Is it Sandbagging to Post Compettive Round Scores only for Handicap Purposes?

[Purple Toupee]

3 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Id prefer there be rules that allowed for protection of your $350 hybrid.  Vs the local guys announcing “ relief from anything “ basically to avoid club damage.  Do you smell what I’m stepping in ?  Lol.  

There is a rule that covers this. 

[bladehunter]

44 minutes ago, Purple Toupee said:

There is a rule that covers this. 

Not without penalty.  That’s the issue. They don’t want the penalty. 

[Hickory4ever]

A very interesting topic. Not much has changed in the golf world from the 1700’s when two or four rich guys negotiated strokes to equalize the differences in their  abilities so that they could win a bet. When they started playing players from another club, they tried to find away to make it work. Three hundred years later, the arguments continue, I’m glad golf is the gentleman’s game ( tongue firmly in cheek).

 

I think it is safe to say that of all golf games played even by those that are members of their national association, less than 5% actually follow all the ROG in “competitive” rounds, whatever that means. I have been a rules official in the past and have scratched my head at how poor most peoples understanding of the rules is, even for elite golfers in competition. Add in the ego and sandbagger parts of human nature and here we are.

 

Any handicap system has limitations but the human factor will always muddy the waters. At best a handicap is an approximation of of your ability, only as accurate as you allow it. If you expect everyone to comply, you will be disappointed.

 

Personally, I don’t play in net competitions and would not play anyone for money until I get to know them. By the way, I put in all my in season scores in both of my handicap accounts with Golf Canada. One is for hickory golf, the other when I play more contemporary equipment.

[Shilgy]

10 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Right.   For myself.  I ramble I know. But the gist of what I was saying is that I do post those rounds. I Just use MLS on the holes after I decide to make it practice or exhibition of stupidity ( whichever it turns into ) And again. It was for example. It’s rare .  Was more common 5/6 years ago whne I started playing.    Rounds are so rare since covid ( once a week ) that I can’t waste rounds on mental errors or blowups now. Which has been a silver lining albeit with a hidden barb of not getting to play due to course overcrowding during the week.  
 

my greater point is exactly what you’re saying. Almost nobody in the us has a handicap that would standup  to audit.  And the square peg in my personality hates that.  
 

I think if we browsed the idea of a completion round to include any grouped club event , and then forced those groups to play by the rules , tons more players could have a comp only round.  Anyway.  Just wanted to explain myself.  Again.  

Can you explain the bold?  We play by the rules at out club.  Do we usually, not always, play putts inside the leather are good?  Yes, and that is covered in the rules of handicapping.  Personally I would prefer putt them all out but some guys whine about “it’s not the US Open we’re here for fun”.  
Point being the rules of handicapping are slightly different than the actual rules of golf.  That is why there is a most likely score element and a holes not finished/played element. 

[bladehunter]

26 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Can you explain the bold?  We play by the rules at out club.  Do we usually, not always, play putts inside the leather are good?  Yes, and that is covered in the rules of handicapping.  Personally I would prefer putt them all out but some guys whine about “it’s not the US Open we’re here for fun”.  
Point being the rules of handicapping are slightly different than the actual rules of golf.  That is why there is a most likely score element and a holes not finished/played element. 

I just mean that If each round was attested , and that marker didn’t give putts, allow for the leaf rule , the root rule , the breakfast ball , the foot wedge , and the take relief from anything that will scratch a club rule , that the  handicap would then stand up to inspection.  As is , if you had video of every round played on earth. I doubt 10 % would pass.     
 

it’s just an abstract irritation.  It’s not as if I expect a result.  It’s just that it’s a farce of sorts and it’s defended as being “ by the rules “.   99 % of people with a handicap have never heard of MLS , let alone use it.  
 

You asked ,  so ill say.  The part about the rules of golf not Mating with the rules of handicapping.  That pretty much sums up the thing im citing , in a nutshell.  
 

to me it sounds like double speak whne someone claims to play by the rules , then defends not playing  by the rules. Not even  meaning you. Meaning earlier in the thread when just that was said in 12 different ways 

[nsxguy]

19 hours ago, oikos1 said:

"If they don't play by the ROG they're not supposed to post the round. That much is clear, is it not ?"

 

No, it absolutely is not clear.  There are people in this very thread who say they don't play all of their rounds by the rules of golf yet they post.  There are also others who say you should post every round you play, even if one bends the rules/close enough (how much you can bend appears to be quite subjective) or you are cheating because all of your rounds are not posted.  Those two ideas of what rounds are "postable" are quite different than what you are saying.

