New World Handicap System

[Sawgrass]

> @ThinkingPlus said:

> > @Sawgrass said:

> > > @ThinkingPlus said:

> > > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > > @ThinkingPlus said:

> > > > > > @Augster said:

> > > > > > > @Augustok said:

> > > > > > > I just looked at the posters from the USGA site link from above and they are showing Net Double Maximum score based on index numbers not course handicap. That can’t be.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I’m not sure what you are looking at....

> > > > > >

> > > > > > When you decide what tees you’ll play, you then get a CH for that day, for those tees. It is that number, the CH, that will determine when you can take a triple or worse for handicap purposes. Just compare the CH to the hole handicap and if you get a stroke, you can post a triple for that hole.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Real world example using the new system:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > My index is 6.7. The CR/slope of the tees I played today is 69.1/122. This calculation gives me a 7 CH NOW. In 2020, I’ll be a 5 because it’s a par 71. (69.1-71=-1.9 rounded to -2). So 7-2= 5 CH

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Since I’m a 5, I can take up to a triple bogey for hole handicaps 1-5, and only up to a double for hole handicaps 6-18.

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > I think we all know how it is supposed to work, but the cartoon poster doesn't show it that way.

> > > >

> > > > I think it does, but doesn’t clearly enough show the math. If you do the math, it works.

> > >

> > > The poster shows a 15.6 index taking an 8 on a random par 5 with no mention of course handicap or handicap holes. There is no math to do. The poster is incomplete at best.

> >

> > There's a "Calculation of Course and Playing Handicap" poster which shows a 15.3 index, 119 slope, 72.0 rating, 71 par and 15 course handicap. The math works.

> >

> > https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/images/handicapping/education-posters/WHS_Playing_Handicap_Poster.jpg

>

> You are looking at the wrong poster. See https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/images/handicapping/education-posters/WHS_Net_Double_Bogey_Poster.jpg

> The current discussion is about NDB computation per @Augustok post above.

 

The poster on the determination of net double bogey requires the use of "handicap strokes received" which of course requires a calculation which one must go to another poster to work out. It's accurate, but limited.

[ThinkingPlus]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @ThinkingPlus said:

> > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > @ThinkingPlus said:

> > > > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > > > @ThinkingPlus said:

> > > > > > > @Augster said:

> > > > > > > > @Augustok said:

> > > > > > > > I just looked at the posters from the USGA site link from above and they are showing Net Double Maximum score based on index numbers not course handicap. That can’t be.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I’m not sure what you are looking at....

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > When you decide what tees you’ll play, you then get a CH for that day, for those tees. It is that number, the CH, that will determine when you can take a triple or worse for handicap purposes. Just compare the CH to the hole handicap and if you get a stroke, you can post a triple for that hole.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Real world example using the new system:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > My index is 6.7. The CR/slope of the tees I played today is 69.1/122. This calculation gives me a 7 CH NOW. In 2020, I’ll be a 5 because it’s a par 71. (69.1-71=-1.9 rounded to -2). So 7-2= 5 CH

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Since I’m a 5, I can take up to a triple bogey for hole handicaps 1-5, and only up to a double for hole handicaps 6-18.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I think we all know how it is supposed to work, but the cartoon poster doesn't show it that way.

> > > > >

> > > > > I think it does, but doesn’t clearly enough show the math. If you do the math, it works.

> > > >

> > > > The poster shows a 15.6 index taking an 8 on a random par 5 with no mention of course handicap or handicap holes. There is no math to do. The poster is incomplete at best.

> > >

> > > There's a "Calculation of Course and Playing Handicap" poster which shows a 15.3 index, 119 slope, 72.0 rating, 71 par and 15 course handicap. The math works.

> > >

> > > https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/images/handicapping/education-posters/WHS_Playing_Handicap_Poster.jpg

> >

> > You are looking at the wrong poster. See https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/images/handicapping/education-posters/WHS_Net_Double_Bogey_Poster.jpg

> > The current discussion is about NDB computation per @Augustok post above.

