Handicaps, is this really right and how to fix it?

[white03]

So we play double bogey max regardless of handicap, which helps keep handicaps in the acceptable range.

 

Ok more complains from a low handicapper.....

 

I have seen many times this happen. On a par 4 the 12 handicapper misses the green on his second shot. the other 3 guys on his team all are on the green. He walks up and hits, without much thought or effort, reasoning that the other guys will hold up the team. Then he three puts, takes a double bogey and goes on. Meanwhile as a low handicapper, wanting to get my handicap as low as possible, I'm grinding over every stroke and shot. If the 12 handicapper had be trying he would have maybe made par or at worse bogey, but he takes a double bogey and artificially inflates his handicap.

 

Nothing you can do about it though

 

I should have also said the game we are playing is the2 best net scores on each hole.....not gross

[HatsForBats]

I’ve said it here numerous times. It’s like legalized sandbagging.

 

68.6/117. Local junior college plays there. Only 6,400 yards. In the tournaments they host they normally only have one or two kids under par (72).

 

It’s just rated so wrong. And even par round is around a three differential.

 

A 117 slope and the course rating being 3.4 below par seems pretty easy. My home course is pretty easy with a 118 slope, 67.7 rating and par 70. An even par round would be a 2.3 differential.

 

It's not that our course is a pushover but when I am on my scores trend lower than a good day on a tougher course. The bad scores at a tougher course are typically higher but then they don't get used for my handicap index. They are just a placeholder for one of 10 scores that will not get used of my last 20.

[nsxguy]

It’s just rated so wrong. And even par round is around a three differential.

 

Of course par has absolutely nothing to do with rating or difficulty.

 

Maybe it should ?

 

I mean I think something's not quite right about shooting -3 (to par of course) and only having a "0" handicap,,,,,,,,,,,,, :dntknw:

[SNIPERBBB]

Not really, a true scratch should be shooting better than even more often than not on such a course. 6400 is a driver wedge course all day long unless there's alot of doglegs or forced layups, which by that slope I would doubt that's the case.

[Newby]

It’s just rated so wrong. And even par round is around a three differential.

 

Of course par has absolutely nothing to do with rating or difficulty.

 

Maybe it should ?

 

 

18 300 yard par 4s , 5400 yards - par 72

18 400 yard par 4s , 7200 yards - par 72

 

Maybe it shouldn't ?

[Krt22]

The pro is doing it correctly. He uses the course rating from each set of tees and the slope rating. I'm not an expert on the exact methods of calculating handicaps, but I believe him and he is doing it correctly

 

Calculating a proper index is one thing (although I cant imagine why a pro would be doing this manually), calculating proper course handicaps when you have players hitting from different sets of tees is another. You have not provided enough concise information for us to draw a conclusion, but it sounds like it might be off. Does he send out tee sheets that shows everyone's index, course handicap, and tees played? (My club does)

[HatsForBats]

It’s just rated so wrong. And even par round is around a three differential.

 

Of course par has absolutely nothing to do with rating or difficulty.

 

Maybe it should ?

 

I mean I think something's not quite right about shooting -3 (to par of course) and only having a "0" handicap,,,,,,,,,,,,, :dntknw:

 

Maybe think of it as the assigned Par is rounded to the nearest whole number. If a course has bunch of par 4's that play like a 3.8 Par they will be rounded to Par 4's, when compared to a course with a bunch of par 4's that play like a 4.2 par there will be a decent discrepancy in the overall scoring.

 

Personally I know of a lot of par 5's at easy courses that I consider long par 4's or play them as par 4.5 (in my mind). It would be rather boring if all courses had to be designed so that the Par rating matched the Course Rating.

[Newby]

Maybe think of it as the assigned Par is rounded to the nearest whole number. If a course has bunch of par 4's that play like a 3.8 Par they will be rounded to Par 4's, when compared to a course with a bunch of par 4's that play like a 4.2 par there will be a decent discrepancy in the overall scoring.

 

Personally I know of a lot of par 5's at easy courses that I consider long par 4's or play them as par 4.5 (in my mind). It would be rather boring if all courses had to be designed so that the Par rating matched the Course Rating.

