The ‘quick question’ thread

[timd77]

I often have something I want to post which only requires 1 or 2 responses, seems a waste posting a new thread each time so I thought I’d start this one off!

So my quick question today is, I’m playing with someone tomorrow who wants to put his first scorecard in. How many shots over par on 1 hole is it where he can just pick up and move onto the next hole? I have +3 in my head.

 

[Orikoru]

I often have something I want to post which only requires 1 or 2 responses, seems a waste posting a new thread each time so I thought I’d start this one off!

So my quick question today is, I’m playing with someone tomorrow who wants to put his first scorecard in. How many shots over par on 1 hole is it where he can just pick up and move onto the next hole? I have +3 in my head.

It's not exactly to do with par it depends on his playing handicap. A net bogey is 1 point in Stableford so net double or worse means you can pick up. i.e. triple bogey on a shot hole, but double bogey on a no-shot hole.

Edit: Realising now if he doesn't have a handicap that doesn't really work. Apologies, just ignore me. Just tell him to putt out unless it's for quad.

 

[timd77]

This is it. I don’t really want to be stood there waiting for him to tap in for a 12!

I’m pretty sure it’s +3 as the maximum handicap is 54 I think? So basically pick up from +4.

 

[wjemather]

I often have something I want to post which only requires 1 or 2 responses, seems a waste posting a new thread each time so I thought I’d start this one off!

So my quick question today is, I’m playing with someone tomorrow who wants to put his first scorecard in. How many shots over par on 1 hole is it where he can just pick up and move onto the next hole? I have +3 in my head.

The maximum hole score for initial rounds is 5 over par.

 

[timd77]

The maximum hole score for initial rounds is 5 over par.

Blimey! Ok, thank you

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Are you sure we can't have 5 more pages of arguing about someone taking +5 on a hole, even though that is the answer .

I like it, next question.............

 

[irip]

Are you sure we can't have 5 more pages of arguing about someone taking +5 on a hole, even though that is the answer .

I like it, next question.............

Ok, if a plane was on a treadmill………..

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Ok, if a plane was on a treadmill………..

Nnnooooooooooooo

 

[timd77]

Playing in my first 4bbb match this weekend, just wanted to confirm how you calculate the shots given/reveived.

According to england golf it’s 90% of your course handicap. Am I right in thinking this would be correct:

Player A off 11 - scratch
Player b off 13 - 2 shots
Placer c off 14 - 3 shots
Player d off 17 - 6 shots

 

[irip]

Playing in my first 4bbb match this weekend, just wanted to confirm how you calculate the shots given/reveived.

According to england golf it’s 90% of your course handicap. Am I right in thinking this would be correct:

Player A off 11 - scratch
Player b off 13 - 2 shots
Placer c off 14 - 3 shots
Player d off 17 - 6 shots

I believe player D gets 5 shots.
The others would be correct.
I think it’s 90% off the lowest handicap.
I may be wrong though so don’t take my word for it as been about 10 years since I last played an official 4bbb match

 

[Lucifer MorningStar]

I believe player D gets 5 shots.
The others would be correct.
I think it’s 90% off the lowest handicap.
I may be wrong though so don’t take my word for it as been about 10 years since I last played an official 4bbb match

About sums it up D would get 5 shots as 90% difference is 5.4 so round down to 5.

 

[timd77]

Just to clarify, those numbers above are 90% of their course handicaps, so do you still take another 10% off?

 

[Lucifer MorningStar]

Just to clarify, those numbers above are 90% of their course handicaps, so do you still take another 10% off?

