Handicapping - Why not a rolling average?

[ianjpreston]

At the back end of 2009 I had a couple of good rounds close together and got cut to 12 (11.5 act). My average score for the year was 16.0 over par. In 2010 it was 14.6 and 2011 it was 16.62. Over this period my handicap has drifted out to a current 13.0. These stats are based on over 40 rounds per annum and I enter as many comps as I can.
Therefore every time I stand on the first tee I am giving the course 3+ shots and consequently come nowhere near to winning anything.
Is this really how the powers that be want handicapping to work?
Why not just have a rolling average which takes into account the way you are actually playing and not a couple of blinders from 2 years previously?

 

[Region3]

Welcome to the site Ian.

The powers that be will say that you've done it before and that your handicap should reflect a good day rather than an average one. After all, being cut a maximum of 0.4 for every shot below you will never get cut to a handicap you've never beaten before.

If there is a genuine reason such as illness or injury that directly affects your ability to play golf you can have it reassessed, and the annual handicap review each year at your club should also highlight players who should go up a bit as well as those that should come down.

Other countries have a different system that makes handicaps much more fluid. We have a guy at our club who played off +2 in America but admits he'd never get that low here.
They take your last 20 scores, then ignore the 10 worst, and average the rest.

 

[USER1999]

Your handicap is not meant to represent your average play.

I also assume that by average, you mean average comp score, not every round?

Also, since every ones handicap is calculated the same way, why do you feel you can't win?

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Your handicap, IHMO, should represent a target for you to aspire to play to. It should be difficult to play to but not impossible.
You must be capable of playing to your handicap as you managed to play below it to be cut to it, as you are only ever cut by 0.1 to 0.4 per shot under CSS.
You have certain things on your side if you don't manage to play to your handicap, based on your division you have a buffer zone of 2 shots. Also, if your course is difficult you may have a CSS over par?
Also, it's the same for everyone so just accept it and get on with enjoying your golf.

 

[ScienceBoy]

The current system is far from perfect but its probably as close as it could possibly be without enormous additional administration.

I personally am quite happy with the current system, it reflects my best golf but with some room for me to beat it.

The one thing it is not great at is dealing with fast improving high (cat 4) handicappers who submit few cards but play and practice a lot. This should be dealt with at a club level by offering more competitions and encouraging supplemental cards.

 

[papyt]

The current system is far from perfect but its probably as close as it could possibly be without enormous additional administration.

I personally am quite happy with the current system, it reflects my best golf but with some room for me to beat it.

The one thing it is not great at is dealing with fast improving high (cat 4) handicappers who submit few cards but play and practice a lot. This should be dealt with at a club level by offering more competitions and encouraging supplemental cards.

i think they are called cheats,we had one last year who won the club trophy, new member put 3 cards in got his h/c 17 then shot a 74 4 over par,transpired he had been playing golf for years at a muni in liverpool and was off 8,funny how no one will play with him and his name is mud.

 

[HawkeyeMS]

My average score this year is close to +13, my handicap at the start was 9.4 and is now 9.8. There are reasons for this, namely new clubs and a lesson and I'm at the point now where I feel a good round is very very close. Can you imagine the outrage if I turn up in next weeks medal and shoot 74 off of 13 for a nett 61 and probably don't win?

Your handicap is a measure of your potential and the 0.1 increases ensure that people's h'caps don't rise to artificially high levels in a short space of time.



The system has it's flaws but it works pretty well on the whole.

 

[HawkeyeMS]

i think they are called cheats,we had one last year who won the club trophy, new member put 3 cards in got his h/c 17 then shot a 74 4 over par,transpired he had been playing golf for years at a muni in liverpool and was off 8,funny how no one will play with him and his name is mud.

That's a bit harsh on genuine improvers. Fellow forummer Sundance went from 26 to 13 last year but he is certainly no cheat and can't be labdlled the same as the guy you mention.

The new Congu guidelines actually take into account rapidly improving players by building a flag into software such as HDID that flags players who score 4 or more below their h'cap inquick succession and recommends the comittee review that persons h'cap.

Again, not perfect but at least trying to sddress the issue

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

I thing the USGA system is based more on a rolling average, it even takes into account social golf and bounce games. However, I've played with some pretty dodgy handicappers when on holiday over there.

I agree, our system isn't great but once you find your level it's not too bad. If you are really struggling, you can ask your secretary to review your handicap. Many clubs have a handicap review at the end of the year to address exactly the problem you describe.

 

[MKDave]

I know a few people who have club handicaps and also put EVERY card into golf shake and obviously have a different handicap. I think the system is pretty fair but it does depend on people playing regularly in comps. As a previous memeber of a golf club who played in very few comps I wish I had and when I join another one then I will play as many comps as I can.