 

Why not stick with far more objective and accurate Course Rating and slope.

Who decides the .2 or .8? The guy who plays a driver and wedge or the one who plays a driver and 7 iron?

[HatsForBats]

Maybe think of it as the assigned Par is rounded to the nearest whole number. If a course has bunch of par 4's that play like a 3.8 Par they will be rounded to Par 4's, when compared to a course with a bunch of par 4's that play like a 4.2 par there will be a decent discrepancy in the overall scoring.

 

Personally I know of a lot of par 5's at easy courses that I consider long par 4's or play them as par 4.5 (in my mind). It would be rather boring if all courses had to be designed so that the Par rating matched the Course Rating.

 

Why not stick with far more objective and accurate Course Rating and slope.

Who decides the .2 or .8? The guy who plays a driver and wedge or the one who plays a driver and 7 iron?

 

I thought I was sticking with that. The course rating is compromised of individual holes where many of them will not have a rating that is a whole number correct? That is how they come to an 18-hole rating like 68.6 or 9-hole rating like 34.3 correct?

[Newby]

 

I thought I was sticking with that. The course rating is compromised of individual holes where many of them will not have a rating that is a whole number correct? That is how they come to an 18-hole rating like 68.6 or 9-hole rating like 34.3 correct?

Holes are not given an individual rating. Objects and obstacles are evaluated. In addition there are factors which are hole independent.

[deadsolid...shank]

It’s just rated so wrong. And even par round is around a three differential.

 

Of course par has absolutely nothing to do with rating or difficulty.

 

But it is absolutely part of the nomenclature of golf and in this case serves as a reference for comparison of scores. And you well know it, “par” is very much a standard in today’s game. It’s every bit as common for someone to say, “I shot three over” as it for them to say “75”.

 

How about this, a SCORE of 72 yields a differential of around three. Happy now?

[deadsolid...shank]

Not really, a true scratch should be shooting better than even more often than not on such a course. 6400 is a driver wedge course all day long unless there's alot of doglegs or forced layups, which by that slope I would doubt that's the case.

 

Here’s the back nine, front isn’t quite as tight, but has its own tricks. You can player driver here, but you’d better be damn good with it.

It’s not D1 golf by means, but there is a reason the college kids don’t tear it up. FWIW, trees are probaly 50’ tall.

[Newby]

It’s just rated so wrong. And even par round is around a three differential.

 

Of course par has absolutely nothing to do with rating or difficulty.

 

But it is absolutely part of the nomenclature of golf and in this case serves as a reference for comparison of scores. And you well know it, “par” is very much a standard in today’s game. It’s every bit as common for someone to say, “I shot three over” as it for them to say “75”.

 

 

I agree that if all the players are playing the same course it is probably the best way of making a comparison, especially for spectators or other observers. It makes a lot of sense in the pro game or in scratch games.

But it makes little sense when players are off different tees, on different courses or in a handicap competition unless net scores are used

[nsxguy]

It’s just rated so wrong. And even par round is around a three differential.

 

Of course par has absolutely nothing to do with rating or difficulty.

 

Maybe it should ?

 

 

18 300 yard par 4s , 5400 yards - par 72

18 400 yard par 4s , 7200 yards - par 72

 

Maybe it shouldn't ?

 

You drive it 180. 72 @ 5400 yards would be excellent, course/slope is whatever.

 

bladehunter drives it 300. 72 @ 7200 yards would be every bit as good, course/slope is whatever.

 

One might say that your 72 was more impressive as you had, on average, 120 in on every hole, a 7, 8, or 9 iron while ol' bladehunter only had, on average, a flip SW in from 100 and should have scored better.

 

One might say if one is playing from the correct tees (for their length) and one shoots even par, that person should be scratch irrespective of course rating/slope.

 

And yes, I'll save you a little typing - I understand that's not how it works.

[bladehunter]

It’s just rated so wrong. And even par round is around a three differential.

 

Of course par has absolutely nothing to do with rating or difficulty.

 

Maybe it should ?

