Why can't slope ratings be more fluid?

[mikejohnchapman]

As you correctly say the vast majority of the rating process is factual.
The proportion which could be deemed as interpretation is so small that you it would have to be incredibly poor to properly have any sort of effect in CR or SR. It is difficult to imagine the size and amount of errors in the small quantity of subjective decisions that could be made to impact the end result.

True and it is also a fact that the club are asked for information relating to their course such as average rough height & stimp ratings which, although checked, tend to be used as they represent the normal playing conditions.

 

[doublebogey7]

The point is not that the relative difficulty will change. The point is the initial ratings given can be completely wrong, so the fluidity would allow it to correct itself over time.

As I have tried to point out before and you have failed to respond. It would only be possible to identify incorrect ratings, if a high enough number of scores were recorded from players who's Hi has been largely calculated from a number of different courses, very few clubs will fit that bill.

 

[rulefan]

As I have tried to point out before and you have failed to respond. It would only be possible to identify incorrect ratings, if a high enough number of scores were recorded from players who's Hi has been largely calculated from a number of different courses, very few clubs will fit that bill.

It won't really matter to those players that don't play at other courses (IMO the majority).