Terrible money game/skin rule

[bladehunter]

15 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Wasn't your and shilgy's observations opinions ?

 

Assuming so, no, I didn't post to the contrary. Maybe youse guys are right. IDK. But I only suggested that the handicap system suggests it is equally likely that, for ANY handicap. golfers make bogies on their stroke holes and pars on their non-stroke holes.

 

THAT is the way the handicap systems works(?). Your, my, or the shilgsters experience notwithstanding. It's there to make a fair game. Does the match/game always come out in a tie ? Of course not.

 

CHEATING is an entirely different thing and no, the handicap system does NOT "allow" players to cheat. Perhaps the way it's reported does but the handicapping rules don't.

 

Is it possible they don't know ? Maybe they need to be edumacated ?

 

If you know guys are posting the wrong score by not taking strokes off via "net double bogey" you need to report them. Call them out - it's the exact same thing as somebody not reporting (good) scores or batting around a 3 footer for par, to take a double or triple and inflate their score.

 

If you choose to not try to stop it, you're not protecting the field,,,,,,,,,,,,, NOR yourself.

 

 

 

 

I’m not at all suggesting that guys in my care are knowingly doing this. I’m saying they’re ignorant to the rules.  There are so many.  And since the posting app and station in the pro shop allows it.  They tend to think they’re in the good.  It’s just the most recent posting error or inconsistency I’ve come across. They seem to be never ending. 
 

 

at any rate.  The gripe I make seems to be pretty universal amongst lower handicap guys.  Do you discount it as nonexistent?   Even though the usga data mentions just how much net events favor the mid to high handicap players based on their sheer numbers alone.  
 

the solution is the one I mentioned early on this thread or the other one. ( I forget ).  To not donate to those pots.  And that’s what most of us do.  

[nsxguy]

7 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

I’m not at all suggesting that guys in my care are knowingly doing this. I’m saying they’re ignorant to the rules.  There are so many.  And since the posting app and station in the pro shop allows it.  They tend to think they’re in the good.  It’s just the most recent posting error or inconsistency I’ve come across. They seem to be never ending. 
 

 

at any rate.  The gripe I make seems to be pretty universal amongst lower handicap guys.  Do you discount it as nonexistent?   Even though the usga data mentions just how much net events favor the mid to high handicap players based on their sheer numbers alone.  
 

the solution is the one I mentioned early on this thread or the other one. ( I forget ).  To not donate to those pots.  And that’s what most of us do.  

 

If they're ignorant of the Rules of Handicapping the answer is very obvious. Bring THAT up to the Committee or the organizer(s). The single rule of "net double bogie" is pretty easy to explain to anybody that understands anything about handicapping. Or to insist they enter HBH if it's available to them UNTIL they understand it.

 

That said you are conflating 2 different "games". Although I totally agree about net (total) scores, and the numbers that we have back it up, net skins is a different game.

 

And it's net skins we are discussing here.

 

 

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

If they're ignorant of the Rules of Handicapping the answer is very obvious. Bring THAT up to the Committee or the organizer(s). The single rule of "net double bogie" is pretty easy to explain to anybody that understands anything about handicapping. Or to insist they enter HBH if it's available to them UNTIL they understand it.

 

That said you are conflating 2 different "games". Although I totally agree about net (total) scores, and the numbers that we have back it up, net skins is a different game.

 

And it's net skins we are discussing here.

 

 

You’re right.  Then I don’t know how you got me off of that then.  
 

statement was , 6-12 handicaps make  more net birdies than the lower caps make real birdies.  Agree or disagree ? 

[Mudguard]

59 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

You’re right.  Then I don’t know how you got me off of that then.  
 

statement was , 6-12 handicaps make  more net birdies than the lower caps make real birdies.  Agree or disagree ? 

How on earth would you know? How often do I birdie the six hardest holes at my home course? The toughest hole I think I've birdied once in two years. How do I know? The club runs a year long eclectic so towards the end of the year I know exactly which holes I have and haven't birdied. Yes in theory as I get a stroke on that hole I will make more pars (net birdie) than birdies, but that's the point of the handicap. It's an average. That hole in particular is a bit brutish, so I'd take par every single time I teed up if someone offered it. Second shot is usually 200m ish off a hanging lie and the green is surrounded by the Pacific.