 

I mean I think something's not quite right about shooting -3 (to par of course) and only having a "0" handicap,,,,,,,,,,,,, :dntknw:

 

 

even more frustrating for a guy who wants to get to plus territory... its near impossible.... maybe shoot 64 once a week ? lol

[lchang]

I’m a bit confused by all the people saying that par should matter more than rating. On your home course, isn’t par the same for the shortest tees and the tips? And isn’t there a massive difference in difficulty?

[Newby]

On your home course, isn’t par the same for the shortest tees and the tips? And isn’t there a massive difference in difficulty?

Par is determined by the length of the hole from a particular tee.

 

This is the USGA version

 

 

 

This is what CONGU say

 

 

Men Women

Yards Yards

Par 3

Up to 250 [up to 210]

Par 4

220 – 500 [180 – 430]

Par 5

440-720 [370-620]

Par 6

660+ [560+]

 

 

This might be worth reading

 

http://oga.org/par-what-is-it-good-for

[deadsolid...shank]

I’m a bit confused by all the people saying that par should matter more than rating. On your home course, isn’t par the same for the shortest tees and the tips? And isn’t there a massive difference in difficulty?

 

Neither one really matters. Both are arbitrary, assigned numbers. The only number that really matters is the actual score.

 

You can make par whatever you want it be. But it has become a common, easy to use term that is accepted by the golf world, and as a standard for a course, and each hole on it.

 

Rating is really only relevant in regards to handicaps. And handicaps matter to such a small, small percentage of all the golfers out there.

 

Pros don’t care about rating, but their score in relation to par tells them (and the viewers) where they currently stand in relation to the field. It’s certainly more useful, and used, in the golf world than rating is.

[lchang]

Im a bit confused by all the people saying that par should matter more than rating. On your home course, isnt par the same for the shortest tees and the tips? And isnt there a massive difference in difficulty?

 

Neither one really matters. Both are arbitrary, assigned numbers. The only number that really matters is the actual score.

 

You can make par whatever you want it be. But it has become a common, easy to use term that is accepted by the golf world, and as a standard for a course, and each hole on it.

 

Rating is really only relevant in regards to handicaps. And handicaps matter to such a small, small percentage of all the golfers out there.

 

Pros dont care about rating, but their score in relation to par tells them (and the viewers) where they currently stand in relation to the field. Its certainly more useful, and used, in the golf world than rating is.

 

Sure. But we are talking about handicaps. And competing from different tees. That’s the topic of this thread!

[Newby]

And handicaps matter to such a small, small percentage of all the golfers out there.

 

Pros don't care about rating, but their score in relation to par tells them (and the viewers) where they currently stand in relation to the field. It's certainly more useful, and used, in the golf world than rating is.

 

Not over here or where USGA handicapping is not the norm for those that have handicaps over there.

 

Edit: Or where stableford is popular.

[deadsolid...shank]

I’m a bit confused by all the people saying that par should matter more than rating. On your home course, isn’t par the same for the shortest tees and the tips? And isn’t there a massive difference in difficulty?

 

Neither one really matters. Both are arbitrary, assigned numbers. The only number that really matters is the actual score.

 

You can make par whatever you want it be. But it has become a common, easy to use term that is accepted by the golf world, and as a standard for a course, and each hole on it.

 

Rating is really only relevant in regards to handicaps. And handicaps matter to such a small, small percentage of all the golfers out there.

 

Pros don’t care about rating, but their score in relation to par tells them (and the viewers) where they currently stand in relation to the field. It’s certainly more useful, and used, in the golf world than rating is.

 

Sure. But we are talking about handicaps. And competing from different tees. That’s the topic of this thread!

 

True. My mistake in not remembering to take it in the context of the thread.

 

And, If I remember correctly, the only reason the question of par came up was in an example I used of a course being rated too low (IMO). Which I then amended io using just a number as opposed to calling it par. In that example, you could call that course a par 70 if you wanted and it would still be rated too low. Which I think brings us back to part of the origin topic. But I wouldn’t bet on it at this point!?

[deadsolid...shank]

And handicaps matter to such a small, small percentage of all the golfers out there.

