CSS is 69?

[dufferman]

How can CSS become 69? It's never been 69 before, it's a par 72 course with CSS usually 70 or 71. 1 nett 68, 1 nett 69 then 71's & up.

I'm not great with CSS, but I thought it was calculated on how the course plays. Clearly with only 2 nett 60's it shouldn't be so low?

 

[Imurg]

CSS is based on SSS which is not necessarily the same as par.
CSS can go down by 1 shot or up by 3 depending on scores.
What's your par and SSS..?

 

[dufferman]

CSS is based on SSS which is not necessarily the same as par.
CSS can go down by 1 shot or up by 3 depending on scores.
What's your par and SSS..?

Par 72 SSS 71

 

[fundy]

CSS is based on SSS which is not necessarily the same as par.
CSS can go down by 1 shot or up by 3 depending on scores.
What's your par and SSS..?

5 minutes to post on a CSS thread, slow for you

 

[rulefan]

How can CSS become 69? It's never been 69 before, it's a par 72 course with CSS usually 70 or 71. 1 nett 68, 1 nett 69 then 71's & up.

I'm not great with CSS, but I thought it was calculated on how the course plays. Clearly with only 2 nett 60's it shouldn't be so low?

.
What software do you use?

 

[duncan mackie]

How can CSS become 69? It's never been 69 before, it's a par 72 course with CSS usually 70 or 71. 1 nett 68, 1 nett 69 then 71's & up.

I'm not great with CSS, but I thought it was calculated on how the course plays. Clearly with only 2 nett 60's it shouldn't be so low?

As you say you're not great with CSS...doesn't really matter how many '60's' per se - what matters is the % of players who achieve buffer or better.

However, if SSS is 71 then CSS won't be 69.

 

[louise_a]

Has your course been shortened for winter golf?

 

[rosecott]

Par 72 SSS 71

Could yellow tees SSS be 70?

 

[dufferman]

Could yellow tees SSS be 70?

Played off white Tees but they were on yellow blocks, didn't think that could make the SSS 70 as it is from the yellows though?

 

[dufferman]

.
What software do you use?

How Did I Do

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Played off white Tees but they were on yellow blocks, didn't think that could make the SSS 70 as it is from the yellows though?

What course is it ?

The SSS for yellow tees is at times different than from the whites - that's set up in the system on Club Systems

For example our SSS on yellows is 69 and whites is 70

If there is a difference then it's more than likely the comp was set up on the yellows on Club Systems

 

[rulefan]

How Did I Do

.
That is simply a reporting system for people using Club2000 / ClubV1. They are the handicapping software systems used by most clubs. They simply send results to HDID.

But is unlikely to be a fault with that software.

Incidentally, HDID does not get information from any other handicapping software systems (eg Handicap Master).

 

[dufferman]

What course is it ?

The SSS for yellow tees is at times different than from the whites - that's set up in the system on Club Systems

For example our SSS on yellows is 69 and whites is 70

If there is a difference then it's more than likely the comp was set up on the yellows on Club Systems

Hoebridge GC in Woking.

On the card it says SSS for yellows is 70, SSS for whites is 71. What I don't get it, although the whites were placed on the yellow blocks, they are still white tees. We didn't play off yellow tees.

If we played off the actual yellow tees, then I'd understand the SSS of 70. But they were white tees, so I thought regardless of position, they were SSS of 71?

Also, worth noting in Div 1 (scratch to 16 h/c) had 1 "under par" 68, one "par" 69 (me), and everyone else 71 or worse (including four nett 80's scores). 24 players.

Div 2 (17 h/c +) were all 71 nett or more, inc 2 rounds in nett 80's. 10 players.

So the WHOLE COMP only had 2 nett 60's rounds. Yet CSS is 69??

Maybe I'm just stupid and don't understand CSS

 

[dufferman]

.
That is simply a reporting system for people using Club2000 / ClubV1. They are the handicapping software systems used by most clubs. They simply send results to HDID.

But is unlikely to be a fault with that software.

Incidentally, HDID does not get information from any other handicapping software systems (eg Handicap Master).

Agh, in that case I do not know!

 

[Deleted member 15344]

It looks like the comp on the system would have been put through as off the yellows so the CSS will be calculated from the SSS of 70

Would recommend asking if the comp was supppsed to be off whites or yellows

 

[NWJocko]

Hoebridge GC in Woking.

On the card it says SSS for yellows is 70, SSS for whites is 71. What I don't get it, although the whites were placed on the yellow blocks, they are still white tees. We didn't play off yellow tees.

If we played off the actual yellow tees, then I'd understand the SSS of 70. But they were white tees, so I thought regardless of position, they were SSS of 71?

Isn't SSS off the measured course, regardless of the colour of blocks actually placed there though? From what you've put above you were playing the "yellow tee" course just with white tee markers is that correct?

Re the scores and reduction in CSS I have absolutely no idea though!