The comment earlier about the player who was playing off 8 and managed to get a handicap of 17 makes me wonder what the member who signed his card missed? I get told alot that I have the swing of a lower handicap golfer and to be fair I can play some real good golf. Surely it's fairly obvious if someones an 8 playing to 17 in 3 rounds? And to back that up I'd say that I don't know any 8 handicap golfers good enough to pretend to be bad.

Just my opinion.

 

[Val]

Average score is the american way, the best system is likely to be a hybrid of both Congu and USGA system.

And again Ive played with some mid single figure americans who made me look good.

 

[ArnoldArmChewer]

Welcome to the site Ian.

The powers that be will say that you've done it before and that your handicap should reflect a good day rather than an average one. After all, being cut a maximum of 0.4 for every shot below you will never get cut to a handicap you've never beaten before.

If there is a genuine reason such as illness or injury that directly affects your ability to play golf you can have it reassessed, and the annual handicap review each year at your club should also highlight players who should go up a bit as well as those that should come down.

Other countries have a different system that makes handicaps much more fluid. We have a guy at our club who played off +2 in America but admits he'd never get that low here.
They take your last 20 scores, then ignore the 10 worst, and average the rest.

When I was a club member in Florida my rolling handicap was generally 1-2 shots below my h/cap here, probably because I was there for a few days and therefore played every day.

 

[Region3]

I like the principle of a faster moving handicap based on your most recent rounds, but 2 things would put me off adopting their system.

1. It's more open to abuse from cheats wanting a higher handicap for a big competition.
2. I enjoy my social rounds where it doesn't count and I can try silly shots and have a laugh without worrying about going up.

 

[Ethan]

The handicap system is basically just a way of analysing statistical data. The US system uses a ruling average (or sorts) based on the best 10 of the last 20 scores, so it is still weighted towards better play. The UK system also give greater weight to better performances.

Each system has its pros and cons. In the US, a handicap can change quite a bit after a run of good or bad play, the UK system is slower to react but more stable over time. Either one can be unrepresentative of any player at a given point in time.

US handicaps tend to run a couple of shots lower than the equivalent UK one. In my opinion, that has more to do with course ratings and slope (like CSS) than the adjustment formula.

 

[Ethan]

The handicap system is basically just a way of analysing statistical data. The US system uses a ruling average (or sorts) based on the best 10 of the last 20 scores, so it is still weighted towards better play. The UK system also give greater weight to better performances.

Each system has its pros and cons. In the US, a handicap can change quite a bit after a run of good or bad play, the UK system is slower to react but more stable over time. Either one can be unrepresentative of any player at a given point in time.

US handicaps tend to run a couple of shots lower than the equivalent UK one. In my opinion, that has more to do with course ratings and slope (like CSS) than the adjustment formula.

rolling average, that is.

 

[Neddy]

Not a member anywhere so won't comment about comps etc, but I agree your handicap should represent your best golf and not just your recent "form"

My unofficial handicap is 24, based on the fact that last year i was regularly shooting in the 90's.

At the moment i am shooting way above that, but to me my "handicap" represents the fact I am capable of better and will work hard to try and get back there/go even lower.

I am playing like a 28+ handicapper, but I don't want to be one!!!

 

[Imurg]

If my handicap reflected my best golf I should be playing off +3.........

The way it works currently is probably as workable as it can be..

 

[SocketRocket]

I don't see why your handicap should reflect your best play, most people will only aspire to that maybe a few times a year. I think your average play is better, sometimes it will be up sometimes down which is fair enough.

The important factor is that people are honest and don't try to manufacture artificially high handicaps, that is pure cheating and benefits no one, not even the cheater who knows he is not worth the accolade he has stolen.

 

[Ethan]

I don't see why your handicap should reflect your best play, most people will only aspire to that maybe a few times a year. I think your average play is better, sometimes it will be up sometimes down which is fair enough.

The important factor is that people are honest and don't try to manufacture artificially high handicaps, that is pure cheating and benefits no one, not even the cheater who knows he is not worth the accolade he has stolen.

Because people don't win comps with their average play, and the difference between average and better play leads to too many extreme scores. A player who is a 10 handicap now might be a 15 based on average play, and a 20 handicap would be 28 or 30. On the one day that the 28 or 30 has a good round, he shoots 10 or 12 shots better than handicap and it makes a mockery of the competition.

Fixing handicaps at a level roughly equivalent to the 80th centime for scoring reduces (bit does not entirely abolish) the extremes.

 

[JustOne]

My average for the year is probably +10 to +12 so far, playing off 6. Every time I tee it up I expect to break par. Sometimes you have a swing and sometimes you leave it in the car.

I wouldn't mind seeing h/caps adjusted on non-comp rounds... as long as they only come down.