Course Handicap

[sunshine]

All relevant factors are measured and accounted for.

Thanks. How is the impact of elevation measured?

 

[wjemather]

Thanks. How is the impact of elevation measured?

Differences in elevation are recorded from tee to green, and from landing zone to green for approach shots; and accounted for by effective playing length corrections and topography.

 

[sunshine]

Differences in elevation are recorded from tee to green, and from landing zone to green for approach shots; and accounted for by effective playing length corrections and topography.

Thanks, I was looking for a more structured explanation, but it's ok if you don't have this

As the raters don't have a robot that hits a consistent 250 yards, I was wondering how the raters calculate the impact of factors such as elevation, wind, etc.

 

[wjemather]

Thanks, I was looking for a more structured explanation, but it's ok if you don't have this

As the raters don't have a robot that hits a consistent 250 yards, I was wondering how the raters calculate the impact of factors such as elevation, wind, etc.

For the most part, recorded values translate to adjustments via lookup tables - there is no calculation of the impact by raters.

 

[D-S]

Thanks, I was looking for a more structured explanation, but it's ok if you don't have this

As the raters don't have a robot that hits a consistent 250 yards, I was wondering how the raters calculate the impact of factors such as elevation, wind, etc.

The raters have to give elevation changes in certain bands 20-40 feet 40 - 50 feet etc. (I think ythe bands have changed recently but can check if you want as we are doing a couple in the next week or so).
Estimations of roll are made on each fairway. The default is 20 yards from the tee on a flat hole onto a flat fairway. If the fairway is a an incline the roll is reduced and if it is downhill it is increased.

 

[wjemather]

The raters have to give elevation changes in certain bands 20-40 feet 40 - 50 feet etc. (I think ythe bands have changed recently but can check if you want as we are doing a couple in the next week or so).
Estimations of roll are made on each fairway. The default is 20 yards from the tee on a flat hole onto a flat fairway. If the fairway is a an incline the roll is reduced and if it is downhill it is increased.

Elevation changes under 10ft are recorded as zero; anything above 10ft is rounded to the nearest 10ft; maximum ±40ft for par 3s.

 

[sunshine]

The raters have to give elevation changes in certain bands 20-40 feet 40 - 50 feet etc. (I think ythe bands have changed recently but can check if you want as we are doing a couple in the next week or so).
Estimations of roll are made on each fairway. The default is 20 yards from the tee on a flat hole onto a flat fairway. If the fairway is a an incline the roll is reduced and if it is downhill it is increased.

Thanks. This is really interesting to understand the methodology.

So what you're saying is there is a standard calculation table, e.g. the model scratch golfer hits a drive 230 yards carry plus 20 yards roll, then the carry is adjusted based on elevation and the roll is adjusted based on incline. And then I assume prevailing wind is also factored in.

And then the same process is applied for a bogey golfer who hits a drive 180 carry plus 20 yards roll?

 

[D-S]

Thanks. This is really interesting to understand the methodology.

So what you're saying is there is a standard calculation table, e.g. the model scratch golfer hits a drive 230 yards carry plus 20 yards roll, then the carry is adjusted based on elevation and the roll is adjusted based on incline. And then I assume prevailing wind is also factored in.

And then the same process is applied for a bogey golfer who hits a drive 180 carry plus 20 yards roll?

Yup.

Average wind speed is also somewhere in the background calculation too.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I’ll put this here as don’t want to open another WHS handicap thread.

It’s noticeable that at my place stableford comps tend not to be won with absurdly high (upper 40s+) points…mostly an occasional 43 or 44…but they are rarish, and 40+ pts for anyone is also fairly rare. I’ve wondered why, given all the whinging on here about bonkers stableford scores winning comps elsewhere - with us very rare.

We have just been remeasured and rerated. New ratings from 1st March.

White tees currently: CR 71.6; Slope 125
White tees rerated: CR 72.5; Slope 136

Maybe this accounts for ‘relatively’ low scoring at my track…and maybe suggests that the slope rating is way too high at courses where big points scores are normal.

And so off 7.7 my Course Handicap jumps from 8 to 10. That’ll help…and make it easier for me to cope with losing a 2.3 and a 5.4 in a few rounds time.

