Wrong Stroke Index...

[vkurup]

Was playing monthly s/f with a 20 HC, so was looking at the SI for our holes. For some reason, I got my SIs wrong. But as we made our way around the course, the discussions was about the SIs. The #1 & #2 are both long and straight P4s (451y & 431y off the back). Other than the length, there is not much in either hole. There are other holes which are tougher e.g. hole #17 which is SI6!! even though it has tee into a hillside with a small landing area followed by a blind shot over a mountain. People are lucky if they escape with a bogie even though it is P5.

How does a committee decide the SI for a course and does it ever get reviewed?

 

[HawkeyeMS]

Was playing monthly s/f with a 20 HC, so was looking at the SI for our holes. For some reason, I got my SIs wrong. But as we made our way around the course, the discussions was about the SIs. The #1 & #2 are both long and straight P4s (451y & 431y off the back). Other than the length, there is not much in either hole. There are other holes which are tougher e.g. hole #17 which is SI6!! even though it has tee into a hillside with a small landing area followed by a blind shot over a mountain. People are lucky if they escape with a bogie even though it is P5.

How does a committee decide the SI for a course and does it ever get reviewed?

SI isn't supposed to represent solely hole difficulty and there are guidelines for allocating SI which can be seen at http://www.englandgolf.org/page.aspx?sitesectionid=337.

However, going on difficulty alone, I don't think Hoebridge have too much wrong. The 4th may be straight but if you miss left or right, reaching the green in two can be very tricky and it is a long hole. the 15th is again straight as you say but there is plenty of trouble to be found off of the tee that make reaching the green in two tricky. 17 is a tough hole but is really all about the tee shot, which when the course is dry is probably one of the hardest around. however, as per the link above, it can't be SI 1 or 2.

 

[dufferman]

I have always thought the same at Hoebridge, that 17th is a killer. But looking at the guidelines, I can see why it isn't; I never realised there were so many restrictions!

The 4th in the winter is almost impossible for me to get on in two... hell, even in the summer it's 2 perfect shots to get on!

 

[vkurup]

SI isn't supposed to represent solely hole difficulty and there are guidelines for allocating SI which can be seen at http://www.englandgolf.org/page.aspx?sitesectionid=33[/B]7.

However, going on difficulty alone, I don't think Hoebridge have too much wrong. The 4th may be straight but if you miss left or right, reaching the green in two can be very tricky and it is a long hole. the 15th is again straight as you say but there is plenty of trouble to be found off of the tee that make reaching the green in two tricky. 17 is a tough hole but is really all about the tee shot, which when the course is dry is probably one of the hardest around. however, as per the link above, it can't be SI 1 or 2.

Need a rocket scientist to work out all the restrictions!!

On the 4th (SI1), have been on the green in 2 last summer when the ball was running. But agree that it is the most difficult hole as you have to be very very accurate in your approach as the ball will run off to both sides.

On the 15th (SI2).. been a decent hunting ground once you get the tee shot right.

 

[Maninblack4612]

It's debatable where the indices are best placed. For example index 1 on a very tough par 4 may result in a high handicapper losing the hole by two strokes. Personally, I'd rather have a stroke on an easier hole. Distribution is much more important, which seems to be the point of the complicated rules.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I'm a geek so I find that the SI guidelines make fascinating reading - then seeing how my own track squares up to them. Think this was discussed on here not that long ago.

 

[North Mimms]

I'm a geek so I find that the SI guidelines make fascinating reading - then seeing how my own track squares up to them. Think this was discussed on here not that long ago.

They must have different guidelines here in the States.
We always play match play so have noticed the SI for each course. Not unusual to have last Hole SI of 2or 1

 

[pbrown7582]

we had 2 sets of SI at one stage 1 for matchplay as per the guidelines and 1 for stableford on course difficulty didn't last long though, the idea was abandoned due to too much confusion.
another myth that its purely difficult when judging SI.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

we had 2 sets of SI at one stage 1 for matchplay as per the guidelines and 1 for stableford on course difficulty didn't last long though, the idea was abandoned due to too much confusion.
another myth that its purely difficult when judging SI.

and all sorts of stuff - like recommendations on the max number of consecutive holes having SI less than say 9 at certain places on the course

 

[Fyldewhite]

Don't see the point of having 2 sets of SI myself, and it must get confusing and cause mix ups all the time.

By far the most important factor is the matchplay situation where hole difficult is nothing to do with it. Medal obviously doesn't matter at all. Stableford, if you think about it, also has very little difference. If you are going to get a decent round you will probably score on every hole anyway and would need a nett double on a hard hole with a high index for it to affect anything. Much ado about nothing if you ask me.

 

[Imurg]

I'm a geek so I find that the SI guidelines make fascinating reading - then seeing how my own track squares up to them. Think this was discussed on here not that long ago.

I'm going to guess that there's not many that follow them precisely.......

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I'm going to guess that there's not many that follow them precisely.......