>

> The poster on the determination of net double bogey requires the use of "handicap strokes received" which of course requires a calculation which one must go to another poster to work out. It's accurate, but limited.

 

All very true, however, the purpose of a poster is to be a standalone infograph that contains the most pertinent information in a simple form that everyone can understand. If one has to cross reference multiple posters to understand a single poster it sort of defeats the whole purpose of having posters in the first place.

[CaseyC]

> @ThinkingPlus said:

 

>

> All very true, however, the purpose of a poster is to be a standalone infograph that contains the most pertinent information in a simple form that everyone can understand. If one has to cross reference multiple posters to understand a single poster it sort of defeats the whole purpose of having posters in the first place.

 

How would you word a single poster?

 

[DaveLeeNC]

One of the posters implied that a Playing Course Condition Adjustment requires only 8 posted scores. That really isn't very many scores. For places that are already doing a form of PCC, how many scores are they typically dealing with and how is the calculation done? And I wonder what percentage of posted scores in the US today are made on the day of play? Probably over half, but I wonder it really is. It isn't uncommon for me to be a day off, although I would not call that my norm. I don't post until I get home and sometimes I just forget.

 

dave

[Sawgrass]

I also wonder if you must search for a listed course when posting in order to be part of the adjustment, and manually entering the course’s name and data will exclude you. (I presume so.)

[Halebopp]

> @DaveLeeNC said:

> One of the posters implied that a Playing Course Condition Adjustment requires only 8 posted scores. That really isn't very many scores. For places that are already doing a form of PCC, how many scores are they typically dealing with and how is the calculation done?

>

> dave

 

In the EGA system you need a minimum of ten scores from players with handicaps of 36 or less.

 

For the calculations for the CBA, check page 45:

 

https://www.golfbelgium.be/files/PDFs/EGA%20Handicap%20System/EGA-RBGF%202013-2016%20version%202013-2.pdf

[HatsForBats]

Some old guys, playing forward tees, are going to freak out over the new Course Handicap calculations but I like it.

[DaveLeeNC]

> @Halebopp said:

> > @DaveLeeNC said:

> > One of the posters implied that a Playing Course Condition Adjustment requires only 8 posted scores. That really isn't very many scores. For places that are already doing a form of PCC, how many scores are they typically dealing with and how is the calculation done?

> >

> > dave

>

> In the EGA system you need a minimum of ten scores from players with handicaps of 36 or less.

>

> For the calculations for the CBA, check page 45:

>

> https://www.golfbelgium.be/files/PDFs/EGA%20Handicap%20System/EGA-RBGF%202013-2016%20version%202013-2.pdf

 

Thanks for the link - interesting.

 

I have not crawled through the math but it appears that they assume a certain probability distribution, apply sampling theory, and make adjustments based on those results.

 

I can see some cases where 'sampling theory' is not a good model, but nothing is perfect and over-all I can believe that this could generate better results than doing nothing. One example of 'imperfection' would be our local MGA which is quite an old group (average age well into the 70's). These guys play all the time, are mostly short and straight, and their higher indexes are due in large part to the fact that they cannot hit the ball 175 yards in the air with any club in their bag (tee or not). Put them on a longer but wide open course and that field on a typical day will generate much different results (against expectations) vs. this same group on a tighter but shorter course that is similarly rated.

 

But like I said - lack of perfection should not prevent 'better'.

 

dave

[Newby]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @"Colin L" said:

> > I hope this is relevant. The player's full, unrestricted Course Handicap is used for net double bogey adjustment. For this purpose, the Course Handicap is rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.

> >

> > Any handicap allowance restriction or strokes received (e.g. in mixed tee competitions) are used only for the purposes of the competition.

>

> Mixed tee competitions no longer get an additional adjustment, as the previous differential in rating adjustment **is replaced with the new delta** between par and rating in EVERYONE'S handicap.

