Can a 4-handicap man beat an LPGA pro?

[jslane57]

Wow! Can't believe this thread is on page 10 and still going. Actually I can. Sorry women. About 80% of golfers are men, and a large percent of those men are of a privileged lot. They think that they're just talking facts. They don't even realize how insulting they're being to LPGA golfers...

 

If it is true, it isn't insulting. It is just a fact.

 

Being a fact and being insulting are not mutually exclusive.

 

You're statement is wrong.

 

Disagree. No one is stating an abusive remark. No one has disparaged women. They're determining at what level a man can compete with a lpga pro. Nowhere has anyone been insulted.

 

Pointing out thresholds of performance isn't insulting. It is simply categorizing talent and performance.

 

You didn't disagree so much as change the premise.

 

That's cool. I appreciate your opinion, which is completely different from your previous statement.

Here's the thing. To take the best women golfers in the world and compare them to men who are simply not the best, is to take the light away from their accomplishments. It is simply privilege and rudeness. You can say facts are facts, but you are discounting these great women golfers.

 

Who won Sports Illustrated sportsperson of the year last year? Serena Williams. Arguing that a college guy can beat her may be true, but there is no other reason to ever bring that up other than to diminish her accomplishments.

[tareatingrat]

A lot of people don't understand the gap between a professional, and an amateur.

 

Even bottom of the barrel pros are leaps and bounds better than the best amateurs.

 

Golf is no different than other sports. I played hockey against a guy who played "low-level" hockey in Europe, but probably could have made the NHL if not for injuries.

 

I wasn't even playing the same game as him.

 

You can wonder what 'cap a man has to be in order to beat a pro, but at the end of the day, it's really a moot point. Everybody knows there are physical differences that prevent the top women from competing against the top men in 99% of situations.

 

So to compare any 'cap to a pro seems silly. They get paid to play golf, you don't, they win, even if by some chance, you eek out a win.

[Shilgy]

I see too many of these threads. 4 handicapper beating LPGA player, nope. Maybe 1% chance.

 

But against a +4 player, maybe more often. I'm a +2 and I know many of those LPGA players will smoke me under competitive conditions on same tees. To some of you guys, keep those egos under control.

Thank you-I was going to reply to another post but this will do fine. How in the worls do some think a 4 capper-or a scratch male-has a chance? Typical scratch will average about 3 over the rating. Do you see the average lady doing that?

Iteach-you mentioned earlier a tournament only +2 cap beating the women. I would say 50-50 on that bet. But...the +2 tournament only player would probably be a +4 or +5 if he posted his more casual rounds as well. A woman that shoots even par-even with the male rating-as a stroke average would be a +2 or +3 when taking the top half of scores.

 

I also told you Ived watched scratch golfers beat LPGA tour players. A tournament +2 would would beat them way more often than 50/50. And no she wouldn't be a + 2 or 3. The courses average a rating of around 71.5 and the 100th ranked scoring average is nearly 73. Scratch golfer absolutely has a chance and probably about a 30-40% chance.

You keep moving the bar. Now the 100th best LPGA player? It was average and now we are down to one that held her card but has no priority. Your example of scratch that best a woman is comparable to a 14 year old girl beating a bunch of male pros in a Tour event. A one off.

[wobgon]

A lot of people don't understand the gap between a professional, and an amateur.

 

Even bottom of the barrel pros are leaps and bounds better than the best amateurs.

 

Golf is no different than other sports. I played hockey against a guy who played "low-level" hockey in Europe, but probably could have made the NHL if not for injuries.

 

I wasn't even playing the same game as him.

 

You can wonder what 'cap a man has to be in order to beat a pro, but at the end of the day, it's really a moot point. Everybody knows there are physical differences that prevent the top women from competing against the top men in 99% of situations.

 

So to compare any 'cap to a pro seems silly. They get paid to play golf, you don't, they win, even if by some chance, you eek out a win.

You seem to contradict yourself........In a nut shell, what is your point?

