back to the unrounded figure for subsequent calculation of PH. The following paragraph, does actually return to using the unrounded CH for the actual calculation of PH though.

I could imagine that he text of the document was copied from a source where Course Handicap IS rounded and not sufficiently 'proof-read' subsequent to the SG changes to highlight the issue(s).

Have you actually confirmed that, while CH on the board is rounded - as per what is wanted on the card - any calculation of PH, if shown on the board, uses the unrounded or rounded value as per the doc. It wouldn't surprise me if you haven't actually checked!

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Er...Where did I state that?

That was one of the issues I referred to when I stated that other issues existed in the doc. The subsequent paragraph states that 13 is the handicap that should appear on the scorecard, but doesn't explain the rounding and going back to the unrounded figure for subsequent calculation of PH. The following paragraph, does actually return to using the unrounded CH for the actual calculation of PH though.

I could imagine that he text of the document was copied from a source where Course Handicap IS rounded and not sufficiently 'proof-read' subsequent to the SG changes to highlight the issue(s).

Have you actually confirmed that, while CH on the board is rounded - as per what is wanted on the card - any calculation of PH, if shown on the board, uses the unrounded or rounded value as per the doc. It wouldn't surprise me if you haven't actually checked!

Good grief your arrogance and ill-founded opinions just don't stop does it? Of course I've "checked", it was obvious at the very first medal last year as folks are asking "why does the board say x, but the App says Y"? After much head scratching, as we'd assumed these were correct as the figures were supplied by SG, did we come to realise they are wrong.

In Scotland not a single board should be showing a rounded CH, but they all do. They are all wrong.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Plenty of other issues with that document!
As I'm in England, it's what EG does that's importnt to me.
You should point out the deficiencies of that doc to SG - rather than just moaning about it (to folk to whom it's irrelevant)!

Here is where you said it.

It's a bizarre comment to make. So basically this forum shouldn't exist? We should address every comment to the body in question and never discuss anything?

 

[Foxholer]

...

In Scotland not a single board should be showing a rounded CH, but they all do. They are all wrong.

So contact SG about it and find out why it's that way! And then publish their full reply on here. As I've posted often, that (rounded) CH is what's required on a Scorecard - according to the SG doc. So it would not surprise me if that's why it's 'on the boards'! FWIW, boards would have to be considerably larger to cover unrounded CH's.

...
It's a bizarre comment to make. So basically this forum shouldn't exist? We should address every comment to the body in question and never discuss anything?

You, conveniently, misinterpret my reply! And still haven't answered where I posted the phrase you accuse me of stating!
If it's something only SG can resolve, then they are the body to go to!

 

[Deleted member 30522]

So contact SG about it and find out why it's that way! And then publish their full reply on here. As I've posted often, that (rounded) CH is what's required on a Scorecard - according to the SG doc. So it would not surprise me if that's why it's 'on the boards'! FWIW, boards would have to be considerably larger to cover unrounded CH's.

You, conveniently, misinterpret my reply! And still haven't answered where I posted the phrase you accuse me of stating!
If it's something only SG can resolve, then they are the body to go to!

Realise again why I had you on ignore. Now back on ignore.

 

[Foxholer]

Realise again why I had you on ignore. Now back on ignore.

Thank You!

 

[woofers]

Why does a "plus handicap" golfer get fewer shots and a "handicap" golfer get more shots when the slope calculation is made on a higher rated course, thereby increasing the difference between them?
Example:
Two players, one has a displayed handicap of -2.4 (the "plus handicapper), the other has a handicap of 11.6
On a standard slope rated course of 113 their course handicaps are -2 and 12, a difference of 14.
On a higher slope rated course, say 125, their course handicaps are -3 and 13, a difference of 16.

 

[Swango1980]

Why does a "plus handicap" golfer get fewer shots and a "handicap" golfer get more shots when the slope calculation is made on a higher rated course, thereby increasing the difference between them?
Example:
Two players, one has a displayed handicap of -2.4 (the "plus handicapper), the other has a handicap of 11.6
On a standard slope rated course of 113 their course handicaps are -2 and 12, a difference of 14.
On a higher slope rated course, say 125, their course handicaps are -3 and 13, a difference of 16.

Because, the entire point of slope is to adjust the relative difference between lower and higher handicappers. A low slope course, the difference between them is less, higher slope courses the difference between them is more.

The way the maths works, zero is the point at which handicaps move away from (higher slope), or toward (lower slope)

In your example, the 125 slope is relatively harder for the higher handicapper than the 113 slope, and therefore the higher handicapper gets 16 more shots, rather than 14.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Why does a "plus handicap" golfer get fewer shots and a "handicap" golfer get more shots when the slope calculation is made on a higher rated course, thereby increasing the difference between them?
Example:
Two players, one has a displayed handicap of -2.4 (the "plus handicapper), the other has a handicap of 11.6
On a standard slope rated course of 113 their course handicaps are -2 and 12, a difference of 14.
On a higher slope rated course, say 125, their course handicaps are -3 and 13, a difference of 16.

Forget about "gets more/fewer shots".
Our handicap indexes put us all on a scale or number line.
Slope ratings above 113 stretch that scale out and below 113 the scale shrinks. The integrity of the relative differences between handicaps on that scale is maintained.

