What Handicap is a good golfer

[stymied]

I apparently have pretty low standards. I consider an 18 (bogey golfer) good. Some good shots and some bad shots. Not sure why someone needs to be able to complete at an elite level to be good.

It's often said in the US that you can get into the baseball hall of fame with only a 25% success rate at the plate (Ray Schalk is in the hall with a .253 batting average). No premier league footballer has averaged a goal a game. One of the things I like about going to live golf events is you see the players who aren't in contention. Watching on TV you only see the best shots of thousands hit on a day.

Being good doesn't mean you have to be without faults...no one is.

 

[The Squirrel]

What makes a good golfer? The thing that struck me when first seeing a live event of the very best players wasn't actually the long shots. Sure they hit it a bit further than a half decent club golfer, but driving 300 vs the 250 club golfer is ony 20% better - different but not THAT different. Yes they're a bit straighter but they still missed plenty of fairways and greens. On the other hand their short game control, particularly distance, was just insane - they were off-the-planet better with pitches, chips, greenside bunker shots, ultralong putts. Shots where the typical club golfer would be pleased just to hit the green they were clearly thinking "hole it; inside 6 feet at worst" and executing that too. You don't always get the sense of just how good they are at that department (or maybe how bad the rest of us are ) on TV.

 

[Orikoru]

I apparently have pretty low standards. I consider an 18 (bogey golfer) good. Some good shots and some bad shots. Not sure why someone needs to be able to complete at an elite level to be good.

It's often said in the US that you can get into the baseball hall of fame with only a 25% success rate at the plate (Ray Schalk is in the hall with a .253 batting average). No premier league footballer has averaged a goal a game. One of the things I like about going to live golf events is you see the players who aren't in contention. Watching on TV you only see the best shots of thousands hit on a day.

Being good doesn't mean you have to be without faults...no one is.

Reminds me of a video I saw the other day with Roger Federer. He said that over his whole career, he won nearly 80% of his matches. But when you look at individual points won, it was only 54%. So even the best players in the world are losing nearly half their points. Makes you think, and I think it's quite applicable to golf too (replacing points with shots of course).

 

[nickjdavis]

Anyone who watched me over the first 12 holes of my round yesterday, as i battled 30-40mph winds, horizontal hail, inverted umbrellas, trolleys thinking they were extras in The great Escape, to shoot just 2 over gross would have looked at me and said....wow, he is a seriously good golfer.

They wouldn't have thought the same if they'd seen me struggle to 2 pars, 2 bogies and 2 doubles over the closing 6 holes, as I ended up succumbing to the elements, unable to feel any extremeties of my body at all, with ice hanging off the fringes of my wooly hat.

 

[SteveW86]

Reminds me of a video I saw the other day with Roger Federer. He said that over his whole career, he won nearly 80% of his matches. But when you look at individual points won, it was only 54%. So even the best players in the world are losing nearly half their points. Makes you think, and I think it's quite applicable to golf too (replacing points with shots of course).

I can see some sense in this, but that is when playing against other elite players. Would be interesting to see a breakdown of % as he progresses through a tournament. Logic would suggest that on average he would win a higher % in the first round and that would drop throughout the tournament.

 

[clubchamp98]

There's good, very good, excellent and whoah in amateur golf at the better end of the scale. It all depends on where you deem good starts. I'd say 12 is the line for a good golfer. It's a completely arguable figure but that's the number in my head.

Edit: @clubchamp98 I was typing as you posted. I'm in a similar position to you. I went up to 12 simply because I've played with some people in that 10-12 category who play some very good golf. Single figures is a landmark number but I sometimes think it is harsh to exclude those just above. I think your guide is a good one though

Yes I agree some mid teens players are good golfers.
I suppose it where your looking from.
A 12 capper looks good from a 20 cappers perspective.

Golf is a tough sport so in my honest opinion I think anyone who only needs one shot per hole is a decent player and it’s a sliding scale to the elite.

So if you need more than one shot per hole I’m writing you off

 

[Voyager EMH]

I think that I'm good, because I tend to hole the majority of my putts.
Rounds where I miss the majority of my putts do happen, but quite rarely.

Handicaps are mostly about how far you bash it, though.
Or so I've been told - over and over again.

 

[Deleted member 36735]

I would have thought that the only relative judgement would be along the lines of "who would everyone in the club consider to be a good golfer?".

