Low h'caps can't win anything??

[Robobum]

Further to FreddieLong bleating on about how hard done by he is to be soooooo good but all the high handicaps win all the trophies. There is some interesting stuff on the CONGU site that dispels a lot of this. I was never bothered about the change but I was under the assumption that changing to full allowance in match play favoured the higher h'cap.....how wrong I was!!

Have a looky see below, the other "myths" are down the left hand side.

I'm so hard done by

 

[heronsghyll]

I posted this earlier.

This is an interesting debate - and I would like to add another angle.

At my club the better golfers (5 Handicap and under) tend NOT to play any of the Stableford competitions to protect their handicap.

The reasoning is that in Stableford competitions, higher hadicap players are able to post good scores (even with the odd blob) which in turn lowers the SS for the day. This means that the buffer zone moves and it is easy to lose 0.1 handicap for an OK round.

In medal play the statistics show the course plays harder and in fact in a lot of cases the SS rises. Therefore the medal round favours the lower handicap player. Don't get me wrong I am not suggesting they are protecting to win anything, just protecting in general.

In truth, I can understand them.

 

[Herbie]

What I see is a graph of cleverly manipulated figures, followed by a conclusion which actually backs some of the argument. These are random figures poorly dressed up to suggest high h/cplayers dont win the most.

Personally an 18 h/c player upwards is a high h/c player even though the catagories have placed them elsewhere.
Nowhere does it show exactly how many 20 h/c players were chosen from cat 3 for example, they may all have been so in this example, no one will know any different.

It all depends on the club scores these figures were obtained from. If you have a membership with a high number of low h/cappers then that club will likely show a favourable return of low h/c winners, likewise if the membership is predominantly 24+h/c players it will show the opposite purely by the law of probability.

To me its poorly constructed and a poor effort by those who commissioned it or produced it to dispel the belief by many that higher h/c players win more.

Now I dont know for sure if these stats are correct nor do I know for sure if they are crap, but what I do know is what I see and experience suggests wins in favour of h/c 18 upwards winning more than single figure players and this has been born out in this poor example too,surprisingly!

If these graphs are to be believed then we would all see h/c between 10 and 14 winning more than any, yet I cant remember when I last saw any significant number of winners from that range of play at the last 5 clubs Ive been a member, now I would have thought I would have, given the results of this offering?

Now unless I missed something reading through it all, i rest my case.

 

[Robobum]

Now unless I missed something reading through it all, i rest my case.

Try looking at the entry distribution??

 

[Herbie]

Now unless I missed something reading through it all, i rest my case.

Try looking at the entry distribution??

Yes I see your point but still dont find a huge light bulb switching on upstairs. As I said I am not sure either way statistically as I am not a huge fan of stats but based on what I have seen and experienced I believe that it is harder for lower h/c players to win as frequently as other h/c players and I dont see anything in these figures that drastically changes that view, also taking into account that to me high h/c is 18+ and low h/c is 6- (to me you understand?

 

[Robobum]

HNJ - I understand totally, I'd go further than you and (no offence to anyone) say that anything over 15 is high and under 5 is low.

Any stats for this sort of thing would weighted towards the largest group of golfers. H'cap average for Britain is what?? 15ish?? So it stands to reason that the majority of winners would come for this range due to a bigger percentage of entries.

As I said in a previous thread, as a Cat 1 player, I am only intersted in winning the Club Champs, a competition that I would hope a 15 h'capper has no chance of winning!! Any other trophy wins would be a bonus and testament to some exceptional golf on the day.

 

[heronsghyll]

As I said in a previous thread, as a Cat 1 player, I am only intersted in winning the Club Champs, a competition that I would hope a 15 h'capper has no chance of winning!! Any other trophy wins would be a bonus and testament to some exceptional golf on the day.

This proves my point - when you get to a good standard Stablefords mean nothing. Club Champs and important board competitions which are normally medal format, is all these guys are interested in.

So they do not play in normal, general comps - which I think - although understandable - is a shame.

 

[Robobum]

This proves my point - when you get to a good standard Stablefords mean nothing. Club Champs and important board competitions which are normally medal format, is all these guys are interested in.

So they do not play in normal, general comps - which I think - although understandable - is a shame.

I semi agree with your 1st point Heron, the "majors" (for want of a better description) are the ones that are more interesting.
But I have never ignored any comp stableford/ 1 division comps or any others. I know that my h'cap is as accurate as possible by playing in all these type of things as well as 36 hole county things at other clubs (Normally 0.2 back on the day!!! )
If I've got to shoot under par gross to contend in a "lesser" comp then great. It makes it all the more sweet.

 

[GB72]

If a club has a reasonable percentage of high handicappers then I would feel it almost inevitable that they would win a large chunk of the competitions. This theory is based on the fact that there is a reasonable chance that one of them will have an exceptional round that a low handicapper would have little or no chance of beating (take for example my net 63 in a medal off 27). To beat that it would need a low handicapper to go round in gross par or lower which I have not seen at my club (even the pro has a record round of one under gross). Add to that the fact that a large percentage of the high handicappers at my club are new to the game and are thus likely to improve and lower their handicap. To do this there will inevitably be stapleford rounds in the mid to high 40's and medal rounds that are substantially under par.

