Stroke Indices benefitting high handicapers so limit points awarded?

[woody69]

This is potentially a daft question, but can assigned stroke indices on holes negatively, or positively affect the outcome of a match if they are not regularly updated?

SI 1 on my course is a relatively short par 5 where even the short hitters are usually up or on the green in 3, so it's a very good birdie opportunity for them. However, due to it's design it is also quite difficult to reach in 2 unless you are a particularly long hitter and accurate as it is bisected by a lake about 130 yards from the green, so most people are taking their drive, laying up to the water and then hitting on. It is possible to get on in 2 of course, just very very hard. In fact, I played a comp with a 19 handicapper who absolutely nailed his drive and went for the green in 2 and caught it sweetly that it ended up 10 feet from the pin. He then managed to sink the putt for an outstanding eagle and I was truly chuffed for him as he scored 6 points! However, I then thought this was potentially a little unfair on the lower handicap golfers who would never have the opportunity to score that many. Let's face it, they are never getting a hole in 1 there!

An eagle is quite an achievement on that hole so even the low handicappers would struggle because of the layout.

I assume it is SI 1 because of the fact most are getting par or worse due to it's layout, but it also means when a low handicapper scores well they can seriously collect the points. I wonder if allowing a max of only 5 points would work better to combact this potential scenario - or if it's really nothing that needs changing!

 

[Spuddy]

Stroke index isn't necessarily based on hole difficulty. That's used as a general guide but it's not an exact science based on historic scoring. For instance, low index holes should be evenly placed throughout the course and shouldn't be on the first couple, or last couple of holes.

 

[pbrown7582]

also SI odd numbers and even numbers should be enclosed on the front or back nine's.
the fact the 19 h/cap has got 3 nett 1 on any hole would make it virtually impossible for someone without a shot to cope on that individual hole but over the round if handicaps are correct it should even out.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

We naturally link the SI of a hole to it's difficulty. But if you think about it for a moment you realise that the SI tells you the holes you will get a shot on; the number of shots you get is based upon your handicap; but your handicap is not based upon your scores on individual holes. So there is absolutely no direct link between your handicap and your ability to play (well or otherwise) any specific hole. It is therefore meaningless to try and create such a link when considering whether you should get a shot on any specific hole.

 

[the smiling assassin]

i remember reading about a suggestion whereby the indexing of each hole was based solely on difficulty, and in match play, strokes were given as follows:

4 handicap versus 10 handiap player

shots given on stroke index holes 5-10.

makes a lot of sense the more i think about it. effectively both players receive a stroke on stroke index holes 1-4.

 

[delc]

i remember reading about a suggestion whereby the indexing of each hole was based solely on difficulty, and in match play, strokes were given as follows:

4 handicap versus 10 handiap player

shots given on stroke index holes 5-10.

makes a lot of sense the more i think about it. effectively both players receive a stroke on stroke index holes 1-4.

Eh? Stroke indexes are used in match play and stablefords. In a singles match the 4 handicap player would have to give the 10 handicapper 6 shots, which would be taken on the stroke index 1-6 holes.

 

[the smiling assassin]

Maybe adding another example will make it clearer:

10 handicap versus 12 handicap player.
10 handicapper gives 2 strokes, on index numbers 11 and 12. (not 1 and 2 as per the current system)

 

[Joff]

Interesting suggestion. Wouldn't like that at my course though!

 

[delc]

Maybe adding another example will make it clearer:

10 handicap versus 12 handicap player.
10 handicapper gives 2 strokes, on index numbers 11 and 12. (not 1 and 2 as per the current system)

Why change from what we have? In the current system the higher handicap player get strokes on the more difficult holes where he most needs them to get a half or a win.

 

[Imurg]

Why change from what we have? In the current system the higher handicap player get strokes on the more difficult holes where he most needs them to get a half or a win.

Unless the low handicapper is scratch or better, if SI mirrored difficulty, he would need a shot too wouldn't he..…?

Always been my problem with SI's linked to difficulty.
Our SI 1 and 2 are the hardest holes on my course. In Matchplay I almost always have to give a shot on them, possibly 2...
Bogey is an acceptable score on either for me, par is not normal. Fragger, for instance, is capable of making 5 on either, meaning I would have to par for a half. A "normal" bogey for me and I'm probably not going to win the hole and maybe not even half it...Far better to give shots on higher SI (easier) holes where the HH is more likely to par but I' m more likely to birdie......