 

I must admit I am still struggling with the USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par) and the CONGU choice CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par). But is this what you mean?

 

 

 

[Sawgrass]

> @Newby said:

> > @Sawgrass said:

> > > @"Colin L" said:

> > > I hope this is relevant. The player's full, unrestricted Course Handicap is used for net double bogey adjustment. For this purpose, the Course Handicap is rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.

> > >

> > > Any handicap allowance restriction or strokes received (e.g. in mixed tee competitions) are used only for the purposes of the competition.

> >

> > Mixed tee competitions no longer get an additional adjustment, as the previous differential in rating adjustment **is replaced with the new delta** between par and rating in EVERYONE'S handicap.

>

> I must admit I am still struggling with the USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par) and the CONGU choice CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par). But is this what you mean?

>

>

>

 

Yes.

 

Currently players competing from different tees here establish their handicaps from the tees which they are playing, and then adjust those handicaps based on the difference between the two tees’ associated course ratings.

 

It seems that subtracting par from the course rating for all players effectively does the same thing next year (close to it, anyhow).

[ThinkingPlus]

> @CaseyC said:

> > @ThinkingPlus said:

>

> >

> > All very true, however, the purpose of a poster is to be a standalone infograph that contains the most pertinent information in a simple form that everyone can understand. If one has to cross reference multiple posters to understand a single poster it sort of defeats the whole purpose of having posters in the first place.

>

> How would you word a single poster?

>

 

I would show a portion blowup of a scorecard with the handicap holes and par shown. The narrative would specify the player's Course Handicap and discuss scores on two holes (one with a stroke and one without). The handicap hole number, whether a stroke was received, and what the NDB limit would be for each hole would be specified. The key concept that differentiates NDB from ESC is the need to know the handicap holes. That needs to be emphasized in the narrative.

[Newby]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @Newby said:

> > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > @"Colin L" said:

> > > > I hope this is relevant. The player's full, unrestricted Course Handicap is used for net double bogey adjustment. For this purpose, the Course Handicap is rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.

> > > >

> > > > Any handicap allowance restriction or strokes received (e.g. in mixed tee competitions) are used only for the purposes of the competition.

> > >

> > > Mixed tee competitions no longer get an additional adjustment, as the previous differential in rating adjustment **is replaced with the new delta** between par and rating in EVERYONE'S handicap.

> >

> > I must admit I am still struggling with the USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par) and the CONGU choice CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par). But is this what you mean?

> >

> >

> >

>

> Yes.

>

> Currently players competing from different tees here establish their handicaps from the tees which they are playing, and then adjust those handicaps based on the difference between the two tees’ associated course ratings.

>

> It seems that subtracting par from the course rating for all players effectively does the same thing next year (close to it, anyhow).

 

Should I have said "USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-CR) " ?

[Roadking2003]

> @Augustok said:

> Another potential issue about the new handicap change is will clubs actually use daily handicap revisions? How will leagues function having to check new handicaps every morning. Will clubs just freeze handicaps on a Monday for instance for the week? Some people actually play most days and there would be constant handicap changes.

 

I don't see a problem with daily handicap calculations. GHIN does it for you. So what's the problem?

[Sawgrass]

> @Newby said:

> > @Sawgrass said:

> > > @Newby said:

> > > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > > @"Colin L" said:

> > > > > I hope this is relevant. The player's full, unrestricted Course Handicap is used for net double bogey adjustment. For this purpose, the Course Handicap is rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.

> > > > >

> > > > > Any handicap allowance restriction or strokes received (e.g. in mixed tee competitions) are used only for the purposes of the competition.

> > > >

> > > > Mixed tee competitions no longer get an additional adjustment, as the previous differential in rating adjustment **is replaced with the new delta** between par and rating in EVERYONE'S handicap.

> > >

> > > I must admit I am still struggling with the USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par) and the CONGU choice CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par). But is this what you mean?

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Yes.

> >

> > Currently players competing from different tees here establish their handicaps from the tees which they are playing, and then adjust those handicaps based on the difference between the two tees’ associated course ratings.

> >

> > It seems that subtracting par from the course rating for all players effectively does the same thing next year (close to it, anyhow).

>

> Should I have said "USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-CR) " ?

 

CR-CR?

[Augustok]

The problem with daily handicaps for instance is a group of 24, and having to wait until the morning of to do the cards. Some people do in fact play every day so changes would be more rapid than the occasional player. I was talking to someone today and pointed out on our course they got 2 strokes on one par five, 1 stroke on another. Therefore maximum would be 9 and 8. Plus 1 stroke on par 3s - max 5, but no stroke on one of the par 4s meaning max 6 on that one but max 7 on the rest. And if anyone puts those USGA explanation posters up on bulletin boards it will make things even more confusing for golfers with higher handicaps especially.

[CaseyC]

> @Augustok said:

> The problem with daily handicaps for instance is a group of 24, and having to wait until the morning of to do the cards. Some people do in fact play every day so changes would be more rapid than the occasional player. I was talking to someone today and pointed out on our course they got 2 strokes on one par five, 1 stroke on another. Therefore maximum would be 9 and 8. Plus 1 stroke on par 3s - max 5, but no stroke on one of the par 4s meaning max 6 on that one but max 7 on the rest. And if anyone puts those USGA explanation posters up on bulletin boards it will make things even more confusing for golfers with higher handicaps especially.

 

How does one get 2 HC strokes on one hole and 0 HC strokes on another? If you are an 18 HC, it's 1 stroke per hole. What is this persons HC in the above situation?

[Colin L]

If your Playing Handicap is 19, you get 2 strokes at Stroke Index 1; if it is 20, you get 2 strokes at Stroke Index 1 and 2; and so on.

[Augster]

> @Augustok said:

> The problem with daily handicaps for instance is a group of 24, and having to wait until the morning of to do the cards. Some people do in fact play every day so changes would be more rapid than the occasional player. I was talking to someone today and pointed out on our course they got 2 strokes on one par five, 1 stroke on another. Therefore maximum would be 9 and 8. Plus 1 stroke on par 3s - max 5, but no stroke on one of the par 4s meaning max 6 on that one but max 7 on the rest. And if anyone puts those USGA explanation posters up on bulletin boards it will make things even more confusing for golfers with higher handicaps especially.

 

As pointed out above, this isn’t possible. If the guy is an 18, he gets 1 shot on all. If he’s a 19, he gets 1 shot on all and 2 shots on the 1-handicap hole. Etc. etc.

 

In other words, if a guy gets 2 shots on a hole, there are ZERO holes where he gets ZERO shots.

 

Also, if he gets a shot on a par3, he can post up to a 6 on that hole. (NDB)

 

[Augustok]

You are right there is a stroke on the short par 4 too.

[James the Hogan Fan]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @Newby said:

> > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > @Newby said:

> > > > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > > > @"Colin L" said:

> > > > > > I hope this is relevant. The player's full, unrestricted Course Handicap is used for net double bogey adjustment. For this purpose, the Course Handicap is rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Any handicap allowance restriction or strokes received (e.g. in mixed tee competitions) are used only for the purposes of the competition.

> > > > >

> > > > > Mixed tee competitions no longer get an additional adjustment, as the previous differential in rating adjustment **is replaced with the new delta** between par and rating in EVERYONE'S handicap.

> > > >

> > > > I must admit I am still struggling with the USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par) and the CONGU choice CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par). But is this what you mean?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > Yes.

> > >

> > > Currently players competing from different tees here establish their handicaps from the tees which they are playing, and then adjust those handicaps based on the difference between the two tees’ associated course ratings.

> > >

> > > It seems that subtracting par from the course rating for all players effectively does the same thing next year (close to it, anyhow).

> >

> > Should I have said "USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-CR) " ?

>

> CR-CR?

 

I think he meant (CR_2-CR_1) The difference between ratings from the two tee sets.

[larrybud]

> @Sawgrass said:

> > @Newby said:

> > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > @"Colin L" said:

> > > > I hope this is relevant. The player's full, unrestricted Course Handicap is used for net double bogey adjustment. For this purpose, the Course Handicap is rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.

> > > >

> > > > Any handicap allowance restriction or strokes received (e.g. in mixed tee competitions) are used only for the purposes of the competition.

> > >

> > > Mixed tee competitions no longer get an additional adjustment, as the previous differential in rating adjustment **is replaced with the new delta** between par and rating in EVERYONE'S handicap.

> >

> > I must admit I am still struggling with the USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par) and the CONGU choice CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par). But is this what you mean?

>

> Yes.

>

> Currently players competing from different tees here establish their handicaps from the tees which they are playing, and then adjust those handicaps based on the difference between the two tees’ associated course ratings.

>

> It seems that subtracting par from the course rating for all players effectively does the same thing next year (close to it, anyhow).

 

Yeah, it's a simplified version of the old version since you're still effectively taking the difference in the course rating of the two (or more) tee boxes since you're adding it to the course handicap. The subtraction of par is fairly arbitrary, since USUALLY par is the same for everybody. They could have as easily said subtract 72 or 36.

[larrybud]

> @Roadking2003 said:

> > @Augustok said:

> > Another potential issue about the new handicap change is will clubs actually use daily handicap revisions? How will leagues function having to check new handicaps every morning. Will clubs just freeze handicaps on a Monday for instance for the week? Some people actually play most days and there would be constant handicap changes.

>

> I don't see a problem with daily handicap calculations. GHIN does it for you. So what's the problem?

 

The current "trend" is your daily handicap. I can see problems of people lagging behind before an event, but I suppose that could happen now if you don't get your scores in by the revision date.

 

As far as the ESC max of net double bogey, the more I think of it, let's just get rid of ESC, or force players to enter hole by hole score. The vast majority of players aren't going to know how to figure it out, sadly.

[Sawgrass]

For an 18 course handicap player, today the ESC max is 7 on any hole. With the new system, this player will have a max 7 for any par four, a max 6 on any par three, and a max 8 on any par five.

 

That's not much of a difference given that par threes go down and par fives go up, but it does feel more equitable.

[HatsForBats]

> @Newby said:

> > @Sawgrass said:

> > > @Newby said:

> > > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > > @"Colin L" said:

> > > > > I hope this is relevant. The player's full, unrestricted Course Handicap is used for net double bogey adjustment. For this purpose, the Course Handicap is rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.

> > > > >

> > > > > Any handicap allowance restriction or strokes received (e.g. in mixed tee competitions) are used only for the purposes of the competition.

> > > >

> > > > Mixed tee competitions no longer get an additional adjustment, as the previous differential in rating adjustment **is replaced with the new delta** between par and rating in EVERYONE'S handicap.

> > >

> > > I must admit I am still struggling with the USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par) and the CONGU choice CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par). But is this what you mean?

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Yes.

> >

> > Currently players competing from different tees here establish their handicaps from the tees which they are playing, and then adjust those handicaps based on the difference between the two tees’ associated course ratings.

> >

> > It seems that subtracting par from the course rating for all players effectively does the same thing next year (close to it, anyhow).

>

> Should I have said "USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-CR) " ?

 

Yes

[DaveLeeNC]

> @larrybud said:

> > @Sawgrass said:

> > > @Newby said:

> > > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > > @"Colin L" said:

> > > > > I hope this is relevant. The player's full, unrestricted Course Handicap is used for net double bogey adjustment. For this purpose, the Course Handicap is rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.

> > > > >

> > > > > Any handicap allowance restriction or strokes received (e.g. in mixed tee competitions) are used only for the purposes of the competition.

> > > >

> > > > Mixed tee competitions no longer get an additional adjustment, as the previous differential in rating adjustment **is replaced with the new delta** between par and rating in EVERYONE'S handicap.

> > >

> > > I must admit I am still struggling with the USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par) and the CONGU choice CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par). But is this what you mean?

> >

> > Yes.

> >

> > Currently players competing from different tees here establish their handicaps from the tees which they are playing, and then adjust those handicaps based on the difference between the two tees’ associated course ratings.

> >

> > It seems that subtracting par from the course rating for all players effectively does the same thing next year (close to it, anyhow).

>

> Yeah, it's a simplified version of the old version since you're still effectively taking the difference in the course rating of the two (or more) tee boxes since you're adding it to the course handicap. The subtraction of par is fairly arbitrary, since USUALLY par is the same for everybody. They could have as easily said subtract 72 or 36.

 

Any arbitrary # works for the case of two players competing and all that matters is the difference in their performance.

 

But using PAR is crucial for calculating rational 'max hole scores' and rational Stableford scores (something that, IMHO, should be far more common in the US than it is).

 

dave

[ThinkingPlus]

> @DaveLeeNC said:

> > @larrybud said:

> > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > @Newby said:

> > > > > @Sawgrass said:

> > > > > > @"Colin L" said:

> > > > > > I hope this is relevant. The player's full, unrestricted Course Handicap is used for net double bogey adjustment. For this purpose, the Course Handicap is rounded up or down to the nearest whole number.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Any handicap allowance restriction or strokes received (e.g. in mixed tee competitions) are used only for the purposes of the competition.

> > > > >

> > > > > Mixed tee competitions no longer get an additional adjustment, as the previous differential in rating adjustment **is replaced with the new delta** between par and rating in EVERYONE'S handicap.

> > > >

> > > > I must admit I am still struggling with the USGA formula CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par) and the CONGU choice CH = HI * (SR/113) + (CR-Par). But is this what you mean?

> > >

> > > Yes.

> > >

> > > Currently players competing from different tees here establish their handicaps from the tees which they are playing, and then adjust those handicaps based on the difference between the two tees’ associated course ratings.

> > >

> > > It seems that subtracting par from the course rating for all players effectively does the same thing next year (close to it, anyhow).

> >

> > Yeah, it's a simplified version of the old version since you're still effectively taking the difference in the course rating of the two (or more) tee boxes since you're adding it to the course handicap. The subtraction of par is fairly arbitrary, since USUALLY par is the same for everybody. They could have as easily said subtract 72 or 36.

>

> Any arbitrary # works for the case of two players competing and all that matters is the difference in their performance.

>

> But using PAR is crucial for calculating rational 'max hole scores' and rational Stableford scores (something that, IMHO, should be far more common in the US than it is).

>

> dave

 

I like the inclusion of par in the calcs, but I will take a hard pass on Stableford.

[Augster]

I love Stableford or Chicago. When I end up running things, it’ll be Stableford every day instead of low net.

 

Really, who wants to grind over a putt for an 8? Pick it up and get on with it. Try to do better next hole.

[Deceptively Short]

With NDB as a max score, basically all scores in future will be ‘Stableford’ or at least easily converted into Stableford.

 

[ThinkingPlus]

> @Augster said:

> I love Stableford or Chicago. When I end up running things, it’ll be Stableford every day instead of low net.

>

> Really, who wants to grind over a putt for an 8? Pick it up and get on with it. Try to do better next hole.

 

Actually I want you to. Lower caps should never play net Stableford comps unless it's flighted because statistically, higher caps have more volatile scores which get truncated at the top end. I suspect, although admittedly I haven't run the numbers so its speculative, that what keeps the lower caps competitive in a net event is the volatility of the higher caps.

[Deceptively Short]

So does this mean that if I play a game in Spain or the USA against a local, their app will be calculating their course handicap including cr-par and my CONGU app will not? Then we will have to decide which system to use in deciding the number of shots given or received?