Review of SSS

[scubascuba3]

When its time to review the SSS of the course to see if its still accurate or work out a slope rating, how do they do it? I would have thought the best way to review would be to analyse the HDID results and course analysis. Surely thats a better way than physically turning up at the course and having a look.

 

[williamalex1]

When its time to review the SSS of the course to see if its still accurate or work out a slope rating, how do they do it? I would have thought the best way to review would be to analyse the HDID results and course analysis. Surely thats a better way than physically turning up at the course and having a look.

I think that SSS reassessments only happen if alterations have been made to the course .

 

[DCB]

Rating is reviewed on a regular basis, have a look here if you have trouble sleeping https://www.scottishgolf.org/club-services/handicapping/course-rating/ there's a lot more to it than just turning up and having a look 😉

 

[scubascuba3]

I think that SSS reassessments only happen if alterations have been made to the course .

I just checked the CONGU regs and it suggests "To take account of course changes and evolution, established courses are required to be re-rated at prescribed intervals or in accordance with license agreements, where appropriate"
I'm not sure what evolution means but maybe a re-rating is required at prescribed intervals. If so it would be interesting to find out how they re-rate if the course hasn't been lengthened.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I just checked the CONGU regs and it suggests "To take account of course changes and evolution, established courses are required to be re-rated at prescribed intervals or in accordance with license agreements, where appropriate"
I'm not sure what evolution means but maybe a re-rating is required at prescribed intervals. If so it would be interesting to find out how they re-rate if the course hasn't been lengthened.

A course can still change its SSS even it hasn't been extended - there is a lot more to rating a course than length. Every factor you can think of is included

 

[Old Skier]

When its time to review the SSS of the course to see if its still accurate or work out a slope rating, how do they do it? I would have thought the best way to review would be to analyse the HDID results and course analysis. Surely thats a better way than physically turning up at the course and having a look.

Reviews are taking place on all courses over the next 10 years, your county should be able to give you an idea of how things are progressing.

 

[scubascuba3]

Rating is reviewed on a regular basis, have a look here if you have trouble sleeping https://www.scottishgolf.org/club-services/handicapping/course-rating/ there's a lot more to it than just turning up and having a look 😉

This doesn't seem to tell you how they and when they re-rate a course. I would have thought the best way is to look at the stats on HDID and use that to work it out. That will show if the course is playing easy or not.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

This doesn't seem to tell you how they and when they re-rate a course. I would have thought the best way is to look at the stats on HDID and use that to work it out. That will show if the course is playing easy or not.

http://www.englandgolf.org/documents/guide_to_sss.pdf

That's how they rate SSS

 

[rulefan]

http://www.englandgolf.org/documents/guide_to_sss.pdf

That's how they rate SSS

No, I'm afraid that is out of date.

From Jan 2015 all courses (ie tees) in the CONGU area are now rated according to the USGA rating system.
Previously all men's national unions and ladies' associations except the English Golf Union (ie men) used that system but the EGU used its own system.

England Golf (or more accurately the County Unions and Associations) are taking on the task of rating all England courses using the USGA system. This will take some/many years. A typical rating process can take a team of 3 people between 4 and 6 hours depending on how many tees have to be rated and the complexity of the course. This does not include the resultant paperwork.
EG have indicated they will only make a contribution to expenses if the ladies' tees are rated in conjunction with the men's.
An added problem is that many clubs are asking for the red tees to be rated for the men also.

The principles of the USGA and the old EGU system are similar but vary in detail and complexity.

However the major difference is that under the USGA system courses are also rated for the 'bogey' player (20ish handicap).
This ultimately provides for the 'Slope' system, which gives a handicap adjustment to player's based on the relative difficulty of the course for all standards of players.

This gives you a taste.

http://www.usga.org/handicapping-articles/course-rating-primer-e5bf725f.html

Some counties with a few courses (10-20) are well on the way but the larger ones (with upto 200) are struggling.

 

[scubascuba3]

No, I'm afraid that is out of date.

From Jan 2015 all courses (ie tees) in the CONGU area are now rated according to the USGA rating system.
Previously all men's national unions and ladies' associations except the English Golf Union (ie men) used that system but the EGU used its own system.

England Golf (or more accurately the County Unions and Associations) are taking on the task of rating all England courses using the USGA system. This will take some/many years. A typical rating process can take a team of 3 people between 4 and 6 hours depending on how many tees have to be rated and the complexity of the course. This does not include the resultant paperwork.
EG have indicated they will only make a contribution to expenses if the ladies' tees are rated in conjunction with the men's.
An added problem is that many clubs are asking for the red tees to be rated for the men also.