 

[stevelev]

Maybe adding another example will make it clearer:

10 handicap versus 12 handicap player.
10 handicapper gives 2 strokes, on index numbers 11 and 12. (not 1 and 2 as per the current system)

So in match off handicaps of 3, and 27 how would that work. Or off 8 and 23

 

[backwoodsman]

We've gone over this so many times before I can't believe people still don't get the point...

In match play the SI is such that a player's with a similar difference in handicap get the given shots at the same stage in their round. Let's say that SI 1 and 2 are holes 5 and 12. A match with player's off 2 and 4 the shots are given at holes 5 and 12. A match with player's off 14 and 16, shots given at holes 5 and 12. Player's off 20 and 22 shots still given at 5 and 12. You see the pattern? Naff all to do with difficulty - it's to do with the stage in the match...

 

[Andy808]

Stroke index isn't necessarily based on hole difficulty. That's used as a general guide but it's not an exact science based on historic scoring. For instance, low index holes should be evenly placed throughout the course and shouldn't be on the first couple, or last couple of holes.

This is the one problem at our course as SI1 is the 17th and SI4 is the 18th. It's quiet common for a player to give away 4 or more shots so you are always trying to get the match done and dusted by the 16th if your giving away 4 or more shots. This has been made worse as the 17th is now a short par 5 instead of a long par 4 so it benefits the higher handicapper even more. It used to be an even bigger problem if you had a match against a lady as you gave the a stroke AND just over 100 yards. This has been cancelled out by the men playin it as a par 5.

It's an easy hole to go wrong on too as the driving area is very narrow for most of the men with the fairway only opening up to the right for the longest hitters. Personally I love the hole as it really is a risk/reward hole but will ruin a score card if your not straight enough off the tee.

 

[stevelev]

We've gone over this so many times before I can't believe people still don't get the point...

In match play the SI is such that a player's with a similar difference in handicap get the given shots at the same stage in their round. Let's say that SI 1 and 2 are holes 5 and 12. A match with player's off 2 and 4 the shots are given at holes 5 and 12. A match with player's off 14 and 16, shots given at holes 5 and 12. Player's off 20 and 22 shots still given at 5 and 12. You see the pattern? Naff all to do with difficulty - it's to do with the stage in the match...

Fine if the handicaps are close but demonstrate it with hcap of 3 for one player and 23 for the other

 

[HawkeyeMS]

Fine if the handicaps are close but demonstrate it with hcap of 3 for one player and 23 for the other

Then the 23 h'cap gets 2 shots at holes 5 & 12

 

[louise_a]

I have often thought that strokes given in matchplay should be the opposite way round, ie if you give 1 shot you give it at stroke index 18 rather than SI 1, after all in stableford everyone bar scratch or better will get at shot on that hole.

 

[duncan mackie]

I have often thought that strokes given in matchplay should be the opposite way round, ie if you give 1 shot you give it at stroke index 18 rather than SI 1, after all in stableford everyone bar scratch or better will get at shot on that hole.

it really doesn't matter Louise, there are valid arguments both ways.

the relative position of the shot (or double shot) holes is more relevant to matchplay - hence the recomendations.

however, there is no doubt in my mind that the provision of strokes according to hole difficulty makes stableford play more enjoyable to most players (even though in practice it makes little difference to scoring - it just seems that way at the time!)

 

[Stuey01]

This is the one problem at our course as SI1 is the 17th and SI4 is the 18th. It's quiet common for a player to give away 4 or more shots so you are always trying to get the match done and dusted by the 16th if your giving away 4 or more shots. This has been made worse as the 17th is now a short par 5 instead of a long par 4 so it benefits the higher handicapper even more. It used to be an even bigger problem if you had a match against a lady as you gave the a stroke AND just over 100 yards. This has been cancelled out by the men playin it as a par 5.

It's an easy hole to go wrong on too as the driving area is very narrow for most of the men with the fairway only opening up to the right for the longest hitters. Personally I love the hole as it really is a risk/reward hole but will ruin a score card if your not straight enough off the tee.

The par of the hole is irrelevant in match play, so how does changing it from a par 4 to a par 5 make any difference? It could be a par 500, the lowest net strokes still wins the hole.