 

 

 

 

 

Well, it SHOULD be clear.

 

You are conflating rounds that are not supposed to be posted with what people admit to doing.

 

But I'll try once more and you can agree or not.

 

If "they" are not playing specifically according to the ROG their handicap will be LOWER than it should and they have vanity caps that at some point will most likely NOT hold up under a true comp.

 

*I* don't care/worry about vanity cappers.

 

In fact, I kinda sorta like 'em. 

[bladehunter]

49 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Well, it SHOULD be clear.

 

You are conflating rounds that are not supposed to be posted with what people admit to doing.

 

But I'll try once more and you can agree or not.

 

If "they" are not playing specifically according to the ROG their handicap will be LOWER than it should and they have vanity caps that at some point will most likely NOT hold up under a true comp.

 

*I* don't care/worry about vanity cappers.

 

In fact, I kinda sorta like 'em. 

So not about following any rules.  Just about winning ?  Lol. Got it. 🤦‍♂️      Kind of shapes the pencil whipping opinion I gave  earlier on the whole deal.    That stance perpetuates both ends of the non rules playing spectrum.  

Edited January 14, 2022 by bladehunter

[oikos1]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

Well, it SHOULD be clear.

 

You are conflating rounds that are not supposed to be posted with what people admit to doing.

 

But I'll try once more and you can agree or not.

 

If "they" are not playing specifically according to the ROG their handicap will be LOWER than it should and they have vanity caps that at some point will most likely NOT hold up under a true comp.

 

*I* don't care/worry about vanity cappers.

 

In fact, I kinda sorta like 'em. 

I'm not conflating anything.  There are two distinct differences in opinion on what is considered postable and what is not.

 

The reason some say it's cheating to not post all rounds, even those that are not played by the rules of golf but are close enough, is that you could have a player not post more than half, or more, of their rounds throughout a season because those rounds weren't played by the official rules of golf.  That means that if "Bob" gets hot in the weeks before a tournament and he is playing money games with different groups that are not postable due to rule bending, he comes into the club championship with a handicap that could be 3-4 strokes higher than what he should be at, not necessarily lower.  This seems to be the very issue as to why some want golf rounds that are played "close enough" to the rules to be posted.  You clearly do not. 

 

The only way we could accurately know "Bob's" handicap is if he had a third party, competition verified handicap certified by the USGA or R&A handicap department. That's it.  Everything else will always be subject to speculation and manipulation.

[nsxguy]

59 minutes ago, oikos1 said:

I'm not conflating anything.  There are two distinct differences in opinion on what is considered postable and what is not.

 

The reason some say it's cheating to not post all rounds, even those that are not played by the rules of golf but are close enough, is that you could have a player not post more than half, or more, of their rounds throughout a season because those rounds weren't played by the official rules of golf.  That means that if "Bob" gets hot in the weeks before a tournament and he is playing money games with different groups that are not postable due to rule bending, he comes into the club championship with a handicap that could be 3-4 strokes higher than what he should be at, not necessarily lower.  This seems to be the very issue as to why some want golf rounds that are played "close enough" to the rules to be posted.  You clearly do not. 

 

The only way we could accurately know "Bob's" handicap is if he had a third party, competition verified handicap certified by the USGA or R&A handicap department. That's it.  Everything else will always be subject to speculation and manipulation.

 

For goodness sake Oiks. What the heck do you want from me ?

 

There is NO opinion necessary.

 

And I don't CARE about any "difference of opinion" you're talking about.

 

If you don't play by the ROG the round is NOT postable. This is from the WHS.

 

Now if you want to discuss the point you ARE conflating with the above, what some/many/most golfers ACTUALLY do about posting rounds that shouldn't be posted, and possibly discuss what to DO about it, knock yourself out. Please.

[nsxguy]

2 hours ago, bladehunter said:

So not about following any rules.  Just about winning ?  Lol. Got it. 🤦‍♂️      Kind of shapes the pencil whipping opinion I gave  earlier on the whole deal.    That stance perpetuates both ends of the non rules playing spectrum.  

 

You post these little "snippets" and expect everyone to understand what you mean. Not everybody does. I get it. Everybody cheats but you.

 

Just about winning ? Why do YOU play ? For the fresh air ? The exercise ?

 

To see how good you can get 

 

Ty ? Ty Webb ? Is that you ? 🙃

[oikos1]

44 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

For goodness sake Oiks. What the heck do you want from me ?

 

There is NO opinion necessary.

