Do 3/4 handicap comps favour good golfers too much?

[duncan mackie]

it's also important to consider the nature of the club when making some of the comparisions being added in here now - if it's a club based on a pay and play course then high handicappers will be totally dominant because you have a dynamic membership who are learning, improving and potentially leaving when they get 'good'.

this will be very different from a more static members club with a solid Cat 1 basis and, who don't permit juniors to play in all club competitions (as an extreme the other way).

the length and nature of the course's hazards and greens will also play a significant part in the equations with certain layouts can go through phases where they play easy, or hard, to certain types of player which can mirror certain handicap types too.

the biggest factor will be whether 'new golfers' are present, and in numbers!

 

[Kellfire]

Disagree Marc
Just been through results at my place last year, havent included monthly medals as they have 2 divisions to get 2 seperate winners

17 Strokeplay events, 3 single figure H/cap winners, (4,5,5 ) , 4 winners of 18, 20, 21, 22 H/caps, average H/cap winner 12.58

10 Stableford events, 4 single figure H/cap winners, (3, 7, 7, 8 ) , others are 11, 14, 15, 15, 16, 17, average H/cap winner 11.3

So, at my place, Low DOESNT BEAT High in Medal on average..............

11.3 and 12.58 are very low averages for winners!

Both are well below the average club handicap. If it favoured high handicappers, we'd expect those to be well up towards 20!

 

[Val]

Can I assume that you never had a handicap over 18 before you achieved your current handicap? I know some lower handicappers who say no-one should get a shot on a par 3 - in fact the Winter Alliance in our county is run on that basis.

I have been higher yes and the holes I had 2 shots on normally ended up in net birdies more often than not, that's not right IMO.

 

[Kellfire]

I have been higher yes and the holes I had 2 shots on normally ended up in net birdies more often than not, that's not right IMO.

Perhaps an issue with your club's SI ratings? Or perhaps you were a rare breed who randomly found himself scoring on those when the average "two shotter" didn't?

 

[moogie]

11.3 and 12.58 are very low averages for winners!

Both are well below the average club handicap. If it favoured high handicappers, we'd expect those to be well up towards 20!

My point being Low doesnt beat high always in medal strokeplay, more 18+ H/cap winners than single digit winners
Also u will probably never see an average winner at 'up towards 20' as it would only take a few single digit winners to pull averages down anywhere

So, ok, Ive just looked at my away club results

16 medal strokeplay events
16 stableford events

Medal, 4 single figure H/cap winners, (2, 5, 7, 8 ) , 4 highest winners, (17, 19, 19, 20 ) , average winning H/cap 12.06

Stableford, 8 single figure H/cap winners, ( 2, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9 ) , 4 highest winners ( 13, 15, 17, 21 ) , average winning H/cap 10.25

So, in conclusion, at both of MY clubs, stableford comps favour the lower players.............

 

[Kellfire]

My point being Low doesnt beat high always in medal strokeplay, more 18+ H/cap winners than single digit winners
Also u will probably never see an average winner at 'up towards 20' as it would only take a few single digit winners to pull averages down anywhere

So, ok, Ive just looked at my away club results

16 medal strokeplay events
16 stableford events

Medal, 4 single figure H/cap winners, (2, 5, 7, 8 ) , 4 highest winners, (17, 19, 19, 20 ) , average winning H/cap 12.06

Stableford, 8 single figure H/cap winners, ( 2, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 9 ) , 4 highest winners ( 13, 15, 17, 21 ) , average winning H/cap 10.25

So, in conclusion, at both of MY clubs, stableford comps favour the lower players.............

All comps favour lower players. Stableford does give high more of a chance.

 

[moogie]

All comps favour lower players. Stableford does give high more of a chance.

And yet at both MY clubs the average stableford winner is LOWER than the average medal / strokeplay winner........??

What a very sweeping statement
if it were true, and knowing that the average golfers handicap is more at the 18, or 18+ end of the scale, then why bother having comps....??.......why would higher cappers enter.......??...........a little bit defeatist surely...............

 

[Kellfire]

What a very sweeping statement
if it were true, and knowing that the average golfers handicap is more at the 18, or 18+ end of the scale, then why bother having comps....??.......why would higher cappers enter.......??...........a little bit defeatist surely...............

No one is saying high handicappers don't win, I had a successful season myself last year with a high handicap.

Handicaps are a measure of potential at any given time. A low handicapper has the consistency to play to their potential more often. That is why a low handicapper has the edge; consistency.

 

[rosecott]

I disagree golf is geared towards high handicappers and 3/4 in Stableford is not right but would say no one should get 2 shots on a hole.

Can I assume that you never had a handicap over 18 before you achieved your current handicap? I know some lower handicappers who say no-one should get a shot on a par 3 - in fact the Winter Alliance in our county is run on that basis.

I have been higher yes and the holes I had 2 shots on normally ended up in net birdies more often than not, that's not right IMO.

If you felt really strongly that you should not have had 2 shots on a hole, you could have entered 18 as your handicap on your card. Your handicap adjustments would have been made on your actual handicap but you would have been able to feel righteous at not winning by having 2 shots on a hole.