[Shilgy]

I understand that white slacks are out of the question for someone my age and build but what about white bermudas? With a dark golf polo or darker or baby blue button down?

 

Thanks much!

 

All the Best,

RP

Are you still a 4 cap or less? :)

[2bGood]

Here's the thing. To take the best women golfers in the world and compare them to men who are simply not the best, is to take the light away from their accomplishments. It is simply privilege and rudeness. You can say facts are facts, but you are discounting these great women golfers.

 

Who won Sports Illustrated sportsperson of the year last year? Serena Williams. Arguing that a college guy can beat her may be true, but there is no other reason to ever bring that up other than to diminish her accomplishments.

I actually kind of find it demeaning to women that you seem to think comparing them to men can only result in diminishing their accomplishments.

 

I don't believe that, as I see it as a way to demonstrate just how good they are.

 

If it is true a top level male D1 golfer is as good as an LPGA player, are you demising the LPGA player or the D1 golfer, or neither?

 

The reason many would find this conversation interesting it they have played far more golf with the scratch player, or college golfer being used as examples than they have LPGA players. Making the comparison gives them a reference point to just how good the LPGA players are. So there is purpose beyond your logic that women are only compared to men to diminish what they accomplished.

 

By your logic there would no reason for women to ever to try to compete with men as the only result could be to diminish their accomplishments they have achieved competing against women only.

[2bGood]

A lot of people don't understand the gap between a professional, and an amateur.

 

Even bottom of the barrel pros are leaps and bounds better than the best amateurs.

 

Golf is no different than other sports. I played hockey against a guy who played "low-level" hockey in Europe, but probably could have made the NHL if not for injuries.

 

I wasn't even playing the same game as him.

 

You can wonder what 'cap a man has to be in order to beat a pro, but at the end of the day, it's really a moot point. Everybody knows there are physical differences that prevent the top women from competing against the top men in 99% of situations.

 

So to compare any 'cap to a pro seems silly. They get paid to play golf, you don't, they win, even if by some chance, you eek out a win.

 

The best amateur golfers are in the same class or very near to it as PGA players and certainly many times better than bottom of the barrel pros (the guys playing the mini tours). I think the Masters is a great measure of this. The best amateurs get invited to this elite field event and often finish mid way up or better.

[AJStatham]

Here's the thing. To take the best women golfers in the world and compare them to men who are simply not the best, is to take the light away from their accomplishments. It is simply privilege and rudeness. You can say facts are facts, but you are discounting these great women golfers.

 

Who won Sports Illustrated sportsperson of the year last year? Serena Williams. Arguing that a college guy can beat her may be true, but there is no other reason to ever bring that up other than to diminish her accomplishments.

I actually kind of find it demeaning to women that you seem to think comparing them to men can only result in diminishing their accomplishments.

 

I don't believe that, as I see it as a way to demonstrate just how good they are.

 

If it is true a top level male D1 golfer is as good as an LPGA player, are you demising the LPGA player or the D1 golfer, or neither?

 

The reason many would find this conversation interesting it they have played far more golf with the scratch player, or college golfer being used as examples than they have LPGA players. Making the comparison gives them a reference point to just how good the LPGA players are. So there is purpose beyond your logic that women are only compared to men to diminish what they accomplished.

 

By your logic there would no reason for women to ever to try to compete with men as the only result could be to diminish their accomplishments they have achieved competing against women only.

 

This. Standing up for the imaginary plight of great athletes in the face of objective comparison. Self-hating [redacted] at it again: it's a fair comparison if the LPGA player hypothetically wins, but it's ignoring the physical limitations involved and diminishing their achievements if the debate starts going the other way. So frustrating.

[birly-shirly]

Hey guys

 

I'm a middle aged, male 4 cap, give or take, and this thread has been pretty disappointing. I mean, no one gives me much of a shot at the LPGA, and frankly, that nikegal sounds like a bit of a bully.

