Course Rating

[Voyager EMH]

I guess this is where length a major factor, Painswick is very enjoyable, though a tough walk, but it extremely short in comparison with most courses even though it’s par 67.
4572 yards off the tees you mention. This means that the bogey golfer can almost certainly get to all of the greens in regulation which negates a lot of the scratch players advantage. The longest par 3 is 144, longest par 4 is 366 and longest par 5 448., The fact that it has no bunkers also reduces its difficulty.

The 6th is a par 3 of 202 yards off the yellows and the 12th is a par 3 of 227 off the yellows.
Or so it says on the card that I kept hold of from 2 years ago.
The 12th is very much downhill. Neither hole is an "easy" par 3.
A bogey golfer will not find it "easy" to hit those two greens in regulation.

The par 3s 5th and 10th are completely blind shots over a hill with a marker post and down to a green the other side. Not very "easy" to judge distance, what club etc.
Or so I recall.

 

[D-S]

The 6th is a par 3 of 202 yards off the yellows and the 12th is a par 3 of 227 off the yellows.
Or so it says on the card that I kept hold of from 2 years ago.
The 12th is very much downhill. Neither hole is an "easy" par 3.
A bogey golfer will not find it "easy" to hit those two greens in regulation.

The par 3s 5th and 10th are completely blind shots over a hill with a marker post and down to a green the other side. Not very "easy" to judge distance, what club etc.
Or so I recall.

Sorry, I misread it on the portal.
The bogey golfer hits it 180 and, in typical flat conditions gets 20 yards of roll.
The 6th (a gorgeous hole I seem to remember now) according to the website is downhill so I would guess the rating states that the bogey golfer does indeed get there. The 12th as you say is 227 and this hole is probably the only one a bogey golfer can’t reach in regulation, although it may be rated as a transition hole if the slope is steep enough which means he gets onto the green 50% of the time.
Your right that there are a few blind holes which is taken into account in the rating. I wasn’t part of the team that rated Painswick last time, otherwise I could have given you first hand knowledge.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Sorry, I misread it on the portal.
The bogey golfer hits it 180 and, in typical flat conditions gets 20 yards of roll.
The 6th (a gorgeous hole I seem to remember now) according to the website is downhill so I would guess the rating states that the bogey golfer does indeed get there. The 12th as you say is 227 and this hole is probably the only one a bogey golfer can’t reach in regulation, although it may be rated as a transition hole if the slope is steep enough which means he gets onto the green 50% of the time.
Your right that there are a few blind holes which is taken into account in the rating. I wasn’t part of the team that rated Painswick last time, otherwise I could have given you first hand knowledge.

The 6th has an elevated tee, but the landing area and run to the green is flat. Lots of slopes to take your ball off line. Quite hard for a bogey golfer to hit the green.

The 12th is steep downhill all the way and I think this would be less hard ("easier") for the bogey golfer to hit the green than the 6th.

 

[Steve Wilkes]

The 6th has an elevated tee, but the landing area and run to the green is flat. Lots of slopes to take your ball off line. Quite hard for a bogey golfer to hit the green.

The 12th is steep downhill all the way and I think this would be less hard ("easier") for the bogey golfer to hit the green than the 6th.

Are bogey golfers suppose to hit the green in reg, or are the raters expecting them to 3 putt

 

[D-S]

Are bogey golfers suppose to hit the green in reg, or are the raters expecting them to 3 putt

The severity of the greens will have an impact on the number of putts a bogey and scratch golfers would to take will be assessed as part of the algorithm . The width of the entrance to the green will be taken into account if the bogey golfer runs it in, as will distance to bunkers, OB etc.etc.

I’m interested to know what more people think could be assessed / measured / taken into account (for those that think this is done in some sort of quick, haphazard cavalier fashion).

 

[jim8flog]

I'm sure there must be quite a few. I've noticed quite a few links courses with high course ratings, but quite low slopes.

I think lack of trees and a more open course means the bogey rating is relatively lower. Whereas you could play a much tighter tree lines course with a lower Course Rating, as scratch golfers find it easier to get round. But bogey golfers find it relatively tougher as it is tight

Not sure if this is typical of what others have experienced?

When this all came in I was very surprised to find that with Burnham and Berrow, a course I have played many times but only once ever have I played to my handicap (although I only played there when my handicap was around 6).

 

[mikejohnchapman]

I think I read courses need to be re-rated every 10 years at least? Not sure if that happens in practice.

You are correct - most counties will have a plan for all courses to be re-rated in this time period and this needs to be registered with England Golf. A course can be re-rated earlier if there have been significant changes.

The recent addition of "short" courses has lead to a spike in courses needing to be rated this year.

 

[rulefan]

Normally 6 to 8 weeks from the day of the rating.

Our Ratings Manager has just confirmed in excess of 8 weeks. As it gets to the end of the season when more ratings are coming in it is likely to be longer.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

Are bogey golfers suppose to hit the green in reg, or are the raters expecting them to 3 putt

No, to both points.

