Would love to know how CSS is worked out!

[Andy808]

At the weekend we had our monthly stableford and due to the weather there were only seven entrants. I won with a score of 35 on what turned out to be a hard day to score as second place had just 29 points!
CSS came in one under par. HOW!
Here is a screenshot of the results from HDID.


Any ideas?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

What is the certified CSS of the course ?

Is it set up on the PC with a CSS of 1 under the par

 

[Andy808]

I have no idea Phil but SSS is 62. Still doesn't make sense when the next best score was SEVEN points short of the magic 36.

 

[Foxholer]

What is the certified CSS of the course ?

Is it set up on the PC with a CSS of 1 under the par

I think you mean SSS! CSS is calculated for each competition, with SSS as a 'base'.

I have no idea Phil but SSS is 62. Still doesn't make sense when the next best score was SEVEN points short of the magic 36.

So CSS was SSS+2 - which certainly reflects the tough scoring day.

Remember, SSS/CSS is nothing to do with Par which is what Stableford points are measured against!

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I have no idea Phil but SSS is 62. Still doesn't make sense when the next best score was SEVEN points short of the magic 36.

Well if SSS is 3 below par then I'm guessing that's what the course is set up on the PC which could be why CSS was only 1 below par.

For your course the magic "HC par is 33"

 

[Foxholer]

Well if SSS is 3 below par then I'm guessing that's what the course is set up on the PC which could be why CSS was only 1 below par.

For your course the magic "HC par is 33"

Er...39?

 

[Imurg]

So CSS was SSS+2 - which certainly reflects the tough scoring day!

Or everyone else simply played crap...........

 

[rosecott]

What is the course par?

It has nothing to do with how far behind the second man was. If you tell me the par, I can work out CSS which will be influenced by whether you are in buffer or not.

 

[louise_a]

the is a separate way of calculating CSS for small fields, which 7 is, I have been trying to get my head around some tables but they are rather confusing.

 

[rosecott]

the is a separate way of calculating CSS for small fields, which 7 is, I have been trying to get my head around some tables but they are rather confusing.

There are only 5 - 2 are Cat 4.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

What is the course par?

It has nothing to do with how far behind the second man was. If you tell me the par, I can work out CSS which will be influenced by whether you are in buffer or not.

It's in the picture

Course par is 65

SSS is 62

 

[Foxholer]

the is a separate way of calculating CSS for small fields, which 7 is, I have been trying to get my head around some tables but they are rather confusing.

Don't bother trying! Or at least, simply consider that CSS will be SSS. It's not something that you can actually influence - and only worth considering on the last hole or 2.

 

[duncan mackie]

I have no idea Phil but SSS is 62. Still doesn't make sense when the next best score was SEVEN points short of the magic 36.

most of these have been highlighted already.....

1. with SSS 62 and par 65 the magic numbers are 39 and, for you, 36 (playing to your buffer against a CSS=SSS
2. you have an effective field of 5 players for CSS calculation which means the normal basis of calculation goes out the window and the small field calculation routine replaces it.

After application you have a CSS of 64 with 1 player meeting buffer or better out of 5 = 20%. A general norm is between 25-45% ie at those numbers for most fields the CSS will = SSS so it's not that far from normal. However, it can't change to normal by any change in the CSS anyway because of the performance of the second best score (which is the sort of situation that the small field calculation is designed to remove and enable the appropriate 0.1s to be applied to the rest of the field.

 

[Andy808]

I think you mean SSS! CSS is calculated for each competition, with SSS as a 'base'.



So CSS was SSS+2 - which certainly reflects the tough scoring day.

Remember, SSS/CSS is nothing to do with Par which is what Stableford points are measured against!

It was a tough day out there with a strong gusty cross wind. I understand the principle of SSS and CSS as we have been pushing to have SSS reassessed as there have been several course changes plus one hole being lengthened since it was last done. As a member of the course committee I have been the one who has been in contact with the Cornwall Golf Union on the matter so I've had to do quiet a lot of homework.
We have had several competitions where the handicap changes have not reflected what has happened. For one instance we had 3 players tied on nett 65 in a medal competition and they all got 0.1 added to their handicap. On another occasion I won a medal competition with a nett 60 with second place 6 strokes back and got cut .3. CSS never seems to make sense but I will look into it being set on the computer at 64 as that was par for the course until last May.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I recently just changed our course because we got certified for a different SSS than previously

Get the course certified for the SSS then update the course on the HC system you use :thup:

 

[louise_a]

The manual says you have to look up figures in a chart but sadly the chart doesn't have any values in.

 

[Andy808]

most of these have been highlighted already.....

1. with SSS 62 and par 65 the magic numbers are 39 and, for you, 36 (playing to your buffer against a CSS=SSS
2. you have an effective field of 5 players for CSS calculation which means the normal basis of calculation goes out the window and the small field calculation routine replaces it.

After application you have a CSS of 64 with 1 player meeting buffer or better out of 5 = 20%. A general norm is between 25-45% ie at those numbers for most fields the CSS will = SSS so it's not that far from normal. However, it can't change to normal by any change in the CSS anyway because of the performance of the second best score (which is the sort of situation that the small field calculation is designed to remove and enable the appropriate 0.1s to be applied to the rest of the field.

Thanks Ducan that makes some sense now.

The only other query is that no one has got 0.1 back for the last 3 months. Is there something in place that automatically makes a competition reductions only?

 

[Andy808]

I recently just changed our course because we got certified for a different SSS than previously

Get the course certified for the SSS then update the course on the HC system you use :thup:

We have had confirmation that we are being reassessed in September or October and we will be going to the slope system at the same time which should be interesting to say the least. It makes it very hard to get your handicap cut to a level it should be when you have to be 3 under just to break even and we regularly have CSS come in at 60 or 61.

 

[rosecott]

most of these have been highlighted already.....

1. with SSS 62 and par 65 the magic numbers are 39 and, for you, 36 (playing to your buffer against a CSS=SSS
2. you have an effective field of 5 players for CSS calculation which means the normal basis of calculation goes out the window and the small field calculation routine replaces it.

After application you have a CSS of 64 with 1 player meeting buffer or better out of 5 = 20%. A general norm is between 25-45% ie at those numbers for most fields the CSS will = SSS so it's not that far from normal. However, it can't change to normal by any change in the CSS anyway because of the performance of the second best score (which is the sort of situation that the small field calculation is designed to remove and enable the appropriate 0.1s to be applied to the rest of the field.

Fine with that Duncan, except that Andy was not in buffer at 35 points so it was table B, field size 5, column +1, giving CSS as SSS + 2.

 

[Foxholer]

It was a tough day out there with a strong gusty cross wind. I understand the principle of SSS and CSS as we have been pushing to have SSS reassessed as there have been several course changes plus one hole being lengthened since it was last done. As a member of the course committee I have been the one who has been in contact with the Cornwall Golf Union on the matter so I've had to do quiet a lot of homework.
We have had several competitions where the handicap changes have not reflected what has happened. For one instance we had 3 players tied on nett 65 in a medal competition and they all got 0.1 added to their handicap. On another occasion I won a medal competition with a nett 60 with second place 6 strokes back and got cut .3. CSS never seems to make sense but I will look into it being set on the computer at 64 as that was par for the course until last May.

Does seem that a review would be in order - and might push the SSS up 1!

By the way. I over-simplified an earlier post....there are a couple of slight relationships between SSS, CSS and Stableford Points.

Btw. If SSS is 62, CSS can only go down to 61. Yellows vs Whites?