In practice I don't think you can very easily. If we did I think I worked out that in one configuration of the SIs that fully adhered - our 9th which was SI 1 until not so long ago and now is SI 4 - would be something like SI 12 - so pretty much a nailed on win for the low handicapper in a match when giving 11 shots (which is a LOT of shots to give)

 

[Liverbirdie]

We did our whole course again recently, as one hole was being lengthened (and from a different comp tee) and our 18th was having a large pond put in before the green. We picked the allocation based on matchplay. When you read all the Congu guidelines it is very hard to stick to it all. One of the sticking points was the "ideally do not have 4 holes on the run, whereby a 10 handicapper would receive 4 shots on the run", so we had to tweak the final allocation again slightly.

 

[Andy808]

We need to redo our SI as it's so far off the mark with some of the changes that have been done around the course. On top of the changes we have a few holes that don't fit in with the SI criteria as SI1 is on the 17th and SI4 is the 18th which really does play into the hands of a player off a higher HC in a tight match.
There are a few things that are being discussed about course changes so I don't think it will happen this season.

 

[bladeplayer]

We need to redo our SI as it's so far off the mark with some of the changes that have been done around the course. On top of the changes we have a few holes that don't fit in with the SI criteria as SI1 is on the 17th and SI4 is the 18th which really does play into the hands of a player off a higher HC in a tight match.
There are a few things that are being discussed about course changes so I don't think it will happen this season.

at ours SI 1 is 16th & SI 3 is 17th that can be a bomber in a close match knowing your giving up 2 shots near the end .. but it is what it is

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I have always thought our SI3 (16th) and SI1 (12th) should be swapped. As they are both on the same nine I'd have thought that would have been simple. The 16th is a much tighter drive with OB tight left, a narrow landing area and large trees blocking anything right. I think I am right in saying the 16th plays harder than 12 in comps too.

As for the 17th at Hoebridge its a doddle. Good drive, lay up and thin an nine iron into the flag for a tap in birdie

 

[Foxholer]

Don't see the point of having 2 sets of SI myself, and it must get confusing and cause mix ups all the time.

By far the most important factor is the matchplay situation where hole difficult is nothing to do with it. Medal obviously doesn't matter at all. Stableford, if you think about it, also has very little difference. If you are going to get a decent round you will probably score on every hole anyway and would need a nett double on a hard hole with a high index for it to affect anything. Much ado about nothing if you ask me.

Depends on the percentage of Matches vs Stableford/Medals there are - SI is used/important for Handicap in Medals.

One old club very rarely played Matches - less than 5% - so a Stableford SI would have worked there. As it was, it was a bit of a bodge, with it neither conforming to guidelines, nor equating to difficulty!

Can certainly understand how there could be some confusion over the 2 SIs - which was only reasonably recently 'allowed' - though. It used to amuse me that R&A published the guidelines, but 'their own' course didn't conform! Does now I believe!

 

[pbrown7582]

We need to redo our SI as it's so far off the mark with some of the changes that have been done around the course. On top of the changes we have a few holes that don't fit in with the SI criteria as SI1 is on the 17th and SI4 is the 18th which really does play into the hands of a player off a higher HC in a tight match.
There are a few things that are being discussed about course changes so I don't think it will happen this season.

not even following odds and even on each 9, that's one of the criteria that does normally get used.

 

[Foxholer]

We need to redo our SI as it's so far off the mark with some of the changes that have been done around the course. On top of the changes we have a few holes that don't fit in with the SI criteria as SI1 is on the 17th and SI4 is the 18th which really does play into the hands of a player off a higher HC in a tight match.
There are a few things that are being discussed about course changes so I don't think it will happen this season.

Could also put more pressure than necessary on him/her when playing 14-16 (if 1 down). So swings and roundabouts. An old club had last 5 holes as 2, 18, 16, 4, 14. Seems ok on paper, but 8+ points from the last 4 holes was rare. So If the low handicapper could survive until 15, then more than likely would win!

After the changes to Wentworth West, they waited 18 months before adjusting SIs. They now both conform to guidelines and pretty much match difficulty. 3 of the Par 3s are now SI < 10. 16th (shortish Par 4) went from 16 to 5(!) a measure of how much they toughened that hole up! Odds now on back.

 

[Fyldewhite]

SI is used/important for Handicap in Medals.

Hadn't really considered the handicap adjustment aspect earlier but although I agree it could sometimes make a difference I still think it's unlikley to have any real impact overall for the same sort of reasons. Nearly all cards with significant adjustments are 0.1's anyway and those in the scoring zone of buffer or better are not often adjusted at all. I know you can score in buffer or get a cut etc with an NR but really doesn't happen that often and even when it does the SI may have made no difference.

I like your the example of R&A.....just about sums up the whole subject - ie inconsistent, confused and misunderstood!! Not helped by the fact that the SI is explained to probably 99.9% of new golfers by saying "Stroke 1 is the hardest hole" etc!!