Scratch golf is course independent

[Deleted member 29109]

I can see both sides of this and fail to get bothered by either argument.

1) If folk are putting in scores properly, their handicap is what the app says it is.

2) Notwithstanding Slope, CR, PCC, BBC, ITV, RAC etc etc, golfers have been debating the relative difficulties of courses since Old Tom was a nipper.

Are we back to the debate about "is it CH or HI" that determines scratch?

CH

 

[Voyager EMH]

HI

 

[wjemather]

I know 2 guys that played off 1 and 2 who wanted to get down to scratch so they both moved to another 'easier' local course and both are now off +1.

Easier course for them, not easier for all - unless that club routinely sets up the course differently to how it was rated, in contravention of the Rules of Handicapping, e.g. by shortening the course by over 100 yards (by placing the tee markers ahead of the measured points), lowering the rough, slowing the greens, etc.

 

[wjemather]

I know a chap who plays off Scratch. Of his last 20 scores, 8 are General Play. These are his counting scores. If the best 8 competition scores counted, he'd have an index of 5.8.

This is obviously someone who needs further investigation by their handicap committee, and anyone aware of it should be reporting it to them.

 

[Crow]

Are we back to the debate about "is it CH or HI" that determines scratch?

Aren't they usually the same at around scratch handicap index?
At my course from all three tees, an index of -0.4 to +0.4 gives a CH of 0.

 

[IanM]

Aren't they usually the same at around scratch handicap index?
At my course from all three tees, an index of -0.4 to +0.4 gives a CH of 0.

I'm not good enough to have checked!

 

[wjemather]

Stagner did not identify what a harder course was, I would imagine it was the CR but this was not stated

It remains true that he claims to have identified it through the Arrcos database.

Either he is lying, the database data is not representative, his calculations are wrong or there are courses which it is easier to get a given handicap on than other courses

Which is a problem; undefined, easier/harder is a subjective opinion. We have people on here who think their course is harder than most, but the CRs (and CR-Par) say otherwise.

Having used Arccos for a while, I certainly wouldn't trust it's raw data. I would hope he is doing substantial sanitisation before using it for any worthwhile analysis.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Aren't they usually the same at around scratch handicap index?
At my course from all three tees, an index of -0.4 to +0.4 gives a CH of 0.

Is that with or without CR-Par?
Asking for some friends (maybe some enemies too)

 

[wjemather]

Are we back to the debate about "is it CH or HI" that determines scratch?

There is no debate. Under WHS, a scratch golfer is defined as a player with a Handicap Index of 0.0.

 

[Crow]

Is that with or without CR-Par?
Asking for some friends (maybe some enemies too)

 

[Backsticks]

There is no debate. Under WHS, a scratch golfer is defined as a player with a Handicap Index of 0.0.

Though colloquially, we would count a scratch player as someone +0.5<HI<-0.4.

 

[Backsticks]

You are the gift that keeps giving

Glad to have enlightened you from your misunderstanding of WHS !

 

[Deleted member 23270]

Glad to have enlightened you from your misunderstanding of WHS !

What was my misunderstanding?

 

[jim8flog]

The theory of CR and SR is a notionally normal scratch player and a notionally normal 20-handicapper.
And the acceptance of there not being any such thing as a difficult or easy course once the CRs and SRs are set.

Our own personal views of courses will remain based on our own perceptions that may vary from the set CR and SR.
I have to shoot 1.9 shots lower from my yellow tees to score the same SD as from the white tees. Both courses have par 70.
My perception is that, for me, yellow tees give me an advantage of something around 0.5 but nowhere near 1.9.
Thus the yellow tees are "harder" for me.
Other players might take the opposite view which will depend on their particular strengths and weaknesses.

Somewhat the other way round for me where I play

The par is the same
The whites have a CR of 70.8 and the Yellows 69.1
However for me there is a 3 shot difference between the 2 tees.

This is down to fact a that as an older golfer I no longer have the length to reach some of the fairways off the tees when playing off the whites and due to the length the greenkeepers keep the intervening rough I am often just left with a wedge shot to get it on to the fairway.

I play with a couple of players similar to myself (once mid single figure) who now have the same problem.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

What was my misunderstanding?

you disagreed with him. Which apparently automatically makes you wrong.

 

[Backache]

Which is a problem; undefined, easier/harder is a subjective opinion. We have people on here who think their course is harder than most, but the CRs (and CR-Par) say otherwise.

Having used Arccos for a while, I certainly wouldn't trust it's raw data. I would hope he is doing substantial sanitisation before using it for any worthwhile analysis.

I agree that his result is not certain but it is the only actually record that I have seen.

On subjectivity of course difficulty I agree that if it is subjective opinion it may change , however being a stats nerd I imagine that he uses the most objective measure across the thousands of courses that he looks at which is CR . It's hard to think what else he might use.

On data sanitisation again, we can't know, but in this instance the data that you need is handicap CR and individual hole scores which are I suspect less subject to the vagaries of collection than position of the ball.

 

[fenwayrich]

This is obviously someone who needs further investigation by their handicap committee, and anyone aware of it should be reporting it to them.

He's not a member of my club, or even my county. Am I under obligation to contact the handicap committee at his club to inform them? He might not be a member there now. A lot of people are still registered as members on WHS having long since left the club.

 

[Orikoru]

If WHS worked perfectly and all course ratings and slope ratings were accurate and correct, then you would be right. The debate however is that that isn't the case. If you played a course that was very easy for you, but had abnormally high ratings that felt wrong, you would get to scratch easier than if it was the other way around (tough course with strangely low ratings). That's obviously the crux of the issue. People feel that some courses are easier than others but the ratings aren't reflecting it. Hence easier to achieve a lower handicap (or in this case, scratch).

 

[Deleted member 23270]

This is obviously someone who needs further investigation by their handicap committee, and anyone aware of it should be reporting it to them.

Nobody wants to be known as the person that grassed someone up.

 

[wjemather]

He's not a member of my club, or even my county. Am I under obligation to contact the handicap committee at his club to inform them? He might not be a member there now. A lot of people are still registered as members on WHS having long since left the club.

Yes, you should report anything like this. The best way is through your own handicap committee, who will pass it on via the county advisor.

If he's not a member at any club, all previous clubs should have resigned him on the system and he should no longer have a handicap. If that club isn't doing this when members leave, they probably just need a reminder.