Scorecards should be fluid

[Voyager EMH]

Only problem here is that your WHS score differential is based on your stableford points.

Same for my brother in Australia.
But what I said was based on GB&I system, sorry I forgot about the rest of the world for a moment.

 

[cliveb]

Same for my brother in Australia.
But what I said was based on GB&I system, sorry I forgot about the rest of the world for a moment.

Not sure I understand what you're getting at.
The WHS differential in GB&I is based on stableford points.
And the previous CONGU handicapping system in GB&I was based on stableford points.

I appreciate that golfers of your standard rarely have a blow up, so gross score does the job.
But for us mere mortals who sometimes have a triple or (god forbid) a quadruple, simple gross score isn't, and never has been, an accurate measure of your performance for handicapping purposes.

 

[Voyager EMH]

You score stableford points according to your "Playing Handicap for individual strokeplay".

Your differential is calculated according to your "Course Handicap" with regard to the net double bogey limit per hole. No stableford points involved in this process.

If you are calculating your stableford points according to your course handicap you are up a gumtree.

I agree that for low handicap players Course Handicap and Playing Handicap for individual strokeplay are the same.

In my recent 2.7 score I had a treble bogey and a complete blobbity-blob pick-up.

 

[Backsticks]

I am not sure that you can state that cards should be fluid, as that is probably too restrictive as well. I see it as more optional. There are those who see par in the traditional fixed way, and they are still entitled to that view too. But certainly it is only moving with the times to allow individual cards and players to identify as whatever par they see themselves. Their relatiionship, and how they view themselves, is really just a matter between them alone and not for others to judge. We must also recognise that that can change over time, and that what is par one day shouldnt mean it is forever fixed at that.

 

[cliveb]

Your differential is calculated according to your "Course Handicap" with regard to the net double bogey limit per hole. No stableford points involved in this process.

The highlighted bit is precisely why the differential is more closely related to your stableford score rather than your gross score.
Yes, playing handicap might knock a point off your stableford score, so I agree that adds an extra complication.

In my recent 2.7 score I had a treble bogey and a complete blobbity-blob pick-up.

If you picked up, how did you work out your differential unless you basically did it as a stableford score against course handicap?
You can't say "I use my gross score but count bad holes as net doubles" and pretend that isn't stableford.

 

[Voyager EMH]

The highlighted bit is precisely why the differential is more closely related to your stableford score rather than your gross score.
Yes, playing handicap might knock a point off your stableford score, so I agree that adds an extra complication.

Up a gumtree. You score stableford points according to your playing handicap for individual strokeplay. There is no "knocking a point off".

If you picked up, how did you work out your differential unless you basically did it as a stableford score against course handicap?
It was a par 4 and not a shot hole so my gross score for differential calculation was limited to a 6.
The treble bogey was on a par 4 that was a shot hole, so this remained a 7 for differential calculation.
No stableford points are involved in differential calculations.

You can't say "I use my gross score but count bad holes as net doubles" and pretend that isn't stableford.
Yes I can, because it is true. I am not pretending.
Time to lessen the talk about stableford.
Stableford point scoring is a form of strokeplay competition not handicap assessment and adjustment.
Because stableford point scoring became so much more popular in recent decades, many people are fixated on it. You are not alone. Many might even agree with everything you say here.
I hold a different view.
Stableford points are relevant to the stableford competition you are playing in, but not your differential calculation.
Stableford could be abolished or you might never play stableford again, but your differential calculations will remain the same with no mention ever of stableford.

 

[cliveb]

Ok, I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall here and at this point I'll quit. But I don't want to just disappear without saying that I think you're so determined to diss the concept of Stableford that you can't acknowledge that handicapping is effectively based on it. You don't like to use the term, but a rose by any other name and all that...

 

[Swango1980]

I've always wondered why some people get so touchy when Stableford is mentioned in relation to the calculation of gross differentials for handicap.

True, for handicaps there is no appearance of Stableford points. However, Stableford awards zero points for any score of nett double bogey or worse, in effect rounding all "bad" scores down to nett double bogey. When calculating gross diff for handicap, bad scores are rounded down to nett double.

So, both systems are doing the same thing effectively. Some people find it easier to thing of Stableford adjustments when thinking in terms of handicap. I do not see the problem or offence in that.

Obviously, it doesnt apply when submitting the initial 3 cards for handicap.

 

[Voyager EMH]

I like stableford competitions based on playing handicap.

I like the way differential calculations are based on adjusted gross score limited to nett double bogey limit per hole according to course handicap with no stableford points involved.

I am not forced to think that this is effectively the same thing nor am I forcing others to think the same way as me. I have expressed my view.

My view is that one's handicapping (differential calculations) is according to your course handicap, but you score stableford points according to your playing handicap only.

 

[Swango1980]

I like stableford competitions based on playing handicap.

I like the way differential calculations are based on adjusted gross score limited to nett double bogey limit per hole according to course handicap with no stableford points involved.

I am not forced to think that this is effectively the same thing nor am I forcing others to think the same way as me. I have expressed my view.

