Handicap of a "good" player

Twin Lakes said:
My view for what it's worth is a good handicap would be scratch.
It's interesting to read that one or two posters think 5 or below is great... Seve and Nicklaus were great!!
I'm off 10 and to be honest I'm not very good at all.
Click to expand...

I'm off 10 at the moment and consider myself a pretty good golfer - I can play some pretty darned good shots - and mean it, That's good enough for me to be pretty good. I can also play some total rubbish and that's why I'm off 10. Doesn't stop me being a pretty good golfer.
 
Twin Lakes said:
My view for what it's worth is a good handicap would be scratch.
It's interesting to read that one or two posters think 5 or below is great... Seve and Nicklaus were great!!
I'm off 10 and to be honest I'm not very good at all.
Click to expand...

So what you and the other guys who have said scratch is good are saying is that something like 99% of all golfers aren't good at golf. That in itself doesn't make any sense. I have no idea how to quantify good in this sense but surely the cutoff has to be higher than scratch? When you get to scratch you surely have to be very good or excellent whihc means good must come some way before that
 
But in the scheme of things, off mid handicaps (which I’m one) we really aren’t that good. What other sports could you consider yourself good with a head start?

Take Cricket for instance, I played to a pretty high standard and when I walked out to bat, the oppo didn’t give me a 50 run head start.

Your are right to the man in the street single figures sounds good, but its not really, scratch is good as it’s a level playing field
 
patricks148 said:
But in the scheme of things, off mid handicaps (which I’m one) we really aren’t that good. What other sports could you consider yourself good with a head start?

Take Cricket for instance, I played to a pretty high standard and when I walked out to bat, the oppo didn’t give me a 50 run head start.

Your are right to the man in the street single figures sounds good, but its not really, scratch is good as it’s a level playing field
Click to expand...

You can't compare team games with Individual games, a lot of individual games have handicaps, tennis for example at club level has handicaps.

The best player at our club currently holds a handicap of 1, he is an ex-touring professional who had to quit through injury. He doesn't play off of scratch so by your reckoning he isn't good at golf :confused:

Scratch is better than just "Good" it has to be otherwise you're saying anyone off of 1 isn't good when they clearly are. I just don't see the logic in that.
 
HawkeyeMS said:
You can't compare team games with Individual games, a lot of individual games have handicaps, tennis for example at club level has handicaps.

The best player at our club currently holds a handicap of 1, he is an ex-touring professional who had to quit through injury. He doesn't play off of scratch so by your reckoning he isn't good at golf :confused:

Scratch is better than just "Good" it has to be otherwise you're saying anyone off of 1 isn't good when they clearly are. I just don't see the logic in that.
Click to expand...

You'll run out of superlatives for the best players
 
HawkeyeMS said:
You can't compare team games with Individual games, a lot of individual games have handicaps, tennis for example at club level has handicaps.

The best player at our club currently holds a handicap of 1, he is an ex-touring professional who had to quit through injury. He doesn't play off of scratch so by your reckoning he isn't good at golf :confused:

Scratch is better than just "Good" it has to be otherwise you're saying anyone off of 1 isn't good when they clearly are. I just don't see the logic in that.
Click to expand...

Cricket is dom by ind scores so can be. If you went out and scored 100 but got a 50 run start would that make it a great score?
 
The real answer here is anyone on 3 or better has not done a proper day job and thus is a tax avoider ... they may be good golfers but they have neglected their social obligations!!
There is a load of tosh being written on this thread by people who are trying to hide behind modesty about their golfing ability and knocking those who supposedly don't. The truth of the matter is that some handicaps are higher than others because of the nature of the course that these handicaps are held at... So saying yeah I play off scratch or better is meaningless because someone who plays at a tougher course could easily shoot a sub par round there. So lets get over it and look at it properly a low handicap is a time investment by the nature of congu's rules ... you cant start at scratch and go up. You are stuffed in at 5 unless there is some other shannigans on the side but they rarely happen and thus the time required to knock it down to scratch is a huge 50 strokes under in general competition with a CSS that floats +/- 2 from the SSS and a load of cat 2 handicappers who are good because one or 2 of them will go round in a competition in single figures and will influence the CSS. :rant:

So guys if your handicap is better than the national average .. your good! if its average .. your average! if its higher ... you have a goal ! now go and enjoy and stop listening to these guys who play on easy courses with vanity handicaps ;)
 
If I am chatting to a customer and mention the fact that I play golf and that my handicap was once 10, they usually say "Oh you're a good player then".
So I guess it depends a lot on who you talk to.
 
It's all relative. I used to think anyone in single figures was a good golfer. I wouldn't argue much with anyone who thought that but my own view has changed as my handicap dropped. Currently I'm thinking cat 1 is good. If I ever get there I'm sure I'll still be finding fault in my game and considering "good" golfers to be lower than me!
 
patricks148 said:
But in the scheme of things, off mid handicaps (which I’m one) we really aren’t that good. What other sports could you consider yourself good with a head start?

