Course Rating

[rulefan]

In another thread Banchory Buddha says
"I said they were flawed, very badly"

Do you believe that to be true? Why and how would you fix them?

 

[Neilds]

I think this because people think courses are rated to their own handicap and distances, and not specific criteria.

 

[nickjdavis]

In another thread Banchory Buddha says
"I said they were flawed, very badly"

Do you believe that to be true? Why and how would you fix them?

I'd be interested to hear how @Banchory Buddha thought that the old SSS (which is what he directed his "flawed" comment towards and hence indirectly towards Course Rating) was flawed.

My own view is that CR's in my neck of the woods seem reasonable and I have no reason to think that any of them are wildly wrong. BB may have specific examples from his region that leads him to conclude there are flaws in the ratings.

 

[wjemather]

If there is a flaw, it's a distance one.
Rolling back technology, particularly the ball and driver, would probably fix it.

But matching ratings with individual perception of difficulty so that most agree with them is an impossible goal.

 

[Slab]

I want to believe in the rating process but I can really only base my opinion on how it impacts me. So either I'm a massive outlier or course rating doesn't match actual golf played

The above doesn't mean the 'standard' rating isn't correct, just that it perhaps doesn't sufficiently cater for changes in course set up/weather/conditions etc

(there is a 3 shot diff in CH between 2 sets of tees but the reality (for me) is more like 10 shots. One or other rating is not correct)

 

[Orikoru]

My annoyance with it is that the ratings seem to be 99% just based on distance. Short courses get a low rating, long courses get a high one. I play at a course which is short, but the greens are all on wild slopes, making chipping and putting a nightmare, even more so in the summer. Professionals have played the course a number of times and rarely even break par. Yet our ratings are pathetically low so I have to play off 13 in comps even when I'm at 14.6 index. Just seems very one-dimensional to me.

It also has out of bounds right on at least 4 or 5 holes, which I would have thought pushes the slope rating up since your typical bogey golfers will slice the ball more - but no, it's only 117 off whites. So I don't really understand how that works either.

 

[clubchamp98]

I want to believe in the rating process but I can really only base my opinion on how it impacts me. So either I'm a massive outlier or course rating doesn't match actual golf played

The above doesn't mean the 'standard' rating isn't correct, just that it perhaps doesn't sufficiently cater for changes in course set up/weather/conditions etc

(there is a 3 shot diff in CH between 2 sets of tees but the reality (for me) is more like 10 shots. One or other rating is not correct)

Agree with this.
I think in hotter countries where conditions don’t really change that much the course dosnt change in difficulty from summer to winter.
In the uk that’s not the case the weather plays a big part .

Off the white tees in winter is vastly different to summer so this can have a big effect on your handicap
But PCC dosnt seem to come in at all .

 

[Steve Wilkes]

My annoyance with it is that the ratings seem to be 99% just based on distance. Short courses get a low rating, long courses get a high one. I play at a course which is short, but the greens are all on wild slopes, making chipping and putting a nightmare, even more so in the summer. Professionals have played the course a number of times and rarely even break par. Yet our ratings are pathetically low so I have to play off 13 in comps even when I'm at 14.6 index. Just seems very one-dimensional to me.

It also has out of bounds right on at least 4 or 5 holes, which I would have thought pushes the slope rating up since your typical bogey golfers will slice the ball more - but no, it's only 117 off whites. So I don't really understand how that works either.

I have mentioned this before Ori, if your index is 14.6 you are shooting to an average of 13 of your best 8 in 20 , if you were shooting +15 then your index would be 16 to 17

 

[D-S]

Having spent a long day as part of the course rating team yesterday (doing 5 sets of tees as we did at another course last week) I am loath to criticise the process as I know the hard work that volunteers put in.
However I do agree with the slightly too large an emphasis on distance over difficulty, how you tweak the algorithm I do not know but all the detailed information on difficulty in terms of a series of measurements is available.
Given the focus on length it does mean that the difference in difficulty between summer and winter is too much as one of the major factors is distance due to cold weather and lack of roll - PCC doesn’t seem to properly account for the discrepancy.

