CR-Par

[D-S]

Thanks very much and apologies for going off on a tangent, interesting reading.

Am I correct in saying that 18 hole course handicaps are based on slope only whereas 9 hole course handicaps already have CR-Par factored in?

I assume this is an anomaly that will also be cleared up next April.

 

[Voyager EMH]

In a competition this weekend I shot 77 gross and this beat my 8th best score by one shot and I received a 0.1 reduction in my handicap index.
Had CR-Par been in operation there would have no change to this process.

I finished in 21st place out of 130 entrants with a nett 71.
If CR-Par had been in operation, I would have finished in 21st place out of 130 entrants with a nett 70.

 

[Swango1980]

In a competition this weekend I shot 77 gross and this beat my 8th best score by one shot and I received a 0.1 reduction in my handicap index.
Had CR-Par been in operation there would have no change to this process.

I finished in 21st place out of 130 entrants with a nett 71.
If CR-Par had been in operation, I would have finished in 21st place out of 130 entrants with a nett 70.

Well done

 

[wjemather]

In a competition this weekend I shot 77 gross and this beat my 8th best score by one shot and I received a 0.1 reduction in my handicap index.
Had CR-Par been in operation there would have no change to this process.

I finished in 21st place out of 130 entrants with a nett 71.
If CR-Par had been in operation, I would have finished in 21st place out of 130 entrants with a nett 70.

This feels like an assumption, or was the CR exactly 1.0 higher than par?

 

[Voyager EMH]

This feels like an assumption, or was the CR exactly 1.0 higher than par?

Are you keen to do some "unpicking" this time?
I respectfully decline your request to do so.

 

[wjemather]

Are you keen to do some "unpicking" this time?
I respectfully decline your request to do so.

So it was just an assumption, and CR is not exactly 1.0 higher than par?
If so, I can only conclude that you did not recalculate all course/playing handicaps, nett scores and countbacks before claiming nothing would have changed.

 

[Voyager EMH]

So it was just an assumption, and CR is not exactly 1.0 higher than par?
If so, I can only conclude that you did not recalculate all course/playing handicaps, nett scores and countbacks before claiming nothing would have changed.

Well, if you must.

I did not claim that "nothing" would have changed.
There may have been some changes in finishing positions for a tiny minority.
I stated, (and you may take this as a guess or a carefully worked out calculation as I don't see that as making any significant difference) that my finishing position was unchanged.

Anyway, this is not going to happen after CR-Par is introduced. "No one will be thinking this way" - comparing outcomes of competitions with or without CR-Par.
I think that everyone will accept their new CHs and PHs and get on with it.

 

[wjemather]

Well, if you must.

I did not claim that "nothing" would have changed.
There may have been some changes in finishing positions for a tiny minority.
I stated, (and you may take this as a guess or a carefully worked out calculation as I don't see that as making any significant difference) that my finishing position was unchanged.

Anyway, this is not going to happen after CR-Par is introduced. "No one will be thinking this way" - comparing outcomes of competitions with or without CR-Par.
I think that everyone will accept their new CHs and PHs and get on with it.

It's abundantly clear that it was a guess and/or you hadn't considered that it might change. The perception of significance may be different if it made the difference between winning and not.

 

[Voyager EMH]

It's abundantly clear that it was a guess and/or you hadn't considered that it might change. The perception of significance may be different if it made the difference between winning and not.

I had considered that there could be a very small number of cases where a change in finishing position could occur. So your assertion that it was abundantly clear is totally wrong.
It was not a guess, but a considered view of mine not to mention this, as whether I might be one of those who would have changed from 21st place to 20th or 22nd was insignificant.
I omitted to mention whether there would be others whose position might have changed - I was only referring to my own outcome.

After the change to CR-Par no one will be thinking about being deprived of a winning score due to the change. No one. This is a way of looking at the transitional change that you have created and are confusing yourself with unnecessarily.