My view is that one's handicapping (differential calculations) is according to your course handicap, but you score stableford points according to your playing handicap only.

That's 100% fine.

But, others think of a Stableford score based on COURSE handicap, and equate that to gross differential. A different way of thinking, but gets you both to the same outcome in the end.

 

[Ndw7]

But that’s my point. That’s done afterward. Instead of going through the round with bogey, double bogey, par, triple bogey, etc, your card for a higher handicapper might say par, bogey, double bogey, etc. Before you tee off each hole you know what is needed for your level so your less likely to feel frustrated during the hole which then effects how you play the hole itself.

Visually seeing what you need for a hole before you tee off has a very different effect before it and during it than working out a net score at the end of it.

I don’t really understand where you’re coming from. Surely anyone with a card in their hand already knows what’s needed on each hole to get a net par depending into heir handicap?

I would be very surprised if any handicap golfer (say mid to high) was under the impression they had to par every hole ?

 

[Ndw7]

Perhaps yeah. But remember that most people quit the game within 3 years of starting because golf is hard. What would that figure be if their expectations were properly managed? A lot less I’m positive if they had realistic expectations.

The more I read this thread the more confused I get. Surely these people are quitting the game because golf is genuinely hard and they either don’t have the time to commit to practicing or just can’t get it. I would say the number of people quitting off a handicap of 28 because they didn’t know double bogeys are net par on SI 1-10 and were upset they weren’t parring these hole is zero?

 

[Ndw7]

Then you’re missing the main point of having a fluid scorecard which I’ve explained throughout the thread.

The point is people most often don’t think like that. What happens with most is they rock up to a par 3, say a 15 handicap, hit a bogey and get annoyed at themselves. They say well actually I get a shot on that hole so it was a par. Probably still feel bad about it because internally they still judging their gross score as their true score based on scratch par.

If you had your digital scorecard in front of you, now that’s your focus and you think internally “as a 15 handicapper to meet my handicap I have to get the ball in the hole in four shots”. Now the perception is different. My goal is to meet or beat MY OWN level of par. So when you hit 4, there is a different feeling. It no longer feels like a loss or not good enough. You’ve met your goal based on what was expected of you at that time.

because you can work out, roughly, what score might be expected of your handicap on a hole, it doesn’t mean that people (1) do it, (2) do it correctly, (3) do it before the round/hole, (4) or that it affects their approach of the hole, (5) or that it affects their perceived self-performance during/after the hole.

Knowing exactly what your true goal is before a round/hole would influence all of these things in my opinion.

Again my confusing has gone through the roof now. So you’re trying to say that a 15 handicapper standard in a par 3 tee box with absolutely no concept that his handicap will allow him to make a 4 on the hole and come away with a net par unless there was an explain to explain this?

Your score card literally tells you all you need to know. Your playing handicap and the strike index of each hole. If people can’t put 2 and 2 together there they probably need to take up knitting ?

The frustration you’re talking about when making net pars is because people want to BETTER their “required” score on each hole to win competitions and lower their handicap

 

[Banchory Buddha]

Mainly following the idea, an obvious flaw is few courses have indexes rated for difficulty, more for matchplay. The idea isn't far off stableford really.

For several years I didn't bother with a scorecard unless I had to, and would just play "fives". i.e. every hole is a par 5, and just keep a running round score, 2 over, 3 under or whatever. Easy to do and being 1 under (fives) felt better than 17 over par. ?

I read this earlier in the week, and thought to myself I used to do that, or rather measure my score in 'x under fives'.

I've been struggling with the new WHS and gone up to at one point 7.3 this year from a starting index of 5.3. So on Thursday I had a senior open, decided to forget par, and concentrate on "going low" ie, how far under fives I could get.

It was remarkably positive, even an early bogey on the shortest par 3 on the course meant "1 under", if my putter had been hotter (6 lip-outs ) I'd have had a great round, as it was it's one of my counting 8 even despite the flat stick.

Maybe one for those of us on mid handicaps, or struggling a bit to consider, psychologically positive frame of mind. Braemar Open today, see how it goes

 

[nickjdavis]

I've always wondered why some people get so touchy when Stableford is mentioned in relation to the calculation of gross differentials for handicap.

True, for handicaps there is no appearance of Stableford points. However, Stableford awards zero points for any score of nett double bogey or worse, in effect rounding all "bad" scores down to nett double bogey. When calculating gross diff for handicap, bad scores are rounded down to nett double.

p.

But this breaks down when a player fails to complete a round and leaves a number of holes unplayed in which case they are treated, for the most part, as Nett Par's....not nett doubles.....in the "old days" nett double would have been an appropriate score for unplayed holes because there was no differentiation between an unplayed hole and a hole that was started but not completed.

 

[Swango1980]

But this breaks down when a player fails to complete a round and leaves a number of holes unplayed in which case they are treated, for the most part, as Nett Par's....not nett doubles.....in the "old days" nett double would have been an appropriate score for unplayed holes because there was no differentiation between an unplayed hole and a hole that was started but not completed.

