Official WHS Survey

[AussieKB]

Everyone has their own perception of what they find difficult on a golf course.
Rightly, the rating system is more objective that that, as it's based on model scratch and bogey players and standardised measurements.

It is Modeled on a USA golf course......does not work here in OZ.

 

[IanMac]

It is Modeled on a USA golf course......does not work here in OZ.

Nor does it work here in Ireland. Some days I'm hitting a wedge, the next day I'm hitting a 3 iron. PCC barely touches it.

And then there's the rough. I was talking to one of the course raters, or whatever they are called, last year. The rough was up and he said the course was unplayable. We laughed.

 

[Golfloveruk]

It is Modeled on a USA golf course......does not work here in OZ.

The US has 10 times more courses than OZ. Surely they have a greater variety than you do?

 

[Golfloveruk]

Nor does it work here in Ireland. Some days I'm hitting a wedge, the next day I'm hitting a 3 iron. PCC barely touches it.

And then there's the rough. I was talking to one of the course raters, or whatever they are called, last year. The rough was up and he said the course was unplayable. We laughed.

Again, nonsense. Which US courses are the models based on?

After the wet spring. One of my courses had chest deep rough in many places and knee deep thick rough everywhere else. It’s also open and exposed to the elements in a very very windy location. Our back tees are 6800 yards. It’s difficult, but not even close to unplayable!!

 

[wjemather]

Nor does it work here in Ireland. Some days I'm hitting a wedge, the next day I'm hitting a 3 iron. PCC barely touches it.

And then there's the rough. I was talking to one of the course raters, or whatever they are called, last year. The rough was up and he said the course was unplayable. We laughed.

And similarly, you'd be taking much less club on downwind holes. These things generally balance out. If scoring was significantly affected, PCC wouldn't be zero.

Extreme rough is accounted for (as an obstacle) in the ratings; it doesn't make the course unplayable (unless there are no fairways or shorter rough).

 

[IanMac]

Again, nonsense. Which US courses are the models based on?

After the wet spring. One of my courses had chest deep rough in many places and knee deep thick rough everywhere else. It’s also open and exposed to the elements in a very very windy location. Our back tees are 6800 yards. It’s difficult, but not even close to unplayable!!

I'm saying it was the rating chap who suggested it was unplayable. We were managing ok but not easy for the bogey golfer who's likely to ding a few more than normal. Handicaps go up rapidly for those chaps and then they win all the turkeys in the winter comps.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

Even with the errors you made (and the very small sample size), your data proved your outlandish claims to be false - scroll back about 15 pages for a recap.

I've simply chosen not to respond to you because you seem utterly incapable of being civil whenever anyone disagrees with you.

*error* ~ one digit as I recall.

You are perfectly happy to reply to people when you think you can browbeat an opinion, but my *actual stats* of a "very small sample size" of c.160 every week for the entire season were too much for you, even you can't argue black is white though you started to try

 

[Banchory Buddha]

Is that what he’s describing as statistics??

Yes, 160 players every week for a whole season. As opposed to yours....?

 

[Golfloveruk]

We are worried about not winning the turkey trot now

Got to be a parody account.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

We are worried about not winning the turkey trot now

Got to be a parody account.

what?

 

[IanMac]

And similarly, you'd be taking much less club on downwind holes. These things generally balance out. If scoring was significantly affected, PCC wouldn't be zero.

Extreme rough is accounted for (as an obstacle) in the ratings; it doesn't make the course unplayable (unless there are no fairways or shorter rough).

You state that so matter of fact-ly.

Really not like that. Play my course in the wind and you'll have been tested. Downwind shots are not easy and most shots get no help as the cross wind isn't good.

Some days even a scratch guy is struggling to break 80. I remember a day where the low gross amongst 3-5 handicappers was 85.

It can be brutal and is often very tough. It's Ireland and we get on with it.

 

[wjemather]

I'm saying it was the rating chap who suggested it was unplayable. We were managing ok but not easy for the bogey golfer who's likely to ding a few more than normal. Handicaps go up rapidly for those chaps and then they win all the turkeys in the winter comps.

So if the extreme rough is accounted for, your course is rated appropriately. Handicaps should not rise rapidly or indiscriminately for anyone.
What happens in the winter, when your course is not setup to be acceptable for handicapping, is a different issue.

 

[IanMac]

So if the extreme rough is accounted for, your course is rated appropriately. Handicaps should not rise rapidly or indiscriminately for anyone.
What happens in the winter, when your course is not setup to be acceptable for handicapping, is a different issue.

You'd really need the course to be rated weekly for it to be accurate. Maybe in Florida it works and maybe in the parts of America where they can't play for 5 months. Doesn't work here.

Yes, winter is a different issue but very hard to deal with the guys who have gone too high due to the summer winds and growth rain.

I come back to my views on nett double bogeys for failed to complete holes. They are a plague for us.

 

[wjemather]

*error* ~ one digit as I recall.

You are perfectly happy to reply to people when you think you can browbeat an opinion, but my *actual stats* of a "very small sample size" of c.160 every week for the entire season were too much for you, even you can't argue black is white though you started to try

You had one result completely wrong and a typo in another.

You proved your earlier claims were wrong; I don't need to re-confirm that. Anyway, I'm sure you believe someone might fall for your bluster.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

You had one result completely wrong and a typo in another.

You proved your earlier claims were wrong; I don't need to re-confirm that. Anyway, I'm sure you believe someone might fall for your bluster.

Here we go, even stats are wrong, nothing can compare to your opinion


There was no wrong result, you claimed that and then couldn't point it out

 

[IanMac]

We are worried about not winning the turkey trot now

Got to be a parody account.

Very odd response from someone who pertains to be a golfer and a club member.

 

[wjemather]

There was no wrong result, you claimed that and then couldn't point it out

Really? #525

 

[Banchory Buddha]

Very odd response from someone who pertains to be a golfer and a club member.

Seemed to be a quite random post as well, not sure what it meant? Wrong thread?

 

[upsidedown]

Yes, 160 players every week for a whole season. As opposed to yours....?

Are you at Banchory golf club ?

 

[Golfloveruk]

Very odd response from someone who pertains to be a golfer and a club member.

Why?

I have never played in a Turkey trott in my life. What has that got to do with being a member of a golf club?? At one club it’s a 9 hole pairs scramble on a Tuesday morning. I’m not taking a day off work for that.

We keep hearing about golf being taken seriously by serious golfers with low handicaps. But then you cry about not winning a Turkey voucher, or the Ozzy guy is talking about stablefords at his seemingly pretty easy courses.

I’ve asked questions on this and the other discussion that you have swerved.

It’s comical.