 

[Orikoru]

I have mentioned this before Ori, if your index is 14.6 you are shooting to an average of 13 of your best 8 in 20 , if you were shooting +15 then your index would be 16 to 17

Well this is what I'm saying doesn't make sense. I have a couple of counting rounds on my record from other courses in the last couple of months. Because shooting 13 over on them gave me 13 differential, but shooting 13 over at my home course would only get me 14-ish differential. So that would imply that my home course is easier, but I don't believe it is because of the reasons I stated above, I think it's actually harder than them. But it's rated less because it's shorter.

 

[Steve Wilkes]

Well this is what I'm saying doesn't make sense. I have a couple of counting rounds on my record from other courses in the last couple of months. Because shooting 13 over on them gave me 13 differential, but shooting 13 over at my home course would only get me 14-ish differential. So that would imply that my home course is easier, but I don't believe it is because of the reasons I stated above, I think it's actually harder than them. But it's rated less because it's shorter.

There will be the exact opposite, someone who plays the other course will say you place is so much easier, it's so short don't have to worry about the greens, just leave your short approaches in the right place.
Every golfer plays differently so impossible to rate for everyone, so the rating has to be based on average, and I think overall distance is a very big factor in how the average player finds how difficult a hole/course is

 

[IanM]

They are not based 99% on length. Plenty of other criteria like size of landing areas, gradients, green sizes etc.

Wales Golf did a Teams Call on course rating, for prospective course raters. Only lasted an hour, very informative. Worth sitting in on when your local Union does similar.

I'm sure the system isn't fool proof. I'm sure at the margins things could be debated.

But, I've not lost any sleep over this!

 

[rulefan]

Having spent a long day as part of the course rating team yesterday (doing 5 sets of tees as we did at another course last week) I am loath to criticise the process as I know the hard work that volunteers put in.
However I do agree with the slightly too large an emphasis on distance over difficulty, how you tweak the algorithm I do not know but all the detailed information on difficulty in terms of a series of measurements is available.
Given the focus on length it does mean that the difference in difficulty between summer and winter is too much as one of the major factors is distance due to cold weather and lack of roll - PCC doesn’t seem to properly account for the discrepancy.

Given that the CR relates to a 'standard' scratch golfer, the expectation is that most of the obstructions (ie non-length factors) will not be in play (or only infrequently) and therefore will make little contribution. Their 'standard' stroke length will effectively determine the rating together with 2 (occasionally 3) putts.
The Bogey Rating relates to a 'standard' 20ish handicapper when obstructions will have a greater incidence and relief may be more difficult (reflected by higher values in the relevant rating table).
The problem is that Slope is a straight line and most players are not and will have different strengths and weaknesses.
'Non-standard' players are more difficult to assess as their playing characteristics vary so much (Short/long/accurate/wayward etc).

WHS assumes that play is year round and therefore winter scores will be balanced by summer scores, otherwise we would be faced with two CRs & Slopes.
I think that PCC was supposed to cope with this but despite the formula being changed it doesn't yet seem to have the effect desired by UK players.
As the PCC formula hasn't been published I can't compare it with the formula for CSS.

 

[Imurg]

Given that the CR relates to a 'standard' scratch golfer, the expectation is that most of the obstructions (ie non-length factors) will not be in play (or only infrequently) and therefore will make little contribution. Their 'standard' stroke length will effectively determine the rating together with 2 (occasionally 3) putts.
The Bogey Rating relates to a 'standard' 20ish handicapper when obstructions will have a greater incidence and relief may be more difficult (reflected by higher values in the relevant rating table).
The problem is that Slope is a straight line and most players are not and will have different strengths and weaknesses.
'Non-standard' players are more difficult to assess as their playing characteristics vary so much (Short/long/accurate/wayward etc).

WHS assumes that play is year round and therefore winter scores will be balanced by summer scores, otherwise we would be faced with two CRs & Slopes.
I think that PCC was supposed to cope with this but despite the formula being changed it doesn't yet seem to have the effect desired by UK players.
As the PCC formula hasn't been published I can't compare it with the formula for CSS.

On the subject of PCC....for me it last kicked in 37 rounds ago........

