SSS and CSS

[Jacraido]

As a first time user of this forum I'll apologise in advance if this subject has been beaten to death already BUT can anyone explain logically why there is any need for the SSS and CSS? At the age of 60, having started playing at about 5 years old, lowest handicap 3 at 19, my sole aim, apart from enjoying the company of my fellow members, is to keep my handicap as low as possible and this year return to single figures from 12.2 . After any sub-par round, because of the CSS system I cannot calculate my new handicap until the dreaded computer spits out the results. In the good old, bad old days the 3 under par 66 nett I carded on Saturday would have earned me a 0.6 reduction. Instead I have to wait until the handicapping software decides that the CSS is 66 for the day, I receive no reduction for my efforts and my fellow member with the same score(but better inward half - grrrr!) and off the same starting handicap earns a 0.2 reduction from a -1 Stableford Adjustment!
I have carded 39 points in Stableford competitions before and achieved no reduction because the SSS/CSS principle assumes the course was easy if there were a lot of low scores. This is like double taxation - if I play well I contribute to a reduction in CSS! Take my word for it whilst my course, Habberley near Kidderminster is a nine hole course no one ever makes a fool of it - when I joined there 20 years ago the course record for a par of 69 was 71!
I suppose I could look for a course where the SSS exceeds the par, like Royal Troon where I used to be a member, but it's a bit far to travel and besides I like the friendly atmosphere at Habberley.
Any thoughts on the particular and in general? The cynic in me says SSS/CSS is computer software annual update-driven.

 

[Macster]

I guess i'm fortunate that our CSS is always higher then the SSS of 68, - mostly 69 or even 70 on some days.

One of our 1st Medals of the year last weekend, and I think in all 3 Divisions, there were perhaps only 10/12 who shot under Nett, and lowest was 67 iirc.

Perhaps someone will explain the CSS computations for us .

 

[Wildrover]

The purpose of the CSS is to take into account the course and weather conditions for that particular day. Eg if it was blowing a gale then possibly nobody would break SS meaning that not even the winner would get cut and could even get .1 back.

 

[RGDave]

Welcome.

I've only ever known golf with a CSS. To me it makes perfect sense, computer or not.

I from your area b.t.w.!

 

[Jacraido]

The purpose of the CSS is to take into account the course and weather conditions for that particular day. Eg if it was blowing a gale then possibly nobody would break SS meaning that not even the winner would get cut and could even get .1 back.

If it blows a gale you then have to adjust your technique to compensate - punch shots, stance,closed face etc - or don't play if you don't want to risk getting 0.1 back. My objection to SSS is that it is based on the mythical performance of a scratch player over my course.
1.Scratch players are a very small proportion of the golfing population - probably well under 0.5%
2.Par, if properly measured and allowing for topography(my course is hilly and tight - on many fairways only 50% of the width is playable,rolling off otherwise into rough)is just as capable of being used as it was when I started.
3.Par is fixed and, along with simple rules such as 0.2 reduction for each shot under par nett, +0.1 for any score over par nett at my level, allows me to keep control of my handicap. For example a few years ago in a Saturday comp. I had a score which was significantly below par nett. The next day I was playing away from home with our Handicap Secretary in an Am/Am event - 3 out 4 nett scores to count. The Secretary hadn't had time to put all the previous days scores through the computer but used his experience to suggest how much I should cut myself and adjusted and signed my Handicap Certificate. We came second by one point using my score as one of the three required but as you will probably have guessed when the Saturday cards were processed,the CSS etc calculated, my new playing handicap was one shot more than I had used in the Am/Am and we would have equalled the winning score and won on countback.
4.Using par as the benchmark, standing on the first tee I know exactly what I have to do and sitting in the 19th I know exactly whether I have taken another step towards this year's goal of single figures again, without recourse to the computer; using SSS/CSS I don't whether off 12.2 I have to play to 6 to get 0.2,0.4,0.6,0.8 or 1.0 off. Our SSS is already 67 against par of 69.
My performance alone against the course and conditions should be the only thing which affects my handicap - not the performance of the rest of the field.
Incidentally at Royal Troon all those years ago I had 12 months of opportunities to get my handicap down to 3 eventually, when I left to join the world of work; here at Habberley we go on to winter mats from Oct to March and regular handicaps are frozen till April meaning I only have a 6 month window to work on reduction.
Rant over - anyone disagree with the logic? Am I missing something significant? Anyone I've spoken to over the years agrees with me or may be they were just being polite.

