Playing Handicap Allowances

[rulefan]

Stating that I won’t know what will happen ones the WHS comes into play can work both ways as CONGU has no idea what will happen.

So you think that the increased effective playing handicaps for higher cappers will discourage them from staying in clubs?

 

[Old Skier]

So you think that the increased effective playing handicaps for higher cappers will discourage them from staying in clubs?

I didn’t post that, I posted that it has a detrimental effect on entering comps at our club. At our level golf is supposed to be about fun, giving someone a handicap index and then informing them that’s not what you can play off isn’t clever. Perhaps they should just reduce the handicap index by 5% then nobody would be the wiser.

 

[rulefan]

I didn’t post that, I posted that it has a detrimental effect on entering comps at our club. At our level golf is supposed to be about fun, giving someone a handicap index and then informing them that’s not what you can play off isn’t clever. Perhaps they should just reduce the handicap index by 5% then nobody would be the wiser.

Do none of these members play matchplay or fourball? Do they know that their effective handicap will almost certainly be higher than now. Do you really think they will be upset by the effect of slope?

 

[Old Skier]

Do none of these members play matchplay or fourball? Do they know that their effective handicap will almost certainly be higher than now. Do you really think they will be upset by the effect of slope?

I think your misrepresenting the argument know we we where discussing stroke play.

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[rulefan]

Specific to stroke play, I reckon that all >18 'cappers will be playing off a higher handicap than now on virtually all UK courses (ie > 120 slope)

 

[Old Skier]

Specific to stroke play, I reckon that all >18 'cappers will be playing off a higher handicap than now on virtually all UK courses (ie > 120 slope)

Sat down yesterday at Yelverton with a couple of club pros looking at the link you provided on clubs slopes and really can’t work out how those doing the courses came up with RND having a much higher slope than either our course and Saunton’s courses when we all felt that RND was a much easier course.

I presume after an initial bedding in there is the possibility of relooking at courses.

 

[Swango1980]

Sat down yesterday at Yelverton with a couple of club pros looking at the link you provided on clubs slopes and really can’t work out how those doing the courses came up with RND having a much higher slope than either our course and Saunton’s courses when we all felt that RND was a much easier course.

I presume after an initial bedding in there is the possibility of relooking at courses.

Slope does not represent difficulty of the course. It is the relative difficulty between low and high handicappers

 

[Swango1980]

Sat down yesterday at Yelverton with a couple of club pros looking at the link you provided on clubs slopes and really can’t work out how those doing the courses came up with RND having a much higher slope than either our course and Saunton’s courses when we all felt that RND was a much easier course.

I presume after an initial bedding in there is the possibility of relooking at courses.

How did the Course Ratings compare?

 

[Old Skier]

Slope does not represent difficulty of the course. It is the relative difficulty between low and high handicappers

But wouldn’t a more difficult course become relatively more difficult the higher the handicap?

 

[Old Skier]

How did the Course Ratings compare?

Going off the link provided


RND. 135. Back 134.White. 130 Yellow

Libb. 131. White 127 yellow

Saunton E 128.Back. 122. White 116 Yellow

 

[rulie]

Going off the link provided


RND. 135. Back 134.White. 130 Yellow

Libb. 131. White 127 yellow

Saunton E 128.Back. 122. White 116 Yellow

Those are the slope ratings, not the course ratings. Course rating numbers would more likely be in the range of 68-73.

 

[Old Skier]

Those are the slope ratings, not the course ratings. Course rating numbers would more likely be in the range of 68-73.

Yep my mistake but playing handicaps would be worked out against the course slope rating not a course rating as I understand it ot am I in the completely wrong ball park.

 

[Colin L]

Yep my mistake but playing handicaps would be worked out against the course slope rating not a course rating as I understand it ot am I in the completely wrong ball park.

By no means in the wrong ball park, but might it be unwise to make judgements about the ratings of particular courses before you have a more secure understanding of the system?

Reducing Handicap indexes by 5% would have a completely different outcome and would affect the entire handicapping calculation whereas the adjustment of the course handicap to the playing handicap affects only the single competition for which it is applied. It has no function whatsoever in the recalculation of your handicap index which is made on the basis of the course handicap.

Your playing handicap is a modification of your course handicap which is made for certain formats. You will already be familiar with it in four ball and probably in greensomes and scrambles. I don't know the statistical justification for modifying for stroke play one it but I know there is one.

 

[rulefan]

Yep my mistake but playing handicaps would be worked out against the course slope rating not a course rating as I understand it ot am I in the completely wrong ball park.

I think you are misunderstanding.
The Course Rating is the figure that gives the score that a scratch player would most likely get on that set of tees on that course. Equivalent (but not exactly the sames as) the old Standard Scratch Score (SSS)
The Bogey Rating is the figure that gives the score that a bogey (20ish handicap) player would most likely get on that set of tees on that course. There is no current equivalent..
The Slope Rating (or Slope) is a measure (using the difference between the CR & BR) of the relative difficulty for a Bogey player as opposed to a Scratch player from the same tees.

Edit:

The player's Course Handicap for the tees/course he is to play is his Handicap Index x (Slope / 113).

So a scratch player always plays off 0 but all others have a Course Handicap which varies depending on the slope.

 

[Ethan]

But wouldn’t a more difficult course become relatively more difficult the higher the handicap?

Not necessarily. If the course had a lot of hazards at 240/250 that low players could carry, it would be much more difficult for the higher handicapper, but of it had a lot of doglegs at 240/250 where the corners couldn't be carried, it might negate the advantage of the lower handicapper. Big flat greens all flatten the relative benefit for lower players compared to tricky greens needing careful placement of the ball.

 

[Old Skier]

I need to go and lie down

 

[rulie]

I think you are misunderstanding.
The Course Rating is the figure that gives the score that a scratch player would most likely get on that set of tees on that course. Equivalent (but not exactly the sames as) the old Standard Scratch Score (SSS)
The Bogey Rating is the figure that gives the score that a bogey (20ish handicap) player would most likely get on that set of tees on that course. There is no current equivalent..
The Slope Rating (or Slope) is a measure (using the difference between the CR & BR) of the relative difficulty for a Bogey player as opposed to a Scratch player from the same tees.

Edit:

The player's Course Handicap for the tees/course he is to play is his Handicap Index x (Slope / 113).

Question - what are the driving distances for a scratch player and a bogey player that are used in the current rating system?

 

[Old Skier]

Question - what are the driving distances for a scratch player and a bogey player that are used in the current rating system?

Not as far as claimed they did give them out at the seminars, will try and dig them out but I’m sure someone has them handy.

 

[rulefan]

Question - what are the driving distances for a scratch player and a bogey player that are used in the current rating system?

Note that these figures are nominal average figures which means there will be variances by many (but not most) players.
Men - Carry only
Scratch - 230
Bogey - 180
Including Roll - 250 & 200

PS. Pretty well the same as the old EGU.

The Scratch total was reevaluated a couple of years ago with thousands of recordings.

A 'scratch' player who claims to hit 299+ yards must have a *****y short game or can't hit straight (or both).

 

[rulie]

Note that these figures are nominal average figures which means there will be variances by many (but not most) players.
Men - Carry only
Scratch - 230
Bogey - 180
Including Roll - 250 & 200

PS. Pretty well the same as the old EGU.

The Scratch total was reevaluated a couple of years ago with thousand of recordings.

A 'scratch' player who claims to hit 299+ yards must have a *****y short game or can't hit straight (or both).

Thanks, was just wondering (they're the same as when I was doing ratings years ago, presumably second shot distances (200 and 170) are also the same)? So all ratings are done using those assigned distances?