 

[D-S]

Given that the CR relates to a 'standard' scratch golfer, the expectation is that most of the obstructions (ie non-length factors) will not be in play (or only infrequently) and therefore will make little contribution. Their 'standard' stroke length will effectively determine the rating together with 2 (occasionally 3) putts.
The Bogey Rating relates to a 'standard' 20ish handicapper when obstructions will have a greater incidence and relief may be more difficult (reflected by higher values in the relevant rating table).
The problem is that Slope is a straight line and most players are not and will have different strengths and weaknesses.
'Non-standard' players are more difficult to assess as their playing characteristics vary so much (Short/long/accurate/wayward etc).

WHS assumes that play is year round and therefore winter scores will be balanced by summer scores, otherwise we would be faced with two CRs & Slopes.
I think that PCC was supposed to cope with this but despite the formula being changed it doesn't yet seem to have the effect desired by UK players.
As the PCC formula hasn't been published I can't compare it with the formula for CSS.

The difficulty is that Golf is a year round sport in the UK but competitions and opportunity to play is very different winter to summer. Some courses do not have any qualifying golf in winter due to course conditions. The weather means that often a lot of courses cannot be qualifying. The weather also closes courses, makes some golf courses very very different winter to summer in terms of greens and surrounds conditions and length due to plugging fairways. Fast draining links and heathland have much smaller variations. This means that for those who put in a lot of cards in the winter their handicaps climb sharply, those who don’t play as much or cannot play qualifying courses their handicaps remain the same. I wouldn’t advocate a winter inactive season but maybe a restriction on the amount/frequency of GP scores.
Our roll up scores of almost all single figure golfers are gross lower off the back tees in summer than off the front tees in winter despite their being a 700 yard, 4 shot CR and 12 slope point difference.

 

[Swango1980]

My annoyance with it is that the ratings seem to be 99% just based on distance. Short courses get a low rating, long courses get a high one. I play at a course which is short, but the greens are all on wild slopes, making chipping and putting a nightmare, even more so in the summer. Professionals have played the course a number of times and rarely even break par. Yet our ratings are pathetically low so I have to play off 13 in comps even when I'm at 14.6 index. Just seems very one-dimensional to me.

It also has out of bounds right on at least 4 or 5 holes, which I would have thought pushes the slope rating up since your typical bogey golfers will slice the ball more - but no, it's only 117 off whites. So I don't really understand how that works either.

When I went to the England Golf seminar before WHS was rolled out, Gemma Hunter explained the Course ratings were roughly 80% based on length (I'm sure that was the % she expressed from memory), and the rest made up of other factors.

It makes sense that Course Ratings should be mainly based on length. That factor can never be avoided, and so the longer distance you have to knock that little white ball about 18 holes, the more shots it will generally take. Especially on your good days, where you'd like to think you can avoid most of the obstacles and/or negotiate them well if they do get in your way.

 

[IanM]

On the subject of PCC....for me it last kicked in 37 rounds ago........

We has a pcc of 2 at North Wales on Tuesday. I think 11 would have been more appropriate!

 

[jim8flog]

Course ratings where I play are fairly similar compared to SSS

Whites are only 0.8 (higher)
Yellows are only 0.4 (higher)
Reds are only 1.2 (higher)

The only card with SSS on it is quite old and we put in few thousand trees and a few extra bunkers in the interim period.

 

[rulefan]

Course ratings where I play are fairly similar compared to SSS

Whites are only 0.8 (higher)
Yellows are only 0.4 (higher)
Reds are only 1.2 (higher)

The only card with SSS on it is quite old and we put in few thousand trees and a few extra bunkers in the interim period.

When SSS was still the nominal standard for men's courses in England but EG had started the USGA rating process, the SSS was converted to the rounded CR This would be from about 2018ish.
If the reds were rated for women the SSS was already the rounded CR as they had already used the USGA system.

 

[Voyager EMH]

On the subject of PCC....for me it last kicked in 37 rounds ago........

I have 6 consecutive scores on my record from mid May to early June. All club comps.
5 of them have a PCC of +1 and there is one with a PCC of +3.
Two of them are in my best 8 and the PCC +3 score equals my 9th best.