Bogey golfers are expected to hit the ball to their proscribed length - adjusted for roll. They are expected to make 2 putts per hole - adjusted for green difficulty.

 

[wjemather]

Our Ratings Manager has just confirmed in excess of 8 weeks. As it gets to the end of the season when more ratings are coming in it is likely to be longer.

Yes, as @D-S noted, there has been an ongoing backlog with EG this year.
All our county's ratings were finalised by EG within 8 weeks last year.

 

[rulefan]

Yes, as @D-S noted, there has been an ongoing backlog with EG this year.
All our county's ratings were finalised by EG within 8 weeks last year.

I gather there is a staffing problem.

 

[wjemather]

You are correct - most counties will have a plan for all courses to be re-rated in this time period and this needs to be registered with England Golf. A course can be re-rated earlier if there have been significant changes.

The recent addition of "short" courses has lead to a spike in courses needing to be rated this year.

Many courses are also being re-rated ahead of schedule in order to more evenly distribute the cycle in the future, eliminating the peak created by the rating surge pre-WHS.

 

[tobybarker]

And how many of the forum complainers would even consider coming forward to share the load?

Well. I did. But was told there were no vacancies in the ratings team.... Send to me they could use everyone they could get round here in Wales

 

[rulefan]

Well. I did. But was told there were no vacancies in the ratings team.... Send to me they could use everyone they could get round here in Wales

The problem might be the resource required to fully train just one applicant. However when I was responsible we usually tried to get a new volunteer to accompany a working team and 'just make themselves useful'.

 

[NearHull]

The problem might be the resource required to fully train just one applicant. However when I was responsible we usually tried to get a new volunteer to accompany a working team and 'just make themselves useful'.

That is how I got involved.

 

[SteveJay]

I'm not up to date with the current processes but when I originally set the system for my county it generally took 4+ hours (depending on the number or tees being rated) for a 3 man (minimum) team. Ladies' & men's tees are usually rated by separate teams because the measurement parameters are different.
This first phase was simply to take and record measurements (eg proximity of obstacles to target areas, height of bunker faces).
The second phase, maybe an hour plus, (usually done by a team leader, though some work may have been delegated) is conversion of measurements to table values. The results would be sent to EG to produce the final figures.
I believe the process and original paperwork has been 'streamlined' since I retired from the job but certainly all the measurements and their conversion is still done.

Most clubs would allocate a block of tee times so that we and players wouldn't interfere with each other. But some would expect us to work as players 'played through' and we would have to stand aside. This of course would add to our time in the field. Some clubs would offer a meal or at least tea or coffee and biscuits but a minority didn't. Given there was no charge to the club (even though the couldn't operate without a rating) I though it rather mean.

thanks Rulefan, thats very interesting.

 

[VVega]

Could someone with access to the rating “manual” shed any light on how rough is considered?

As an extreme sxample, the course sets up the rough that is effectively OB (no chance of finding the ball), pinching the Fw to 20 yds at 250 yds (scratch golfer distance). Would this affect the rating or be ignored?

Unlike bunkers, water and OB, the rough cut, length and density depends on the whims of the committee members etc. and varies from year to year hugely. It is also fully cut for the winter. So it could be completely penal = lost ball every time, manageable = 50% find rate or non-existent - fairways become 60+ yds wide.

Just curious what the official guidelines on considering rough in course ratings are, if any.

 

[wjemather]

Could someone with access to the rating “manual” shed any light on how rough is considered?

As an extreme sxample, the course sets up the rough that is effectively OB (no chance of finding the ball), pinching the Fw to 20 yds at 250 yds (scratch golfer distance). Would this affect the rating or be ignored?

Unlike bunkers, water and OB, the rough cut, length and density depends on the whims of the committee members etc. and varies from year to year hugely. It is also fully cut for the winter. So it could be completely penal = lost ball every time, manageable = 50% find rate or non-existent - fairways become 60+ yds wide.

Just curious what the official guidelines on considering rough in course ratings are, if any.

General rough is assessed based on cut length, with any variances in specific areas noted. Intermediate cut between rough and fairway is reflected in adjustment to fairways width measurements.

Extreme rough is considered under lateral and crossing obstacles (along with penalty areas, out of bounds); any potential stroke and distance penalty is also assessed. Lateral obstacles very close to the fairway landing zones reduce the effective width.

Mid-season course setup should not vary greatly from when the course was rated.

 

[D-S]

If a course makes significant changes to fairway widths, positioning of extreme rough, changes in semi rough width etc. they should notify the County Course Rating Lead.
A local club made a an important change to the length of their rough (much, much shorter) and the re rating caused a significant drop in both CR and Slope. Rough length affects almost every hole on the course so a significant change has a much bigger effect than the addition of a couple of bunkers for example.

 

[DickInShorts]

The issue my - and many other inland - courses around here have had this year is lush first cut due to the wet weather. Fairways are softer than usual so less run out.if your ball lands in the rough it stops quickly and is also then difficult to hit usual club distance.

I suppose the answer is that if scores are affected then PCC will compensate- but it doesn’t!