Playing to your handicap EVERY ROUND

[pinestreetgolf]

On 10/2/2020 at 8:26 AM, cardoustie said:

I have a close friend who says he shoots 74, 75 or 76 every single Thursday in his league.   2.4 index.

 

Courses are rated 73.2 / 133 and 72.1 / 130 

 

Aren't you supposed to play to your cap every 4 or 5 rounds?  I know this was the general measuring stick when it was 10 scores of 20.

 

BTW, he shot 90-90 in the club C's .. which to me is a sign

 

Are there odds for this?  Similar to the Pope of Slope talking about exceptional rounds?

 
I think more than the score matters.  One year our CC was the day before tropical storm Cindy made landfall.  I fired a 92 in absurd conditions and the winning score was 71. Granted it wasn’t two rounds in a row but stuff happens in tournaments that doesn’t happen in casual rounds as far as nerves and conditions go.  It’s not impossible but the fact that it was two in a row is somewhat damning. Also if you shoot 90 by blowing up with a 14 somewhere that is more understandable than 18 bogeys for a golfer claiming to be a low single digit IMO. When I shot the 92 I had over-10 scores on 5 and 16 because I wasn’t long enough to reach the fairway into the TS Cindy wind.

 

Id give him the benefit of the doubt for now but two days in a row is weird. If conditions were placid doubly so.

[TourSpoon]

I am  going to say that he is the worst 2.4 you will ever meet. Most of the guys I know that play that well try to stay under the radar and let their scores do the talking. Then to shoot 90 and follow that up on the same course with another 90 seems ridiculous unless he was injured, playing opposite hand (lefty), or was heavily drinking. I am surprised he didn't withdraw after the first 90.  Maybe I am just a skeptic and sarcastic (of course), but I am not buying it. 

[cardoustie]

His club c was faster greens and harder pins than normal ... home course

 

he plays with same 3 guys every Thursday and they booze a little.  I told him it’s statistically unlikely unless putts are being raked etc

 

he claims it’s legit and no shenanigans

[Shilgy]

28 minutes ago, cardoustie said:

His club c was faster greens and harder pins than normal ... home course

 

he plays with same 3 guys every Thursday and they booze a little.  I told him it’s statistically unlikely unless putts are being raked etc

 

he claims it’s legit and no shenanigans

Sounds like he should drink and giggle during the CC.🥴

[golfandtennisfan]

I’m with the others as that seems a little suspicious. I am the opposite take as I would want to play him for money and take it til he realizes he is only hurting himself (if he ever does). Usually the fastest way to learn is consistently lose money. Not many handicaps that low are going to throw in consecutive 90s. 80 or 85 on a tight course and a bad driving day sure. But there is a reason they are a 2. 

[2bGood]

Just a fun note. If you shot your handicap each round under the old system your handicap would keep going down (because of the multiplier). Under the new system it would stay the same (because it is a pure average). 

Edited October 8, 2020 by 2bGood

[nsxguy]

10 hours ago, 2bGood said:

Just a fun note. If you shot your handicap each round under the old system your handicap would keep going down (because of the multiplier). Under the new system it would stay the same (because it is a pure average). 

 

Don't think so. Can you show the math ?

 

If I was a 9.6 and I kept shooting 80 every round (9.6 diff), my best 10 would add up to 96.0 and my index would be 9.2; .96 of 960.

 

How would it keep going down (under 9.2) if I kept shooting 80/9.6 diff ?

[2bGood]

27 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Don't think so. Can you show the math ?

 

If I was a 9.6 and I kept shooting 80 every round (9.6 diff), my best 10 would add up to 96.0 and my index would be 9.2; .96 of 960.

 

How would it keep going down (under 9.2) if I kept shooting 80/9.6 diff ?

Because shooting 80/9.6 would not be shooting 'your cap' anymore - your cap would 9.2 and you would have to shoot a 9.2 to 'shoot your cap' shooting a 9.6 would be shooting over your cap (and you cap would go back up from 9.2). 