 

I would however like to consider myself world class at the game I love, so please help me out with the appropriate field for comparison purposes. High school kids might still be a bit of a stretch, but maybe introduce an additional age restriction? If not that, how about one- armed or sight-impaired golf?

[golfing_penguin]

I got the good fortune to be a sign-carrier for a group during the Ladies European Masters at my former club, and was following Laura Davies, Karie Webb, and Charlie Hull for 18 holes. They played essentially from the yellow tees, and in no way would a 4hcp stand a chance against them. The amount of long-irons that were hit inside 20ft was exceptional, and 4hcps just don't hit irons that close, long or short

 

(I'm aware they are among the cream in the ladies game, and not the average)

[larssonlegend]

I agree that LPGA players would beat a 4 most of the time but at 6400 yrds most 4 handicappers would be hitting wedges in as most par 4s would be under 380 and par fives would be reachable . So if you are really good short game you could maybe compete. Strangely I think it would be easier to compete with playing woman from their tees than playing them from mens. A LPGA pro is usually dynamite with their woods so longer shots dont faze them as much.

[iteachgolf]

I see too many of these threads. 4 handicapper beating LPGA player, nope. Maybe 1% chance.

 

But against a +4 player, maybe more often. I'm a +2 and I know many of those LPGA players will smoke me under competitive conditions on same tees. To some of you guys, keep those egos under control.

Thank you-I was going to reply to another post but this will do fine. How in the worls do some think a 4 capper-or a scratch male-has a chance? Typical scratch will average about 3 over the rating. Do you see the average lady doing that?

Iteach-you mentioned earlier a tournament only +2 cap beating the women. I would say 50-50 on that bet. But...the +2 tournament only player would probably be a +4 or +5 if he posted his more casual rounds as well. A woman that shoots even par-even with the male rating-as a stroke average would be a +2 or +3 when taking the top half of scores.

 

I also told you Ived watched scratch golfers beat LPGA tour players. A tournament +2 would would beat them way more often than 50/50. And no she wouldn't be a + 2 or 3. The courses average a rating of around 71.5 and the 100th ranked scoring average is nearly 73. Scratch golfer absolutely has a chance and probably about a 30-40% chance.

You keep moving the bar. Now the 100th best LPGA player? It was average and now we are down to one that held her card but has no priority. Your example of scratch that best a woman is comparable to a 14 year old girl beating a bunch of male pros in a Tour event. A one off.

Wasn't a one off. Have seen it multiple times. And I didn't change anything. I never said average. I always said 75-100 player that was struggling to keep their card. Make sure you know what you're talking about before you accuse me of doing something I clearly didn't. I've been consistent the entire time and very clear.

[Jacob Mac]

Wow! Can't believe this thread is on page 10 and still going. Actually I can. Sorry women. About 80% of golfers are men, and a large percent of those men are of a privileged lot. They think that they're just talking facts. They don't even realize how insulting they're being to LPGA golfers...

 

If it is true, it isn't insulting. It is just a fact.

 

Being a fact and being insulting are not mutually exclusive.

 

You're statement is wrong.

 

Disagree. No one is stating an abusive remark. No one has disparaged women. They're determining at what level a man can compete with a lpga pro. Nowhere has anyone been insulted.

 

Pointing out thresholds of performance isn't insulting. It is simply categorizing talent and performance.

 

You didn't disagree so much as change the premise.

 

That's cool. I appreciate your opinion, which is completely different from your previous statement.

 

No I didnt. An insult is an abusive or scornful remark. That's what the word means. Stating a fact isn't abusive or scornful. So I didn't change the premise, I just used the word in its proper context.

 

For example. Saying an lpga pro would kick the s*** out of a 4 cap is not insulting. It is true. Another example, saying Nikegal would smoke me from the blues at Oakmont isn't insulting to me. Because it is true.

 

 

[pinhigh27]

A lot of people don't understand the gap between a professional, and an amateur.

 

Even bottom of the barrel pros are leaps and bounds better than the best amateurs.