But, if they fail to complete a round (hopefully rare), and they are still aware they should score nett par on unplayed holes, they can simply give themselves 2 points per unplayed hole, in same way a player who likes to think gross differential would give themselves nett par instead of a no returned / disqualified round.

 

[Voyager EMH]

That's 100% fine.

But, others think of a Stableford score based on COURSE handicap, and equate that to gross differential. A different way of thinking, but gets you both to the same outcome in the end.

I do get the point you are making, but calculating your stableford score according to course handicap and relating that to differential achieved does not make sense.

In the following two examples I had a CH and PH of 3 both times,

Yesterday 31 points and a differential of 6.2.

Earlier this year on a different course I scored 29 points and a differential of 5.6.

You will note that the 29 points was a better score than the 31 points.

Stableford points are relevant to the stableford competition that is being played, but they do not relate to how you performed according to handicap.
Making a statement that handicapping is based on stableford is wrong, in my view. That is putting cart before the horse.
Stableford is a system of point scoring in strokeplay competition. It is not a system that handicapping is based on.
I see it as stableford mirrors the way, to a certain extent, the way in which the nett double bogey limit is applied to differential calculations.

The reason, I feel, that a majority do not see this the same way as me, is due to an excessive fixation on stableford.
I do not see stableford as King.
Your total score for 18-holes should be King. This is reduced to a nett double bogey limit per hole for handicapping purposes.

Another stableford comp for me on Wednesday. Looking forward to it. I like stableford competitions.

 

[AliMc]

I am going to digress.
From reading responses in this thread and others, it seems to me that many players are continuing to judge their score by stableford points scored.
As I said in my previous post on this thread, when I started playing, no one did this.
Even when it was a stableford competition players were more interested in how many over par they had shot.
With the new handicap system, quoting your stableford points to others is often meaningless.
Off our white tees, 35 points is playing to my handicap.
Off our yellows it is 37 points to do so.
A few months ago I would have thought this silly, but really it makes more sense to quote the differential you achieved for your round to let others know how you have done.
My last three scores have been 5.3, 2.7 and 6.2.
I think it is time to lessen the talk of stableford points.

Have to say i agree with this, in 45 + years of playing club competitions i have never heard anyone giving their score for a medal round as stableford points, unless it's a stableford comp obviously, it's either gross score or over/under par, genuine question (and not meant as inflammatory) is this more of a thing in England as I've never come across it here in Scotland ?

 

[Swango1980]

I do get the point you are making, but calculating your stableford score according to course handicap and relating that to differential achieved does not make sense.

In the following two examples I had a CH and PH of 3 both times,

Yesterday 31 points and a differential of 6.2.

Earlier this year on a different course I scored 29 points and a differential of 5.6.

You will note that the 29 points was a better score than the 31 points.

Stableford points are relevant to the stableford competition that is being played, but they do not relate to how you performed according to handicap.
Making a statement that handicapping is based on stableford is wrong, in my view. That is putting cart before the horse.
Stableford is a system of point scoring in strokeplay competition. It is not a system that handicapping is based on.
I see it as stableford mirrors the way, to a certain extent, the way in which the nett double bogey limit is applied to differential calculations.

The reason, I feel, that a majority to not see this the same way as me, is due to an excessive fixation on stableford.
I do not see stableford as King.
Your total score for 18-holes should be King. This is reduced to a nett double bogey limit per hole for handicapping purposes.

Another stableford comp for me on Wednesday. Looking forward to it. I like stableford competitions.

Yes, but the fact you had different score differentials based on those Stableford points would have been due to different course ratings and/or PCC. Clearly course rating needs to be known, regardless if you are comparing to your Stableford score or adjusted gross score, when comparing to handicap.

Personally, I always find it quicker looking at a Stableford score to know whether a player has played to handicap. I can tell from the score straight away (and the Course Rating). Whereas, if I only know their gross score, I cannot make any certain assessment. I'd need to look at all their individual hole scores first to see if any bad holes needed downward adjustment.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Yes, but the fact you had different score differentials based on those Stableford points would have been due to different course ratings and/or PCC. Clearly course rating needs to be known, regardless if you are comparing to your Stableford score or adjusted gross score, when comparing to handicap.

Personally, I always find it quicker looking at a Stableford score to know whether a player has played to handicap. I can tell from the score straight away (and the Course Rating). Whereas, if I only know their gross score, I cannot make any certain assessment. I'd need to look at all their individual hole scores first to see if any bad holes needed downward adjustment.

So which of these tells you more about whether a player has played to handicap?

A. HI of 8.2 and differential of 9.1 today.
B. HI of 8.2 and 35 points today.

It is "B" where you need more information, as you say, regarding CR and SR.
"A" gives you all you should need to know.

So if I know a player's handicap, them telling me their differential tells me a lot more than if they tell me their stableford points.
We could talk far less about our stableford points when telling others about our score. This I believe would be a good thing. It was what most people did up to about 25 to 30 years ago.