In short, I have to agree that playing off a full handicap in a comp means that the odds are strongly stacked in favour of a high handicapper winning.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Don't the clubs you guys play at have best gross prizes for the normal monthly medal/stablefords?
Mine does, as did my last club.
This means the low handicap players have two prizes to aim for at each, lesser, comp'!

 

[Dodger]

I play in everything possible be it scratch cups or cups/medals/stablefords that include 28 hcp players and any win is a bonus!
To be fair at my club I do not feel I have no chance in a comp that has high handicappers playing as usually the winning score isn't much lower than nett 68 so that is perfectly within my capabilities.Only last weekend nett 65 won and that was my mate who plays off 5,he won by 4 from the rest of the field.Maybe it shows you what a tough track it is when seldom a medal is won with lower than 67/68 nett.

 

[Robobum]

Don't the clubs you guys play at have best gross prizes for the normal monthly medal/stablefords?
Mine does, as did my last club.
This means the low handicap players have two prizes to aim for at each, lesser, comp'!

Sorry Gil, you're missing the point. These are from "all in comps" and are just for statistical purposes. Yep, we have divisons and a low gross prize for most comps.

 

[Twire]

At my place, most of the comps are divisional (monthly medal & stableford) so we all get a chance of winning, and seeing most of the entry money comes from h'cap 10 and upwards, I don't moan when a low capper gets the same 1/3 share of the pot as a high capper.

All the other comps (the majors) are won by the juniors anyway, so no one else has a chance of those.

 

[Robobum]

I play in everything possible be it scratch cups or cups/medals/stablefords that include 28 hcp players and any win is a bonus!
To be fair at my club I do not feel I have no chance in a comp that has high handicappers playing as usually the winning score isn't much lower than nett 68 so that is perfectly within my capabilities.Only last weekend nett 65 won and that was my mate who plays off 5,he won by 4 from the rest of the field.Maybe it shows you what a tough track it is when seldom a medal is won with lower than 67/68 nett.

I agree 100% Dodger, rarely is any comp "out of reach" for anyone at my club.

41 points won an "all in" stableford on Sunday, a 4 h'capper bagged 2nd with 40 points including a blob.

 

[freddielong]

Hey Robobum Im glad I inspired you to do some research

I think the point that I was trying to make was that the handicap system is flawed as it does not encourage consistancy for example if you shoot a around the same score all the time be that 68 or 78 you get to a point were your score is nulified by your handicap

 

[Herbie]

I play in all sorts of things when I can its just that my commitment level differs in comp format and overview of the field at the time, but I enjoy all my golf even when its crap, as there is always something great during a round!

 

[Canfordhacker]

Now I dont know for sure if these stats are correct nor do I know for sure if they are crap, but what I do know is what I see and experience suggests wins in favour of h/c 18 upwards winning more than single figure players and this has been born out in this poor example too,surprisingly!


Now unless I missed something reading through it all, i rest my case.

HNJ - didn't you make the same argument last time stats were posted - that you didn't believe somebody elses research but were perfectly happy to believe your own none empirical local research? Still not sure it stands as an objective rebuttal of the authorities on the topic, which is what CONGU are.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I think if you are entering competition and looking "at an overview of the field" you aren't in it for the right reasons. All of the clubs I've belonged too have divisions for medals and stablefords so the lower and higher ends are catered for in their own sections. I agree that a larger proportion of good scores from higher handicappers will have a bearing on CSS but that is a risk I guess that comes with low figures.

To be honest most of our individual gold letter/board events are won by players no higher than around 9. This is simply because most of these are stroke events and therefore suit a more consistant performer. We do have a few stableford events but these are normally two round affairs and so it relies on the higher handicapper being able to recreate their good form two days running which is unlikely or they wouldn't be high handicaps if they were consistant regularly. I've seen 44 points come in before from a 20+ handicapper and everyone moaned that it was out of reach to win and the guy went out and only got 27 the next day having been cut and didn't even get top 3.

 

[rgs]

Our comps are divided into appropriate divisions. Our medals are usually won between 68 and 72(3 under to 1 over) well within the capabilities of the low handicappers in the club.

Our lowest handicapper won our matchplay comp last year.

 

[Herbie]

Now I dont know for sure if these stats are correct nor do I know for sure if they are crap, but what I do know is what I see and experience suggests wins in favour of h/c 18 upwards winning more than single figure players and this has been born out in this poor example too,surprisingly!


Now unless I missed something reading through it all, i rest my case.

HNJ - didn't you make the same argument last time stats were posted - that you didn't believe somebody elses research but were perfectly happy to believe your own none empirical local research? Still not sure it stands as an objective rebuttal of the authorities on the topic, which is what CONGU are.

Yes and the question has been raised again so what is your point?

And No! its not based on local non imperical research and never was, its based on 30 yrs experience and membership at more than 8 clubs and probably STATISTICALLY accounts for a broader and more accurate QUESS which is exactly what a STATISTIC is, need I defend my opinion to the statistic religeon further, or will this also never satisfy you. amen!

I have the satisfaction of being right when statistics have been wrong on many occasions,I have been wrong also but never far out against the stats, do you have the same satisfaction with your favour of the statistic?

But all that aside, I have the right to an opinion, without thr repeticious critique I think?