 

Old system:

10 scored average * .96. Ie (10 x 80 ) / 10 * .96 = 76.8 (now you have to shoot 76.8 to 'shoot your cap' shooting 80 would be over your cap)

 

New System:

 8 score average. 8 * 80 / 8 = 80 (still have to shoot 80 to 'shoot your cap as your cap would not go lower)

 

I think the part you missing is in the old system your handicap would go lower after the handicap calculation if you 'shot your current handicap', then you would have a new handicap that is lower and have to shoot a lower score to 'shoot your cap' again.  In your example you would go from having to shoot 9.6 to 'shoot your cap', to  9.2  "shoot your cap" and if you shot 9.2 all the time you would go to 8.8 etc etc - always going down.

 

In other words in the old system if you keep shooting your cap - your cap will keep getting lower and you will have to keep shooting lower scores to 'shoot your cap'. In the new system you have to shoot a score lower than your handicap to make your handicap go down. 

 

Hopefully I am explaining it well. 

Edited October 8, 2020 by 2bGood

[nsxguy]

46 minutes ago, 2bGood said:

Because shooting 80/9.6 would not be shooting 'your cap' anymore - your cap would 9.2 and you would have to shoot a 9.2 to 'shoot your cap' shooting a 9.6 would be shooting over your cap (and you cap would go back up from 9.2). 

 

Old system:

10 scored average * .96. Ie (10 x 80 ) / 10 * .96 = 76.8 (now you have to shoot 76.8 to 'shoot your cap' shooting 80 would be over your cap)

 

New System:

 8 score average. 8 * 80 / 8 = 80 (still have to shoot 80 to 'shoot your cap as your cap would not go lower)

 

I think the part you missing is in the old system your handicap would go lower after the handicap calculation if you 'shot your current handicap', then you would have a new handicap that is lower and have to shoot a lower score to 'shoot your cap' again.  In your example you would go from having to shoot 9.6 to 'shoot your cap', to  9.2  "shoot your cap" and if you shot 9.2 all the time you would go to 8.8 etc etc - always going down.

 

In other words in the old system if you keep shooting your cap - your cap will keep getting lower and you will have to keep shooting lower scores to 'shoot your cap'. In the new system you have to shoot a score lower than your handicap to make your handicap go down. 

 

Hopefully I am explaining it well. 

 

Shoulda known, you tricky lil devil you.

 

Of course "shooting your cap" is an unclear term. I expect some might think of it as a number that keeps your index the same rather than shooting a number where the diff matches the index.

 

But yeah, I see where you've gone with that. 👍

[2bGood]

9 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Shoulda known, you tricky lil devil you.

 

Of course "shooting your cap" is an unclear term. I expect some might think of it as a number that keeps your index the same rather than shooting a number where the diff matches the index.

 

But yeah, I see where you've gone with that. 👍

Okay I am glad I explained it well (enough).

 

For me the new system has really kept me low though, the soft and hard cap actually came in to play (coming back from an injury) and then laughably just over a 1/3 of my rounds have been low and the rest have been terrible. My true average score over par has been about 11 , but my handicap is 4. 88, 88, 72, 84, 74, 91, etc. 

 

 

[nsxguy]

49 minutes ago, 2bGood said:

Okay I am glad I explained it well (enough).

 

For me the new system has really kept me low though, the soft and hard cap actually came in to play (coming back from an injury) and then laughably just over a 1/3 of my rounds have been low and the rest have been terrible. My true average score over par has been about 11 , but my handicap is 4. 88, 88, 72, 84, 74, 91, etc. 

 

 

 

Don't forget, your Committee can override your cap's caps.

 

I had open heart surgery a year ago and between convalescing and the pandemic couldn't get back to my former self. I think I might have been the first ever to have a soft cap applied.

 

Started the year at 5.1 and not too long afterwards went over 8.1 as I could barely break 90 for quite a while. Almost got to the hard cap before scores started getting a bit more normal.

 

But being I don't belong to a formal club anymore, therefore not having a "Committee", I had to just keep playing.

 

 

[2bGood]

16 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Don't forget, your Committee can override your cap's caps.

 

I had open heart surgery a year ago and between convalescing and the pandemic couldn't get back to my former self. I think I might have been the first ever to have a soft cap applied.