 

[Herbie]

CSS is often questionable as it is only as good as the information put in.

Fortunately most courses CSS against SSS are fairly balanced but as much by accident as accuracy.

Golf should be simple.
18 holes, a par score and a simple handicap system.

The more variations on how a score can be obtained and h/c adjusted, the more chance of inaccuracy rather than accuracy.

Old simplistic systems were never perfect but neither are the more involved, detailed or complex ones, so it doesnt say much for them after all the years golf has been going.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I won the December 07 medal with a net 69 (-1) and was the ONLY player in the field to break par and so the CSS was 73. As a result I got done more than I would have been normally (losing 4 x 0.3).

 

[golf_bug]

I shot nett 67 yesterday in fairly blowy conditions, but am awaiting the CSS to be calcuated. I think the winner got nett 64 so I am expecting the CSS to be lower than SSS, meaning I may not be cut that much.

 

[jammydodger]

It's always been a contentious subject this one.

When I first took up the game I was amazed to find out that you could shoot under par nett and not get cut. Took a while to get my head round it.

I suppose it's all to do with trying to make everyones handicaps valid on other courses. We all know tracks where you feel that people's h/c are worth 2 strokes more than others or vice versa

My previous course was sss72 css71 and I always felt that my h/c should have been 1 less than it was.

Had a m/w medal last week and there were only 11 competitors and the winner shot nett 69 and the css went down from 72 to 71 , it's all very odd to me

 

[Imurg]

A few years back I played in a medal. Ours are played over Saturday and Sunday. Saturday, the day I played, the weather was gale force winds and rain. Sunday was calm and sunny.Our scores from Saturday - decent in the conditions, I think I shot nett par - were poor compared to the good scoring on Sunday. So CSS dropped a shot and all Saturday players went up .1

SO I shot inside my buffer zone but went up because on a different day scoring was better.

Fair?
Not in my book but the Hon Sec wouldn't see each days play as separate for handicapping purposes.

Par - 71
Whites SSS - 69
Yellows SSS - 67.

 

[jammydodger]

A few years back I played in a medal. Ours are played over Saturday and Sunday. Saturday, the day I played, the weather was gale force winds and rain. Sunday was calm and sunny.Our scores from Saturday - decent in the conditions, I think I shot nett par - were poor compared to the good scoring on Sunday. So CSS dropped a shot and all Saturday players went up .1

SO I shot inside my buffer zone but went up because on a different day scoring was better.

Fair?
Not in my book but the Hon Sec wouldn't see each days play as separate for handicapping purposes.

Par - 71
Whites SSS - 69
Yellows SSS - 67.

Thats absolute pants imurg , surely some common sense could prevail in these situations or am i missing something or some crazy rule

having thought about it though i suppose you can get differing conditions from am to pm on the same day.

im all confused now and im off to bed ...

 

[RGDave]

Golf should be simple.
18 holes, a par score and a simple handicap system.

The more variations on how a score can be obtained and h/c adjusted, the more chance of inaccuracy rather than accuracy.

I agree with this. I've been the victim of +/- CSS adjustments.
I also think CSS is a bit daft period. I personally don't like to see a player get cut on 36 points just because the CSS comes in a stroke higher and/or vice versa.

i.i.u.c. the original post was airing "frustrations", some of which I appreciate. I'm intrigued to read that 39 points has (on occasion) not been rewarded with a cut.....that's like making the "par" for the day 3 under, i.e. nett 66 on a par 69. If I was a secretary doing it by hand (not computer) I'd cut them all!!!

I'd imagine the SSS at Habberly would be under the par, and probably by at least a shot. It does make sense to me, under these circumstances to be a little "cautious" about wholesale cuts.

