New course rating

[wjemather]

Clubs can request SI suggestions from EG using the form (CR005) available on the Change Request Resources page - they will use hole-by-hole rating data to produce a suggestion in accordance with WHS recommendations. A second form (CR004) is then needed to implement any changes on the WHS system.

As far as I know the only publicly available information is the "hole statistics" report on the WHS portal. This can be used for assigning SIs per real-world scoring patterns but it should be noted that these stats are inevitably skewed by higher handicappers (due to the average handicap index in England being around 17) - rather than being an average of scratch and bogey (per the WHS recommendation) so are not ideal - the result will likely be similar to using the hole bogey ratings alone.

 

[Backache]

75% of competitive rounds with us are stableford, 20% medalplay, and 5% matchplay. So best biased to stricter hole difficulty, matchplayers can lump it.

Medal play the SI is completely meaningless and Stableford the SI determines mainly which holes the points are scored on rather than the number of points.

 

[jim8flog]

But what format do members play day in day out in their social golf?

I know where I play the vast majority of social and member organised roll ups are stableford, we even play 4BBB as stableford in rather than match play.
In our club knockouts this year (match play) one comp only had 2 teams enter.

As I have said before I find it silly to have contrived SIs when we have so little match going on at our club.

I have tried to resurrect the idea of two sets of SIs but have garnered no support for such.

 

[Bdill93]

After a long time of moaning our course has also finally been re-rated by the county and slope has moved from 134 to 120 off whites and 117 off yellows.

Not sure on CR and Bogey ratings at present but im sure they will give a full update soon and I can view it all properly.

 

[wjemather]

After a long time of moaning our course has also finally been re-rated by the county and slope has moved from 134 to 120 off whites and 117 off yellows.

Not sure on CR and Bogey ratings at present but im sure they will give a full update soon and I can view it all properly.

The EG WHS Platform shows the old Slope Rating at R&PP as being 122, not 134?

White: 67.2/120 (was 67.1/122), BR 89.5
Yellow: 65.9/117 (was 65.8/119), BR 87.5

 

[Bdill93]

The EG WHS Platform shows the old Slope Rating at R&PP as being 122, not 134?

White: 67.2/120 (was 67.1/122), BR 89.5
Yellow: 65.9/117 (was 65.8/119), BR 87.5

I swear it was 134 could be wrong.

Even still - I don’t care about technicalities, I care that somethings been done about it! It’s a positive post

 

[bunkerblaster]

Recommended stroke index allocation methodology is at Appendix E R&A Rules. Triad method of stroke index allocation.

Question please: We are passing our winter course measurement certificate to County for them to Course, Bogey and Slope rate it separately for men and women. Should we as a handicap committee allocate the par and stroke indexes for the 18 holes now and pass them to County for guidance/confirmation before they C and SR it? For info we will be given a temporary rating pending the full Cycle 2 rating for all our courses in about 2027. County have already visited and consulted on our winter course and will use existing hole by hole data to rate it off the new yardages. Or do we wait for both Course ratings to come through and if its a CR of say 72 and 74 fit the pars to match the CRs? With CR-par in April best to have them the same if possible?

 

[rulefan]

Recommended stroke index allocation methodology is at Appendix E R&A Rules. Triad method of stroke index allocation.

Question please: We are passing our winter course measurement certificate to County for them to Course, Bogey and Slope rate it separately for men and women. Should we as a handicap committee allocate the par and stroke indexes for the 18 holes now and pass them to County for guidance/confirmation before they C and SR it? For info we will be given a temporary rating pending the full Cycle 2 rating for all our courses in about 2027. County have already visited and consulted on our winter course and will use existing hole by hole data to rate it off the new yardages. Or do we wait for both Course ratings to come through and if its a CR of say 72 and 74 fit the pars to match the CRs? With CR-par in April best to have them the same if possible?

It depends on whether your county is prepared to allocate the SIs for you. They won't always have the resources available.
I would suggest you make a preliminary Appendix E triad and adjust pars to conform with Appendix F if they don't already. Then ask the county to review it. If they can't you know at least you are on the right lines.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

In the overall scheme of things is par and SI that important for a winter course? Assuming you follow the general rules in Appendix F then surely you are good to go. The new rules about harmonising par come in in April next year so you have time this year to see how it goes.

