How do they calculate Stroke index?

[turkish]

So when I 1st started I was told SI 1... ah hardest hole on the course... from my own experience over the last couple of years it never felt like it was. How our club has just printed a report on 2000 medal rounds and the analysis is very confusing as the SI 1 played as the 8th hardest hole on the course for the year at an average of 1.07 over par.

It also didn't have the most bogeys, most doubles or worse, least pars, birdies- it was by average a pretty average hole. I have heard people say that a lot of the times they are there to balance out the course and you will often find for example odds on one 9 and evens on the other but not always the case.

But even that doesn't make sense to me as the hardest hole on the course statistically is our 3rd(SI 3) which is on the same front 9 as the the SI 1.

That stats are scrambling my head but just doesn't make sense to me. I really wouldn't care about course balance it would make so much more sense to make the hardest hole SI 1, 2nd hardest SI2 etc?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

http://www.englandgolf.org/page.aspx?sitesectionid=337

 

[Liverbirdie]

As well as Phil's attachment, we totally did ours about 3 years ago, and its no easy task.

Other things like a 10 handicapper shouldn't have 4 shots on the run, and he shouldn't go 4 holes without a shot are in the guidelines.

Holes 1,2,17 and 18 shouldn't be any of SI 1,2,17 or 18, ideally and a few others.

Get all the guidelines and do it with a few buddies in the bar one day- interesting, but hard to agree.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

It doesn't matter how many times I read or hear the guidelines it still feels wrong that stroke index 1 and 2 are not the hardest holes on the course. It still creates a discussion when we are playing if a 1 or 2 are easy (ish). It is one of those things that goes against what you think is right. A bit like a Heston dish.

 

[Hobbit]

A bag full of chicken bones with numbers 1 to 18.

 

[Dasit]

SI 1 and SI 18 are spot on at my course.

Almost every single round they play as the hardest and easiest holes.

The rest seem to be a big mismatch. I have often asked playing partners why this hole is SI 2 or 3 and people always have varying reasons, more myth than reality.

 

[rosecott]

We have just gone through this process due to impending major course changes. Five members of the Handicap Committee were asked to study the CONGU manual appendix concerned with Stroke Index allocation and produce their suggestions. One of the main difficulties was overcoming the entrenched attitude that SI 1 must be the most difficult to play to its par, SI 2 the second most difficult and so on. This "received wisdom" is very prevalent amongst players and it's unlikely to change much as most players are not really interested in the correct method. There is nothing wrong with trying to attach lower SIs to "difficult" holes and higher ones to "easy" holes, provided that you first of all make sure that all the other factors detailed in the appendix are addressed.

 

[AmandaJR]

Our has recently been amended - last year I think. All I know is it felt "wrong" today when I was giving 31 shots in a match. Of the 5 holes where I didn't have to give 2 shots, 2 of them were on 17 and 18 (SI 14 and 16) - sadly all a bit too late as birdies and pars weren't enough and had to eagle the 13th just to win it :-(

 

[Orikoru]

http://www.englandgolf.org/page.aspx?sitesectionid=337

Until I read this I never noticed before that every course I play has all the odd number SIs on the front nine and the even ones on the back nine. Haha, learn something new every day. I genuinely had no idea that this much thought went into those SI numbers.

 

[duncan mackie]

I believe that in Australia the same holes on every course are allocated specific stroke indices...based solely on the distribution factor.

The best system is to have a set for stroke play based fundamentally on difficulty, with the odd tweak for distribution over the 2 9's, and another set as above for matchplay.

If you only have one it should be matchplay (distribution) based because it doesn't matter in stroke play - it just seems to!

However, there's no doubt that it's more enjoyable to play stableford where the SIs fundamentally reflect the difficulty of making par.