Plus players’ handicaps?

[Swango1980]

Indeed - but only really useful as a playing measure/check on a hole-by-hole basis as overall assessment of your round is not based upon the aggregated par for the course.

Exactly, but this would not be the case if CR-Par was factored into Course Handicap. If it was, then comparing scores to Par would be much more meaningful and easy to comprehend to virtually all golfers

 

[sunshine]

Indeed - but only really useful as a playing measure/check on a hole-by-hole basis as overall assessment of your round is not based upon the aggregated par for the course.

But overall assessment is based on par. If you watch professional golf, the leaderboard is displayed as aggregate score v par. When my mates tell me what they scored at the weekend, it is how many over par they finished. But you know that already.

 

[wjemather]

Does (CR -Par) always mean that 36 points is 'played to handicap'?
I ask because I have always played against the SSS. I have always recorded my hole gross and never written points on a card. If marking a card I insist on the other player checking hole gross. Before I got a handicap I decided to read the rules and have tried to stick with them ever since.

I would say not exactly due to the rounding and potential PCC, but it is certainly regarded as such in CONGU's rules/guidance - 'Play to Handicap' = 36 –round(CR-Par).

 

[rulefan]

I don’t see how par is arbitrary.
It’s basically a case of how many shots you’d be expected to take to reach the green, plus 2 putts.

Not so. Why does a par 3 cover a length of up to 260 yards and a par 4 cover a length of 240 to 490 yards? How many amateur players do you know who can reach 490 yards in 2?

 

[Swango1980]

Not so. Why does a par 3 cover a length of up to 260 yards and a par 4 cover a length of 240 to 490 yards? How many amateur players do you know who can reach 490 yards in 2?

Most amateur players would get at least one shot from their handicap on a 490 yard par 4 though

 

[rulefan]

But overall assessment is based on par. If you watch professional golf, the leaderboard is displayed as aggregate score v par. When my mates tell me what they scored at the weekend, it is how many over par they finished. But you know that already.

Par in pro golf is just a convenient way of keeping track of all the players' relative progress, especially for spectators.

When your mates tell you their scores, you know the course (par & SSS) so you know their how good or bad their actual performance was.
But if they had all been on an away trip to a new course you wouldn't know how well they had actually performed: only their performance relative to each other.

 

[rulefan]

Most amateur players would get at least one shot from their handicap on a 490 yard par 4 though

But what about a 240 yard par 4?

Of course that is not a given using Appendix E

 

[wjemather]

Not so. Why does a par 3 cover a length of up to 260 yards and a par 4 cover a length of 240 to 490 yards? How many amateur players do you know who can reach 490 yards in 2?

But what about a 240 yard par 4?

Of course that is not a given using Appendix E

Par is determined by following Appendix F, and "reflects the score a scratch player is expected to score on a given hole".

 

[Swango1980]

But what about a 240 yard par 4?

Of course that is not a given using Appendix E

They probably won't get a shot on that, or one instead of 2. Whereas if it was a par 3, they probably would get a shot, or 2 instead of 1.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Not so. Why does a par 3 cover a length of up to 260 yards and a par 4 cover a length of 240 to 490 yards? How many amateur players do you know who can reach 490 yards in 2?

Plenty

 

[sunshine]

Not so. Why does a par 3 cover a length of up to 260 yards and a par 4 cover a length of 240 to 490 yards? How many amateur players do you know who can reach 490 yards in 2?

Par is supposed to reflect how many shots a scratch player would take. So I would expect virtually all amateur scratch players to be able to reach a 490 yard par 4 in 2. If they couldn't (e.g. the hole is uphill or typically into the wind) it would be a par 5. That's how golf works.

 

[sunshine]

Par in pro golf is just a convenient way of keeping track of all the players' relative progress, especially for spectators.

When your mates tell you their scores, you know the course (par & SSS) so you know their how good or bad their actual performance was.
But if they had all been on an away trip to a new course you wouldn't know how well they had actually performed: only their performance relative to each other.

If my mate off 5 tells me he played at X golf course today and finished 2 over par, I say well done. I don't ask him for the SSS or CR in order to assess his actual performance.

 

[rulefan]

If my mate off 5 tells me he played at X golf course today and finished 2 over par, I say well done. I don't ask him for the SSS or CR in order to assess his actual performance.

And if par was 3 greater than the CR it wasn't so well done.

 

[sunshine]

And if par was 3 greater than the CR it wasn't so well done.

Absolutely true. But nobody measures their score v CR or SSS. That's left to the handicapping system. It's a shame that the UK WHS has not incorporated the difference between CR and par, because if they did I think people would actually start thinking about it.

 

[rulefan]

Absolutely true. But nobody measures their score v CR or SSS. That's left to the handicapping system. It's a shame that the UK WHS has not incorporated the difference between CR and par, because if they did I think people would actually start thinking about it.

So when you finished a good round in a comp under CONGU how did you determine the effect on your handicap? Everyone I know checked against the SSS (or CSS if the weather was bad).

 

[Swango1980]

And if par was 3 greater than the CR it wasn't so well done.

This is EXACTLY why we are having the argument about including CR-Par within the Course Handicap. If we did, we wouldn't need to be having this debate.

Also, if including CR-Par was deemed to be fundamentally correct, why have the US and Australia included it? Did they miss that memo that stated it should not be done?

 

[sunshine]

So when you finished a good round in a comp under CONGU how did you determine the effect on your handicap? Everyone I know checked against the SSS (or CSS if the weather was bad).

I have never ever heard anyone tell me their score v CSS. Only score v par.

 

[rulefan]

I have never ever heard anyone tell me their score v CSS. Only score v par.

How did score v par tell you whether you are in your buffer zone or if you were due a 0.x reduction?

 

[Deleted member 3432]

This thread has well and truly gone off piste.

 

[rulefan]

This thread has well and truly gone off piste.

As the original culprit, my apologies to all.