 

[Ethan]

So you're sticking by your notion that, in medal, high handicappers have the advantage?

It is not a notion. It is an observation made by experts in the stats of the game that the variability (from best to worst) of scores is greater for high handicappers.

By the way, what I said, is that if handicaps are accurate, higher handicappers should have the advantage. Note the words accurate and should.

For example, this data from the US (but applicable to the UK too) on exceptional scoring:

http://www.usga.org/bookrule.aspx?id=14410

It ain't rocket science.

 

[Kellfire]

It is not a notion. It is an observation made by experts in the stats of the game that the variability (from best to worst) of scores is greater for high handicappers.

By the way, what I said, is that if handicaps are accurate, higher handicappers should have the advantage. Note the words accurate and should.

For example, this data from the US (but applicable to the UK too) on exceptional scoring:

http://www.usga.org/bookrule.aspx?id=14410

It ain't rocket science.

You're making a completely different point to me.

Statistically, with accurate handicaps, low handicaps win more often than high handicaps.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

At the end of the day I'll get my ball round in as few shots as I can and deduct my handicap from the end result. If it beats everyone else happy days. I am solely interested in getting as low as I can and if I pick up a pot or two then thats fine. Similarly I'll get it round in matchplay as best I can giving or receiving shots as decreed and as long as I've played to my best and enjoyed the other guys company then you can't ask for more.

Golf is one of those games when you can give everything you have, play well and still not win. Accept it. To be honest as long as I've done myself justice when I play that'll do me. I can't be bothered worrying if 3/4 or full gives any particlar group an advantage. Until someone invents something superior to CONGU that is what we have to work with so why fight it?

 

[thecraw]

You're doing the low players a disservice here, like you're saying they too won't have players who shoot out of their skin.

Low beats high in medal on average.

Show me the last time a 3 handicap player came in with a net 60??? Happens fairly frequently with 18+ handicap golfers.

 

[ColchesterFC]

My biggest problem is that off my 18 handicap I'm fairly steady and will shoot 35-37 points 7 rounds out of 10, 38-40 points 1 out of 10 and 30-32 points 2 out of 10. I enter the competitions to play competitive golf but off the 3/4 handicap of 14 I am only able to compete 1 round out of 10 on average. I don't mind the fact I'm not winning every tournament but it gets disheartening to not even be able to put in a half reasonable score. My last round on Friday I came in with 27 points and it's putting me off playing in more comps.

 

[FairwayDodger]

Can I assume that you never had a handicap over 18 before you achieved your current handicap? I know some lower handicappers who say no-one should get a shot on a par 3 - in fact the Winter Alliance in our county is run on that basis.

There's a par 3 on my course where I frequently have to give 2 shots, completely ludicrous in my opinion.

 

[Kellfire]

There's a par 3 on my course where I frequently have to give 2 shots, completely ludicrous in my opinion.

Why does it being a par 3, in your mind, preclude it from being a two shot hole? There are many par 3s that play as the more difficult holes on the course and that's before we take into account that stroke indexing is about much more than just difficulty.

 

[Kellfire]

Show me the last time a 3 handicap player came in with a net 60??? Happens fairly frequently with 18+ handicap golfers.

Yes, sometimes a high handicapper will shoot well below handicap. But (and this is the most important part) ON AVERAGE a low handicapper will beat a high handicapper in both Stableford and medal.

Giving examples of comps you've played in doesn't change the average and CONGU will legislate based on averages, not individual rounds when low handicaps moan about being beaten by a high handicap.

I took bandit accusations a lot at the start of last year and was told during a match play round that it was a joke that he had to give me four shots (yea because three would've stopped me beating him 5&3) but it's water off a duck's back because I know that overall the better player to par will win out.

 

[FairwayDodger]

Why does it being a par 3, in your mind, preclude it from being a two shot hole? There are many par 3s that play as the more difficult holes on the course and that's before we take into account that stroke indexing is about much more than just difficulty.

It's not a difficult hole. It's downhill with only about a quarter of the front of the green protected by a bunker. People frequently duff their tee shots and they run onto the green anyway. And then I give them 2 shots; it's very annoying.

Yes, stroke indexing is about more than difficulty which is why this one has a low SI. Conversely at the hardest par three on the course you rarely (never off my handicap) give 2 strokes and don't even give one unless you're giving 15 or more in total. These would be reversed if it was in pure difficulty terms but then all the low SI holes would bunched together.

 

[Ethan]

Show me the last time a 3 handicap player came in with a net 60??? Happens fairly frequently with 18+ handicap golfers.

That is exactly my point too.

 

[Kellfire]

It's not a difficult hole. It's downhill with only about a quarter of the front of the green protected by a bunker. People frequently duff their tee shots and they run onto the green anyway. And then I give them 2 shots; it's very annoying.

Yes, stroke indexing is about more than difficulty which is why this one has a low SI. Conversely at the hardest par three on the course you rarely (never off my handicap) give 2 strokes and don't even give one unless you're giving 15 or more in total. These would be reversed if it was in pure difficulty terms but then all the low SI holes would bunched together.

So what's the problem then? Those two shots you're giving to a high handicap is made back on the hardest par 3 where they could probably use the shot but don't get it!