giving shots based on stroke index.

[louise_a]

I have just been thinking about this and it seems to me that its the wrong way round.

In stroke play unless you play off scratch you get get a shot on stroke index 1 and it is percieved to be the hardest hole and unless you are 18 or over you will not get one at SI18.

In matchplay if you play off someone with a lower handicap you will get a shot on SI1 and if you play a higher handicapper you give 1.
so in theory this means that if I play someone of 22 I get a shot but if I play someone off 24 they get one. This tends to indicate that the 24 handicapper will take 2 hots more than the 22 handicapper, which is clearly stupid.

Would it not be more sensible to give shots at SI18 and work downwards?

 

[louise_a]

Can you tell that I am bored, not teeing off until 3.15.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

I've always thought that the shots should be awarded on the holes between the 2 handicaps.

So, for example if I was playing a 10 handicapper:
Instead of me giving him shots on holes 1 to 5, holes I'm supposed to bogey anyway based on handicaps. I should give shots on holes 6 to 10, holes I'm supposed to par and him bogey.

I recently played a 13 handicapper and I was 5 up after 9 and won one up. After he proceeded to par 4 of the holes he had shots on on the back 9. I also parred them.

 

[HawkeyeMS]

This was bought up in the mag some months back by Jezz I think and I agree, it does seem daft. However, it is only daft because SI at most courses are allocated with difficulty as the primary factor when it shouldn't be. If SI were allocated more in line with the guidelins, it would be more random. There are a few courses which have separate SIs for strokeplay and matchplay but they are few and far between

 

[North Mimms]

I have just been thinking about this and it seems to me that its the wrong way round.

In stroke play unless you play off scratch you get get a shot on stroke index 1 and it is percieved to be the hardest hole and unless you are 18 or over you will not get one at SI18.

In matchplay if you play off someone with a lower handicap you will get a shot on SI1 and if you play a higher handicapper you give 1.
so in theory this means that if I play someone of 22 I get a shot but if I play someone off 24 they get one. This tends to indicate that the 24 handicapper will take 2 hots more than the 22 handicapper, which is clearly stupid.

Would it not be more sensible to give shots at SI18 and work downwards?

Louise, I think we were separated at birth!


If I were off 18 (I wish!) and playing a 17 hcp player, i would get one shot off her at SI 1.
However if we were both playing a Stableford comp, she would get one shot less than me, the difference being at SI 18.

Of course, SI does not really reflect difficulty, but most Clubs try to correlate the two, within the constraints of balancing SI throughout the card.

 

[rosecott]

There are a few courses which have separate SIs for strokeplay and matchplay but they are few and far between

I think that more clubs will be going down that route as suggested by CONGU. Our club intends introducing it when the current scorecards are due for re-print. It only needs an extra column as Ullesthorpe Court's card shows:

http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/bestwestern/83849/docs/1990fc1879/ULLESTHORPESCORECARD2009(2).pdf

 

[North Mimms]

I think that more clubs will be going down that route as suggested by CONGU. Our club intends introducing it when the current scorecards are due for re-print. It only needs an extra column as Ullesthorpe Court's card shows:

http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/bestwestern/83849/docs/1990fc1879/ULLESTHORPESCORECARD2009(2).pdf

good idea, but since i freequently get men and women's SI mixed up, that would be beyond me!

 

[duncan mackie]

I think that more clubs will be going down that route as suggested by CONGU. Our club intends introducing it when the current scorecards are due for re-print. It only needs an extra column as Ullesthorpe Court's card shows:

http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/bestwestern/83849/docs/1990fc1879/ULLESTHORPESCORECARD2009(2).pdf

sadly we went the other way last year because 'people found it confusing' and, based on pure difficulty, the back 9 had 7 of the 8 hardest holes so in stableford an 8 handicapper would get 7 shots on the back 9 (for a reason I say!).

so we now use the matchplay indices which are, as most, set out as a compromise between the recommended positioning of the various holes and their difficulty - weighted strongly to positioning. this works well for matchplay, but seems somewhat bizarre to many visiting golfers playing stableford who frequently end up with 20+ points on the front 9 and nearer 12 on the back!

 

[duncan mackie]

good idea, but since i freequently get men and women's SI mixed up, that would be beyond me!

there is of course absolutely no logic to having these different at all - and lots of reasons to have them the same!

but that's another matter....

 

[bladeplayer]

Not trying to get another row started on this , but i think most will agree , against guidelines or not , most clubs have their indexes set out against the precieved dificulty of the hole . ie index 1 being the hardest & so on..
say me off 8 was playing a guy off 18 .. i think i would have better chance of winning or halving the harder holes , even giving away a shot .. i surely wouldnt wana be giving him shots on the so called easier 10 holes ..

