New course rating

[tobybarker]

Its a very opinion based rating, and subject to opinion, debating skills, and strength of character of the individuals making the rating. Far from a solid objective evaluation.

This isn't how it was described to us by wales golf .. In fact they seemed at pains to point out the fact that there WASN'T wriggle room...bogey golfer can hit it 200 and scratch 250, is what they assume. That yields likely landing areas.

 

[rulie]

This isn't how it was described to us by wales golf .. In fact they seemed at pains to point out the fact that there WASN'T wriggle room...bogey golfer can hit it 200 and scratch 250, is what they assume. That yields likely landing areas.

Having rated courses in the past, I can confirm that it is a very fact based process, as it should be. Opinions are of little value in the process.

 

[wjemather]

Its a very opinion based rating, and subject to opinion, debating skills, and strength of character of the individuals making the rating. Far from a solid objective evaluation.

No, ratings are almost entirely based on measurements. The dozen or so factors that involve any judgement can only ever result in negligible variance to the ratings.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

No, ratings are almost entirely based on measurements. The dozen or so factors that involve any judgement can only ever result in negligible variance to the ratings.

A this is one of my gripes with the process. Little account is made for the environmental impact of the course such as whether it is an exposed clifftop course vs an inland course. If they were exactly the same measurements they would have the same rating when in reality one is much harder than the other for the majority of the year.

I know there are a couple of factors considered (such as protection by trees) but this appears to have minimal impact on the rating.

 

[NearHull]

A this is one of my gripes with the process. Little account is made for the environmental impact of the course such as whether it is an exposed clifftop course vs an inland course. If they were exactly the same measurements they would have the same rating when in reality one is much harder than the other for the majority of the year.

I know there are a couple of factors considered (such as protection by trees) but this appears to have minimal impact on the rating.

I believe average wind speeds and direction of each course is taken into account in the baseline calculation- but not during the actual measurement exercise.

 

[Jason.H]

We had a few stroke indexes changed when our course was assessed. The competition scores over the years show exactly which holes are the easiest or hardest. But then they need to balance the front 9 and the back 9 out so it becomes quite complicated.
Players will always disagree on indexes depending on how well they play holes.

 

[Jason.H]

The guy who was part of the assessment team said that out of all the courses they have done in most cases the course ratings would change to being lower than they were.

 

[rulefan]

Its a very opinion based rating, and subject to opinion, debating skills, and strength of character of the individuals making the rating. Far from a solid objective evaluation.

Have you ever rated a course?
I was the Rating Manager for my County until I retired a short while ago. That was not my experience of any of my teams and is still not.

How do you debate how far a bunker or the OB margin is from the target area?

 

[AussieKB]

Bottom line, how many courses have you played where you thought the course was rated to easy or the course was rated to hard, in my experience a lot.....and I play a lot of courses here in OZ and UK, (over 200 there)

 

[rulefan]

A this is one of my gripes with the process. Little account is made for the environmental impact of the course such as whether it is an exposed clifftop course vs an inland course. If they were exactly the same measurements they would have the same rating when in reality one is much harder than the other for the majority of the year.

I know there are a couple of factors considered (such as protection by trees) but this appears to have minimal impact on the rating.

As mentioned by NearHull, a number of environmental factors are taken into account. Obviously prevailing wind and weather but eg also the inherent nature of the ground (ie softer parkland or firmer links), topography and altitude.

 

[IanM]

I think if you haven't been out on a course rating, or as a minimum, attended a Rating Seminar, it's very difficult to give an informed opinion about the validity of the process.

I've done the latter, and was pleasantly reassured by what I saw. I'll be joining a Rating Team as an observer when they go out again near me.

 

[rulefan]

We had a few stroke indexes changed when our course was assessed. The competition scores over the years show exactly which holes are the easiest or hardest. But then they need to balance the front 9 and the back 9 out so it becomes quite complicated.
Players will always disagree on indexes depending on how well they play holes.