 

Golf is no different than other sports. I played hockey against a guy who played "low-level" hockey in Europe, but probably could have made the NHL if not for injuries.

 

I wasn't even playing the same game as him.

 

You can wonder what 'cap a man has to be in order to beat a pro, but at the end of the day, it's really a moot point. Everybody knows there are physical differences that prevent the top women from competing against the top men in 99% of situations.

 

So to compare any 'cap to a pro seems silly. They get paid to play golf, you don't, they win, even if by some chance, you eek out a win.

 

That's why a 16 yr old Jordan spieth can get t16 on the pga tour and be in top 10 through 3 rounds. Ams routinely are near top of leader board in majors. Sometimes even hs kids.

 

No one is hating on pros. You guys are just drastically underestimating how good top level ams are.

[pinhigh27]

Paul dunne as an am was literally leading the British thru 54 holes last yr. So clearly all the pros in the field were drastically superior to him

[Llortamaisey]

In this theoretical match, does the LPGA player get to have her dad there? That makes a huge difference in the outcome.

[dpb5031]

I came into this thread expecting lots of people completely misunderstanding the handicap system. Was not disappointed. The USGA really needs to do a better job explaining to people what a handicap index actually is and how it's calculated because it's clear that like 90% of golfers have no clue (I.e. it's NOT average score in relation to par and it should not go up or down based on what tees you play).

 

You're last statement is incorrect. Handicaps do go up and down based on which set of tees you play. Especially men v. women.

 

Course ratings are very different for women than they are for men.

 

If a 0 handicap female plays from the back tees, competing against men, the difference between the men's course rating and the women's course rating from the same tees is added to her handicap to make it a fair match.

 

Edit for aggravating phone auto-correct! ?

[bph7]

I came into this thread expecting lots of people completely misunderstanding the handicap system. Was not disappointed. The USGA really needs to do a better job explaining to people what a handicap index actually is and how it's calculated because it's clear that like 90% of golfers have no clue (I.e. it's NOT average score in relation to par and it should not go up or down based on what tees you play).

 

You're last statement is incorrect. Handicaps do go up and down based on which set of tees you play. Especially men v. women.

 

Course ratings are very different for women than they are for men.

 

If a 0 handicap female plays from the back tees, competing against men, the difference between the men's course rating and the women's course rating from the same tees is added to her handicap to make it a fair match.

 

Edit for aggravating phone auto-correct! ?

 

I know about men's vs women's handicap. That's not what I was referring to, although I admit I wasnt clear. I was trying to say there is no such thing as "I'm a scratch but only from X tees", which is said all the time. Scratch is scratch, means essentially you are shooting the men's rating if a guy on average for top 50% of scores. If that player moved back a set of tees, the rating would go up, so the worse course that said golfer shoots should still be around the (higher) rating and keep them at scratch. I admit I was less than clear.

[dpb5031]

I came into this thread expecting lots of people completely misunderstanding the handicap system. Was not disappointed. The USGA really needs to do a better job explaining to people what a handicap index actually is and how it's calculated because it's clear that like 90% of golfers have no clue (I.e. it's NOT average score in relation to par and it should not go up or down based on what tees you play).

 

You're last statement is incorrect. Handicaps do go up and down based on which set of tees you play. Especially men v. women.

 

Course ratings are very different for women than they are for men.

 

If a 0 handicap female plays from the back tees, competing against men, the difference between the men's course rating and the women's course rating from the same tees is added to her handicap to make it a fair match.

 

Edit for aggravating phone auto-correct! ?

 

I know about men's vs women's handicap. That's not what I was referring to, although I admit I wasnt clear. I was trying to say there is no such thing as "I'm a scratch but only from X tees", which is said all the time. Scratch is scratch, means essentially you are shooting the men's rating if a guy on average for top 50% of scores. If that player moved back a set of tees, the rating would go up, so the worse course that said golfer shoots should still be around the (higher) rating and keep them at scratch. I admit I was less than clear.