 

[Curls]

Have to agree with Bladeplayer here, if I get a par on the hardest hole (SI index 1) then Ive played well for my level to do so and possibly deserve a win over the low guy who just parred there also. I dont think this works the other way around. If I par SI18, not beyond many golfers abilities, then is the low guy presumed to birdie it for a half?! Its an easy hole granted but birdies dont come that easily even to low guys, it would be like handing higher h/cs holes instead of making them play well for them. We're lucky at our course, its well designed and while you might raise an eyebrow about the SI of 1 or 2 holes on the whole the course plays fairly and shot holes are well distributed. I guess it depends on how your course is laid out.

 

[HawkeyeMS]

sadly we went the other way last year because 'people found it confusing' and, based on pure difficulty, the back 9 had 7 of the 8 hardest holes so in stableford an 8 handicapper would get 7 shots on the back 9 (for a reason I say!).

so we now use the matchplay indices which are, as most, set out as a compromise between the recommended positioning of the various holes and their difficulty - weighted strongly to positioning. this works well for matchplay, but seems somewhat bizarre to many visiting golfers playing stableford who frequently end up with 20+ points on the front 9 and nearer 12 on the back!

If an 8 h'capper was getting 8 shots on one 9, you SI's were breaking just about every guideline there is

 

[Curls]

If an 8 h'capper was getting 8 shots on one 9, you SI's were breaking just about every guideline there is

Not to mind the number of dog licenses handed out on the basis that the higher guy never got a shot!

 

[Val]

Not trying to get another row started on this , but i think most will agree , against guidelines or not , most clubs have their indexes set out against the precieved dificulty of the hole . ie index 1 being the hardest & so on..
say me off 8 was playing a guy off 18 .. i think i would have better chance of winning or halving the harder holes , even giving away a shot .. i surely wouldnt wana be giving him shots on the so called easier 10 holes ..

Im with you here, If i was receiving 8 shots from you i'd like them on the 8 hardest not the 8 easiest.

 

[rosecott]

Im with you here, If i was receiving 8 shots from you i'd like them on the 8 hardest not the 8 easiest.

Yes, but would you be happy that 7 of your 8 shots were in the last 8 holes - your match could well be done and dusted before you got the second of your 8 shots - see Duncan's post #8.

 

[duncan mackie]

If an 8 h'capper was getting 8 shots on one 9, you SI's were breaking just about every guideline there is

no - none because these were SI for stableford play only; as referenced in the post I was replying to.

the matchplay ones are set out pretty much in line with the distribution guidelines with the odd tweak. For example 13 through 18 are SI 5,13,1,9,7,11 but in terms of difficulty they would be 2, 5, 1, 3, 6, 7 based on Captains Day stats this year which is a reasonable generalisation and not far from the SI's they used to have for stableford play.

 

[Hobbit]

I have just been thinking about this and it seems to me that its the wrong way round.

In stroke play unless you play off scratch you get get a shot on stroke index 1 and it is percieved to be the hardest hole and unless you are 18 or over you will not get one at SI18.

In matchplay if you play off someone with a lower handicap you will get a shot on SI1 and if you play a higher handicapper you give 1.
so in theory this means that if I play someone of 22 I get a shot but if I play someone off 24 they get one. This tends to indicate that the 24 handicapper will take 2 hots more than the 22 handicapper, which is clearly stupid.

Would it not be more sensible to give shots at SI18 and work downwards?

Once upon a time in a galaxy far, far away..... called Scotland, this is exactly how shots were given. Now remember, the Scots invented the game, and refined the game and as much as it hurts me to say, they're bl00dy good at knowing how it is best played.

Yep, totally agree. Unless you are good at the game you will drop a shot on stroke index 1, as will the higher handicapper you are playing and he is almost guaranteed a win because of the shot he receives. So if you are both very close in handicap surely its fairer to give the shot on the hole you are most likely to half??

 

[RGDave]

It's a wierd one.

One of my course doesn't do the whole "most difficult hole" style of SI. It works very well.

At my home course, the SI 1 is the hardest hole (statistically) due to the number of bad scores because of the OOB.

It's a stupid hole for folks off almost identical handicaps. Much too hard to par and far too easy to bogey.

 

[backwoodsman]

As others have said, there's really supposed to be separate SI ratings for strokeplay and matchplay. But then there's the real world...

But for matchplay think of it this way. The SI is supposed set things so that pairings with similar differences in handicap receive the given shots at the same point in their matches. Lets say SI 1 is hole 5 and SI2 is hole 12. The higher handicapper in a match between a 2h and a 4h player gets the shots at 5th & 12th. As does the higher between a 10h & 12h and a 20h & 22h - they all get the shots at the same point in their matches. Perhaps it doesn't stay quite as neat as the handicap difference starts getting quite big - but the point remains.

 

[Foxholer]

there is of course absolutely no logic to having these different at all - and lots of reasons to have them the same!

but that's another matter....

H'mm!

A previous club had a few distinctly peculiar issues with Men's and Ladies tee, Pars and Stroke Indexes. So much so that, in mixed matches where Men's SI and Par was used (with equity), one hole was an almost certain win for Ladies and another (the last, so a bit iffy about the positioning) an almost certain win for Men.