 

[rulie]

Please explain the meaning/action of "harmonizing par". Isn't par for a hole set by the hole's length? Is it necessary to have the same par for each set of tees?

 

[Swango1980]

Please explain the meaning/action of "harmonizing par". Isn't par for a hole set by the hole's length? Is it necessary to have the same par for each set of tees?

I'm struggling to see the point myself. If they are different pars at the moment, they are so for a reason. Why would that reason change now? If a hole is a 430 yard par 4 off yellows and a 550 par 5 off whites, then you'd surely just stick with that?

 

[wjemather]

Please explain the meaning/action of "harmonizing par". Isn't par for a hole set by the hole's length? Is it necessary to have the same par for each set of tees?

"Standardizing par" simply allows clubs to set the same par for every set of tees, irrespective of whether one (or more) of those tees falls outside the standard yardage bracket for the par.

For example, the 2nd hole at Knowle in Bristol is a 473yd par 5 from the white tees and a 447yd par 4 from the yellow tees (for men). Standardizing will allow the club to set both tees as a par 5, despite the yellows being below 450yd.

It isn't necessary for to standardise par across all tees, but the option is now there. There will be cases where standardising makes little sense.

 

[rulefan]

In addition, as pars are actually ranges of distance and those range limits have changed over the years, it is an opportunity to 'correct' and/or standardize at the same time.

 

[D-S]

"Standardizing par" simply allows clubs to set the same par for every set of tees, irrespective of whether one (or more) of those tees falls outside the standard yardage bracket for the par.

For example, the 2nd hole at Knowle in Bristol is a 473yd par 5 from the white tees and a 447yd par 4 from the yellow tees (for men). Standardizing will allow the club to set both tees as a par 5, despite the yellows being below 450yd.

It isn't necessary for to standardise par across all tees, but the option is now there. There will be cases where standardising makes little sense.

Similarly the 14th at Chipping sodbury GC - 475 par 4 off the whites, 515 yard par 5 off the yellows. Course is par 72 off whites, 73 off the yellows. Makes for a confusing score card if nothing else. Always a bit strange in a scratch League match going forward, past the yellows, to play off the whites.

 

[Swango1980]

Similarly the 14th at Chipping sodbury GC - 475 par 4 off the whites, 515 yard par 5 off the yellows. Course is par 72 off whites, 73 off the yellows. Makes for a confusing score card if nothing else. Always a bit strange in a scratch League match going forward, past the yellows, to play off the whites.

That just seems plain weird to me, in all honesty.

I've been at courses where the yellows is a long par 4 and the whites is a short to medium length par 5. Never the opposite way round.

 

[D-S]

That just seems plain weird to me, in all honesty.

I've been at courses where the yellows is a long par 4 and the whites is a short to medium length par 5. Never the opposite way round.

To be fair it is a bit of an odd design - especially as it is a designed course on a single piece of land that hasn't been chopped around over the years; Par 73 with only 3 par 3s all of virtually the same length 158/153/153 - also they are all on the odds so in foursomes you have exactly the same shot for 3 of your 9 tee shots. Apart from that it is not a bad track although it does have upturned saucer greens.

 

[tobybarker]

After a long time of moaning our course has also finally been re-rated by the county and slope has moved from 134 to 120 off whites and 117 off yellows.

Not sure on CR and Bogey ratings at present but im sure they will give a full update soon and I can view it all properly.

They rerated our course easier too, much to some people's annoyance

 

[Old Skier]

They rerated our course easier too, much to some people's annoyance

We have gone easier as well. Rerating advice has changed for assessors apparently.

 

[Jason.H]

Main areas are cost. All of the course boards will have to be changed. There is also some major admin work to be completed on the ISV with the problem with me is, it was done a while ago now and I can’t remember how I did all the courses. It’s an age thing.

Ours is being recalculated on the 18th and I have threatened the assessment team with death by a thousand cuts if they changes either the CR or the slope.

I actually met one of the assessors from Derbyshire County golf who did our course and he said the course rating would change.

 

[tobybarker]

I actually met one of the assessors from Derbyshire County golf who did our course and he said the course rating would change.

It was interesting getting the detail of how they rate.... We were arguing that the course is harder than they said because of the usual weather, but they go 95 percent if not more on pure distances to landing zones and a few other bits. That's simplifying, of course, but that was the gist