CSS - Booooooo !!

[guest100718]

Play a tougher course

 

[dufferman]

Something a bit fishy there. SSS71 cannot become CSS69.

Possibly the Stableford only is off the yellow blocks, medal white tee's are a touch further back.

 

[Imurg]

Interesting to note that, almost always, CSS coming down is instantly accredited to the "course playing easy", rarely to "players playing well".

 

[rosecott]

Interesting to note that, almost always, CSS coming down is instantly accredited to the "course playing easy", rarely to "players playing well".

And, of course, CSS going up means "course playing hard" rather than "players playing badly".

 

[Foxholer]

Interesting to note that, almost always, CSS coming down is instantly accredited to the "course playing easy", rarely to "players playing well".

State of mind (glass half empty/full) apart, that's absolutely correct! At least statistics wise, which is what the CSS adjustment is!

 

[delc]

And, of course, CSS going up means "course playing hard" rather than "players playing badly".

Essentially, provided you have a large enough field, it is statistically unlikely that all the players will play well or badly on a given day. Hence CSS is a reasonable estimate of the course difficulty on the day. If you battled through gale force winds and tricky pin positions to score 36 points (i.e. a good performance), you might be a bit miffed not to get a cut. On such days the CSS is likely to go up, so you may well get cut.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

It's quite simple really. If more than 46% of players achieve buffer or better, then CSS is SSS -1. So, if around half or more of the field play well enough to buffer, the system reckons that it's much easier than normal to score well, whatever the reason for that - benign conditions, easy pin positions, receptive greens etc. etc..

Good explanation and clear, 1 question, if a member at the op's club had not entered the comp, played on the same day off the same tees but decided to put a supplementary card in (carried out correct procedures before) and scored exactly the same as the op, would his card be marked against SSS or would the scoring from the comp influence his card?

 

[louise_a]

Supplementary cards are purely judged against SSS.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Supplementary cards are purely judged against SSS.

Thank you, so the supposed other player would've been cut?

 

[delc]

Good explanation and clear, 1 question, if a member at the op's club had not entered the comp, played on the same day off the same tees but decided to put a supplementary card in (carried out correct procedures before) and scored exactly the same as the op, would his card be marked against SSS or would the scoring from the comp influence his card?

Supplementary cards are always assessed against the course SSS. If he played at a different time of day to the competition, course conditions might be different!

P.S. At our club, members only seem to put supplementary cards in on the most benign, easiest days (assuming they want to get cut) for this precise reason!

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Supplementary cards are always assessed against the course SSS. If he played at a different time of day to the competition, course conditions might be different!

But he also might be in the middle of the comp tee times but instead of entering the comp he wishes to put a supplementary card in, but Louise had already answered thanks :thup:

 

[Imurg]

Supplementary cards are always assessed against the course SSS. If he played at a different time of day to the competition, course conditions might be different!!

Course conditions can be different starting at 8 and starting at 9 so that's not relevant.

 

[backwoodsman]

It's quite simple really. If more than 46% of players achieve buffer or better, then CSS is SSS -1. So, if around half or more of the field play well enough to buffer, the system reckons that it's much easier than normal to score well, whatever the reason for that - benign conditions, easy pin positions, receptive greens etc. etc..

Thanks. That's the one that explains it. It was either 13 or14 from the 23 that made buffer or better. Hadn't realised that the reason for a drop could be elucidated so easily.

And whilst I'm not a statistician, it seems to me that it might be more common for 46% of a smaller number to achieve buffer than from a big one. Seems so at our place anyway. CSS rarely goes down and fields are usually a lot bjgger than 23.

I'll just have to do better next time

 

[Val]

We all know people don't take CSS or SSS into consideration when they hear "40 points" or "nett 69". They just think "That guy needs a good cut!"

And your first post on this thread would suggest you are with this thought too.

 

[sawtooth]

I had 36 points the other week with no cut. CSS came down by 2 (38 points) but managed to make buffer. Thankful not to get .1

 

[backwoodsman]

I had 36 points the other week with no cut. CSS came down by 2 (38 points) but managed to make buffer. Thankful not to get .1

Given that CSS can only go down by 1, that's quite a feat of calculation by the club ??

 

[dufferman]

And your first post on this thread would suggest you are with this thought too.

It is true, I think most if not all golfers would think someone is not quite playing to a "true" handicap if they saw 2 under par scores with little or no cut. However, my first post was more about feeling you've played well against the course and perhaps not being rewarded with the handicap cut.

Not that it matters, but I wonder if the CSS = 70, where those 2 shots should be made up? It would be interesting to go into a comp with the mindset of "hole 9 is in fact a par 4 today not a par 5".

 

[duncan mackie]

CSS came down by 2

It can't - the end.

 

[duncan mackie]

It is true, I think most if not all golfers would think someone is not quite playing to a "true" handicap if they saw 2 under par scores with little or no cut. However, my first post was more about feeling you've played well against the course and perhaps not being rewarded with the handicap cut.

Not that it matters, but I wonder if the CSS = 70, where those 2 shots should be made up? It would be interesting to go into a comp with the mindset of "hole 9 is in fact a par 4 today not a par 5".

It's these feeling that seem to cause the gap between the various groups (for want of a better word). Some people automatically feel that a 69 or 40 points must mean that someone's done well against the (any) course and others will ask what the SSS (any d par in the case of 40pts) were. I know courses where I have gone up 0.1 with a 69!

Personally I think it would be disastrous to take such a mindset into a comp - in simple terms when you have 18 holes played 10 yards shorter it's not about picking one to target a shot less; it's about the overall probability of scoring 1 less across all of them!

 

[dufferman]

It's these feeling that seem to cause the gap between the various groups (for want of a better word). Some people automatically feel that a 69 or 40 points must mean that someone's done well against the (any) course and others will ask what the SSS (any d par in the case of 40pts) were. I know courses where I have gone up 0.1 with a 69!

Personally I think it would be disastrous to take such a mindset into a comp - in simple terms when you have 18 holes played 10 yards shorter it's not about picking one to target a shot less; it's about the overall probability of scoring 1 less across all of them!

Yeah I guess that isn't a great way to take on a Par 5 - "I MUST birdie this for the par"!