Best explanation to this i've seen before is :

Step-by-Step Calculation (Example)
Imagine a match with the following players and their Course Handicaps:

• Player A: 6 (Lowest Handicap)
• Player B: 14
• Player C: 18
• Player D: 24

1. Establish the Baseline
Player A has the lowest handicap, so they get \(0\) shots. [1, 2]
2. Calculate the Differences
Subtract the lowest handicap (6) from everyone else's:

• Player B: \(14 - 6 = 8\)
• Player C: \(18 - 6 = 12\)
• Player D: \(24 - 6 = 18\)

3. Apply the 90% Allowance
Multiply the difference by \(0.90\) and round to the nearest whole number (0.5 rounds up): [1, 2, 3, 4]

• Player B: \(8 \times 0.90 = 7.2\) = 7 shots received
• Player C: \(12 \times 0.90 = 10.8\) = 11 shots received
• Player D: \(18 \times 0.90 = 16.2\) = 16 shots received [1, 2]

 

[rosecott]

https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.whsplatform.englandgolf.org%2Fclubs%2F1000-1%2Fuploads%2Fexcel%2Fmixed%2520tee%2520calculator%2520version%25201%252027.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK

 

[timd77]

Ok thanks for that. So to update it then starting with course handicaps:

Player a CH = 12 - no shots

Player b CH = 14, difference of 2. Less 10% is 1.8, rounded up to 2

Player c CH is 15, difference of 3. Less 10% is 2.7, rounded up to 3

Player B CH is 19, difference of 7. Less 10% is 6.3, rounded down to 6

 

[Orikoru]

I have a betterball match scheduled, and this is what IG app says:



So from that, it appears that you take the full course handicap, work out the difference, and then it's just 90% of that difference. Otherwise these numbers don't work. Because those CH numbers are 100%.

 

[timd77]

https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.whsplatform.englandgolf.org%2Fclubs%2F1000-1%2Fuploads%2Fexcel%2Fmixed%2520tee%2520calculator%2520version%25201%252027.xlsx&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK

Thanks for that. Looks very good but I don’t have excel unfortunately and so unable to input the numbers.

 

[timd77]

I have a betterball match scheduled, and this is what IG app says:

View attachment 61848

So from that, it appears that you take the full course handicap, work out the difference, and then it's just 90% of that difference. Otherwise these numbers don't work. Because those CH numbers are 100%.

That looks like a useful tool, we don’t have anything like that.

You can do similar in the eg app (posted on that thread) whereby you can add players, see their course handicaps, change the percentage and it gives you the playing handicaps, and so I initially thought you just work out the difference from there.

I wonder if it’s one of those quirks of maths where if you take the 10% before or after the calculation will occasionally skew the result.

 

[nickjdavis]

That looks like a useful tool, we don’t have anything like that.

You can do similar in the eg app (posted on that thread) whereby you can add players, see their course handicaps, change the percentage and it gives you the playing handicaps, and so I initially thought you just work out the difference from there.

I wonder if it’s one of those quirks of maths where if you take the 10% before or after the calculation will occasionally skew the result.

So...if you remember that it is 90% of the difference, not the difference of 90%, you wont go far wrong.

When the WHS was first introduced, the authorities, god bless their little cotton socks, decided that the latter method was how we were going to calculate 4BBB matchplay allowances....despite for years before everyone being used to 90% of the difference. It only lasted a couple of years before we reverted back to the way we've known since stone age times.

You are quite correct to wonder if there is a difference between the two calculation methods and, due to rounding at different stages in the calculation process, the methods do produce slightly different results in a minority (around 10% unsurprisingly) of cases.

 

[timd77]

So...if you remember that it is 90% of the difference, not the difference of 90%, you wont go far wrong.

When the WHS was first introduced, the authorities, god bless their little cotton socks, decided that the latter method was how we were going to calculate 4BBB matchplay allowances....despite for years before everyone being used to 90% of the difference. It only lasted a couple of years before we reverted back to the way we've known since stone age times.

You are quite correct to wonder if there is a difference between the two calculation methods and, due to rounding at different stages in the calculation process, the methods do produce slightly different results in a minority (around 10% unsurprisingly) of cases.

Thanks for the explanation, much appreciated!