 

And I don't CARE about any "difference of opinion" you're talking about.

 

If you don't play by the ROG the round is NOT postable. This is from the WHS.

 

Now if you want to discuss the point you ARE conflating with the above, what some/many/most golfers ACTUALLY do about posting rounds that shouldn't be posted, and possibly discuss what to DO about it, knock yourself out. Please.

 

I respect your position, but it's clearly not the case in practice, so it's no wonder there are so many threads about sandbaggers, cheaters and problems with the WHS.  Best wishes in your competitions.

[nsxguy]

8 minutes ago, oikos1 said:

I respect your position, but it's clearly not the case in practice, so it's no wonder there are so many threads about sandbaggers, cheaters and problems with the WHS.  Best wishes in your competitions.

 

The reason, IMO, there are so many sandbaggers complaints, besides the fact that they don't understand handicapping, is that nobody can understand how THEY had a great round, shot a net -5 and lost to a net -6 to a "sandbagger".

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 14, 2022 by nsxguy

[bladehunter]

55 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

You post these little "snippets" and expect everyone to understand what you mean. Not everybody does. I get it. Everybody cheats but you.

 

Just about winning ? Why do YOU play ? For the fresh air ? The exercise ?

 

To see how good you can get 

 

Ty ? Ty Webb ? Is that you ? 🙃

Lol.  Try to stay with me.  I quoted your post.  You said you didn’t worry about one set of cheaters since I benefited YOU.   Right ?  
 

this whole thread is about the handicap system and how it would or Wouldn’t be more accurate if it were only based on either 1.  Competition  rounds. Or 2. Rounds played by the rules of golf.  Yes so far ??? 
 

 

so In that vein , I’m saying your and others attitude regarding playing by the rules , is what’s wrong with  the system.  As stated by you , it doesn’t bother you to see vanity caps.  Meaning , you’re happy to see them so you can easily win ?  Yes ?   Ok.  Seems that from your perspective , sandbaggers don’t effect you , and vanity caps benefit you …. Yes ?  So , who has the most to gain from this current situation.  Me or you ?   ( easy answer ).   Me thinks you’d be saying different things if you encountered the opposite end of that spectrum as i do.  Right ?  
 

i appologize for the short post above. I’m regularly accused of walls of text etc. trying to explain.  Then I get it out in a short hand fashion and that’s an issue too. 🤦‍♂️    The system stacks from both ends  towards the middle , is the synopsis.  That being 10-15 …. 
 

and I’ll take the Ty webb jab as a compliment, clearly the most brilliant guy at bushwood . 😂
 

 

Edited January 14, 2022 by bladehunter

[nsxguy]

1 minute ago, bladehunter said:

Lol.  Try to stay with me.  I quoted your post.  You said you didn’t worry about one set of cheaters since I benefited YOU.   Right ?  
 

this whole thread is about the handicap system and how it would or Wouldn’t be more accurate if it were only based on either 1.  Competition  rounds. Or 2. Rounds played by the rules of golf.  Yes so far ??? 
 

 

so In that vein , I’m saying your and others attitude regarding playing by the rules , is what’s wrong with  the system.  As stated by you , it doesn’t bother you to see vanity caps.  Meaning , you’re happy to see them so you can easily win ?  Yes ?   Ok.  Seems that from your perspective , sandbaggers don’t effect you , and vanity caps benefit you …. Yes ?  So , who has the most to gain from this current situation.  Me or you ?   ( easy answer ).   Me thinks you’d be saying different things if you encountered the opposite end of that spectrum as i do.  Right ? 

 

Firstly, kindly show me where I said or implied that sandbaggers don't affect me.

 

Secondly, kindly explain how we are on "opposite ends of the spectrum".

 

I play ANY game to compete and/or win a little ca$h. If my opponent(s) want to help me out by giving me, extra shots, who am I to complain about it ?

[bladehunter]

8 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Firstly, kindly show me where I said or implied that sandbaggers don't affect me.

 

Secondly, kindly explain how we are on "opposite ends of the spectrum".

 

I play ANY game to compete and/or win a little ca$h. If my opponent(s) want to help me out by giving me, extra shots, who am I to complain about it ?

You’ve repeatedly said the sandbagger issue doesn’t exist.  Which makes one infer that you don’t come into contact with.  Can it be both ? 
 

 

Im simply using your words.  You say you like the system as is.  I do not.  That’s opposite.  You’re for posting Rounds that aren’t played by the rules of golf.  I’m not.  I don’t know how much more opposite we can see it. 