Take Cricket for instance, I played to a pretty high standard and when I walked out to bat, the oppo didn’t give me a 50 run head start.

Your are right to the man in the street single figures sounds good, but its not really, scratch is good as it’s a level playing field
Click to expand...

Cricket is a very poor comparator – it bears no relation to golf whatsoever.

I play cricket to a decent club standard, and on that basis I’m good at cricket. However, runs scored as a metric of ability is meaningless unless considered in the context of your opposition. If I went out and played for a club several leagues below my club I’d score a lot of runs and take a lot of wickets because I would be better than my opponents relatively speaking. There’s no such distortion in golf – you are completely exposed as what happens is only ever a result of your ability. Take someone like Glen McGrath or Jimmy Anderson as examples, not good batsman by test match standards, but I have little doubt at all that they would look like pretty decent batsman at most club levels.

The scoring method for golf makes it incredibly transparent as to how everybody compares to the very best players in a way that just isn’t the case in almost every other sport I can think of. You do effectively have a handicap when you play cricket, and that handicap is that you don’t play against test match standard opposition.
 
Is it a bit like old age? - old is always 15 years older than your current age - so no matter how much better you get good is always just out of reach?

If someone says to me that I'm a good golfer (5 handicapper playing off 7 atm) I shy away from any commitment with "I have my moments!" or "some days it's better than others!" - basically I think somewhere between decent and good on a club level
 
Smiffy said:
If I am chatting to a customer and mention the fact that I play golf and that my handicap was once 10, they usually say "Oh you're a good player then".
So I guess it depends a lot on who you talk to.
Click to expand...

Of course it does. And the only sensible unbiased answer to the question comes from the man on the street who has played a round or two of golf and so knows what your handicap means - and he is your customer.

Or rephrase the question iin the OP

'We asked 100 golfers with a golf handicap what handicap they would consider to be that of a good golfer'
 
Last edited:
Snelly said:
A scratch or + handicap is exceptional.

1-3 is very good.

3-6 is good.

7-10 is reasonable.

10-13 is not bad.

13-18 is passable.

18+ - no comment.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine anyone responding to the question with these answers.

Person: So you play golf, are you any good?
Golfer: I'm no comment (can you not hit the ball?) ... I'm passable (what the hell does that mean) ... I'm very good (you c*ck!).

Depends who your audience is and depends what they play off.
Anyone who plays off single figures will be considered very good to a golfer that plays off 24.
Anyone that plays off scratch will be considered very good to a golfer off more than 7.
It's all relative.

I think the next level of analysis then comes down to how the golfer plays to their ability. Can 2 players of the same handicap be considered better of worse than the other. Personally, I think they can.
 
londonlewis said:
I can't imagine anyone responding to the question with these answers.

Person: So you play golf, are you any good?
Golfer: I'm no comment (can you not hit the ball?) ... I'm passable (what the hell does that mean) ... I'm very good (you c*ck!).

Depends who your audience is and depends what they play off.
Anyone who plays off single figures will be considered very good to a golfer that plays off 24.
Anyone that plays off scratch will be considered very good to a golfer off more than 7.
It's all relative.

I think the next level of analysis then comes down to how the golfer plays to their ability. Can 2 players of the same handicap be considered better of worse than the other. Personally, I think they can.
Click to expand...

...correct analysis IMO - and so why I say that the question can only apply asked to the man-in-the-street. Most questions are posed in an understood and defined context. So for instance - the question - Is the sun big? is a completely meaningless question until you give it a context.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
...correct analysis IMO - and so why I say that the question can only apply asked to the man-in-the-street. Most questions are posed in an understood and defined context. So for instance - the question - Is the sun big? is a completely meaningless question until you give it a context.
Click to expand...



But shirley... if you asked the "man in the street" he might think 26 is a good player, but what would and scratch player call a good golfer? ;)
 
patricks148 said:
But shirley... if you asked the "man in the street" he might think 26 is a good player, but what would and scratch player call a good golfer? ;)
Click to expand...

Egg-zactly. The man in the street might well. But only he (assuming he has at least tried to play the game) can take a neutral and unbiased view of golfing ability - and he would say that someone off 10 is a good player. Context is all. No point in asking regular golfers as you'll get a different answer - as we have found - according to ability and handicap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
Best player you’ve played with
3 4 5
Replies
80
Views
4K
Crazyface
Crazyface
M
Posting Only Good Scores
2 3
Replies
51
Views
4K
D-S
D
H
Competitive vs Recreational handicaps
2 3
Replies
56
Views
2K
Voyager EMH
Voyager EMH
H
GOAT 2012 v 2025
3 4 5
Replies
83
Views
2K
Orikoru
Orikoru
N
Golf Licence
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
4K
D-S
D
Top