It's completely arbitrary, I think higher handicappers make fewer birdies purely by virtue of their handicap. There are very few nine handicappers who make nine birdies a round and nine doubles on average.

[nsxguy]

2 hours ago, bladehunter said:

You’re right.  Then I don’t know how you got me off of that then.  
 

statement was , 6-12 handicaps make  more net birdies than the lower caps make real birdies.  Agree or disagree ? 

 

Taking this statement literally I'd agree. BECAUSE you said "real birdies". Sorry (if) I missed that.

 

If I'm faithful to my argument net birdies vs. real birdies would have to favor the net birdies in your scenario. So I'd agree with your statement.

 

But I'm not sure what that has to do with a "net skins" discussion as that's "apples and oranges" when it comes to net skins.

 

But handicapping says the 1-3 cap players you originally referred to should make bogeys on their cap holes 1-3 and pars everywhere else. Just like the 6-12 cap players. Just like the 24 cap players who'd get 2 on 6 holes and 1 on the other 12.

 

So for NET birdies there should be no advantage to anybody. For net birdies versus real birdies, yes, theoretically the net birdies should outnumber the real birdies. 👍

[Shilgy]

5 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

Taking this statement literally I'd agree. BECAUSE you said "real birdies". Sorry (if) I missed that.

 

If I'm faithful to my argument net birdies vs. real birdies would have to favor the net birdies in your scenario. So I'd agree with your statement.

 

But I'm not sure what that has to do with a "net skins" discussion as that's "apples and oranges" when it comes to net skins.

 

But handicapping says the 1-3 cap players you originally referred to should make bogeys on their cap holes 1-3 and pars everywhere else. Just like the 6-12 cap players. Just like the 24 cap players who'd get 2 on 6 holes and 1 on the other 12.

 

So for NET birdies there should be no advantage to anybody. For net birdies versus real birdies, yes, theoretically the net birdies should outnumber the real birdies. 👍

If a group is playing net skins and a player makes the only gross birdie and no one that strokes on the hole makes par net birdie he would win both gross and net-no?  That is what we are discussing but you continue to gloss over it.  What would be considered mid handicaps at many clubs, those in the 6-12 range,  make more net birdies on average than the typical scratch to 3 handicap player.  That is what @bladehunterand I are asserting.  The top tour pros average under five birdies per round but many mid caps will make that many net birdies per round.  Which is being compared to the low guys gross birdies because in a net game that is their net as well!  If I am playing net skins with a group of 6-12 cap players I need to either birdie one of my couple stroke holes or hope a birdie holds on the 13-18th rated holes on the course where no one strokes.

 Strokes are made to make 18 hole matches even….not hole by hole net skins.

Edited November 1, 2021 by Shilgy

[Shilgy]

53 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Taking this statement literally I'd agree. BECAUSE you said "real birdies". Sorry (if) I missed that.

 

If I'm faithful to my argument net birdies vs. real birdies would have to favor the net birdies in your scenario. So I'd agree with your statement.

 

But I'm not sure what that has to do with a "net skins" discussion as that's "apples and oranges" when it comes to net skins.

 

But handicapping says the 1-3 cap players you originally referred to should make bogeys on their cap holes 1-3 and pars everywhere else. Just like the 6-12 cap players. Just like the 24 cap players who'd get 2 on 6 holes and 1 on the other 12.

 

So for NET birdies there should be no advantage to anybody. For net birdies versus real birdies, yes, theoretically the net birdies should outnumber the real birdies. 👍

Handicapping doesn’t work that way.  Let’s compare a 3 to the 12.  To play an even match the 12 needs the 9 strokes to make it an even match.  Based on your post of scores they “should”shoot on each hole that means the 12 should win the 1-3 handicap holes because both the 3 and 12 should bogey the hole?  Nonsense.  It’s over the course of the match the strokes make it even-ish.  I never have an issue giving a guy his strokes in match play. But playing a group of mid caps it’s pretty dang hard to ever get a net skin.

Edited October 31, 2021 by Shilgy

[nsxguy]

49 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

If a group is playing net skins and a player makes the only gross birdie and no one that strokes on the hole makes par net birdie he would win both gross and net-no?  Hat is what we are discussing but you continue to gloss over it.  What would be considered mid handicaps at many clubs, those in the 6-12 range,  make more net birdies on average than the typical scratch to 3 handicap player.  That is what @bladehunterand I are asserting.  The top tour pros average under five birdies per round but many mid caps will make that many net birdies per round.  Which is being compared to the low guys gross birdies because in a net game that is their net as well!  If I am playing net skins with a group of 6-12 cap players I need to either birdie one of my couple stroke holes or hope a birdie holds on the 13-18th rated holes on the course where no one strokes.