 

[Alan Clifford]

In a competition this weekend I shot 77 gross and this beat my 8th best score by one shot and I received a 0.1 reduction in my handicap index.
Had CR-Par been in operation there would have no change to this process.

I finished in 21st place out of 130 entrants with a nett 71.
If CR-Par had been in operation, I would have finished in 21st place out of 130 entrants with a nett 70.

So no reason then not to join the rest of the world and use a course handicap that actually reflects the arithmetic of the differential calculation.

 

[Voyager EMH]

So no reason then not to join the rest of the world and use a course handicap that actually reflects the arithmetic of the differential calculation.

No reason not to do can happen together with no reason to do.
But it is going to happen and that will be the reality.
I hope the opportunity will be taken at the same time to unify with Scotland and apply allowances (95%, 90%, 85% etc) to the unrounded CH.
Better still would be to embed 95% (or 93%) and do away with CH altogether as Australia do.
When I read posts about, I played today and scored 35 points, I am never certain whether the writer is scoring points against CH or PH. The Australian way would solve this confusion that some people have that individual strokeplay can be played with a 100% allowance.

I'm looking forward to 2025 when UK and USA will have all courses measured in metres with no mention of yards on scorecards.
OK, I made that bit up.

Today I'm going to calculate just how many kilometres per litre my car does.
OK, I'm not actually going to do that.
I have no reason to do it, but no reason not to do it.

 

[IanM]

I'm so glad I got into the handicap board producing business.

(His butler typed this!)

 

[Voyager EMH]

I'm so glad I got into the handicap board producing business.

(His butler typed this!)

We have yellows 127 and whites 132.
I copied and printed this and keep it in my scorecard holder.
It appears to be an American thing, but seems to work OK in the UK.

 

[Alan Clifford]

No reason not to do can happen together with no reason to do.
But it is going to happen and that will be the reality.
I hope the opportunity will be taken at the same time to unify with Scotland and apply allowances (95%, 90%, 85% etc) to the unrounded CH.
Better still would be to embed 95% (or 93%) and do away with CH altogether as Australia do.
When I read posts about, I played today and scored 35 points, I am never certain whether the writer is scoring points against CH or PH. The Australian way would solve this confusion that some people have that individual strokeplay can be played with a 100% allowance.

I'm looking forward to 2025 when UK and USA will have all courses measured in metres with no mention of yards on scorecards.
OK, I made that bit up.

Today I'm going to calculate just how many kilometres per litre my car does.
OK, I'm not actually going to do that.
I have no reason to do it, but no reason not to do it.

I understand the final point of view expressed in your eloquent post but allow me to modify my original post to add clarity.

So no reason then not to join the rest of the world and use a course handicap that actually reflects the arithmetic of the differential calculation and a very good reason to join the rest of the world and use a course handicap that actually reflects the arithmetic of the differential calculation.

 

[apj0524]

A member of my M&H Team, who is a County Handicap advisors has just advised the following:

I have county level info re handicap revision next year.

Handicap advisors not having a course but a joint county/club presentation by EG in the new year.
Yes CR-Par from 1st April. Yes 4bbb for handicap (more details to follow about that!). Short courses over 1500 yards can be rated. Some software calculations changing. 9 hole comps etc.

This is not going to go well with the average golfer and in my view increase the burden to M&H Committees

 

[Backsticks]

Whats M&H for the uninitiated ?

(Mergers and Hacquisitions ? )

 

[apj0524]

Whats M&H for the uninitiated ?

(Mergers and Hacquisitions ? )

Match & Handicap

 

[Backsticks]

The same for Scotland, or is EG going its own way on this does anyone know ?

 

[D-S]

The same for Scotland, or is EG going its own way on this does anyone know ?

I think this is the issue - nobody knows yet. Our County have had no official advice yet at all.

 

[tobybarker]

Our cr is 67.7 and par is 70, so CH to drop by 2.3...... Members will be chuffed. We're wales, and they are following suit