 

Pros don't care about rating, but their score in relation to par tells them (and the viewers) where they currently stand in relation to the field. It's certainly more useful, and used, in the golf world than rating is.

 

Not over here or where USGA handicapping is not the norm for those that have handicaps over there.

 

Edit: Or where stableford is popular.

 

I’m not sure I follow Newby.

 

I understand the concept of par is arbitrary, but it’s become universal. It might be made up, but every course has it. And how can it not apply to Stableford? Par is the baseline In Stableford scoring.

 

What else is course rating used for other than handicapping?

[SNIPERBBB]

Par doesn't necessarily have to be the baseline for stableford as you can pick a target score that isn't par. I've never seen it used but I could imagine it for bogey+ golfers if you don't want to play a net stableford.

[HatsForBats]

I thought I was sticking with that. The course rating is compromised of individual holes where many of them will not have a rating that is a whole number correct? That is how they come to an 18-hole rating like 68.6 or 9-hole rating like 34.3 correct?

Holes are not given an individual rating. Objects and obstacles are evaluated. In addition there are factors which are hole independent.

 

Still the ratings are based mostly on a hole by hole analysis even though they don't release an individual rating per hole.

[deadsolid...shank]

Par doesn't necessarily have to be the baseline for stableford as you can pick a target score that isn't par. I've never seen it used but I could imagine it for bogey+ golfers if you don't want to play a net stableford.

 

Isn’t doing that essentially just changing par?

 

I don’t play much Stableford so I admit my knowledge is limited. But every scoring chart I’ve seen shows the scoring is all based on par, birdie, bogie, etc.

[SNIPERBBB]

The way it's actually referred to in the rules is "(fill in the blank) over/below target score)"

[nsxguy]

So we play double bogey max regardless of handicap, which helps keep handicaps in the acceptable range.

 

Ok more complains from a low handicapper.....

 

I have seen many times this happen. On a par 4 the 12 handicapper misses the green on his second shot. the other 3 guys on his team all are on the green. He walks up and hits, without much thought or effort, reasoning that the other guys will hold up the team. Then he three puts, takes a double bogey and goes on. Meanwhile as a low handicapper, wanting to get my handicap as low as possible, I'm grinding over every stroke and shot. If the 12 handicapper had be trying he would have maybe made par or at worse bogey, but he takes a double bogey and artificially inflates his handicap.

 

Nothing you can do about it though

 

I should have also said the game we are playing is the2 best net scores on each hole.....not gross

 

You are, of course, correct. My club has always had this same "problem" in our weekly "2 best ball" team game. The 1, 2 & 3 players are far more likely to come into play than the 4th guy. This also applies, though to a lesser extent, to ALL the players on the team, not just the 3rd or 4th guy.

 

Even the best player on the team may try to pull off a shot that he otherwise wouldn't play if he was only playing his own ball.

 

And this unintentional(?) "sandbagging", if it happens often enough, can certainly affect a handicap so that later on, when playing in a net singles event these guys are getting from 1-3 shots more per round in that handicap event. And the higher handicapper already has a built-in advantage over the lower handicapper to begin with.

 

We tried to figure out how to stop this but,,,,,,, we couldn't figure out a way. You can't very well force a guy to have side bets to make him try for a "real" score.

[deadsolid...shank]

The way it's actually referred to in the rules is "(fill in the blank) over/below target score)"

 

Ok, thanks Sniper. That shows my limited knowledge of that system (although isn’t target score basically a synonym for par!?((sorry, now just being argumentative for the sake of arguing!))

[pholway]

You average the 800yards over 18 holes and thats 44 yard shorter per hole. I know id be lost for a while making that jump.

Passive Brag Grade: A- with a gold star

[nsxguy]

The way it's actually referred to in the rules is "(fill in the blank) over/below target score)"

 

Ok, thanks Sniper. That shows my limited knowledge of that system (although isn’t target score basically a synonym for par!?��((sorry, now just being argumentative for the sake of arguing!))

 

Yes, target score IS par for the hole; at least in the Stablefords I've played in.