 Strokes are made to make 18 hole matches even….not hole by hole net skins.

 

I am not glossing over anything.

 

I already admitted (to blade) I overlooked the "6-12 handicaps make more net birdies than the lower caps make real birdies" That, as it turns out, you said, not blade.

 

Proof ? Your anecdotal proof.

 

That said, match play, say between a 3 and a 7 give the higher capper 4 shots on rated holes 1-4 because that is where they will "most likely" need them.

 

For your subsequent post, take the handicap rule for posting a round not completed. Strokes not yet "gotten" are used to determine a hole-by-hole completion of the holes not played as those stroke holes are where the player "needs" the shots. <-- That's clumsy but you know what I mean and I don't feel like re-typing it.

 

IMO, same with "net skins". It's not a match/match play. It's a separate and different game and players need the strokes wherever they fall.

 

You (and blade) disagree. No sweat.

[bladehunter]

3 hours ago, Mudguard said:

How on earth would you know? How often do I birdie the six hardest holes at my home course? The toughest hole I think I've birdied once in two years. How do I know? The club runs a year long eclectic so towards the end of the year I know exactly which holes I have and haven't birdied. Yes in theory as I get a stroke on that hole I will make more pars (net birdie) than birdies, but that's the point of the handicap. It's an average. That hole in particular is a bit brutish, so I'd take par every single time I teed up if someone offered it. Second shot is usually 200m ish off a hanging lie and the green is surrounded by the Pacific.

It's completely arbitrary, I think higher handicappers make fewer birdies purely by virtue of their handicap. There are very few nine handicappers who make nine birdies a round and nine doubles on average.

Well. I hesitate to say I “ know “ anything.  We rarely know any universal truths.  But I digress. 😂

 

for my club I have an insight because I’m on the handicap committee and have a login to  be able to see our members postings.  I’ve noticed how most of the winners in net events have several net birdies.  I’ve played in the net match play brackets for our club and interclub.  I know what gets put on me in those matches.  We’re talking pars with a stroke.  ( net birdies ) Not real birdies.  The subject is net skins.   I simply said that 6-12 handicap guys cleanup in net skins. 

[bladehunter]

2 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

Taking this statement literally I'd agree. BECAUSE you said "real birdies". Sorry (if) I missed that.

 

If I'm faithful to my argument net birdies vs. real birdies would have to favor the net birdies in your scenario. So I'd agree with your statement.

 

But I'm not sure what that has to do with a "net skins" discussion as that's "apples and oranges" when it comes to net skins.

 

But handicapping says the 1-3 cap players you originally referred to should make bogeys on their cap holes 1-3 and pars everywhere else. Just like the 6-12 cap players. Just like the 24 cap players who'd get 2 on 6 holes and 1 on the other 12.

 

So for NET birdies there should be no advantage to anybody. For net birdies versus real birdies, yes, theoretically the net birdies should outnumber the real birdies. 👍

Right.  I guess.  But.  If you don’t get any shots.  Then it’s real vs net.  So playing skins with guys net is , well. Hard to win any.  
 

 

[Golferpaul]

On 10/29/2021 at 10:07 PM, cardoustie said:

1/2 shot skins is the only way to go

 

works for all caps, doing this for 20 years with 24 guys ranging from +2 to 26 caps

My experience and data (as posted earlier) does not agree.  But maybe that's because we only have eight guys on our golf trips.  I find no correlation between handicap and skins won.

[Golferpaul]

23 hours ago, Shilgy said:

The top tour pros average under five birdies per round but many mid caps will make that many net birdies per round.  

 I know this is a small sample, but my most recent three trips do not agree with you.

 

My data for our Bend trip:

Indexes 7.2 to 11.4 (which would be your mid handicap range) averaged 2.81 net birdies per round.

Indexes 2.6 to 5.4 averaged 4.00 net birdies per round.

 

My data for our Reynolds trip:

Indexes 6.5 to 8.8 averaged 3.13 net birdies per round.