 

Started the year at 5.1 and not too long afterwards went over 8.1 as I could barely break 90 for quite a while. Almost got to the hard cap before scores started getting a bit more normal.

 

But being I don't belong to a formal club anymore, therefore not having a "Committee", I had to just keep playing.

 

 

I am on the committee - so I knew I could request a revision, but I had too much pride for that. 🤨

[J Bez]

On 10/2/2020 at 7:08 PM, bazinky said:

Sounds like a former member at my club. His official handicap would always be in the +2 to +4 range. His posted rounds were never above par. Every year in the club championship he would show up and shoot in the 90's, with the exception of the year he threw up a zip code while playing with a couple of legit scratches. He left the club shortly therafter ...

why would this guy even play in the CC???

[Hogan9]

My index is 9.2 which makes me a 10 from the tees we play. I had two rounds in the high 70s a month ago, but I've scored 83 on five of my last six rounds. The sixth one was 82.  I guess I should be happy that I'm consistent. However, every one of those rounds included at least two double bogies. So, I'm scoring pretty close to my handicap. Here's hoping I can break 80 tomorrow.

[nsxguy]

2 hours ago, 2bGood said:

I am on the committee - so I knew I could request a revision, but I had too much pride for that. 🤨

 

Pride schmide. The idea is to call a fair game for everyone. You are part of "everyone".

 

I get that puts you in an uncomfortable place but the Committee's job is to keep the playing field level. That includes adjusting handicaps when permitted by the Handicapping Rules.

 

Just make the case, then recuse yourself and live with the decision.

[2bGood]

54 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Pride schmide. The idea is to call a fair game for everyone. You are part of "everyone".

 

I get that puts you in an uncomfortable place but the Committee's job is to keep the playing field level. That includes adjusting handicaps when permitted by the Handicapping Rules.

 

Just make the case, then recuse yourself and live with the decision.

Pride might not of been the right words, more concerned about the optics. Even though I was shooting terrible rounds most of the time, once and a while I could show up and play my old game and produce a very low net score. I would hate to have had my cap revised higher and then shoot a really low net score in an event. To be honest I would have voted against my request for my cap to go up given I did have some very low scores mixed in, showing I still did have my pre-injury potential for a good round.

 

[peterwalkerrr12321]

I pretty much play right on my cap every time I play +6

[mark174ace]

Definitely suspect shooting two 90's back to back on a course he claims to shoot mid 70's on regularly. I have no idea how far your friend drives the ball so I suppose he could be a big hitter having a bad day with the driver that could easily spin out of control into a 90, but two consecutive rounds I call BS.

 

I have a fairly tight deviation generally shooting between 75-80 on a par 72, but I am also a short but straight hitter so I rarely lose strokes or balls going way left or right. If I could go longer with the driver I would probably have some 72's but also more +80 rounds.

 

Once or twice a year I will have a 85 or so when I am just having a bad day, or my neck acts up. A couple of years ago I had a 90 when my neck flared up at one of the worst possible moments when I was playing the extremely difficult Pasatiempo in Santa Cruz, CA. I think Allister McKenzie may have been going through a divorce when he designed it haha.

 

A really really long 2 hour drive home that day.

[goheels11]

On 10/2/2020 at 7:08 PM, bazinky said:

Sounds like a former member at my club. His official handicap would always be in the +2 to +4 range. His posted rounds were never above par. Every year in the club championship he would show up and shoot in the 90's, with the exception of the year he threw up a zip code while playing with a couple of legit scratches. He left the club shortly therafter ...

Sounds like the kind of player to get a good bet with.  😂 

[goheels11]

We recently implemented a program called Cap Patrol.  Comp committee gets a ton of data and we adjust players accordingly.  Amazing what the data shows...home vs away, tourney scores, etc.   vanity and sand baggers revealed with data.   I’m a fan so far.  The first time we pulled the data, it was exactly who you would have suspected.  

[sheppy335]

Maybe the guy is super comfortable at his league, and then at Club Champ he pushed to hard and blew up. 

 

We had a guy last year in our league, he tore it up. His league cap was +1, he was always around par. He switched leagues for more challenge and different course and boom his scores went up.