Handicap system is broken for match play

[JJFWebster]

8 minutes ago, kmak said:

According to the USGA, the odds of a 13 index shooting 78 (assuming course rating of 72.0) is 552 to 1, considered in the range of sandbagging.

Interesting, thanks for sharing. Course is 72.6 from the tees we played. I thought he may have been sandbagging so I was surprised he didn't make playoffs. When I checked his next best round, in the past 20, it was an 82. 🤷‍♂️ Golf.

[Pastit]

5 hours ago, JJFWebster said:

Interesting, thanks for sharing. Course is 72.6 from the tees we played. I thought he may have been sandbagging so I was surprised he didn't make playoffs. When I checked his next best round, in the past 20, it was an 82. 🤷‍♂️ Golf.

Like all statistics, grouping data can produce meaningless results. I’ve been in this hypothetical situation at at time of rapid improvement in my twenties but it’s quite meaningless to use this stuff to fit a group or sub-group of players. 

[Colin L]

On 10/4/2022 at 9:59 PM, T_Golf_23 said:

I think that is part of what I deal with. I play differently trying to do things I normally would not do, trying to overcome the stroke deficit on certain holes. 
 

ultimately this forces errors. In gross play, I just play my game. 

 

it’s tough to not feel at a disadvantage when you are giving 9,10 or more strokes in a round. Nothing like getting a birdie and pushing a hole. 
 

 

Some glimmerings of hope in there that you'll give up the over-analysis that is beating you up and seemingly spoiling your golf.  Generalising a bit, the principal differences between the low handicapper and the high are the length and consistency of the lower and the lack of length and dramatic inconsistency of the lower.  Add to that, the combination of length and consistency means the the lower is closer to the green for an approach shot and and then being consistent, say, with a wedge whllst the higher is further away and then being inconsistent with a 6 or 7 iron.  There will be long par 4s which the higher cannot reach in 2.  

 

Why worry about  high handicapper who gets a stroke a hole and even 2 strokes at one of them?  There are multiple reasons why he gets that number of strokes and on a normal day they will all work to your advantage.  There's  a good chance the higher will blow up at the 2 stroke hole and even if he doesn't, that hole will be in the inward half by which time you should have built up a pretty secure lead.  And if he wins, share his delight - it might be a rare experience for him.  

 

Match play is a great format, perhaps the purest form of golf, an elemental hole by hole battle with never a dull moment.  Get out there and enjoy winning some and losing some.  And if the match goes to the last putt on the 18th so much the better.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 8, 2022 by Colin L

[larrybud]

11 hours ago, T_Golf_23 said:

why should the 17 capper lose the 1HCp hole to the 18 if they both score as expected according to their handicaps? Another words, they both shoot a 5 on a par 4 is is expected by their handicaps. 

That's the best point you've made, and in fact, how one posts a score when they have "unplayed holes" per the USGA handicapping rules (par + any strokes they might get, using their full course handicap). Also, in larger fields who are playing NET skins, rarely do those fields play off the low player in the field.

 

However, the answer to your question, at least according to the OLD way hole indexes were determined, is that the #1 hole index was the hole which had the greater disparity in average score between the high and low handicapper, so it's where the high handicapper needed help "the most". Your argument holds more water now that indexes are determined relative to par, regardless of handicap.

Like I said before, I think if you figure out your match the way you want, it's going to end up with the same result anyway. In fact, I bet you could go out and play with random stroke indexes (provided they aren't all front or back loaded with the hardest holes) and the result would usually be the same, and over time, WOULD be the same.

The reason for this is simple, we're talking fractions of a stroke difference between holes... Hundredths of strokes.

 

To me, what the actual hole index is isn't the cause for concern. The issue is when the hole indexes are either front or back loaded on one side or another (or both!). It gives an unfair advantage/disadvantage to one player or another.

 

I have a course in my area that my buddy and I played a couple of times in the last month or so. I was giving him 11 shots over 18 holes. On the back 9, he stroked on the first 5 holes, and none on the last 4.  That throws an imbalance to the match. At the start it's a big disadvantage to me since I'm giving him 11 shots in the first 14 holes, but if I survive, it suddenly becomes a big advantage for me since we're playing even up the last 4 holes. Spreading those indexes out a bit would just give a better match for both of us.