We didn't have any below 6.

 

My data for our Bandon trip:

Indexes 6.3 to 9.4 averaged 2.94 net birdies per round.

Our 3.7 index averaged 2.5 net birdies per round

 

 

 

[Shilgy]

2 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

 I know this is a small sample, but my most recent three trips do not agree with you.

 

My data for our Bend trip:

Indexes 7.2 to 11.4 (which would be your mid handicap range) averaged 2.81 net birdies per round.

Indexes 2.6 to 5.4 averaged 4.00 net birdies per round.

 

My data for our Reynolds trip:

Indexes 6.5 to 8.8 averaged 3.13 net birdies per round.

We didn't have any below 6.

 

My data for our Bandon trip:

Indexes 6.3 to 9.4 averaged 2.94 net birdies per round.

Our 3.7 index averaged 2.5 net birdies per round

 

 

 

I guess I did phrase that poorly.  I did say “per round” and just meant “in a round”.  I have certainly seen waaay more mid caps make six net birdies in a round than any low caps make six gross birdies.  And the mid caps will definitely make more net eagles than will the lower guys make net/gross eagles.

[Golferpaul]

On 11/2/2021 at 9:51 AM, Shilgy said:

I guess I did phrase that poorly.  I did say “per round” and just meant “in a round”.  I have certainly seen waaay more mid caps make six net birdies in a round than any low caps make six gross birdies.  And the mid caps will definitely make more net eagles than will the lower guys make net/gross eagles.

There is no doubt that mid or even high cappers will have more net eagles than low cappers.  And I agree that mid caps will frequently make more net birdies than low caps.

 

I don't have data, but I'm sure that the higher you go up the handicap chain the more variability you will have.   

[Shilgy]

3 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

There is no doubt that mid or even high cappers will have more net eagles than low cappers.  And I agree that mid caps will frequently make more net birdies than low caps.

 

I don't have data, but I'm sure that the higher you go up the handicap chain the more variability you will have.   

You’re looking for this….which shows variance by handicap group.

 

http://www.popeofslope.com/sandbagging/odds.html

[bladehunter]

On 11/2/2021 at 8:00 AM, Golferpaul said:

 I know this is a small sample, but my most recent three trips do not agree with you.

 

My data for our Bend trip:

Indexes 7.2 to 11.4 (which would be your mid handicap range) averaged 2.81 net birdies per round.

Indexes 2.6 to 5.4 averaged 4.00 net birdies per round.

 

My data for our Reynolds trip:

Indexes 6.5 to 8.8 averaged 3.13 net birdies per round.

We didn't have any below 6.

 

My data for our Bandon trip:

Indexes 6.3 to 9.4 averaged 2.94 net birdies per round.

Our 3.7 index averaged 2.5 net birdies per round

 

 

 

That’s absolutely amazing. But not shocking.  
 

now.  Compare that to a 0 who has posted a lot of birdie free rounds of 72-74.     The 6 with 3 net birds destroys that guy  most likely  even if they both cover their  handicap . That’s 3 down before he starts.   
 

real birdies require made putts.  Net birdies only require 2 putts most often.  

[charli]

Man that’s bothersome. Makes zero sense and just stealing money from the man 

[golfortennis]

41 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

That’s absolutely amazing. But not shocking.  
 

now.  Compare that to a 0 who has posted a lot of birdie free rounds of 72-74.     The 6 with 3 net birds destroys that guy  most likely  even if they both cover their  handicap . That’s 3 down before he starts.   
 

real birdies require made putts.  Net birdies only require 2 putts most often.  

 

Not quite on topic but similar to a situation I had in a match a few years ago.  Playing against a guy who was at a similar cap(maybe a stroke one way or the other, can't recall). Hits it a long way, and intimidates most people.  I'm a fair bit shorter than him, but long enough that his length doesn't earn him free holes. Anyway, through the match we were talking about how our best rounds the previous year were.  On a par 71, mine was a 72 with 1 birdie, and 2 bogeys.  His was 75 with 6 birdies and 3 triples.  I needed to play real well to beat him with those types of cards.  

[mark m]

Pope of Slope talks about “Wild Willie’s” and “Steady Eddie’s”. You guys would have made good partners. If he plays well, you’d have a chance in a larger field event.
 

