Stroke index and older golf courses.

[Tashyboy]

Driving to golf and I have about 25 minutes to think of nothing. Today's nothing has got me wondering about something and am not sure there's one easy answer.
The oldest course in the world is St Andrews around 1574, and I could be a 100 years out at that.
But at what point was Stroke index incorporated into courses, or more so course design. Now I could be wrong, but I would imagine when courses were designed originally it would just be following the lay of the land. stroke index 1 to 18 would not of even been thought of, or was it?
Reason I ask, I remember when I first got back into golf, I was playing in a KO and mentioned to a seasoned golfer that two of my five shots I got were over the last four holes. He said that's a bit naughty because they should be spread over the 18 holes to make it fair. In essence I could be beaten with four holes left. As it happend I won before the last four holes. But if SI is to be fair, it was not a factor when courses were originally designed so how have courses got over that problem to make it fair. Or has it never really been a problem. Lastly, when was SI brought in. stableford was first used in 1898. So there was a lot of courses built before then in which SI of holes is crucial.

Cheers folks.

 

[Slab]

Wouldn't stroke indexes have come in around the same time handicaps did (you only need the SI because of the handicap)

I read that initially they were set up for matchplay format because that was the most popular at the time and guidelines were given to clubs about what SI's to put where round the course to make it an 'even' or fair spread in a match format and pretty much naff all to do with difficulty (making it kinda obsolete for today's game) One of the points was to try and make sure it was less likely for folks to get a stroke on the key holes (1,18,9,10 where a tie might go to extra holes)

Some courses have more than one set of stroke indexes for players to use depending on what format you're playing which seems sensible but at the very least I think these days it should be aimed more at stroke-play format due to the dominance but folks answer that in stroke-play it doesn't matter where you get your strokes (unless you score the stoke play in stableford of course)

I've played a course with SI 1 on the 18th hole and while not great for a match it was perfect for stableford as it really was the toughest hole by far (I played plenty stableford round there but never played a match)

 

[rulefan]

Interesting history of handicapping but nothing about stroke index or stroke holes. except hints in the last couple.

http://www.usga.org/articles/2011/1...-part-i--roots-of-the-system-21474843620.html

http://www.usga.org/articles/2011/1...ng-part-ii-increasing-demand-21474843658.html

http://www.usga.org/articles/2011/1...-part-iii-usga-leads-the-way-21474843686.html

http://popeofslope.com/history/

http://popeofslope.com/history/part2.html

http://popeofslope.com/history/Handicapping_by_Travis_1901.html

 

[USER1999]

I think stroke indexes are to be re evaluated at all golf courses fairly soon. I have heard rumours to this effect anyway.

 

[Grant85]

Driving to golf and I have about 25 minutes to think of nothing. Today's nothing has got me wondering about something and am not sure there's one easy answer.
The oldest course in the world is St Andrews around 1574, and I could be a 100 years out at that.
But at what point was Stroke index incorporated into courses, or more so course design. Now I could be wrong, but I would imagine when courses were designed originally it would just be following the lay of the land. stroke index 1 to 18 would not of even been thought of, or was it?
Reason I ask, I remember when I first got back into golf, I was playing in a KO and mentioned to a seasoned golfer that two of my five shots I got were over the last four holes. He said that's a bit naughty because they should be spread over the 18 holes to make it fair. In essence I could be beaten with four holes left. As it happend I won before the last four holes. But if SI is to be fair, it was not a factor when courses were originally designed so how have courses got over that problem to make it fair. Or has it never really been a problem. Lastly, when was SI brought in. stableford was first used in 1898. So there was a lot of courses built before then in which SI of holes is crucial.

Cheers folks.

A few points...

SI is probably never really given much thought in terms of golf course design and it is not up to the architect to determine the Stroke Indexing. I'd say a good course should have a mixture of challenging holes and scoring opportunities spread out - but obviously that is personal preference.

It seems in America there is a feeling of 'difficult is better' and so many architects will deliberately have a stretch of tough holes all together. 'Amen Corner', 'the Bear Trap', 'the Green Mile' are 3 such examples.

Also SI is not necessarily done on a scientific basis of highest score to par will def be SI 1, 2nd highest 2 etc. Obviously they have to make sure the SI's match on each 9, so one 9 is all odd and one is all evens.
I think with SI, it is never preferable to have the 1st as a very low number because it is a bit of a disproportionate advantage to the 'weaker player' in the event of a match going into sudden death.

My feeling is that 'back in the day' when matchplay was the dominant format (and SI or handicapping wasn't a thing) there was a tendency to have a couple of 'stronger' holes to finish on, in order to give the advantage to the better player. Anecdotally having some of the lower SI holes in the closing stretch would support this theory.