[Needsmoreeagles]

Question:

 

I am playing at an 8.8 now (best ever) and I do not want to post anything bigger than an 85 and have not been.

 

Am I an anti-sandbagger?

 

My usual round is mid to high 80s but I see not benefit (personally) for letting it go up other than by being a Sandbagger to win tourneys.  I would rather try to improve my scoring than win with a bigger handicap and have people think I am a SANDBAGGER.

 

[BlackDiamondPar5]

3 hours ago, Needsmoreeagles said:

Question:

 

I am playing at an 8.8 now (best ever) and I do not want to post anything bigger than an 85 and have not been.

 

Am I an anti-sandbagger?

 

My usual round is mid to high 80s but I see not benefit (personally) for letting it go up other than by being a Sandbagger to win tourneys.  I would rather try to improve my scoring than win with a bigger handicap and have people think I am a SANDBAGGER.

 

Not sure about a Sandbaggger but as I've told all my friends that use a similar excuse---  That high score you post, while never being part of the 8 used to calculate your index, could still change your 8 scores used in to calculate your index and thus your index would be incorrect.   

 

REDACTED BECAUSE I WAS WRONG ---For example you could post a 100 and while that 100 won't be used in your index calculation, you could have a score fall off that WAS being used in your handicap and thus your handicap could go either up or down. 

Edited January 15, 2022 by BlackDiamondPar5

[ThinkingPlus]

17 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

Not sure about a Sandbaggger but as I've told all my friends that use a similar excuse---  That high score you post, while never being part of the 8 used to calculate your index, could still change your 8 scores used in to calculate your index and thus your index would be incorrect.   For example you could post a 100 and while that 100 won't be used in your index calculation, you could have a score fall off that WAS being used in your handicap and thus your handicap could go either up or down. 

In the situation you describe, the handicap index can only go up or stay the same.  It cannot go down.

[Needsmoreeagles]

No I am very proud to capture my lower ones and happily replace 84s with an 80.  So when one falls off they will be lower ones added not higher ones.  I see no benefit under the system to post higher scores unless I want to be a sandbagger.  

 

Also, my index would not be an 8.8 if my home turf was a tougher track.  No good way to measure this for golfers that play 1 track, especially if an easier one.  Handicaps should be a blended score across many courses to actually show a legit handicap.

 

All 8 of my scores are from my easier home turf.

Edited January 14, 2022 by Needsmoreeagles

[davep043]

19 minutes ago, Needsmoreeagles said:

I see no benefit under the system to post higher scores unless I want to be a sandbagger.  

You're intentionally manipulating your Handicap if you choose not to post high scores because of the effect they'll have on your handicap.  That's exactly the same as if you choose not to post low scores because of the effect they'll have on your handicap.  Intentional manipulation is wrong.  The benefit of posting all appropriate scores is accuracy.  Its not sandbagging to do things in accordance with the rules.  If everyone does things correctly, the handicap system works as well as it can reasonably be expected to work.  If each of us makes the "adjustments" to the system that we think is right, the system can't work as well.

I read plenty of people who say that vanity handicappers (you seem to fit that description) only hurt themselves.  That's true, until they get into partner or team situations.  Worst of all are the occasional "blind draw" competitions, when you happen to get paired with a guy whose handicap is 3 or 4 or more strokes less than it would be if he posted all his scores accurately.  

 

[Mr. Bean]

18 minutes ago, davep043 said:

You're intentionally manipulating your Handicap if you choose not to post high scores because of the effect they'll have on your handicap.  That's exactly the same as if you choose not to post low scores because of the effect they'll have on your handicap.  Intentional manipulation is wrong.  The benefit of posting all appropriate scores is accuracy.  Its not sandbagging to do things in accordance with the rules.  If everyone does things correctly, the handicap system works as well as it can reasonably be expected to work.  If each of us makes the "adjustments" to the system that we think is right, the system can't work as well.

I read plenty of people who say that vanity handicappers (you seem to fit that description) only hurt themselves.  That's true, until they get into partner or team situations.  Worst of all are the occasional "blind draw" competitions, when you happen to get paired with a guy whose handicap is 3 or 4 or more strokes less than it would be if he posted all his scores accurately.  

 

 

Well spoken, Dave.

 

I just cannot comprehend people who cannot even try to make their index to match their skills. Just cannot. I feel sorry for them.

[Krt22]

1 hour ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Well spoken, Dave.

 

I just cannot comprehend people who cannot even try to make their index to match their skills. Just cannot. I feel sorry for them.

