Matty2803
Head Pro
Ahh ok. I was only 11 (14 now) when I got my first handicap of 37, so it would be great to be able to do 3 cards again! haha!
Par 5s and 480, 490 and 542. Maybe two drivable 4s, but plenty trouble on them!
CSS Farce
- Thread starter FairwayDodger
- Start date
Ahh ok. I was only 11 (14 now) when I got my first handicap of 37, so it would be great to be able to do 3 cards again! haha!
Par 5s and 480, 490 and 542. Maybe two drivable 4s, but plenty trouble on them!
MashieNiblick
Tour Winner
I used to feel the same way.
But then I thought what is the point of a handicap? It isn't to give me an absolute stand alone definitive value to my golfing ability (or lack of) although sometimes we tend to treat it as such. It is not a merit award. It is an artificial mechanism to allow me to compete against other golfers. Therefore I think it is inherently a relative measure and as such there is an element that is determined to some extent by how I perform relative to those other golfers. Their performance impacts on my handicap because the true purpose of my handicap is toallow me to compete against them and therefore my performance must to some extent be assessed relative to theirs. I therefore accept that to some degree the difference between my handicap and theirs should change depending on how well I perform against SSS relative to them.
The best reason for CSS is that SSS is based on set attributes of the course in certain conditions. The difficulty of some courses is more subject to variations of weather, conditions etc than others, making SSS unrealistic as a true measure of difficulty on a given day. SSS is fixed but conditions are not. CSS changes with, and usually reflects, playing conditions on the day based on actual performance of players. No shoulds, coulds or oughts. It is not perfect but how else do you factor in conditions on the day when they may be a really significant element in the relative difficulty of the course?
Remember SSS is only what somebody thinks a notional scratch player should score in normal summer conditions. Why is that any better as a benchmark than how real people actually perform on the day?
pbrown7582
Money List Winner
@matty;
That sort of explains it a bit with 480/490 par 5 a scratch player would be expected get on the green in 2 hence possible the reason why SSS is below par. Doesn't help trying to get a cut though as you need 40 points! Nephew plays a course similar and it's hard going but once you start thinking in terms of SSS instead of par it helps. Good luck.
That sort of explains it a bit with 480/490 par 5 a scratch player would be expected get on the green in 2 hence possible the reason why SSS is below par. Doesn't help trying to get a cut though as you need 40 points! Nephew plays a course similar and it's hard going but once you start thinking in terms of SSS instead of par it helps. Good luck.
NWJocko
Tour Winner
But your handicap is never measured against par....
Therefore "4 under your handicap" would be net 63 against SSS.
Net 4 under par and net 4 under your handicap are different things.
rosecott
Money List Winner
Why would it be wrong? I know you play in Scotland but you must have played on a day when the weather was still and balmy and the greenkeepers had been extraordinarily kind with pin placements. In that event there will most likely be a significantly higher number achieving scores close to or better than SSS. That doesn't make the SSS wrong as it will be back to normal when the weather reverts to normal along with the pin positions.
cookelad
Tour Winner
Do you have many low-handicappers at that course?
Matty2803
Head Pro
Nope. Not too many!
chrisd
Major Champion
But the argument is that we can all play well on bad weather days and poorly on good ones and we don't care what others do on the day and how easy or difficult the course is for everyone else, we just want the full cut when we beat SSS and vice versa.
Goodness me Rose, I have precious few good days!
louise_a
Money List Winner
I find that I am generally affected by CSS going the other way, I can only recall our CSS going down once and that was last year but it often goes up. Twice this year I have bigger cuts than expected as CSS as gone up, in fact I did a thread about it last month.
cookelad
Tour Winner
Figures that they would find it difficult to get cut and/or buffer if they've constantly got to be par or better
louise_a
Money List Winner
Just had a look at all my scores this season, I started on 11.9 and based on CSS I am now off 10.1, had SSS been used instead, I would now be playing off 12.1
IanG
Tour Rookie
Css at our place rarely comes down for either men or women, but there is considerably more variation in the ladies CSS due to the (often) small numbers playing in the comp. On the gents side I'd say there is a reasonable correlation between the weather conditions and CSS.
Maybe the minimum number of competitors needed to trigger a CSS shift should be increased ??
Maybe the minimum number of competitors needed to trigger a CSS shift should be increased ??
azazel
Assistant Pro
No-one else has acknowledged this post but I think it's a great one and sums things up very well indeed :whoo:
HawkeyeMS
Ryder Cup Winner
Why does it matter if the course plays easier or more difficult on a given day? So a few more players go up 0.1 or get cut a little against SSS, big deal, as long as it's the same for everyone who cares?
There's a particular windy day that I feel does make life difficult for the lower handicappers. For example, someone on a mid handicap might get 14 shots. The wind is a good breeze, and the par 4's that were 3 shoter's into the green on a gentle breeze are still 3 shoter's into a strong breeze. But the lower guys maybe didn't get a shot on those holes, but because of the weather they can't reach in two.
For me, these are the days when CSS gets screwed. It isn't fair across the board, when Cat 2 and the lower end of Cat 3 are still playing their version of regulation golf, i.e. playing 3 net 2 into the green irrespective of the wind but Cat 1's can no longer play their version of regulation golf.
For me, these are the days when CSS gets screwed. It isn't fair across the board, when Cat 2 and the lower end of Cat 3 are still playing their version of regulation golf, i.e. playing 3 net 2 into the green irrespective of the wind but Cat 1's can no longer play their version of regulation golf.
Jacko_G
Blackballed
It's not the same for everyone though. Some get a buffer of 1, some get a buffer of 2 etc. Why should this be the case?
duncan mackie
Money List Winner
Just to put that in perspective (because I disagree!) - we have 2 courses and whilst for one is SSS = par -1, +1 or +2 depending on the tee used (Q comps off all) on the other SSS = par - 3.
The easiest way for most to get cut is off the forward tees on the long one (par -1) or even easier the shorter course at par -3.
Given the choice between 18 x 430 yd holes at 73 or 18 x 280 yard holes at 65 many will find the latter to represent a better option despite the 8 shot difference over the round.
This is also consistent with the many posts suggesting that playing Q comps of the yellow tees is too easy and results in low handicaps that aren't 'right'!
In the context if this thread most better golfers would wish to play the shorter course when the ground is nice and soft as well - whilst others might appreciate being able to 4 putt most of the par 4s (counting thinned shots as long putts!)
garyinderry
Ryder Cup Winner
Good point.
If everybody played 'rubbish', there must have been something difficult about the course that day, such as hard fast running greens or awkward pin positions, even if the weather was benign. We had one qualifier at our club that was like that earlier this summer. Provided you had a large enough field it is statistically unlikely that they all played badly in easy weather conditions, hence the CSS would be expected to go up.
HawkeyeMS
Ryder Cup Winner
We're not talking about buffer, we're talikng about SSS/CSS. When I said it's the same for everyone, I meant if you just used SSS then everyone knows what they have to shoot, on some days a dozen or so more people might get and extra cut vs using CSS and on other days they might get a 0.1 back, but why does it matter if a few more people get adjusted?
I can kind of see why you might need a +3 or +3(RO) CSS as that does usually mean conditions are bad but -1 or +1 aren't generally in my experience anything to do with conditions, they are just caused by how people play on the day.
Last edited:
