Did the 2016 USGA solo round posting change create people that look like sandbaggers but aren't?

[bortass]

> @Sean2 said:

> I find this to be a rather misguided rule. Lots of folks play solo from time to time, and it's not like when you do play with other people they are tracking your score.

 

So what is the purpose of the rule( asking in general not you specifically Sean)? I had hoped to hear what impact this change has had in the US but really haven't. It was done for a reason yet the rule itself, if I read things correctly, only requires you to not be alone for X number of holes. I believe that if my wife who doesn't golf were to accompany me on the course I can post. Not sure how that would help prevent sandbagging, if that was the point.

 

I know that if I am playing a non event round with people that are not friends of mine, I don't care what they are doing. Take mulligans, improve your lie, whatever as long as you're not slowing things down, etc. The only score I keep is my own. Having me or them there is not going to change what gets posted in GHIN.

 

[davep043]

> @bortass said:

> > @Sean2 said:

> > I find this to be a rather misguided rule. Lots of folks play solo from time to time, and it's not like when you do play with other people they are tracking your score.

>

> So what is the purpose of the rule( asking in general not you specifically Sean)? I had hoped to hear what impact this change has had in the US but really haven't. It was done for a reason yet the rule itself, if I read things correctly, only requires you to not be alone for X number of holes. I believe that if my wife who doesn't golf were to accompany me on the course I can post. Not sure how that would help prevent sandbagging, if that was the point.

>

> I know that if I am playing a non event round with people that are not friends of mine, I don't care what they are doing. Take mulligans, improve your lie, whatever as long as you're not slowing things down, etc. The only score I keep is my own. Having me or them there is not going to change what gets posted in GHIN.

>

 

One of the prime tenets of the handicap system is that your scoring record is subject to peer review. If you are alone, there is absolutely ZERO chance of anyone being able to review your score. By requiring you to be in the company of someone else, there is at least a minimal opportunity. Certainly they could have made the rule stronger, requiring prior registration and attestation for instance, but this was a baby step, and still created a furor. We may indeed see further procedures installed to decrease the chances to sandbag, and every one will be met by howls of protest from people who don't want to change.

 

Handicaps are meant to facilitate fair competition. Competition means playing with (and/or against) other people. The scores that count logically should be from rounds played with other people.

 

In my opinion, the new rule probably has created a new class of cheaters. These are the people who have decided that the rules don't apply to ME, I'll post my solo scores if I want to, I'm more important than the rules. These folks may be absolutely honest in their scorekeeping and posting, yet they're still deliberately choosing to break the handicap rules. In my mind, that's cheating, but not necessarily sandbagging. I struggle to understand that many of these people feel virtuous, that they're somehow doing the right thing when they decide that they're above the rules.

[cgr]

> @SecondandGoal said:

> I think most of you are missing the OP's point. I don't think the OP is talking about playing worse with others vs. alone.

>

> What he's saying is that he hasn't played in awhile, so his cap is at its highest (30-ish). By starting to play regularly again, he believes he will *improve* dramatically, scoring closer to when he had his low index of 19-ish. If the majority of those rounds are played solo, he can't post them, so his index will remain roughly the same.

>

> Let's say he plays 40 rounds over a 10 week period, shooting 100+ at the beginning, but having the last 15 or so rounds around 90 because he's getting his swing back. If he plays 38 of those 40 rounds by himself, and can only post 2 of the rounds, his index isn't going to move much, but he's playing much better golf. That's a case of **someone playing much better than their completely legitimate high handicap**.

>

> One thing my club does to prevent this kind of thing is require a minimum number of rounds posted to qualify for a tournament.

 

I can see that with playing solo for score versus playing with groups for skins too. Aggressive, potentially less safe play in the skins group compared to conservative, metered play solo that wouldn't get posted. Being hyper aggressive, it's a lot easier to make a double than a birdie.

[bladehunter]

> @davep043 said:

> > @bortass said:

> > > @Sean2 said:

> > > I find this to be a rather misguided rule. Lots of folks play solo from time to time, and it's not like when you do play with other people they are tracking your score.

> >

> > So what is the purpose of the rule( asking in general not you specifically Sean)? I had hoped to hear what impact this change has had in the US but really haven't. It was done for a reason yet the rule itself, if I read things correctly, only requires you to not be alone for X number of holes. I believe that if my wife who doesn't golf were to accompany me on the course I can post. Not sure how that would help prevent sandbagging, if that was the point.

> >

> > I know that if I am playing a non event round with people that are not friends of mine, I don't care what they are doing. Take mulligans, improve your lie, whatever as long as you're not slowing things down, etc. The only score I keep is my own. Having me or them there is not going to change what gets posted in GHIN.

> >

>

> One of the prime tenets of the handicap system is that your scoring record is subject to peer review. If you are alone, there is absolutely ZERO chance of anyone being able to review your score. By requiring you to be in the company of someone else, there is at least a minimal opportunity. Certainly they could have made the rule stronger, requiring prior registration and attestation for instance, but this was a baby step, and still created a furor. We may indeed see further procedures installed to decrease the chances to sandbag, and every one will be met by howls of protest from people who don't want to change.

>

> Handicaps are meant to facilitate fair competition. Competition means playing with (and/or against) other people. The scores that count logically should be from rounds played with other people.

>

> In my opinion, the new rule probably has created a new class of cheaters. These are the people who have decided that the rules don't apply to ME, I'll post my solo scores if I want to, I'm more important than the rules. These folks may be absolutely honest in their scorekeeping and posting, yet they're still deliberately choosing to break the handicap rules. In my mind, that's cheating, but not necessarily sandbagging. I struggle to understand that many of these people feel virtuous, that they're somehow doing the right thing when they decide that they're above the rules.

 

Dave , all of that is true , in theory.

 

 

But in practice it’s only true in pockets . We’ve proven that the opposite is also true here. The two resident baggers we helped run off this past year joined a bigger private club 30 min away. And teamed up to with the member member at that new club , and capture the net points title for the year. I played with one of them Saturday , and witnessed him being 6 under par on 12. He did however give 3 of those back between 12 and 18. He’s currently playing as a 5 handicap. Down from an 8. So he’s been able to continue his ways at another club this year. Peer review and all.

 

And to anyone who asks why id play with him. Well it’s fun taking a dollar off a cheat. And the more competition the more potential dollars to take. That’s heads up. But net ? No chance I’d play with any of them.

[davep043]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @davep043 said:

> >

> > One of the prime tenets of the handicap system is that your scoring record is subject to peer review. If you are alone, there is absolutely ZERO chance of anyone being able to review your score. By requiring you to be in the company of someone else, there is at least a minimal opportunity.

>

> Dave , all of that is true , in theory.

>

>

> But in practice it’s only true in pockets . We’ve proven that the opposite is also true here. The two resident baggers we helped run off this past year joined a bigger private club 30 min away. And teamed up to with the member member at that new club , and capture the net points title for the year. I played with one of them Saturday , and witnessed him being 6 under par on 12. He did however give 3 of those back between 12 and 18. He’s currently playing as a 5 handicap. Down from an 8. So he’s been able to continue his ways at another club this year. Peer review and all.

>

> And to anyone who asks why id play with him. Well it’s fun taking a dollar off a cheat. And the more competition the more potential dollars to take. That’s heads up. But net ? No chance I’d play with any of them.

 

No, that is 100% true, no matter what. If you are alone, there is not a single person in the world who can "review" your score.

 

And I'm not sure what "opposite" you've proven. Your group of cheating ba5tards would cheat on their handicaps, regardless of the prohibition on posting solo rounds. The rule change a few years ago, didn't create sandbaggers, they were sandbaggers already.

[SNIPERBBB]

I think peer review is really a poor choice of words for the handicap system. To some it means you can see the scores and you can flat anomalies for consideration as an event organizer or handicap committee. To others it's physically witnessing the play of rounds being posted.

 

Organizers of big money tournaments should require X scores posted within a Y period of time to participate in any net tournament.

[bortass]

Sandbaggers have and always will exist. No matter what is done, someone will find a way to game the system. That's a reflection upon and of them.

 

Playing the hypothetical, which is why I asked about this rule.

 

Say I am able to start playing and practicing like I used too and that my index will be the same as when I stopped carrying one years ago, 30.3. I do what I did before and post every round that I am **allowed** to post. My game improves but a good portion of said rounds are solo and cannot be posted, so my index lags behind, which is tends to do with an improving player anyways, but now it will be longer.

 

If I am playing like a 23 but my index is a 28, would you consider me as a sandbagger? I could envision someone dropping me in with the pool of the actual sandbaggers. Intent matters, IMO, but it's not like others may be aware of the scenario that I laid out.

 

At the end of the day it's a moot point and, at least for me, won't matter in the greater scheme of things. I'm not the type to be looking for a money game. My history was to play in just the club tournaments, mostly scrambles, and sporadically a very low stakes points game where I do good because of the format.

[davep043]

> @bortass said:

> Sandbaggers have and always will exist. No matter what is done, someone will find a way to game the system. That's a reflection upon and of them.

>

> Playing the hypothetical, which is why I asked about this rule.

>

> Say I am able to start playing and practicing like I used too and that my index will be the same as when I stopped carrying one years ago, 30.3. I do what I did before and post every round that I am **allowed** to post. My game improves but a good portion of said rounds are solo and cannot be posted, so my index lags behind, which is tends to do with an improving player anyways, but now it will be longer.

>

> If I am playing like a 23 but my index is a 28, would you consider me as a sandbagger? I could envision someone dropping me in with the pool of the actual sandbaggers. Intent matters, IMO, but it's not like others may be aware of the scenario that I laid out.

>

> At the end of the day it's a moot point and, at least for me, won't matter in the greater scheme of things. I'm not the type to be looking for a money game. My history was to play in just the club tournaments, mostly scrambles, and sporadically a very low stakes points game where I do good because of the format.

 

I understand your point, but I think the use of the word "sandbagger" confuses your point a bit. Sandbagging, to me, means intentional manipulation of your handicap, and that's not what you're talking about. The elimination of solo rounds form your handicap record certainly can mean that your HI is slower to react to changes in your game than it otherwise would. Keep in mind, that would also mean that its slower to increase if your game deteriorates, meaning you are under-handicapped. **But if you post all appropriate scores in accordance with the rules, you are NOT a sandbagger.**

 

Most important, welcome back to playing, I hope you improve quickly enough to have the problem we're talking about.

[bladehunter]

> @davep043 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @davep043 said:

> > >

> > > One of the prime tenets of the handicap system is that your scoring record is subject to peer review. If you are alone, there is absolutely ZERO chance of anyone being able to review your score. By requiring you to be in the company of someone else, there is at least a minimal opportunity.

> >

> > Dave , all of that is true , in theory.

> >

> >

> > But in practice it’s only true in pockets . We’ve proven that the opposite is also true here. The two resident baggers we helped run off this past year joined a bigger private club 30 min away. And teamed up to with the member member at that new club , and capture the net points title for the year. I played with one of them Saturday , and witnessed him being 6 under par on 12. He did however give 3 of those back between 12 and 18. He’s currently playing as a 5 handicap. Down from an 8. So he’s been able to continue his ways at another club this year. Peer review and all.

> >

> > And to anyone who asks why id play with him. Well it’s fun taking a dollar off a cheat. And the more competition the more potential dollars to take. That’s heads up. But net ? No chance I’d play with any of them.

>

> No, that is 100% true, no matter what. If you are alone, there is not a single person in the world who can "review" your score.

>

> And I'm not sure what "opposite" you've proven. Your group of cheating ba5tards would cheat on their handicaps, regardless of the prohibition on posting solo rounds. The rule change a few years ago, didn't create sandbaggers, they were sandbaggers already.

 

No. But it does make sandbaggers out of some honest folks who play alone a lot. The more data entered the more complete the real handicap.

 

And let’s be honest. There’s zero peer review going on now when playing with a group. Nobody is attesting your or my score. I can post any number I want. Why criminalize the single for doing the exact same thing you and i are doing. Playing and posting what we choose ( accurate or not ).

[davep043]

> @bladehunter said:

> No. ** But it does make sandbaggers out of some honest folks who play alone a lot.** The more data entered the more complete the real handicap.

>

> And let’s be honest. There’s zero peer review going on now when playing with a group. Nobody is attesting your or my score. I can post any number I want. Why criminalize the single for **doing the exact same thing you and i are doing**. Playing and posting what we choose ( accurate or not ).

 

You're telling us all that to you, "sandbaggers" includes people who follow all the rules? I just don't agree, sandbaggers are cheaters, players who purposely manipulate their handicaps outside of the rules. We're not "criminalizing" anyone who follows the rules, at least I'm not. The folks who do the exact same thing I am doing are CHOOSING to play and post their score in accordance with the rules. The people who CHOOSE to post their solo rounds are CHOOSING to BREAK THE RULES, which is definitely not "exactly what I am doing." They may not be doing it to gain an advantage, but they ARE putting their own preferences above playing by the rules.

 

You claim that there's no peer review anywhere, and I know you're wrong. At least with the group I play with, and with most of the active players at my club, we're reviewing scorecards of each other, and generally posting at the table after the round. Tournament scores are entered by the pro shop, and double checked. That's not the case everywhere, I know, but its not uncommon at many clubs.

[HatsForBats]

> @bortass said:

> Playing the hypothetical, which is why I asked about this rule.

>

> Say I am able to start playing and practicing like I used too and that my index will be the same as when I stopped carrying one years ago, 30.3. I do what I did before and post every round that I am **allowed** to post. My game improves but a good portion of said rounds are solo and cannot be posted, so my index lags behind, which is tends to do with an improving player anyways, but now it will be longer.

>

> If I am playing like a 23 but my index is a 28, would you consider me as a sandbagger? I could envision someone dropping me in with the pool of the actual sandbaggers. Intent matters, IMO, but it's not like others may be aware of the scenario that I laid out.

>

 

At least there is something in the new system that has the potential to reduce your handicap if you play like a 23 index when your actual index is a 28. I assume this is automatically applied but not 100% sure on that and it looks like the handicap committee has the ability to override it which I am not sure how that works either.

 

 

 

 

[SNIPERBBB]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @davep043 said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @davep043 said:

> > > >

> > > > One of the prime tenets of the handicap system is that your scoring record is subject to peer review. If you are alone, there is absolutely ZERO chance of anyone being able to review your score. By requiring you to be in the company of someone else, there is at least a minimal opportunity.

> > >

> > > Dave , all of that is true , in theory.

> > >

> > >

> > > But in practice it’s only true in pockets . We’ve proven that the opposite is also true here. The two resident baggers we helped run off this past year joined a bigger private club 30 min away. And teamed up to with the member member at that new club , and capture the net points title for the year. I played with one of them Saturday , and witnessed him being 6 under par on 12. He did however give 3 of those back between 12 and 18. He’s currently playing as a 5 handicap. Down from an 8. So he’s been able to continue his ways at another club this year. Peer review and all.

> > >

> > > And to anyone who asks why id play with him. Well it’s fun taking a dollar off a cheat. And the more competition the more potential dollars to take. That’s heads up. But net ? No chance I’d play with any of them.

> >

> > No, that is 100% true, no matter what. If you are alone, there is not a single person in the world who can "review" your score.

> >

> > And I'm not sure what "opposite" you've proven. Your group of cheating ba5tards would cheat on their handicaps, regardless of the prohibition on posting solo rounds. The rule change a few years ago, didn't create sandbaggers, they were sandbaggers already.

>

> No. But it does make sandbaggers out of some honest folks who play alone a lot. The more data entered the more complete the real handicap.

>

> And let’s be honest. There’s zero peer review going on now when playing with a group. Nobody is attesting your or my score. I can post any number I want. Why criminalize the single for doing the exact same thing you and i are doing. Playing and posting what we choose ( accurate or not ).

 

Simple solution to that is no more public handicap computers and any internet posted scores needs a scorecard turned in

[bladehunter]

> @davep043 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > No. ** But it does make sandbaggers out of some honest folks who play alone a lot.** The more data entered the more complete the real handicap.

> >

> > And let’s be honest. There’s zero peer review going on now when playing with a group. Nobody is attesting your or my score. I can post any number I want. Why criminalize the single for **doing the exact same thing you and i are doing**. Playing and posting what we choose ( accurate or not ).

>

> You're telling us all that to you, "sandbaggers" includes people who follow all the rules? I just don't agree, sandbaggers are cheaters, players who purposely manipulate their handicaps outside of the rules. We're not "criminalizing" anyone who follows the rules, at least I'm not. The folks who do the exact same thing I am doing are CHOOSING to play and post their score in accordance with the rules. The people who CHOOSE to post their solo rounds are CHOOSING to BREAK THE RULES, which is definitely not "exactly what I am doing." They may not be doing it to gain an advantage, but they ARE putting their own preferences above playing by the rules.

>

> You claim that there's no peer review anywhere, and I know you're wrong. At least with the group I play with, and with most of the active players at my club, we're reviewing scorecards of each other, and generally posting at the table after the round. Tournament scores are entered by the pro shop, and double checked. That's not the case everywhere, I know, but its not uncommon at many clubs.

 

Lol. Slow down Dave. You’re misunderstanding me or I’m not explaining clearly.

 

I’m not saying that my cheaters are ok nor am I saying they are doing what you and I do.

 

I’m saying that you or I could tomorow decide to cheat and nobody would know or be able to catch us until we crossed the line into the absurd like my idiots have. For instance. A 5 handicap could pull off being a 7 no sweat. Now I’m talking in the abstract. I abhor cheating. I tell mine to their faces. They still come back to play in gross games. And frankly the few of us I’d call honest are outnumbered. So it’s not as if running 1 guy off will matter. But I digress.

 

I’m saying that posting without a witness listed is no different than if a single posted his round. Both have zero witness to call on. Sure. My guys may know what I shoot. But I post later on the ap. And our club doesn’t post scores for anybody unless I personally police some of the cheats and call on the committee to do it ( vote with me ). But the guy padding 1-3 shots here or there will never be caught.

 

I just don’t see the need to criminalize singles posting. I empathize with them as I started out that way. And wouldn’t have had any handicap if I couldn’t post single rounds. Try to look past the arbitrary new rule. And think right vs wrong. Rules are written by flawed people. Sometimes you have to think about what makes real sense. Just because I question it doesn’t mean I’d break the rule. Just like I won’t follow a rule just because it is a rule. I’d prefer the rule have a point that plays out in real application and preforms a service of some kind. I do not think that this rule does anything.

[bortass]

@HatsForBats That's a great infographic. Good to see that the new system has some built in controls.

[davep043]

> @bladehunter said:

> I just don’t see the need to criminalize singles posting. I empathize with them as I started out that way. And wouldn’t have had any handicap if I couldn’t post single rounds. Try to look past the arbitrary new rule. And think right vs wrong. Rules are written by flawed people. Sometimes you have to think about what makes real sense. Just because I question it doesn’t mean I’d break the rule. Just like I won’t follow a rule just because it is a rule. **I’d prefer the rule have a point that plays out in real application **and preforms a service of some kind. I do not think that this rule does anything.

 

The rule has a rather valid point, in my opinion. Handicaps are specifically intended to allow fair competition between players with different abilities. Competition means playing with someone else. Its is completely logical, then, to base a handicap on only those instances where you actually play with someone else. If you play about the same, with or without companions, the rule has no effect. If you consistently play differently, either better or worse, the rule makes your handicap more representative of your playing history when you've played with other people. Understand, I'm talking about its effect on those people who actually follow the rule.

 

When this happened, I thought there may have been another motivation for the rule. This change brought our handicap posting practices into slightly closer conformity with the way things are done in the rest of the world. This was, in my view, the very first step towards the World Handicap System, even if it wasn't ever publicized that way.

[DaveLeeNC]

> @SNIPERBBB said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @davep043 said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > @davep043 said:

> > > > >

> > > > > One of the prime tenets of the handicap system is that your scoring record is subject to peer review. If you are alone, there is absolutely ZERO chance of anyone being able to review your score. By requiring you to be in the company of someone else, there is at least a minimal opportunity.

> > > >

> > > > Dave , all of that is true , in theory.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > But in practice it’s only true in pockets . We’ve proven that the opposite is also true here. The two resident baggers we helped run off this past year joined a bigger private club 30 min away. And teamed up to with the member member at that new club , and capture the net points title for the year. I played with one of them Saturday , and witnessed him being 6 under par on 12. He did however give 3 of those back between 12 and 18. He’s currently playing as a 5 handicap. Down from an 8. So he’s been able to continue his ways at another club this year. Peer review and all.

> > > >

> > > > And to anyone who asks why id play with him. Well it’s fun taking a dollar off a cheat. And the more competition the more potential dollars to take. That’s heads up. But net ? No chance I’d play with any of them.

> > >

> > > No, that is 100% true, no matter what. If you are alone, there is not a single person in the world who can "review" your score.

> > >

> > > And I'm not sure what "opposite" you've proven. Your group of cheating ba5tards would cheat on their handicaps, regardless of the prohibition on posting solo rounds. The rule change a few years ago, didn't create sandbaggers, they were sandbaggers already.

> >

> > No. But it does make sandbaggers out of some honest folks who play alone a lot. The more data entered the more complete the real handicap.

> >

> > And let’s be honest. There’s zero peer review going on now when playing with a group. Nobody is attesting your or my score. I can post any number I want. Why criminalize the single for doing the exact same thing you and i are doing. Playing and posting what we choose ( accurate or not ).

>

> Simple solution to that is no more public handicap computers and any internet posted scores needs a scorecard turned in

 

How is removing 'public handicap computers' (whatever that is) helpful when you can post on the internet? And for the MANY golfers who play on muni courses, who is the recipient of their scorecard and what do you think whoever would do with it?

 

dave

[Sean2]

When you are playing a casual round with friends, or strangers, do you know what each person in the group shot at the end of the round? Did you ensure that each person in the group took the proper drop, followed all the rules, and the like? Do the people you played your round with know what you shot at the conclusion of the round?

 

If you did none of the former, and your playing partners don't know what you shot, what is the point of the rule? A sandbagger is going to sandbag no matter what. So why take it out on the vast majority of singles who follow the rules and post honest scores?

 

Just because the USGA makes a rule doesn't mean it is inviolable. This is yet another failed attempt by the USGA to "grow the game", *rolls eyes.

 

 

 

[SNIPERBBB]

> @DaveLeeNC said:

> > @SNIPERBBB said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @davep043 said:

> > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > @davep043 said:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > One of the prime tenets of the handicap system is that your scoring record is subject to peer review. If you are alone, there is absolutely ZERO chance of anyone being able to review your score. By requiring you to be in the company of someone else, there is at least a minimal opportunity.

> > > > >

> > > > > Dave , all of that is true , in theory.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > But in practice it’s only true in pockets . We’ve proven that the opposite is also true here. The two resident baggers we helped run off this past year joined a bigger private club 30 min away. And teamed up to with the member member at that new club , and capture the net points title for the year. I played with one of them Saturday , and witnessed him being 6 under par on 12. He did however give 3 of those back between 12 and 18. He’s currently playing as a 5 handicap. Down from an 8. So he’s been able to continue his ways at another club this year. Peer review and all.

> > > > >

> > > > > And to anyone who asks why id play with him. Well it’s fun taking a dollar off a cheat. And the more competition the more potential dollars to take. That’s heads up. But net ? No chance I’d play with any of them.

> > > >

> > > > No, that is 100% true, no matter what. If you are alone, there is not a single person in the world who can "review" your score.

> > > >

> > > > And I'm not sure what "opposite" you've proven. Your group of cheating ba5tards would cheat on their handicaps, regardless of the prohibition on posting solo rounds. The rule change a few years ago, didn't create sandbaggers, they were sandbaggers already.

> > >

> > > No. But it does make sandbaggers out of some honest folks who play alone a lot. The more data entered the more complete the real handicap.

> > >

> > > And let’s be honest. There’s zero peer review going on now when playing with a group. Nobody is attesting your or my score. I can post any number I want. Why criminalize the single for doing the exact same thing you and i are doing. Playing and posting what we choose ( accurate or not ).

> >

> > Simple solution to that is no more public handicap computers and any internet posted scores needs a scorecard turned in

>

> How is removing 'public handicap computers' (whatever that is) helpful when you can post on the internet? And for the MANY golfers who play on muni courses, who is the recipient of their scorecard and what do you think whoever would do with it?

>

> dave

 

That's what the handicap committee is for. If you don't have one, don't have net events

[Newby]

> @Sean2 said:

> When you are playing a casual round with friends, or strangers, do you know what each person in the group shot at the end of the round?

>

 

I thought that was the role of a marker. Is it beyond the wit of groups for each player to agree with another to act as a marker. As it happens it is a requirement of the rules. If a player or group is prepared to breach one rule, why not five?

[DaveLeeNC]

> @SNIPERBBB said:

> > @DaveLeeNC said:

> > > @SNIPERBBB said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > @davep043 said:

> > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > @davep043 said:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > One of the prime tenets of the handicap system is that your scoring record is subject to peer review. If you are alone, there is absolutely ZERO chance of anyone being able to review your score. By requiring you to be in the company of someone else, there is at least a minimal opportunity.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Dave , all of that is true , in theory.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > But in practice it’s only true in pockets . We’ve proven that the opposite is also true here. The two resident baggers we helped run off this past year joined a bigger private club 30 min away. And teamed up to with the member member at that new club , and capture the net points title for the year. I played with one of them Saturday , and witnessed him being 6 under par on 12. He did however give 3 of those back between 12 and 18. He’s currently playing as a 5 handicap. Down from an 8. So he’s been able to continue his ways at another club this year. Peer review and all.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > And to anyone who asks why id play with him. Well it’s fun taking a dollar off a cheat. And the more competition the more potential dollars to take. That’s heads up. But net ? No chance I’d play with any of them.

> > > > >

> > > > > No, that is 100% true, no matter what. If you are alone, there is not a single person in the world who can "review" your score.

> > > > >

> > > > > And I'm not sure what "opposite" you've proven. Your group of cheating ba5tards would cheat on their handicaps, regardless of the prohibition on posting solo rounds. The rule change a few years ago, didn't create sandbaggers, they were sandbaggers already.

> > > >

> > > > No. But it does make sandbaggers out of some honest folks who play alone a lot. The more data entered the more complete the real handicap.

> > > >

> > > > And let’s be honest. There’s zero peer review going on now when playing with a group. Nobody is attesting your or my score. I can post any number I want. Why criminalize the single for doing the exact same thing you and i are doing. Playing and posting what we choose ( accurate or not ).

> > >

> > > Simple solution to that is no more public handicap computers and any internet posted scores needs a scorecard turned in

> >

> > How is removing 'public handicap computers' (whatever that is) helpful when you can post on the internet? And for the MANY golfers who play on muni courses, who is the recipient of their scorecard and what do you think whoever would do with it?

> >

> > dave

>

> That's what the handicap committee is for. If you don't have one, don't have net events

 

How is that related to my questions? These muni courses already (most likely) don't hold net events. Or even if they have one per year, how is that related to the questions?

 

dave

[Sean2]

> @Newby said:

> > @Sean2 said:

> > When you are playing a casual round with friends, or strangers, do you know what each person in the group shot at the end of the round?

> >

>

> I thought that was the role of a marker. Is it beyond the wit of groups for each player to agree with another to act as a marker. As it happens it is a requirement of the rules. If a player or group is prepared to breach one rule, why not five?

 

No reason they can't. I play a lot of golf and I have yet to hear anyone suggest using markers. I would also suggest that some people wouldn't feel comfortable with someone keeping their score as they might feel under pressure to perform well, as opposed to just going out and having a good time. I couldn't care less if someone keeps my score or not, what bothers me about the rule is the presumption that a soloist is a sandbagger.

[Newby]

> @DaveLeeNC said:

>

> How is that related to my questions? These muni courses already (most likely) don't hold net events. Or even if they have one per year, how is that related to the questions?

>

> dave

 

If they don't hold net events what is the point of having a handicap?

[SNIPERBBB]

> @DaveLeeNC said:

> > @SNIPERBBB said:

> > > @DaveLeeNC said:

> > > > @SNIPERBBB said:

> > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > @davep043 said:

> > > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > > @davep043 said:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > One of the prime tenets of the handicap system is that your scoring record is subject to peer review. If you are alone, there is absolutely ZERO chance of anyone being able to review your score. By requiring you to be in the company of someone else, there is at least a minimal opportunity.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Dave , all of that is true , in theory.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > But in practice it’s only true in pockets . We’ve proven that the opposite is also true here. The two resident baggers we helped run off this past year joined a bigger private club 30 min away. And teamed up to with the member member at that new club , and capture the net points title for the year. I played with one of them Saturday , and witnessed him being 6 under par on 12. He did however give 3 of those back between 12 and 18. He’s currently playing as a 5 handicap. Down from an 8. So he’s been able to continue his ways at another club this year. Peer review and all.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > And to anyone who asks why id play with him. Well it’s fun taking a dollar off a cheat. And the more competition the more potential dollars to take. That’s heads up. But net ? No chance I’d play with any of them.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > No, that is 100% true, no matter what. If you are alone, there is not a single person in the world who can "review" your score.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > And I'm not sure what "opposite" you've proven. Your group of cheating ba5tards would cheat on their handicaps, regardless of the prohibition on posting solo rounds. The rule change a few years ago, didn't create sandbaggers, they were sandbaggers already.

> > > > >

> > > > > No. But it does make sandbaggers out of some honest folks who play alone a lot. The more data entered the more complete the real handicap.

> > > > >

> > > > > And let’s be honest. There’s zero peer review going on now when playing with a group. Nobody is attesting your or my score. I can post any number I want. Why criminalize the single for doing the exact same thing you and i are doing. Playing and posting what we choose ( accurate or not ).

> > > >

> > > > Simple solution to that is no more public handicap computers and any internet posted scores needs a scorecard turned in

> > >

> > > How is removing 'public handicap computers' (whatever that is) helpful when you can post on the internet? And for the MANY golfers who play on muni courses, who is the recipient of their scorecard and what do you think whoever would do with it?

> > >

> > > dave

> >

> > That's what the handicap committee is for. If you don't have one, don't have net events

>

> How is that related to my questions? These muni courses already (most likely) don't hold net events. Or even if they have one per year, how is that related to the questions?

>

> dave

 

Already said said you would have to turn the card in if posted via the Internet.

[DaveLeeNC]

> @SNIPERBBB said:

> > @DaveLeeNC said:

> > > @SNIPERBBB said:

> > > > @DaveLeeNC said:

> > > > > @SNIPERBBB said:

> > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > @davep043 said:

> > > > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > > > @davep043 said:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > One of the prime tenets of the handicap system is that your scoring record is subject to peer review. If you are alone, there is absolutely ZERO chance of anyone being able to review your score. By requiring you to be in the company of someone else, there is at least a minimal opportunity.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Dave , all of that is true , in theory.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > But in practice it’s only true in pockets . We’ve proven that the opposite is also true here. The two resident baggers we helped run off this past year joined a bigger private club 30 min away. And teamed up to with the member member at that new club , and capture the net points title for the year. I played with one of them Saturday , and witnessed him being 6 under par on 12. He did however give 3 of those back between 12 and 18. He’s currently playing as a 5 handicap. Down from an 8. So he’s been able to continue his ways at another club this year. Peer review and all.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > And to anyone who asks why id play with him. Well it’s fun taking a dollar off a cheat. And the more competition the more potential dollars to take. That’s heads up. But net ? No chance I’d play with any of them.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > No, that is 100% true, no matter what. If you are alone, there is not a single person in the world who can "review" your score.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > And I'm not sure what "opposite" you've proven. Your group of cheating ba5tards would cheat on their handicaps, regardless of the prohibition on posting solo rounds. The rule change a few years ago, didn't create sandbaggers, they were sandbaggers already.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > No. But it does make sandbaggers out of some honest folks who play alone a lot. The more data entered the more complete the real handicap.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > And let’s be honest. There’s zero peer review going on now when playing with a group. Nobody is attesting your or my score. I can post any number I want. Why criminalize the single for doing the exact same thing you and i are doing. Playing and posting what we choose ( accurate or not ).

> > > > >

> > > > > Simple solution to that is no more public handicap computers and any internet posted scores needs a scorecard turned in

> > > >

> > > > How is removing 'public handicap computers' (whatever that is) helpful when you can post on the internet? And for the MANY golfers who play on muni courses, who is the recipient of their scorecard and what do you think whoever would do with it?

> > > >

> > > > dave

> > >

> > > That's what the handicap committee is for. If you don't have one, don't have net events

> >

> > How is that related to my questions? These muni courses already (most likely) don't hold net events. Or even if they have one per year, how is that related to the questions?

> >

> > dave

>

> Already said said you would have to turn the card in if posted via the Internet.

 

Who (whom?) do they give it to and what do they do with it?

 

dave

[DaveLeeNC]

> @Newby said:

> > @DaveLeeNC said:

> >

> > How is that related to my questions? These muni courses already (most likely) don't hold net events. Or even if they have one per year, how is that related to the questions?

> >

> > dave

>

> If they don't hold net events what is the point of having a handicap?

 

The "they" is the various muni clubs. In many cases if they have a 'handicap committee' it is inactive and unable (or unwilling) to process scorecards. The individuals want a handicap so they can compete with others in various events at other clubs or against friends (or even strangers) that they play with anywhere. Most of these 'muni players' pick and choose among a variety of courses in their area (or where-ever they might travel).

 

dave

[Sean2]

This rule may bring up another question: let's say you keep someone's score, is it then incumbent upon you to check with GHIN to ensure he posted it? What if he shot a very low round, and you do go to the trouble of checking GHIN and discover he didn't post the score. Then what? Do you confront the player if you know him? Do you go to the committee? What if he is a stranger and simply introduces himself as "Steve". Do you ask for his last name ("Can you spell that for me please?"), so you can check to see if he posted his score?

 

What if you take a drop and your marker doesn't agree with it? Do you get in an argument about it on the golf course? Do you play two balls then after the round try and track someone down who will give you a ruling?

 

What impact does this rule have on pace of play? Let's say your marker is 100 yards from you and you have a question (and he is walking), you have to call him over, discuss your issue then play your shot. He then has to go back to his ball and play his shot. Or, even if he is in a cart, maybe he has to take his playing partner to his ball first, then ride over to you, discuss the ruling, then go back to his ball, play his shot, then go pick up his playing partner. I am sure the groups behind you on a busy weekend would be thrilled with this.

[SNIPERBBB]

The handicap committee via the pro shop...if the club/course doesn't want to take handicaps seriously, event organizers should be wary of allowing players from that course to use their stated handicap, if they allow them at all.

[davep043]

> @Sean2 said:

>

> No reason they can't. I play a lot of golf and I have yet to hear anyone suggest using markers. I would also suggest that some people wouldn't feel comfortable with someone keeping their score as they might feel under pressure to perform well, as opposed to just going out and having a good time. I couldn't care less if someone keeps my score or not, what bothers me about the rule is the presumption that a soloist is a sandbagger.

 

Perhaps you've paid no attention to the explanations, but it is NOT a presumption that solo players are sandbaggers. Handicaps are meant to be used when competing, competing means playing with others, so the score for handicap should come from the rounds you play with other people. If you shoot the same scores either, way, there's no difference. If you score better when you're alone, or worse, the use of only "accompanied" scores will mean your handicap is more appropriate for competitions, when you are playing with others.

[DaveLeeNC]

> @SNIPERBBB said:

> The handicap committee via the pro shop...if the club/course doesn't want to take handicaps seriously, event organizers should be wary of allowing players from that course to use their stated handicap, if they allow them at all.

 

I think that having a 'stronger' handicap system than is the norm (as practiced today in the US) is important to many folks for very good reasons. But I am not sure that dragging everyone into such a system is workable in the US. I was REALLY expecting a 'two flavor' handicap system - call it 'audited and social' or whatever. Guess that isn't happening.

 

dave

[SNIPERBBB]

I prefer just negotiating strokes amongst friends. All others must play gross.