Also - I think back in the day there was a feeling that the opening couple of holes were two of the easier holes. This was to give people a bit of a 'warm up'.

 

[jim8flog]

I think stroke indexes are to be re evaluated at all golf courses fairly soon. I have heard rumours to this effect anyway.

It is not the SIs that will be re- evaluated, that is up to the club to decide, it the course rating that will be evaluated so that a slope rating can be set in time for the World Handicap System.

 

[Tashyboy]

Interesting history of handicapping but nothing about stroke index or stroke holes. except hints in the last couple.

http://www.usga.org/articles/2011/1...-part-i--roots-of-the-system-21474843620.html

http://www.usga.org/articles/2011/1...ng-part-ii-increasing-demand-21474843658.html

http://www.usga.org/articles/2011/1...-part-iii-usga-leads-the-way-21474843686.html

http://popeofslope.com/history/

http://popeofslope.com/history/part2.html

http://popeofslope.com/history/Handicapping_by_Travis_1901.html

Some excellent reads there some of which have had me in bits, but even hundreds of years later the same problems exist today. Eg
quote "Any failure to hand in competitive score should be visited by a penalty of a stroke in the delinquents handicap". Obviuosly back in the 1800's they knew Golf monthly forum would still have a few on here.

Quote
One of the advantages generally suggested as likely to result from the formation of a Golfing Association, is the possibility of ticketing players with a handicap applicable to all greens. I imagine the actual figure would not be the same in all cases: 7 at Wimbledon would mean 9 at Sandwich. The advantages of such a uniformity would be numerous . . . it would be possible to handicap visitors to a green quickly and satisfactorily.
That was back In 1891, why has it taken the best part of 125 years to rectify that.


Wife's Ignorance of 'Half One.

• Some time ago, two golfers were anxious to have a happy round, one being inferior was to get half-one. His opponent coming to his house on the road to the Links, they talked over the match when he remarked, "I'm no able to gie ye half-one, I doubt"
  The lord of the house answered "Nae fears o' that, ye can gie me half one an' can lick me too."
  "Lick ye?" says his better half (wife). "Nae wonder if he gies you half-one at every hole (meaning half a glass of liquor), you'll be a bonnie miller before your round.
• ."Yet still to this day the better half ( wife) still misunderstands the draw of golf although I have never been licked on a course before. 😳

 

[duncan mackie]

Haven't read the links so apologies if they cover these points

1. Handicapping was originally done by the professional (and their predecessors) who would simply advise who should get strokes, and on which holes, in any match.
2. Stroke play pretty much came in with professional tournaments, with the concept of par arriving as a result of a newspaper article trying to illustrate comparative performances in a competition (Daily Telegraph I think).

Moving on to opinion;
I believe stableford is more enjoyable when SI reflect the playing charecteristics of holes - but accept that in practice it makes little difference to scoring.
Distribution in match play is much more important and I like the pure nature of fixed SI positions rather than any reflection of difficulty (there's as bigger argument that in a match where 1 stroke is being given it should be on the easiest hole rather than the hardest as there is for the current system). However that latter point is a different argument!

 

[Tashyboy]

I tried to find the link where it was quoted that womens hcaps were sorted out a long time before mens.
They cracked on with it whilst the men dilly dallied

 

[cookelad]

The first time I played Sandiway we stood on the 5th tee and my host for the day said something along the lines of 'this isn't actually the hardest hole on the course, that's on the back 9, but they put the stroke index 1 on the front 9 because in a match where there's only 1 shot being given the match could be over before the shot was received'. Now, for me, unless the hole that should've been SI 1 was the 18th or maybe the 17th that shot isn't going to make much difference if the match is over by the time you get to the hole.

 

[rulefan]

I tried to find the link where it was quoted that womens hcaps were sorted out a long time before mens.
They cracked on with it whilst the men dilly dallied

Correct.

The Ladies’ Golf Union (LGU) was formed in 1893 with one of its major objectives being to provide a national system of handicapping for ladies. Its handicapping system operated from then until 2004 and during that period the Ladies’ Golf Union was the Handicapping Authority for ladies in Great Britain and Ireland and for affiliated Overseas Unions and Associations.

On 14th February 1924 The Royal and Ancient Golf Club of Andrews convened a conference in York attended by representatives of the four Men’s Golf Unions of Great Britain and Ireland. The outcome was the formation of The British Golf Unions Joint Advisory Committee, an organisation that later became The Council of National Unions, with the objectives of formulating a definitive system of calculating Scratch Scores and designing a uniform system of handicapping based on Scratch Scores.

The Committee duly prepared The Standard Scratch Score and Handicapping Scheme in 1925 and it became operational in Great Britain and Ireland from 1st March 1926 for male golfers.