Stroke Indices are not part of the rating procedure. Your club may simply have used the opportunity to reconsider the allocation.

 

[Swango1980]

Bottom line, how many courses have you played where you thought the course was rated to easy or the course was rated to hard, in my experience a lot.....and I play a lot of courses here in OZ and UK, (over 200 there)

But what does it matter? Who cares what an individual thinks?

I'll find some courses hard that loads think are simple. I also love some courses and play well, where others think are really hard. We all have so many individual strengths, weaknesses, preferences and hates.

Furthermore, we all have great days and terrible days. Even on our home course that we play loads, if you score 40+ points you'll be thinking everything felt easy that day. Go out the next day and score 20 points, it will feel like the course contributed in battering you.

So, go to away courses, and how you play on the day will very much feed in to how easy or hard you felt the course was. And if you play badly there once or twice, you'll always feel that course is tough. Whereas if you go there and shoot a great score, you'll have lots of positive vibes about that course in future.

 

[rulefan]

The guy who was part of the assessment team said that out of all the courses they have done in most cases the course ratings would change to being lower than they were.

Nationwide, no significant variance was found. Generally it was less than 1 stroke either way. The exceptions were mainly as a result of the previous SSS (using a different method) not having been assessed for many years or a course change not having been registered.

 

[D-S]

Its a very opinion based rating, and subject to opinion, debating skills, and strength of character of the individuals making the rating. Far from a solid objective evaluation.

No you are wrong. Obviously you have not attended the rating of a course. It is predominantly a measurement, fact based, objective process.

 

[rulefan]

Bottom line, how many courses have you played where you thought the course was rated to easy or the course was rated to hard, in my experience a lot.....and I play a lot of courses here in OZ and UK, (over 200 there)

Remember, rating is not about you or any other specific player. It is about two model players. One a model scratch and the other a model bogey.
They hit the ball standard distances and have a standard ability (eg they are not especially good or poor at playing out of bunkers).

 

[wjemather]

A this is one of my gripes with the process. Little account is made for the environmental impact of the course such as whether it is an exposed clifftop course vs an inland course. If they were exactly the same measurements they would have the same rating when in reality one is much harder than the other for the majority of the year.

I know there are a couple of factors considered (such as protection by trees) but this appears to have minimal impact on the rating.

Type of course and exposure to the elements are recorded and accounted for, as is the average wind speed. An exposed course will have higher ratings than an identical but well-protected course.

Trees are obstacles, which add to the individual hole ratings, so do not simply reduce the overall rating by making the course less exposed.

 

[LincolnShep]

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.

You have. The 6th at Gainsborough (on the Thonock course) is like this. Yellow yardage is longer than white but white is par 4 and yellow is par 5.

It's very easy (unless you notice the scorecard) to see the white markers and the yellow markers and automatically line up pointing 180* in the wrong direction!

 

[jim8flog]

I would be very interested to see what would happen to our course rating if done (it was done a well before the WHS).

We had a new course manager shortly afterwards.

He has lengthened the carries to get to the fairways, narrowed the fairways down, narrowed holes down by moving OB , added OB where there was none previously, grown the primary rough on a lot of holes to ball losing height, narrowed the entrances to the greens so pitch and runs are out of the question on some holes, turned a lot of what once primary rough in to unkempt 'wastelands' where very often players no longer even start to look for a ball.

 

[Imurg]

I would be very interested to see what would happen to our course rating if done (it was done a well before the WHS).

We had a new course manager shortly afterwards.

He has lengthened the carries to get to the fairways, narrowed the fairways down, narrowed holes down by moving OB , added OB where there was none previously, grown the primary rough on a lot of holes to ball losing height, narrowed the entrances to the greens so pitch and runs are out of the question on some holes, turned a lot of what once primary rough in to unkempt 'wastelands' where very often players no longer even start to look for a ball.

Sounds like a dream place to play....