 

Edited October 5, 2022 by larrybud

[T_Golf_23]

In this case you are talking about two higher index players that are separated by only 1 stroke. In reality there is no disparity between what they are expected to score in the 1HCp hole. There is disparity relative Ronald they are expected to score in 18hcp hole. This has been my point through out. 

 

the current way of scoring match play only holds water if one of the competitors being strokes off of  is scratch. 
 

On my course, if you are giving 11 strokes, you get 10 of those strokes in the first 13 holes. Leaving only 1 stroke for the last 5. So the high handicappers get to make a big run between holes 2 and 13. So 90% of the strokes are given on 67% of the course. This is a good point…. Course layout can penalize players giving strokes on one course more than another. 

[Colin L]

1 minute ago, T_Golf_23 said:

In this case you are talking about two higher index players that are separated by only 1 stroke. In reality there is no disparity between what they are expected to score in the 1HCp hole. There is disparity relative Ronald they are expected to score in 18hcp hole. This has been my point through out. 

 

the current way of scoring match play only holds water if one of the competitors being strokes off of  is scratch. 
 

On my course, if you are giving 11 strokes, you get 10 of those strokes in the first 13 holes. Leaving only 1 stroke for the last 5. So the high handicappers get to make a big run between holes 2 and 13. So 90% of the strokes are given on 67% of the course. This is a good point…. Course layout can penalize players giving strokes on one course more than another. 

Your problem there is a faulty stroke index.   

[david.c.w]

One other thing to consider is that the handicaps on the card rarely indicate the true difficulty of the hole.  Is it not suspicious that the front is all the odd handicap holes, and the back is all the even.  Or usually the par 3's are the 4 easiest holes?  Over the past couple years one of my playing partners has been collecting scorecards from our groups and entering scores into a spreadsheet and then re-ranking the difficulty.  Granted our group ranges between 4 and 9 indexes, so somewhat of a targeted sample, but the rankings on the card don't match up at all with our reality.  The #1 is actually the 7th hardest.  The 15th is really the 5th hardest.  And one of the par 3's is actually the 4th hardest.

 

I also understand that some clubs, especially in Europe, have a stroke play handicap and a match play handicap printed on the card.

[Ty_Webb]

14 minutes ago, T_Golf_23 said:

In this case you are talking about two higher index players that are separated by only 1 stroke. In reality there is no disparity between what they are expected to score in the 1HCp hole. There is disparity relative Ronald they are expected to score in 18hcp hole. This has been my point through out. 

 

the current way of scoring match play only holds water if one of the competitors being strokes off of  is scratch. 
 

On my course, if you are giving 11 strokes, you get 10 of those strokes in the first 13 holes. Leaving only 1 stroke for the last 5. So the high handicappers get to make a big run between holes 2 and 13. So 90% of the strokes are given on 67% of the course. This is a good point…. Course layout can penalize players giving strokes on one course more than another. 

 

If a 17 plays an 18, then with your way to do it, the 17 would give the shot on the easiest hole. Let's say that they play that game and both post their scores, which results in both cases in a good score from 20 rounds ago dropping out of their last 20. Both players handicap goes up by one stroke. Now they play the next day and they are 18 and 19. Now with your way to do it, the 18 is going to give the 19 the one stroke on the hardest hole. Same match, one day apart - one day it's the easiest hole and the next it's the hardest - does that make sense?

 

In both instances, they're roughly a shot different from each other. That's around 5 hundredths of a shot per hole. That will vary by hole, with generally speaking the harder holes being bigger than 5 hundredths and easier holes being smaller than that. You can't round it, because then you either get a shot on every hole or none. You have to pick somewhere to give the shot, so the one with the biggest difference makes at least as much sense as any other. That's true whether it's a 0 playing a 1 or a 17 playing an 18 or anything else. Whichever hole you give the shot on you're probably going to lose, but the weight of your being better than them will on average come to you winning one more hole of the other 17 than they do. 