A few years ago in our group game (includes gross and net skins, low net, par 3 nearies), one 18 handicap Wild type had 7 net 2’s. LOL. He parred all the 3’s and 3 gross birdies on par 4’s. They won their Fourball match on #12. His net was just 72. Numerous blow ups including after the match was decided. But he had a partner for the bad holes. Obviously the opponents weren’t pleased.

 

I’m with Blade and others. I wouldn’t play in a net only game. I prefer both, but could live with half shot skins in a pinch.

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, bladehunter said:

That’s absolutely amazing. But not shocking.  
 

now.  Compare that to a 0 who has posted a lot of birdie free rounds of 72-74.     The 6 with 3 net birds destroys that guy  most likely  even if they both cover their  handicap . That’s 3 down before he starts.   
 

real birdies require made putts.  Net birdies only require 2 putts most often.  

That part bothers me less.  Playing match play they still likely came out even because he messed up somewhere else.  The hard guy to ever beat is the six that has a couple or three doubles or triples and is even on the other holes.  
It’s net skins where the low handicap has very little chance. Imho.

[bladehunter]

41 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

That part bothers me less.  Playing match play they still likely came out even because he messed up somewhere else.  The hard guy to ever beat is the six that has a couple or three doubles or triples and is even on the other holes.  
It’s net skins where the low handicap has very little chance. Imho.

Right.  I guess I conflate the two together.  You’re right.  The skins game is literally unfair. 

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, mark m said:

Pope of Slope talks about “Wild Willie’s” and “Steady Eddie’s”. You guys would have made good partners. If he plays well, you’d have a chance in a larger field event.
 

A few years ago in our group game (includes gross and net skins, low net, par 3 nearies), one 18 handicap Wild type had 7 net 2’s. LOL. He parred all the 3’s and 3 gross birdies on par 4’s. They won their Fourball match on #12. His net was just 72. Numerous blow ups including after the match was decided. But he had a partner for the bad holes. Obviously the opponents weren’t pleased.

 

I’m with Blade and others. I wouldn’t play in a net only game. I prefer both, but could live with half shot skins in a pinch.

Yep. I’ve played half skins several times and never felt “ wrong”.    I play in one net skins game and I honestly do it with the mindset of donating.  I play because I like the guys.  Which is rare. And it’s their game if that makes sense. I have no standing to mention changing it.  I was invited to play and occasionally do so for lack of other options to play.  That day it cost 💲 20 more to play.  That’s how I reconcile it.  I’ve not broke even yet.  

[mark m]

3 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Yep. I’ve played half skins several times and never felt “ wrong”.    I play in one net skins game and I honestly do it with the mindset of donating.  I play because I like the guys.  Which is rare. And it’s their game if that makes sense. I have no standing to mention changing it.  I was invited to play and occasionally do so for lack of other options to play.  That day it cost 💲 20 more to play.  That’s how I reconcile it.  I’ve not broke even yet.  

I’ve done the same for the same reason. I believe we are both fortunate to play well enough to be able to keep one foot firmly planted on the gross side of the game, and just one foot in the net world for cohesion with the larger group/club. 

[shoot4par]

1 hour ago, mark m said:

I’ve done the same for the same reason. I believe we are both fortunate to play well enough to be able to keep one foot firmly planted on the gross side of the game, and just one foot in the net world for cohesion with the larger group/club. 

 

I agree with this point. To be honest, I'd rather play gross with guys that are between 0 - 12. There are different types of scratch guys. I know guys that are steady hit a lot of greens but don't necessarily give themselves phenomenal birdie looks where as you may have a guy whose a ten who puts up two birdies a round but has a couple big numbers. You may have a twelve that's super long which gives them an advantage on 5s. It makes for a good environment where everyone gets a little better. 

[Shilgy]

23 minutes ago, shoot4par said:

 

I agree with this point. To be honest, I'd rather play gross with guys that are between 0 - 12. There are different types of scratch guys. I know guys that are steady hit a lot of greens but don't necessarily give themselves phenomenal birdie looks where as you may have a guy whose a ten who puts up two birdies a round but has a couple big numbers. You may have a twelve that's super long which gives them an advantage on 5s. It makes for a good environment where everyone gets a little better. 

