Cross Border rounds and handicapping

[rulefan]

For the uninitiated are you able to explain the algorithm/PCC in simple terms please?

Just to add to my earlier response, the reference to "fewer/more players than anticipated attained their expected score" suggests that players' scoring history is taken in to account. CSS only considered players' current handicaps.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

The problem is that no-one really understood the complexities involved in linking the world together.
The idea of everyone ultimately working to the same rules was ambitious enough. Given the major differences between the old systems, IMO they have made a pretty good fist of that part. The current differences may seem significant but in practice will have no material effect on handicap comparisons in the short term.
I don't believe the authorities really put much thought into inter communication. As I said before, GB&I is really the only area where large numbers of players move between different authority areas and as apps and covid were not really on the horizon, no one anticipated the need.

Totally agree, and totally damning comments. Let's throw the whole handicap system into turmoil, but don't brainstorm the various issues that will arise.

It's not like "we've got a world system so that 0.0001% we're changing everything for can play anywhere, how do we achieve this"? should ever have been anywhere but right at the top of the to do list. Shambles

 

[Banchory Buddha]

Incidentally, perhaps a Scot can tell me, did Scottish Golf commission the whole package (ie competition management (a la V1, IG HM etc) and the full blown WHS score processing and database or just the back end leaving the ISVs to continue with comps?

The VMS system is a full golf club management package, there's no need for any third party providers

 

[Banchory Buddha]

It's really in the first sentence of this...

https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/Handicap/BreakingDownPCC_detailed.pdf

It really isn't. There's literally no formula shown ion any of that

 

[rulefan]

It really isn't. There's literally no formula shown ion any of that

True but how useful would the full formula/algorithm be to players? How many golfing mathematicians would wish or be able to challenge it? If indeed it needed challenging.
I can't ever remember anyone challenging the formula or tables of the CSS.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

True but how useful would the full formula/algorithm be to players? How many golfing mathematicians would wish or be able to challenge it? If indeed it needed challenging.
I can't ever remember anyone challenging the formula or tables of the CSS.

No need, because you could verify it, indeed when it was first introduced you had to do it manually. That said I was often asked for eg "how come CSS didn't go up, there were no low scores", and repeatedly had to tell (often the same folks) that how low a score was was irrelevant, simply making the buffer or better was what was required. Now, I have nothing "it's a secret formula that nobody will explain so there ye go".

there's literally no need whatsoever not to explain how it's worked out, don't know about you, but I'm long past just accepting something at face value that isn't checkable, especially with the mess this roll out has been in virtually every aspect.

 

[Foxholer]

PCC can only be calculated once all scores (comp or otherwise) for the day have been received and analysed. I used to be able to predict CSS fairly accurately, having been responsible for entering scores in pre-PSI days and by perusing results from PSI scores.

Notwithstanding the 'requirement' for PCC to be considered when calculating 'tomorrows Handicap Index', it's unlikely to actually be a major factor in the result of the calculation of a WHS HI! This is because it's very likely to be 0 more often than not and, when non-zero, the effect is diluted/reduced because of the 'average of best 8 of last 20' method used for WHS - as opposed to each (comp) round having a 'full' effect on the existing H'cap as was the Congu calc method!

It was only for 'completeness/accuracy' that I highlighted the (possiible) need to consider it (Post 42)!

 

[KenL]

Have 30+ counting scores under whs, pcc hasn't kicked in once yet !

Nor in any medals or opens I have played in.

 

[IanM]

The Senior Open at Southerndown in August had a PCC of 2. (only time this year I've seen a change) More people walked in, than entered 18 hole scores!

 

[rulie]

Sounds like it is a good thing that PCC is based on statistical analysis rather than people's opinions of what it should be!

 

[IanM]

Sounds like it is a good thing that PCC is based on statistical analysis rather than people's opinions of what it should be!

And would have credibility if rational links to the outcomes were more overt

 

[Banchory Buddha]

Sounds like it is a good thing that PCC is based on statistical analysis rather than people's opinions of what it should be!

Is it? What analysis? Nobody knows, and yet you could usually have a pretty good guess at where a CSS would come out, now we have a system that nobody can explain, and that almost never changes whatever the conditions. Brilliant that eh?

 

[rosecott]

Is it? What analysis? Nobody knows, and yet you could usually have a pretty good guess at where a CSS would come out, now we have a system that nobody can explain, and that almost never changes whatever the conditions. Brilliant that eh?

Post #57 gives an adequate explanation and there is little need for the golfer or the club to know how to calculate it. Since the start of WHS, we have had 3@+2, 6@+1 and 3@-1. That's not a million miles from occurrences of CSS in the old system. One of the +2s and one of the +1s happened in October.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

Post #57 gives an adequate explanation and there is little need for the golfer or the club to know how to calculate it. Since the start of WHS, we have had 3@+2, 6@+1 and 3@-1. That's not a million miles from occurrences of CSS in the old system. One of the +2s and one of the +1s happened in October.

No sir, it's an inadequate explanation, the authorities won't explain how it works, so what faith can you have in such a system? I like to *know* how things work if I can, there's literally no reason for not making this available, unless.....

And your figures are surprising, because every anecdote I've read, and comments from other clubs around here, is that PCC hardly ever moves. We used to have between a third and a half of our medals move CSS, this year we haven't had one single PCC adjustment, so nothing like the same, and even in opens I think I've seen 2 all season, though I'd have to double check that.

 

[rosecott]

No sir, it's an inadequate explanation, the authorities won't explain how it works, so what faith can you have in such a system? I like to *know* how things work if I can, there's literally no reason for not making this available, unless.....

And your figures are surprising, because every anecdote I've read, and comments from other clubs around here, is that PCC hardly ever moves. We used to have between a third and a half of our medals move CSS, this year we haven't had one single PCC adjustment, so nothing like the same, and even in opens I think I've seen 2 all season, though I'd have to double check that.

I think you are making a very large mountain from a very small molehill, I don't have a single member who has demanded the tools to do his own PCC calculation - a brief explanation of the principle involved satisfies them, as it used to do with explanations of CSS.

A parallel situation - will you demand to know how all the calculations were done to set your Course and Slope Ratings? We do have the experts with the expertise to do so without every golfer demanding the data.

 

[SammmeBee]

I think you are making a very large mountain from a very small molehill, I don't have a single member who has demanded the tools to do his own PCC calculation - a brief explanation of the principle involved satisfies them, as it used to do with explanations of CSS.

A parallel situation - will you demand to know how all the calculations were done to set your Course and Slope Ratings? We do have the experts with the expertise to do so without every golfer demanding the data.

Experts 😂

 

[rosecott]

Experts 😂

And your knowledge and experience is?

 

[SammmeBee]

And your knowledge and experience is?

It doesn’t actually matter as I don’t profess to be the ‘expert’ in this instance…..sadly I’m not sure that those that do are either……

 

[rulie]

Some need to join Critics Anonymous.

 

[rulefan]

.sadly I’m not sure that those that do are either……

What evidence have you got for such a statement?
Well in my county all raters have rigorous training in measuring and assessing all the elements involved. The conversion to rating values is done and checked by experienced team leaders and the results are calculated by computer using a formula available to the county officials and EG.