On that basis I'm sticking with about 4 hcap down, to say that low teens would be universally considered a "good golfer" within any golf club is a bit of a stretch.
A plus or scratch golfer would still acknowledge a solid 4 to be a good player without being unrealistic. I know loads of guys in that category who have families, don't get time to practice etc but can still turn up and knock it round fairly well and consistently, quite often there's little difference in ability between them and the scratch player.

 

[Voyager EMH]

We have a few +chaps at our club.
But the lady member who plays off 0.7 and was in the winning England team at the European Team Championships Amateur Seniors - is, perhaps, to be regarded as better.

Her dad still plays. Must be over 80, handicap 14.4
I would say that is good.

 

[Deleted member 36735]

But the lady member who plays off 0.7 and was in the winning England team at the European Team Championships Amateur Seniors - is, perhaps, to be regarded as better.

What's her name?

Edit, got it, must be Helen if it's Leics.
The women came 3rd in the Euros.

 

[Voyager EMH]

What's her name?

Edit, got it, must be Helen if it's Leics.
The women came 3rd in the Euros.

They won in 2019.
3rd in 2024 as you say.

She has done very well (1st places) in individual national comps as well.

 

[harpo_72]

We have a few +chaps at our club.
But the lady member who plays off 0.7 and was in the winning England team at the European Team Championships Amateur Seniors - is, perhaps, to be regarded as better.

Her dad still plays. Must be over 80, handicap 14.4
I would say that is good.

I agree good is irrespective of handicap when age degrades distance.
We have a few guys who are good you can tell the quality in the swing and approach but age is robbing them.
I wouldn’t get hung up on plus handicaps the new system has made them more abundant. My experience of 30 years ago was any scratcher could be beaten by a 5 or less handicapper with no shots given. I don’t know now I wandered whether if you break it down by percentiles and say the top 20% are good and top 5% are elite etc. .. is the only way of actually determining good. Perhaps with whs this has changed a bit .. who knows.

 

[chrisd]

I played in a pairs match play a few weeks back, our opponents were an 8 handicapper and a scratch player. I would have considered both players to be, at the very least Very good.. The 8 h/c didn't have a much better swing than me and my partner, but the scratch golfer was just different class. His club to ball contact was awesome, but he was giving us a shed load of shots and, as he said, everybody raises their game when he plays, so we won quite comfortably given that his partner was less gifted and played poorly. So my view is that anyone up to 5 handicap is really good, after 5 it depends whether they bring their A game

 

[D-S]

Without a clear, precise definition of ‘good’ in this context, the question is nigh on impossible to answer.

 

[Deleted member 36735]

Without a clear, precise definition of ‘good’ in this context, the question is nigh on impossible to answer.

The question is extremely easy to answer:

"When you think of a good “club Amatuer” what do you see as their HC?"

The question is what do you think...

 

[VVega]

Extending the question slightly - what’s the most “unattainable” skill that the good players have?

— to me it’s their ability to compress their irons… the sound, the flight etc it creates…

In contrast, many get to a very low hcp without having this as their skill.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Extending the question slightly - what’s the most “unattainable” skill that the good players have?

— to me it’s their ability to compress their irons… the sound, the flight etc it creates…

In contrast, many get to a very low hcp without having this as their skill.

Second bounce spin to stop the ball dead .

Absolute control, repeatable, off the tee with a club such as a hybrid or 5 iron.

 

[Golf is fun]

Extending the question slightly - what’s the most “unattainable” skill that the good players have?

— to me it’s their ability to compress their irons… the sound, the flight etc it creates…

In contrast, many get to a very low hcp without having this as their skill.

Not "unattainable" but "not attained by many despite not being physically hard" the ability to focus on whatever it takes to get the ball in the hole in as a few shots as possible. I know it sound silly because allegedly we are all doing this, but so many are distracted by having a swing look a certain way, having a certain ball flight, being able to hit a certain short game shot that they spend too much energy on this rather than on getting a lower score. A lot is driven by trying to fit in, or be conventional.

 

[VVega]

A lot is driven by trying to fit in, or be conventional.

Personally haven’t come across anyone who was working on their swing to “fit in”. If anything, modern golf has moved miles away from the perfect swing idea.

 

[Swango1980]

Who defines a good golfer? A 20 handicapper could see a single figure handicapper as a great golfer. Whereas a 2 handicapper could see an 8 handicapper as a hacker. Very subjective answer.

Personally, I'd rate some 11,12,13, etc handicappers as good golfers, as I watch them play and love their ball striking and consistency. Clearly there must be other areas that let them down, but I still rate them higher than myself in many aspects. And I'm in single figures, lower handicap than them. And I'm a terrible golfer as far as I'm concerned.