 

On a somewhat separate note, a lot of the time I see these sorts of posts, someone will pipe up with "I was playing a match against an 18 handicap and had to give them 15 shots - they made 7 pars on shot holes - how am I supposed to keep up with that? I won on the last".

[North Butte]

As a golfer, if you want the best chance to win a match, the closer you can come to just playing your own game and ignoring things like what the other player does, where he's getting strokes and how stupid the handicap system is the better your chances. There are plenty of things to concentrate on that you can control, thinking about things you can't control has no benefit at all.

 

I'm just sayin'...

[Newby]

1 hour ago, david.c.w said:

 

 

I also understand that some clubs, especially in Europe, have a stroke play handicap and a match play handicap printed on the card.

Notably in Australia. If they haven't changed I believe the allocations were the same on all courses set by the Oz Authority

Edited October 5, 2022 by Newby

[DaveLeeNC]

Just a general comment - there have been lots of references to 'expected score' for a given hole basically being net par (assuming 100% handicaps). This really is a misleading perspective. To take an example of a course where par = Course Rating it is not unreasonable to think that the scratch golfer hole rating for the toughest hole on a course might well be 0.7 over par. Certainly for this case net par on that hole is not the expected score for a scratch golfer. 

 

dave

Edited October 5, 2022 by DaveLeeNC

[Newby]

2 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

Just a general comment - there have been lots of references to 'expected score' for a given hole basically being net par (assuming 100% handicaps). This really is a misleading perspective. To take an example of a course where par = Course Rating it is not unreasonable to think that the hole rating for the toughest hole on a course might well be 0.7 over par. Certainly for this case net par on that hole is not the expected score for a scratch golfer. 

 

dave

And 'expected score' is a range which gets larger as handicaps go up.

[T_Golf_23]

10 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

Just a general comment - there have been lots of references to 'expected score' for a given hole basically being net par (assuming 100% handicaps). This really is a misleading perspective. To take an example of a course where par = Course Rating it is not unreasonable to think that the scratch golfer hole rating for the toughest hole on a course might well be 0.7 over par. Certainly for this case net par on that hole is not the expected score for a scratch golfer. 

 

dave

Your index need to be adjusted to course handicap via slope and rating. 

[DaveLeeNC]

Just now, T_Golf_23 said:

Your index need to be adjusted to course handicap via slope and rating. 

 

I intentionally chose a case where CH, PH, and index are all zero. dave

[larrybud]

4 hours ago, david.c.w said:

One other thing to consider is that the handicaps on the card rarely indicate the true difficulty of the hole.  Is it not suspicious that the front is all the odd handicap holes, and the back is all the even. 

No, it's not suspicious at all, it's the recommendation in the handicapping manual on how to set hole indexes.

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/handicapping/roh/Content/rules/Appendix E Stroke Index Allocation.htm?tocpath=V. Appendices|_____5

[vandyfan]

No one asked me and I am always wrong but if you are giving someone more than 5 shots (due to handicaps) I think match play is kind of stupid at that point. You are not very close in skill at all. Just play stroke play at that point because the higher handicap is due to have a blow up hole or two or three whereas in match play that gets completely removed from the equation, they just give up on that hole and move on. 

[larrybud]

Isn't the whole point of handicapping is to equalize disparate skill?

 

[T_Golf_23]

15 minutes ago, larrybud said:

Isn't the whole point of handicapping is to equalize disparate skill?

 

What other sport, aside from bowling, equalizes the field? 
 

 

[vandyfan]

16 minutes ago, larrybud said:

Isn't the whole point of handicapping is to equalize disparate skill?

 

Yes, which is almost an impossible task. I think I am just being the pessimist who also offers no help in that I think a 20 hdcp playing a scratch golfer, even with handicap adjustments, is a bit ridiculous. They are so far separated in skill they would never play against each other in really any other sport except golf. 

[Ty_Webb]

1 minute ago, T_Golf_23 said:

What other sport, aside from bowling, equalizes the field? 
 

 

If you don't want to play in an event where the field is equalized then stick to scratch events.

[larrybud]

5 minutes ago, T_Golf_23 said:

What other sport, aside from bowling, equalizes the field? 