I don't mind vanity caps, they just shoot themselves in the foot when it comes tournament time and they need to play the ball down/count every stroke

[nsxguy]

2 hours ago, Needsmoreeagles said:

No I am very proud to capture my lower ones and happily replace 84s with an 80.  So when one falls off they will be lower ones added not higher ones.  I see no benefit under the system to post higher scores unless I want to be a sandbagger.  

 

Also, my index would not be an 8.8 if my home turf was a tougher track.  No good way to measure this for golfers that play 1 track, especially if an easier one.  Handicaps should be a blended score across many courses to actually show a legit handicap.

 

All 8 of my scores are from my easier home turf.

 

If you're not posting 85+ rounds that should be posted your (true) index isn't 8.8 now. It's what's called a "vanity" handicap.

 

There are only 2 reasons I can think of to do so.

 

1) So you can tell people you're a 8.8 cap (hence the vanity tag)

or

2) You want to enter a tournament which has a minimum handicap index to play in (e.g. under 10) and, if you included those higher scores, you wouldn't BE an 8.8 and you wouldn't get in.

 

Theoretically your handicap should be roughly the same on ANY course from ANY tee set. The reality (vis-a-vis tee set) I personally believe, is different. But I can't prove it.

 

The ONE COURSE theory though is very real IMO. If you play the vast majority of your rounds on a single course your handicap index probably won't "travel" very well.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

2 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

In the situation you describe, the handicap index can only go up or stay the same.  It cannot go down.

Yeah my error. That's what 3 hours of sleep last night will do to me 🙂  It's the other way around.

[rogolf]

Dumb question - why do some golfers think that they "know better" than the people that developed the rules of handicapping and handicapping system?

Stop manipulating - just post all the scores that are acceptable in your region's/country's version of the WHS.  It's really that simple - stop any and all "manipulation".  Just do as the rules of handicapping say, then rest easy.

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Well spoken, Dave.

 

I just cannot comprehend people who cannot even try to make their index to match their skills. Just cannot. I feel sorry for them.

Agreed Mr Bean….you are what you are is what I say.  Sure, we can all hate posting that good score right before a comp that makes the cap go down and potentially hurt our chances but does it really?  First it is most often one stroke difference.  I would certainly feel less than honest if I hadn’t posted and that feeling would permeate into my game.  I would rather be on a high knowing my game was in good shape and the handicap was as accurate as possible.

[Krt22]

9 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

 

The ONE COURSE theory though is very real IMO. If you play the vast majority of your rounds on a single course your handicap index probably won't "travel" very well.

That depends on the course IMHO. Some club golfer caps travel better than others

[Mr. Bean]

12 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Agreed Mr Bean….you are what you are is what I say.  Sure, we can all hate posting that good score right before a comp that makes the cap go down and potentially hurt our chances but does it really?  First it is most often one stroke difference.  I would certainly feel less than honest if I hadn’t posted and that feeling would permeate into my game.  I would rather be on a high knowing my game was in good shape and the handicap was as accurate as possible.

 

Well, in year 2000 on one Saturday I participated a final of which the winner got a ticket to Miami for 5 days to participate the world final. All expenses paid. The previous Thursday I went on my home course to play a bad round to increase my handicap that one stroke. Instead I played one of my best rounds ever and my handicap went down. On Saturday I scored the same as the winner but he left for Miami as his index was lower than mine. Had I not posted that Thursday round I would have been the one. But... I had declared that round to be posted and that I also did. Should have played better in the final, that simple. Or not to have hit one of my drives out of bounds.

[rogolf]

13 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

Well, in year 2000 on one Saturday I participated a final of which the winner got a ticket to Miami for 5 days to participate the world final. All expenses paid. The previous Thursday I went on my home course to play a bad round to increase my handicap that one stroke. Instead I played one of my best rounds ever and my handicap went down. On Saturday I scored the same as the winner but he left for Miami as his index was lower than mine. Had I not posted that Thursday round I would have been the one. But... I had declared that round to be posted and that I also did. Should have played better in the final, that simple. Or not to have hit one of my drives out of bounds.

Were you attempting to manipulate your handicap in order to win the prize?  There are names for that.

[Shilgy]

11 minutes ago, rogolf said:

Were you attempting to manipulate your handicap in order to win the prize?  There are names for that.

Yes….but more likely he had a low score coming off his last 20 and went out relaxed thinking a “normal” round would bump him up a stroke on his course handicap. Oops…the relaxed golfer played well.