Practical differencies between EGA and CONGU HCP

[dejf]

In continuation to my first thread I would like to ask, what is the difference between CONGU and EGA systems from the practical point of view.

If I would about to describe EGA HCP in short, how a normal golfer use it when going to a tournament, it would go like this. You have a HCP, which is number between -9 to 54. You go to a course and look at their "HCP table". This table is one of the results of "course evaluation" process, which is done before the new course can be used for official tournaments. The table is different for each set of tees.

You find a column in this course HCP table that matches your HCP and your tees and it will give you your competition HCP, which is different number that considers the difficulty of the course from the selected tees. This number if always the whole number without decimals.

Then you play your round and you get your stableford points. If you get over 37 or more points on 18 holes course, your HCP will improve. How much it improves depends on your HCP category. The lower HCP, the less your HCP improves with every stableford point over 36. In the highest category, each stableford point over 36 means your HCP improves by 1 point. In the lowest category, each stableford point means 0.1 improvement of your HCP. Similarly, if you score below a certain limit, your HCP gets worse by certain amount.

There are many online applications that are simple to use, you put there your initial HCP before the game, then choose the course, the tees and fill in your scores on each hole and the result is your new EGA HCP.

How does CONGU work in short? Is it somehow similar to EGA? Are there any free online calculators for it?

 

[upsidedown]

Very simply you'll be 2-3 shots higher on a CONGU handicap in my experienced. Played under the USGA system in New Zealand and can see it's benefits :thup:

 

[Region3]

It's similar.

There is no table to look up before you play. Instead of having an adjusted handicap before play and 36pts is playing to handicap, each course will have a rating (Standard Scratch Score) so the 'par' score is adjusted.

For example, Par 72, SSS 71, 37pts is playing to handicap.

To complicate matters more, the scratch score for each competition is adjusted after play to (in theory) account for easy or hard playing conditions, and is loosely based on what percentage of certain handicaps scored inside their buffer.

Buffer is how many strokes over handicap you can be without your handicap going up, and is based on your handicap category.

Category 1	Golf Handicaps of 5 or less	Buffer Zone = 0 to 1 shot	Adjustment factor = 0.1
Category 2	Golf Handicaps of 6 to 12 inclusive	Buffer Zone = 0 to 2 shots	Adjustment factor = 0.2
Category 3	Golf Handicaps of 13 to 20 inclusive	Buffer Zone = 0 to 3 shots	Adjustment factor = 0.3
Category 4	Golf Handicaps of 21 to 28 inclusive	Buffer Zone = 0 to 4 shots	Adjustment factor = 0.4

The adjustment factor is how much your handicap is reduced for every stroke below the scratch score for the day.
If you are outside your buffer zone you go up 0.1 regardless of how many over you are.



I hope that makes some kind of sense, any more questions please fire away.

 

[Foxholer]

The 2 systems have significant differences and are recognised as being incompatible. Though, as UpsideDown pointed out, there is a 'finger in the air' correlation.

Does the EGA system only use competition/tournament scores? I know that the USGA one, on which it is based, uses ALL scores - even friendly ones, that might involve gimees, Mulligans and 'Breakfast Balls'! Congu only uses competition (or Supplementary) scores.

Congu doesn't use the Slope to increase Course handicap - simply the Course Rating (SSS in Congu terms). It does, however, make an attempt to allow for conditions on the day (something not in the USGA system) - adjusting that SSS according to what the actual scores on the day were. It also uses a completely different method to adjust handicaps. And it is is applied pretty much immediately - once scores have been posted. I'm not sure about EGA, but (I believe, but again not absolutely certain) the USGA system is refreshed fortnightly - from the best of last 20 scores.

Hope that helps.

 

[dejf]

Region3: Makes perfect sense, because this is very much the same. EGA also recognizes adjustments in hard conditions, but this is used so rarely that most players do not even know about this. And also "the buffer" concept is very similar to what EGA uses, except that there are more categories in EGA. So yes, it makes sense. It is actually very similar except for the part mentioned by Foxholer.

 

[dejf]

Foxholer: I see, thanks! In EGA, we've got Course Rating and Slope Rating. I can see that CONGU does not recognize Slope.

EGA accepts only "official" results. These are either from official competitions (that must be played on a course that complies with EGA conditions) OR certain HCP categories (I think it was HCP > 11.4) could submit result from a non-tournament round played under a supervision of another golfer holding EGA HCP. So, if you have a friend with HCP 36 or below, you can ask him to be your marker and sign up your score card that counts as any other score card from a tournament.

But once you have lower HCP than the limit, you can only play 18 holes tournaments, other rounds are not counted towards your EGA HCP.

 

[louise_a]

I do believe that all UK courses are in the process of being rated with a view to adopting the slope system in the future. It will take a few years before it comes in though.

 

[dejf]

OK, so now ... How do I get the SSS number for a specific course in UK? I have only played this course so far http://www.bluemountaingolf.co.uk/, but I do not see this number on their pages. How do I get this?

 

[Foxholer]

I had heard that EGA system was a combination of Congu and USGA systems, but didn't realise there was quite as much of Congu in it as there appears.

There is a move to unify the systems - using USGA as the base. That will require all UK courses to be rated and sloped, an exercise that, as louise_a posted, is underway. That's a huge exercise, for relatively marginal benefit imo. It won't, imo, help solve the problen that is that scourge of the golfing world - the sandbagger!

 

[Region3]

SSS is normally somewhere on the scorecard. You won't know in advance what the CSS will turn out to be in comps though, although it's limits are down 1 and up 3 (?).

On this one it's in the top right corner, and different tees have different SSS.

 

[rosecott]

OK, so now ... How do I get the SSS number for a specific course in UK? I have only played this course so far http://www.bluemountaingolf.co.uk/, but I do not see this number on their pages. How do I get this?

Follow this link and you can see SSS for clubs in England:

http://www.englandgolf.org/golfcentral/default.asp

 

[dejf]

Very nice, thanks guys!

 

[dejf]

OK, so Blue Mountains is 69 with par 70 from whites.

 

[upsidedown]

I do believe that all UK courses are in the process of being rated with a view to adopting the slope system in the future. It will take a few years before it comes in though.

One of our members is the lead administrator for the County and he hopes to have our County done within 5 years . It's a very detailed assessment they carry out apparently .

 

[duncan mackie]

One of our members is the lead administrator for the County and he hopes to have our County done within 5 years . It's a very detailed assessment they carry out apparently .

As is the standard SSS calculation!

What's different in terms of rating is the twofold
1. Greater recognition of the impact of hazard placement, green difficulty etc than length
2. Seperate evaluation of a bogey index ie the relationship between the hazards and the play of an 18 handicap golfer rather than just a scratch one.

How you mix them, whether you use a rolling average or the CONGU process approach, is a seperate matter, as is the slightly more principled issue of normalising around the player (congu) or the course index and therefore par (USGA & EGA).

Personally I think an 8 handicapper should be an 8 handicapper - and am not tied to the arbitrary delineation of par for any course - but it really doesn't matter in the bigger scheme of things.

All scores and rolling averages does concern me - the fight over true amateur ' ism is already being lost (prize table events are already out of control IMO) and we have a dual world of handicap golf between those who play Q events to win and those who would rather avoid them (phrase softened slightly)

The really incompatible part of the two approaches is the acceptance of the sensitivity of any course rating to the actual conditions in play - the differences far exceed any nominal changes that the underlying ratings bring into play!