 

I don't know, but you ask that if it's a bad idea. I take the opposite stance: It's GREAT that two unequal players have a way to compete. 

 

That's why tennis sucks for example, (for both players) unless the two players are very close to the same level, or one on one basketball, or any other one on one sport.

So in golf, not only can you compete against players who are near your own skill level, you have a way to compete against those who are NOT near your own skill level.   I compete against my buddy for the last 30 years doing this, and I can't imagine it being any other way.

Edited October 5, 2022 by larrybud

[larrybud]

2 minutes ago, vandyfan said:

 

Yes, which is almost an impossible task. I think I am just being the pessimist who also offers no help in that I think a 20 hdcp playing a scratch golfer, even with handicap adjustments, is a bit ridiculous. They are so far separated in skill they would never play against each other in really any other sport except golf. 

That's a feature, not a bug.

[rogolf]

7 minutes ago, T_Golf_23 said:

What other sport, aside from bowling, equalizes the field? 
 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handicap_(horse_racing)

[david.c.w]

35 minutes ago, larrybud said:

No, it's not suspicious at all, it's the recommendation in the handicapping manual on how to set hole indexes.

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/handicapping/roh/Content/rules/Appendix E Stroke Index Allocation.htm?tocpath=V. Appendices|_____5

 

Totally understand the recommendation, but do you think architects layout their courses with this in mind?  I dont think so....

 

 

[larrybud]

Just now, david.c.w said:

 

Totally understand the recommendation, but do you think architects layout their courses with this in mind?  I dont think so....

 

It's not often I play a course in which one side is materially harder or easier than the other, but that doesn't really matter anyway.

[klebs01]

14 minutes ago, vandyfan said:

 

Yes, which is almost an impossible task. I think I am just being the pessimist who also offers no help in that I think a 20 hdcp playing a scratch golfer, even with handicap adjustments, is a bit ridiculous. They are so far separated in skill they would never play against each other in really any other sport except golf. 

I think the system works well. I play others in match play money games with caps from plus to over twenty all season at multiple clubs and find the system works well. Match play is great because people are grinding over putts for 11. Unusually large blow up holes don’t impact handicap due to max net double so that issue is covered. I haven’t had a real issue with sandbagger at any club I’ve been at, but that is probably down to peer pressure at a small club and knowing the people in the match. 

[rogolf]

6 minutes ago, david.c.w said:

 

Totally understand the recommendation, but do you think architects layout their courses with this in mind?  I dont think so....

 

 

This seems to be a totally irrelevant point wrt to the handicapping system.  The handicapping system obviously comes after the course has been built and tries to be adaptable to all courses, with the able assistance of the club's knowledgeable handicap committee.

Being a critic is an easy job!

[david.c.w]

4 minutes ago, larrybud said:

 

It's not often I play a course in which one side is materially harder or easier than the other, but that doesn't really matter anyway.

 

My point is that the ranking of the difficulty of the holes is somewhat arbitrary, and not a true representation of the actual difficulty.  OP trying to move stroke holes around to make things more equitable is somewhat meaningless.

[vandyfan]

1 minute ago, klebs01 said:

Match play is great because people are grinding over putts for 11. Unusually large blow up holes don’t impact handicap due to max net double so that issue is covered.

 

I am aware of the max net double limiting factor but I guess I am thinking of the 20 hdcps I know and they usually bogey most every hole and have 1-2 holes where they max out. In a match play scenario those max out holes are not getting factored into their score whereas it would on stroke play. As someone who plays very safe (me), it is extremely rare that I make worse than bogey and fairly rare that I ever make a birdie so I feel like my safe play is punished a bit in match play. Not saying that is bad or good or that the system should be overhauled. Also, I should probably bow out of this conversation because I think handicapping is stupid just on the whole. Everything should be gross in my mind and it's not like I am a good player or something. 

[david.c.w]

6 minutes ago, rogolf said:

This seems to be a totally irrelevant point wrt to the handicapping system.  The handicapping system obviously comes after the course has been built and tries to be adaptable to all courses, with the able assistance of the club's knowledgeable handicap committee.

Being a critic is an easy job!

 

I am in full support of how it works today.  Shifting around where strokes are applied does not make any sense.