- - - - - - - -

If I was running a club and not affiliated to any organisation, I'd simply align the points to the SSS, regardless of tee used. At mine, the par is 70 but the SSS 69. I'd not cut anyone until they made more than 37 points.
Off winter mats, the CSS is 67....I'd let players make 39 before any cuts........

To my mind the SSS is THE important factor, forget par and CSS. I would just do it on par, but very long or very short courses are better analysed by looking at the SSS.

 

[JezzE]

Have followed this thread with interest and have just two comments
1) Spare a thought for those trying to deliver as universal a handicap system as possible to cope with a huge range of different golf courses and golfers capable of mind-boggling inconsistency in their scoring (just as an example, as a six-handicapper I might shoot close to par some days, then struggle to break 90 others when things get a little out of sync!)
2) Surely any system that attempts to allows for varying course and weather conditions (as the current one does) must be fairer than one that says 'that's your SSS or par - try and play to that in this 40mph wind and lashing rain'. Personally if I gritted out a good score on a day when it was significantly harder than others, I'd be pretty miffed if no allowance was made for this when calculating my subsequent handicap.

Just my thoughts for what they're worth

 

[Wildrover]

Jacraido

You miss my point, I accept that in windy conditions you adapt your style of play, but what I'm getting at is that the scores will inevitably go up, meaning that it is possible that nobodies nett score would be under the SSS. This would then mean that the winner could get 0.1 back. The CSS system would allow for the weather conditions to be taken into account. It's not a perfect system by any means but what system would be?

 

[Herbie]

I dont see the conditions thing the way others do, I have often come in under my h/c in awful conditions, followed by a nice calm sunny day shooting 2 or 3 over, then another time it will be the other way round. Enough to send any computer nuts I think, certainly unfair as against the common sense approach, but hey, its there, its in use and doesnt look like it will change so no point in letting it bother anyone.

 

[Jacraido]

I asked the EGU why I had carded the same score at the same handicap as a fellow member but not been cut like him. On the basis of this response maybe we should make all comps Stableford and do away with the professional-like pressure of medal play - dumbing down comes to golf!
"Craig
A handicap adjustment is based on the number of stableford points achieved against the CSS of the qualifying competition played. As you had a nett 66 against a CSS of 66 there was no change to your handicap.
You effectively played to your handicap on that particular day.

The other gentlemen who also had a 66 has received an adjustment because of the Stableford adjustment (Clause 19 of the CONGU UHS). Please find attached information on Clause 19. This has resulted in him achieving 40pts (39pts required to play to handicap) and the 0.2 reduction.
Regards
James Crampton
SSS & Handicap Manager
The English Golf Union Ltd

I think I'll start a movement to enable proper golfers to regain personal control of their handicaps - without recourse to the silicon chip - my 56 degree chip is bad enough!

 

[Jacraido]

Just another example of the unpredictability of our current handicap system which removes control from the player and places it in the hands of Bill Gates(Handicap - ?) and the EGU and CONGU and the software programmers. I only want, at my age, to play off less than 10. It's not much to ask but it's like playing our 18th - par 3, 220yds, in to prevailing wind, up hill all the way - a bit daunting!

 

[SammmeBee]

You are the only person who is in control of your handicap as you are the only person who is hitting your ball....

The CSS is to allow your score to be measured against the field on any particular day against the course....there are though par 72s that are too 'easy' and par 70s that are too 'hard' so their SSS are either lower or higher to make allowances - there are some days when the whole field may not break par but +1 or +2 may still be a good score and so the CSS allows for the good scores over par to still get cut.

If you think your SSS is too low then perhaps the club should ask to be reassessed by their County and they may change it....

 

[TonyN]

I think Jezz and Sammee have hit the ball out of the middle with this one!

Exactly what I wanted to say when the post sprung, but couldn't get it out to sound as good!

First qualifier of year I shot terrible scores and was convinced it was down to the course and not me. I thought I would gain shots but when I got back in everyone else had struggled too.

I think out of a field of 80+ 7 managed to shoot under handicap. The comp became reduction only!