 

[jim8flog]

Why does a "plus handicap" golfer get fewer shots and a "handicap" golfer get more shots when the slope calculation is made on a higher rated course, thereby increasing the difference between them?
Example:
Two players, one has a displayed handicap of -2.4 (the "plus handicapper), the other has a handicap of 11.6
On a standard slope rated course of 113 their course handicaps are -2 and 12, a difference of 14.
On a higher slope rated course, say 125, their course handicaps are -3 and 13, a difference of 16.

It is why a factor of 95% is applied to Course Handicaps for individual comps. At 13 the higher handicap would only get 12. It is not an exact science but it helps.

 

[woofers]

Thank you for your prompt responses which are in line with the way I was thinking, but needed clarification.
Having said that, explaining it to the affected parties, mostly the “plus handicapper” may be a bit more challenging as from his stand alone point of view he believes he is “getting fewer shots on a harder course” and not considering “relative differences”.

 

[Swango1980]

Thank you for your prompt responses which are in line with the way I was thinking, but needed clarification.
Having said that, explaining it to the affected parties, mostly the “plus handicapper” may be a bit more challenging as from his stand alone point of view he believes he is “getting fewer shots on a harder course” and not considering “relative differences”.

You just need to explain that slope does not tell you a course is hard or not. All it does is tell you how hard it is for a high handicapper against a low handicapper. So, a higher slope, you give higher handicappers more shots.

In terms of the absolute difficulty of a course, which is more easily highlighted using the difference between course rating and par (as most humans compare difficulty to the par on the card), there is no adjustment to anyones handicap in the UK. That is why a player with a 0.0 Index will have a course handicap of 0.0 on every course they play at, whether it be the shortest / easiest course or the longest / hardest course. Pretty much everywhere else in the world include CR-Par within the course handicap calculation, and therefore all players, get an adjustment based on the absolute difficulty of the course. For example, a 0.0 handicapper could play of -4 at a very easy course (i.e. plus 4), or 4 of a very hard course

 

[rulefan]

Pretty much everywhere else in the world include CR-Par within the course handicap calculation, and therefore all players, get an adjustment based on the absolute difficulty of the course. For example, a 0.0 handicapper could play of -4 at a very easy course (i.e. plus 4), or 4 of a very hard course

I'm not sure why you seem to suggest that par has something to do with absolute difficulty. That is what the Course Rating tells us (specifically for a scratch player).
Par is an arbitrary number which gives an approximation to the length of a hole and possibly to the length of a course. eg A par 4 hole could be anything from 240 to 490 yards. A 260 yard hole could alternatively be a par 3.

I gather that a supposed advantage for using (CR - Par) is something to do with getting 36 points in a stableford.

 

[Swango1980]

I'm not sure why you seem to suggest that par has something to do with absolute difficulty. That is what the Course Rating tells us (specifically for a scratch player).
Par is an arbitrary number which gives an approximation to the length of a hole and possibly to the length of a course. eg A par 4 hole could be anything from 240 to 490 yards. A 260 yard hole could alternatively be a par 3.

I gather that a supposed advantage for using (CR - Par) is something to do with getting 36 points in a stableford.

Please, rulefan, we have had this conversation to death elsewhere before. I have explained my positioning, and that Par is absolutely not arbitrary. In the bit of my response you replied to, in the very opening line of that paragraph, I put in brackets to exactly explain why I was using Par. Not sure you missed that?

Course Rating on its own tells you nothing about course difficulty. Or at least, most normal thinking human beings. You could have a 8000 yard course, a big open field, with a high CR. You could then have a 6000 yard course, with water, bunkers, tight fairways, horrible rough, etc with a lower CR.

Now, you may try and explain to people that the big open field is "difficult" because it has a higher CR. But, most would find it extremely easy, albeit a boring slog fest. Whereas the 6000 yard course may give them nightmares due to the difficulty.

 

[rulefan]

Please, rulefan, we have had this conversation to death elsewhere before. I have explained my positioning, and that Par is absolutely not arbitrary. In the bit of my response you replied to, in the very opening line of that paragraph, I put in brackets to exactly explain why I was using Par. Not sure you missed that?

Course Rating on its own tells you nothing about course difficulty. Or at least, most normal thinking human beings. You could have a 8000 yard course, a big open field, with a high CR. You could then have a 6000 yard course, with water, bunkers, tight fairways, horrible rough, etc with a lower CR.

Now, you may try and explain to people that the big open field is "difficult" because it has a higher CR. But, most would find it extremely easy, albeit a boring slog fest. Whereas the 6000 yard course may give them nightmares due to the difficulty.

Any 8000 yard course is inherently more difficult to score on because it take more strokes to cover the distance. CR is about a scratch player who generally hits further, finds the fairway, can play out of bunkers and two putts. Obstacles (eg water, bunkers, rough) are all factored in for the few occasions they are encountered in relation to the proximity of the edges of the fairway.
When you say 'most'; from memory the 'average' handicapper is about 16 - 20 (approximating to a bogey player). They would find the 8000 a slog because they would have to play so many more shots, whether good, bad or indifferent. The obstacles above are factored it with a higher weighting for such a player because their increased likelihood of encountering them and their difficulty in handling them. Which is what Slope is.
Of course an 8000 yard course would have a far higher par than a 6000 yard course anyway.

I know we disagree but the above is aimed at those who missed it before.