Stroke Index - mens & ladies or just one index

[golflife]

Our club is currently considering moving from having a separate mens index and separate ladies index, to instead just having one index (ie removing the ladies index). Are there any issues with doing that?

 

[wjemather]

If there is a significant difference in how holes play from different tees and/or for different genders, having the same SIs may not be equitable as it affects where strokes are received, especially in Stableford and for handicapping.
Examples that could be an issue are: a hole that plays 'easy' as a short par 5 from one set of tees and 'hard' as a long par 4 from another; or a par 3 that is over 200 yards from the back tee and just 120 from the forward tee.
There is also match play to consider. For example, that long par 4/short par 5 is similar in relative scoring for low/high handicaps in match play regardless of the tee used, and accordingly some courses have separate SIs for stroke play and match play.

 

[jim8flog]

I reckon that would be a hard thing to do where I play.

Some examples
Men's/ Lady's
5/17
17/7
7/16
13/2
3/10
18/6

Some holes have a major difference between reds and yellow length

 

[Alan Clifford]

Our club is currently considering moving from having a separate mens index and separate ladies index, to instead just having one index (ie removing the ladies index). Are there any issues with doing that?

How can a club do that? Surely you have to be rated by "the powers that be", which I think is your county organization.

Personally, I think this is a good idea if applied universally. Get rid of gender ratings, have one set of course and slope rating for each tee, and let the handicap system sort it out. After all, if we must divide the golfing world into just two, maybe the division would be better if it were old people versus young people.

 

[rulefan]

How can a club do that? Surely you have to be rated by "the powers that be", which I think is your county organization.

Personally, I think this is a good idea if applied universally. Get rid of gender ratings, have one set of course and slope rating for each tee, and let the handicap system sort it out. After all, if we must divide the golfing world into just two, maybe the division would be better if it were old people versus young people.

The Course Rating system is not concerned with Stroke Indices which is what the OP is about.

 

[Alan Clifford]

The Course Rating system is not concerned with Stroke Indices which is what the OP is about.

Aren't the hole indexes all part of the rating procedure done by the county rating people?

 

[jim8flog]

Aren't the hole indexes all part of the rating procedure done by the county rating people?

No.

As per Rulefan it is up to the club to set the SIs but there is guide from Congu.
Some clubs set them for match play, others by difficulty and some clubs have two cards - one for match play and the other for stableford.

 

[rulefan]

but there is guide from Congu.

And Appendix E has the WHS recommendation.

 

[golflife]

If there is a significant difference in how holes play from different tees and/or for different genders, having the same SIs may not be equitable as it affects where strokes are received, especially in Stableford and for handicapping.
Examples that could be an issue are: a hole that plays 'easy' as a short par 5 from one set of tees and 'hard' as a long par 4 from another; or a par 3 that is over 200 yards from the back tee and just 120 from the forward tee.
There is also match play to consider. For example, that long par 4/short par 5 is similar in relative scoring for low/high handicaps in match play regardless of the tee used, and accordingly some courses have separate SIs for stroke play and match play.

Thank you, appreciate your input. Our course is a relatively short (but not 'easy') course 5.100 metres for men, 4,500 metres for ladies. On most holes, there is little difference between mens and ladies tees.. and on the hole that has the biggest difference in terms of length, it is index 4 for both men and ladies. I am trying to get a breakdown of the stats for each hole, (scoring history) for both men and ladies.. as I guess that is the obvious information that needs to be looked at.

 

[rulefan]

I am trying to get a breakdown of the stats for each hole, (scoring history) for both men and ladies.. as I guess that is the obvious information that needs to be looked at.

That may not be the whole story. The playing stats will not necessarily show how bogey players perform in relation to scratch.

 

[Alan Clifford]

This whole men versus women thing is so irritating. I suspect old men versus young men would make much more sense. So go for three sets of indexes. No, make that 4. Old women versus young women as well.

 

[ntommo]

We changed our SI's last year and after looking into it, the SI's are more about matchplay competition rather than difficulty of holes however difficulty can come into the equation when numbering. There is guidance somewhere which is something along the lines of :-
1. A 10 handicap should not get 3 shots in consecutive holes
2. First 9 holes should be even numbers and 2nd nine should be odd with the 1st and 2nd most difficult in the middle of these nines
3. Holes 1,9,10 and 18 should be SI 9, 10, 11 and 12.

This isnt mandatory but just guidance, was an eye opener for a lot of us who always thought SI was all about hole difficulty

 

[Backsticks]

And I would think it should be about hole difficulty, and that the modification of that to suit matchplay, is obsolete given the proportion of strokeplay competitions to matchplay ones generally played. It is a distortion for 95% of the competitions played in our club, to suit the other 5%.

 

[wjemather]

We changed our SI's last year and after looking into it, the SI's are more about matchplay competition rather than difficulty of holes however difficulty can come into the equation when numbering. There is guidance somewhere which is something along the lines of :-
1. A 10 handicap should not get 3 shots in consecutive holes
2. First 9 holes should be even numbers and 2nd nine should be odd with the 1st and 2nd most difficult in the middle of these nines
3. Holes 1,9,10 and 18 should be SI 9, 10, 11 and 12.

This isnt mandatory but just guidance, was an eye opener for a lot of us who always thought SI was all about hole difficulty

The guidance has changed substantially over the years, with match play no longer a consideration (unless the committee decide to have separate indexes).
WHS recommendations (Appendix E) can be summarised as follows:

• Odd numbered indexes on the front 9 unless the back 9 is significantly more difficult
• Indexes evenly distributed
• Lowest index on each 9 allocated to one of the middle 3 holes unless no hole is ranked in the 6 most difficult in relation to par
• Second lowest index on each 9 allocated to one of the first or last 3 holes unless the lowest index is already one of those 3 holes
• Avoid low indexes on consecutive holes

 

[ntommo]

• Odd numbered indexes on the front 9 unless the back 9 is significantly more difficult

• Indexes evenly distributed

• Lowest index on each 9 allocated to one of the middle 3 holes unless no hole is ranked in the 6 most difficult in relation to par

• Second lowest index on each 9 allocated to one of the first or last 3 holes unless the lowest index is already one of those 3 holes

• Avoid low indexes on consecutive holes

This is very much how we done it except we didnt work them out using Scratch Value and Bogey Value because we didnt have those values. Just picked numbers we thought fit the guidance

 

[Neilds]

Thank you, appreciate your input. Our course is a relatively short (but not 'easy') course 5.100 metres for men, 4,500 metres for ladies. On most holes, there is little difference between mens and ladies tees.. and on the hole that has the biggest difference in terms of length, it is index 4 for both men and ladies. I am trying to get a breakdown of the stats for each hole, (scoring history) for both men and ladies.. as I guess that is the obvious information that needs to be looked at.

You say there is little difference between the mens and ladies tees but a difference of 600 metres means an average of 33m on each hole. That is about 3 clubs difference so I believe that is quite substantial when it comes to how the holes play

 

[Alan Clifford]

The guidance has changed substantially over the years, with match play no longer a consideration (unless the committee decide to have separate indexes).
WHS recommendations (Appendix E) can be summarised as follows:

• Odd numbered indexes on the front 9 unless the back 9 is significantly more difficult

Interesting. We have the odds on the back 9 but the front has 35/34/123 and the back has 34/33.5/104 for par/course/slope.

 

[rosecott]

Interesting. We have the odds on the back 9 but the front has 35/34/123 and the back has 34/33.5/104 for par/course/slope.

Under the previous CONGU guidance, the odd numbers were to be on the more difficult 9, usually the longer.