Our SI have also been reassessed and significantly changed…will make things interesting.

Big changes have come about as we will no longer have any gender-specific tees, and as a result have come up with a single set of indexes to accommodate ladies and gents abilities.

 

[Orikoru]

I’ll put this hear as don’t want to open another WHS handicap thread.

It’s noticeable that at my place stableford comps tend not to be won with absurdly high (upper 40s+) points…mostly an occasional 43 or 44…but they are rarer, and 40+ pts for anyone is also fairly rare. Wondered why, given all the whinging on here about bonkers stableford scores winning comps elsewhere - with us very rare.

We have just been remeasured and rerated. New ratings from 1st March.

White tees currently: CR 71.6; Slope 125
White tees rerated: CR 72.5; Slope 136

Maybe this accounts for ‘relatively’ low scoring at my track…and maybe suggests that the slope rating is way too high at courses where big points scores are normal.

And so off 7.7 my Course Handicap jumps from 8 to 10. That’ll help…and make it easier for me to cope with losing a 2.3 and a 5.4 in a few rounds time.

Our SI have also been reassessed and significantly changed…will make things interesting.

Big changes have come about as we will no longer have any gender-specific tees, and as a result have come up with a single set of indexes to accommodate ladies and gents abilities.

I have moaned about it already but our ratings recently went down. The next Stableford comp was won with 37 points, joint second-place were on 35.

 

[SteveW86]

I have moaned about it already but our ratings recently went down. The next Stableford comp was won with 37 points, joint second-place were on 35.

Similar to ours. I like it!

 

[D-S]

I’ll put this here as don’t want to open another WHS handicap thread.

It’s noticeable that at my place stableford comps tend not to be won with absurdly high (upper 40s+) points…mostly an occasional 43 or 44…but they are rarish, and 40+ pts for anyone is also fairly rare. I’ve wondered why, given all the whinging on here about bonkers stableford scores winning comps elsewhere - with us very rare.

We have just been remeasured and rerated. New ratings from 1st March.

White tees currently: CR 71.6; Slope 125
White tees rerated: CR 72.5; Slope 136

Maybe this accounts for ‘relatively’ low scoring at my track…and maybe suggests that the slope rating is way too high at courses where big points scores are normal.

And so off 7.7 my Course Handicap jumps from 8 to 10. That’ll help…and make it easier for me to cope with losing a 2.3 and a 5.4 in a few rounds time.

Our SI have also been reassessed and significantly changed…will make things interesting.

Big changes have come about as we will no longer have any gender-specific tees, and as a result have come up with a single set of indexes to accommodate ladies and gents abilities.

Unless you have made a lot of changes since the previous rating, this is a huge change and would suggest that the original rating was very wrong. If the changes have been in place for some time the course should have been rerated shortly after they were introduced.
However, if your members play the vast majority of their qualifying golf at your club your comp scores should be similar to other clubs as handicaps would increase or decrease to account for the course being ‘too easy’ or ‘too difficult’. They would only see a difference when they play at other clubs or against other clubs either to their benefit or not dependent on whether the rating is too high or too low.

 

[sjw]

I have moaned about it already but our ratings recently went down. The next Stableford comp was won with 37 points, joint second-place were on 35.

Sounds like it worked then, assuming the scores were higher before?

 

[Orikoru]

Sounds like it worked then, assuming the scores were higher before?

Are they supposed to be that low though? I thought you would normally expect to have a handful of people shooting 37-40 and maybe one or two over that. That was more or less what we had in the December Stableford anyway - three scores 40-41 range, one 39 and the rest 36 or lower. Similar back in November, winner got 42, then three scores of 37.

 

[sjw]

Are they supposed to be that low though? I thought you would normally expect to have a handful of people shooting 37-40 and maybe one or two over that. That was more or less what we had in the December Stableford anyway - three scores 40-41 range, one 39 and the rest 36 or lower. Similar back in November, winner got 42, then three scores of 37.

At least at my club, 37s and 38s are met with joking shouts of bandit and typically it's 35 or 36 points that win a rollup and 37 or 38 might win a comp. We are a small club though. I wouldn't want to be somewhere where 40+ points was winning all the time

 

[Swango1980]

I’ll put this here as don’t want to open another WHS handicap thread.