 

[duncan mackie]

Hoebridge GC in Woking.

On the card it says SSS for yellows is 70, SSS for whites is 71. What I don't get it, although the whites were placed on the yellow blocks, they are still white tees. We didn't play off yellow tees.

If we played off the actual yellow tees, then I'd understand the SSS of 70. But they were white tees, so I thought regardless of position, they were SSS of 71?

Also, worth noting in Div 1 (scratch to 16 h/c) had 1 "under par" 68, one "par" 69 (me), and everyone else 71 or worse (including four nett 80's scores). 24 players.

Div 2 (17 h/c +) were all 71 nett or more, inc 2 rounds in nett 80's. 10 players.

So the WHOLE COMP only had 2 nett 60's rounds. Yet CSS is 69??

Maybe I'm just stupid and don't understand CSS

It doesn't matter what colour the tee markers are, only the measured course they were put out for. So from that side of things it appears that the wrong markers were placed on a course (yellow) with a SSS of 70, and the system entry reflected this. Your experience of the course you played seems to reflect this but obviously should be checked as mis-hits matches between what was and should have been can happen!

Re the calculations - we know the system was told that the base SSS was 70 and

On Sat 9 players out of the 26 entries played to buffer based on an SSS of 70 = 34% which is always going to give CSS = SSS, and did here.
On Sunday 6 out of the 11 players played to buffer = 54% which is to high for normal stats and would result in a reduced CSS of 69.

If the SSS should have been 71 then the CSS for Sat just might still have been 70 because the % would be up at 42 and detailed breakdowns etc may come into it, and the CSS for Sunday would have been calculated at 70.

 

[Foxholer]

Hoebridge GC in Woking.

On the card it says SSS for yellows is 70, SSS for whites is 71. What I don't get it, although the whites were placed on the yellow blocks, they are still white tees. We didn't play off yellow tees.

If we played off the actual yellow tees, then I'd understand the SSS of 70. But they were white tees, so I thought regardless of position, they were SSS of 71?

Also, worth noting in Div 1 (scratch to 16 h/c) had 1 "under par" 68, one "par" 69 (me), and everyone else 71 or worse (including four nett 80's scores). 24 players.

Div 2 (17 h/c +) were all 71 nett or more, inc 2 rounds in nett 80's. 10 players.

So the WHOLE COMP only had 2 nett 60's rounds. Yet CSS is 69??

Maybe I'm just stupid and don't understand CSS

It's the highlighted bit!

As the Yellow Tees make the course over 200 yards less than the Whites, the only way to make it a qualifying course is (it cannot be qualifying if >100 shorter than off 'blocks') to deem it a 'Yellow Tee comp' - so SSS=70.

CSS can go down be 1 or up by 3 (any more than 3 and it becomes 'Reduction Only'.

As previously posted, it doesn't matter about the actual scores, even if there's 1 or more remarkable scores, or even if there are no scores better than SSS (I have seen this a couple of times at 1 old club and the CSS was still SSS-1!)! It's about the percentages of those in Cat 1-4 who have scored Buffer or better - with Cat 1 scores have a greater weighting, as they are supposedly more consistent. therefore more indicative of the conditions.

 

[dufferman]

It doesn't matter what colour the tee markers are, only the measured course they were put out for. So from that side of things it appears that the wrong markers were placed on a course (yellow) with a SSS of 70, and the system entry reflected this. Your experience of the course you played seems to reflect this but obviously should be checked as mis-hits matches between what was and should have been can happen!

Re the calculations - we know the system was told that the base SSS was 70 and

On Sat 9 players out of the 26 entries played to buffer based on an SSS of 70 = 34% which is always going to give CSS = SSS, and did here.
On Sunday 6 out of the 11 players played to buffer = 54% which is to high for normal stats and would result in a reduced CSS of 69.

If the SSS should have been 71 then the CSS for Sat just might still have been 70 because the % would be up at 42 and detailed breakdowns etc may come into it, and the CSS for Sunday would have been calculated at 70.

It's the highlighted bit!

As the Yellow Tees make the course over 200 yards less than the Whites, the only way to make it a qualifying course is (it cannot be qualifying if >100 shorter than off 'blocks') to deem it a 'Yellow Tee comp' - so SSS=70.

CSS can go down be 1 or up by 3 (any more than 3 and it becomes 'Reduction Only'.

As previously posted, it doesn't matter about the actual scores, even if there's 1 or more remarkable scores, or even if there are no scores better than SSS (I have seen this a couple of times at 1 old club and the CSS was still SSS-1!)! It's about the percentages of those in Cat 1-4 who have scored Buffer or better - with Cat 1 scores have a greater weighting, as they are supposedly more consistent. therefore more indicative of the conditions.

I see! I hadn't really understood the buffer bit. Makes sense.

Thank you!

 

[rosecott]

I see! I hadn't really understood the buffer bit. Makes sense.

Thank you!

You can now consider changing your handle to Bufferman.