Im no longer scratch but where can I get into a gross skins game with 12 caps?🙄

[StudentGolfer4]

Guys, I know that no one has specified what par is or course rating or any specifics like that but the scratch guy that continually shoots 72-74 (par 72) without making birdies usually does not exist. Maybe they make 16-18 pars a couple of times a year? Guys that are legit scratch players make a couple birdies a round, on average. 
 

Just for reference, I googled Rahms 2021 stats. Scoring average 69.3. 4.5 birdies per round. Point is, he makes a couple bogeys most rounds and is the best player in the world! The idea that you will find scratch guys that make 16-18 pars and 0-2 bogeys isn’t realistic. 
 

edit: it may happen once a year but it won’t happen consistently. 
 

 

Edited November 5, 2021 by StudentGolfer4

[nsxguy]

21 minutes ago, StudentGolfer4 said:

Guys, I know that no one has specified what par is or course rating or any specifics like that but the scratch guy that continually shoots 72-74 (par 72) without making birdies usually does not exist. Maybe they make 16-18 pars a couple of times a year? Guys that are legit scratch players make a couple birdies a round, on average. 
 

Just for reference, I googled Rahms 2021 stats. Scoring average 69.3. 4.5 birdies per round. Point is, he makes a couple bogeys most rounds and is the best player in the world! The idea that you will find scratch guys that make 16-18 pars and 0-2 bogeys isn’t realistic. 
 

edit: it may happen once a year but it won’t happen consistently. 
 

 

 

You are absolutely correct.

 

We're now hearing all about these unicorns to support guys' dislike of playing a game where they're giving strokes, deserved or not.

 

A 6 who makes 2 doubles or triples ? A 0 who shoots 72-74 with no birdies ? Good grief. Sure these guys may have a round, maybe even 2 like that in their last 20, but to make it sound like they score like that all the time and therefore it at a disadvantage, is just silly. 🙃

[eht8266]

On 10/28/2021 at 7:12 AM, 2bGood said:

There are people that have run the numbers on it and gross beats net favours the low cap. Pure net favours the high caps. (all off the low man in groups under 30)

 

As a result there are few modified skins games. One is net skins with real birdies trumping net birdies. This is statistically pretty fair to all. The other is half points for strokes. This slightly favours low caps still and also has the effect of more skins being paid out. 

 

yep - we play it this way and call it "Natural over net" - Not sure if the stats work that out to be basically 50% of cap...

[bladehunter]

43 minutes ago, StudentGolfer4 said:

Guys, I know that no one has specified what par is or course rating or any specifics like that but the scratch guy that continually shoots 72-74 (par 72) without making birdies usually does not exist. Maybe they make 16-18 pars a couple of times a year? Guys that are legit scratch players make a couple birdies a round, on average. 
 

Just for reference, I googled Rahms 2021 stats. Scoring average 69.3. 4.5 birdies per round. Point is, he makes a couple bogeys most rounds and is the best player in the world! The idea that you will find scratch guys that make 16-18 pars and 0-2 bogeys isn’t realistic. 
 

edit: it may happen once a year but it won’t happen consistently. 
 

 

Yes. Overall this is true. I “ average “ 2.81 birdies a round year to date ……. But it’s a hot or cold putting rollercoaster .  So it’s not alot of 3 birdie rounds.  It’s pretty equal 0-1 birdie rounds as many as 5-6 birdie rounds.  It just depends on putting.  The example was never meant to be taken as a literal daily occurrence.  I also make 2.87 bogeys a round on average.  Year to date.  For a scoring average of 73.88.  The scratch player who hits it well and has many days making zero putts exists.  I have the stats to prove it.  Can screen shot any of them. I use decade. It records everything.  

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

You are absolutely correct.

 

We're now hearing all about these unicorns to support guys' dislike of playing a game where they're giving strokes, deserved or not.

 

A 6 who makes 2 doubles or triples ? A 0 who shoots 72-74 with no birdies ? Good grief. Sure these guys may have a round, maybe even 2 like that in their last 20, but to make it sound like they score like that all the time and therefore it at a disadvantage, is just silly. 🙃

Hmm, I know a unicorn then.  A 6 who is long. 185-190 8 iron and well over 300 on good drives.  Too many of his drives are also 50 yards offline leading to at least a couple doubles per round.  Even on his counting scores so a lot of good holes and a couple blow ups..  There are scratch guys averaging very few birdies.  They get killed in skins games while the erratic player cleans up.