It’s noticeable that at my place stableford comps tend not to be won with absurdly high (upper 40s+) points…mostly an occasional 43 or 44…but they are rarish, and 40+ pts for anyone is also fairly rare. I’ve wondered why, given all the whinging on here about bonkers stableford scores winning comps elsewhere - with us very rare.

We have just been remeasured and rerated. New ratings from 1st March.

White tees currently: CR 71.6; Slope 125
White tees rerated: CR 72.5; Slope 136

Maybe this accounts for ‘relatively’ low scoring at my track…and maybe suggests that the slope rating is way too high at courses where big points scores are normal.

And so off 7.7 my Course Handicap jumps from 8 to 10. That’ll help…and make it easier for me to cope with losing a 2.3 and a 5.4 in a few rounds time.

Our SI have also been reassessed and significantly changed…will make things interesting.

Big changes have come about as we will no longer have any gender-specific tees, and as a result have come up with a single set of indexes to accommodate ladies and gents abilities.

I think before CR-Par was introduced, the "whinging" about incredibly high scores would have been more prominent simply because a lot of courses would have had a CR a good few shots lower than Par. Many golfers were programmed to believe 36 points was playing to handicap, and didn't realise that 39/40/41 points could actually be playing to Par if CR was that much lower than Par. So, if a golfer played better than handicap, they could be a lot higher than 36 points, and promote whinging from people who thought their 36 points was decent, when it wasn't actually great.

Since CR-Par was introduced, golfers at these courses have all seen their course handicaps plummet. I'm sure that was a shock, and many would have said "why have I lost "x" shots, I'm never a "y" handicapper". Once they get used to where their handicap is at, then all that will settle down. And it could be that the new benchmark for accusing people of being a bandit will be more like 40/41/42+ points rather than 45+ points

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Unless you have made a lot of changes since the previous rating, this is a huge change and would suggest that the original rating was very wrong. If the changes have been in place for some time the course should have been rerated shortly after they were introduced.
However, if your members play the vast majority of their qualifying golf at your club your comp scores should be similar to other clubs as handicaps would increase or decrease to account for the course being ‘too easy’ or ‘too difficult’. They would only see a difference when they play at other clubs or against other clubs either to their benefit or not dependent on whether the rating is too high or too low.

We have rebuilt all our bunkers and put new ones in in strategically tricky places…plus other changes.

 

[IanM]

We have rebuilt all our bunkers and put new ones in in strategically tricky places…plus other changes.

And the re-rating has adjusted it upwards. Sounds like it's working.

 

[JonnyGutteridge]

I played with a member at a local parkland course once, and he asked what the slope was for my course. He then said “that means my course is harder than yours”.

Obviously that’s an incorrect assessment. It means its harder for a bogey golfer… The course rating for this place was like -3 whereas its +1.5 at my course.

I tried to think logically about what would cause that slope rating though… all I could really think of was:
My course? 0 ponds
His course… Lots of ponds

For a bogey golfer, ponds are a nightmare. Has almost 0 impact on a scratch golfer. Just by virtue of there being no ponds, a bogey golfer is probably saving a couple of shots a round?

I couldn’t think why else though.

Is my logic sound?

 

[sunshine]

I played with a member at a local parkland course once, and he asked what the slope was for my course. He then said “that means my course is harder than yours”.

Obviously that’s an incorrect assessment. It means its harder for a bogey golfer… The course rating for this place was like -3 whereas its +1.5 at my course.

I tried to think logically about what would cause that slope rating though… all I could really think of was:
My course? 0 ponds
His course… Lots of ponds

For a bogey golfer, ponds are a nightmare. Has almost 0 impact on a scratch golfer. Just by virtue of there being no ponds, a bogey golfer is probably saving a couple of shots a round?

I couldn’t think why else though.

Is my logic sound?

Is it because your course has been designed to be playable for a bogey golfer, whilst still challenging a scratch golfer? So a bogey golfer can still make bogey on most holes, but a scratch golfer struggles to make par.

On the parkland course, the bogey golfer is still going to make bogeys on most holes, but the scratch player can tear it up. So the gap in scoring between scratch and bogey is higher leading to higher slope index.