The principles of the USGA and the old EGU system are similar but vary in detail and complexity.

However the major difference is that under the USGA system courses are also rated for the 'bogey' player (20ish handicap).
This ultimately provides for the 'Slope' system, which gives a handicap adjustment to player's based on the relative difficulty of the course for all standards of players.

This gives you a taste.

http://www.usga.org/handicapping-articles/course-rating-primer-e5bf725f.html

Some counties with a few courses (10-20) are well on the way but the larger ones (with upto 200) are struggling.

Very interesting, I've not seen that before. One thing appears missing though from the old and new method, and that is to take account of average weather conditions and the impact on Roll. For example my course in Scotland seems wet most of the year yet this doesn't seem to be a factor they take into account. Perhaps it assumes mid summer conditions, still often wet.

 

[rulefan]

Very interesting, I've not seen that before. One thing appears missing though from the old and new method, and that is to take account of average weather conditions and the impact on Roll. For example my course in Scotland seems wet most of the year yet this doesn't seem to be a factor they take into account. Perhaps it assumes mid summer conditions, still often wet.

It does.

"A USGA Course Rating is the evaluation of the playing difficulty of a course for scratch golfers under normal course and weather conditions".

'Normal' relates to the specific course.

 

[scubascuba3]

Good, I'm glad it takes weather into account, when i scanned the old criteria i didn't notice it mentioned.

 

[rulefan]

Good, I'm glad it takes weather into account, when i scanned the old criteria i didn't notice it mentioned.

The daily changes in weather manifest themselves in the CSS calculation of course.

 

[scubascuba3]

The daily changes in weather manifest themselves in the CSS calculation of course.

Yes, my course though with all the cat 2s 3s and 4s with large buffers the CSS will rarely go up 1 so most of the time in wet conditions CSS stays as SSS

 

[rulefan]

Yes, my course though with all the cat 2s 3s and 4s with large buffers the CSS will rarely go up 1 so most of the time in wet conditions CSS stays as SSS

Counting in all the players takes out the inherent variability of the single player.
C stands for Competition not P for player

 

[SammmeBee]

Yes, my course though with all the cat 2s 3s and 4s with large buffers the CSS will rarely go up 1 so most of the time in wet conditions CSS stays as SSS

So that would suggest handicaps are correct and the SSS is correct?! Have you considered trying to play better.....

 

[scubascuba3]

So that would suggest handicaps are correct and the SSS is correct?! Have you considered trying to play better.....

I don't think it proves SSS is correct, the cats only have to get in buffer which is mostly 2,3 or 4 at my course. I'm 5 not too bad, whats your HC?

 

[SammmeBee]

I don't think it proves SSS is correct, the cats only have to get in buffer which is mostly 2,3 or 4 at my course. I'm 5 not too bad, whats your HC?

So if they buffer generally then there handicap is about right? My handicap has nothing to do with it but I can get it round ok. Par is generally what good golfers look at anyway.....you'll be up to 6 or 7 soon and then you'll be able to get a cut. Sounds like you found your own level at 5....

 

[duncan mackie]

I don't think it proves SSS is correct, the cats only have to get in buffer which is mostly 2,3 or 4 at my course. I'm 5 not too bad, whats your HC?

By your starting argument they prove it's correct....but I suspect from subsequent inferences that what you really mean is that they should look at the stats of the cat 1 golfers in isolation, being the only relevant ones.

It doesn't really matter, the relative buffers simply tune the handicapping - I seem to remember that for the same rating cat 1 has also had a buffer of 2 in the recent past.

Anyway, it will all become irrelevant when your course is re-rated to a course and bogey index, and your handicap becomes a handicap index to be applied to each course you play (as and when the new system comes in)

 

[scubascuba3]

By your starting argument they prove it's correct....but I suspect from subsequent inferences that what you really mean is that they should look at the stats of the cat 1 golfers in isolation, being the only relevant ones.

It doesn't really matter, the relative buffers simply tune the handicapping - I seem to remember that for the same rating cat 1 has also had a buffer of 2 in the recent past.

Anyway, it will all become irrelevant when your course is re-rated to a course and bogey index, and your handicap becomes a handicap index to be applied to each course you play (as and when the new system comes in)

Yep, I'm looking forward to the new system, i now think its better