 

The reason I pointed this out is that in my experience most are unaware of this stipulation when it comes to handicapping.

 

When a female player posts a score from the middle or back tees, the course rating is entirely different than for a male player posting from the same tees. In many cases it's a 5,6, and even 7 shot difference.

 

The end result is seen in the differentials. So, a man and a woman play the tips and both shoot the same score, the effects on their handicap index are completely different. The woman's index will end up being much lower than the man's.

[Forged4ever]

I came into this thread expecting lots of people completely misunderstanding the handicap system. Was not disappointed. The USGA really needs to do a better job explaining to people what a handicap index actually is and how it's calculated because it's clear that like 90% of golfers have no clue (I.e. it's NOT average score in relation to par and it should not go up or down based on what tees you play).

 

You're last statement is incorrect. Handicaps do go up and down based on which set of tees you play. Especially men v. women.

 

Course ratings are very different for women than they are for men.

 

If a 0 handicap female plays from the back tees, competing against men, the difference between the men's course rating and the women's course rating from the same tees is added to her handicap to make it a fair match.

 

Edit for aggravating phone auto-correct! ?

 

I know about men's vs women's handicap. That's not what I was referring to, although I admit I wasnt clear. I was trying to say there is no such thing as "I'm a scratch but only from X tees", which is said all the time. Scratch is scratch, means essentially you are shooting the men's rating if a guy on average for top 50% of scores. If that player moved back a set of tees, the rating would go up, so the worse course that said golfer shoots should still be around the (higher) rating and keep them at scratch. I admit I was less than clear.

 

The reason I pointed this out is that in my experience most are unaware of this stipulation when it comes to handicapping.

 

When a female player posts a score from the middle or back tees, the course rating is entirely different than for a male player posting from the same tees. In many cases it's a 5,6, and even 7 shot difference.

 

The end result is seen in the differentials. So, a man and a woman play the tips and both shoot the same score, the effects on their handicap index are completely different. The woman's index will end up being much lower than the man's.

HaHa, I was one of those idiots until Madison explained it to me. I bet a lot more guys didn't know this than would admit.

 

Have a nice day Bro :)

 

All the Best,

Richard

[PixlPutterman]

I was a 3 in college and our best player was actually on the women's team, she would play from the men's tee with us, using a Sunday bag with 7 clubs and EMBARASS US

 

You played college golf as a 3?

Yep, never said I was the top player :) NAIA also

You still Played and have some great memories!!

 

I don't regret for a second the path that I chose in college(football) however I went back to my BFF's son's homecoming game a few years ago and he Plays at a nice small DIII school and the whole atmosphere was so different and we went into the locker room and it was like a 180* from a DI locker room but maybe in a good way, lol. These guys all had fun and when the game was over, they were free till Monday at practice and then films Monday evening. We saw Saturday's game film Sunday at 1:00pm and then Sunday evening at 6:30 we started film for the next week. My bud's son seemed to be having fun along with a life outside of football. It seemed like HS ball, which was a a lot of fun. Don't get me wrong, I had a blast in college and have no regrets but it was a friggin job.

 

I'm sure that you had a blast, Played some great courses and tourneys and have wonderful memories.

 

Is there a NAIA National Championship in golf, either teams or individual?

 

Stay well my Friend :)

 

My Best,

Richard

 

Had a blast. Our top players in both mens and womens shot under par all the time so I was on the "worse side" by a decent margin.

 

It was a small school so I had the chance to play others wouldn't. Who wouldn't pass up a scholarship and free golf :D

[North Texas]

I came into this thread expecting lots of people completely misunderstanding the handicap system. Was not disappointed. The USGA really needs to do a better job explaining to people what a handicap index actually is and how it's calculated because it's clear that like 90% of golfers have no clue (I.e. it's NOT average score in relation to par and it should not go up or down based on what tees you play).

 

You're last statement is incorrect. Handicaps do go up and down based on which set of tees you play. Especially men v. women.

 

Course ratings are very different for women than they are for men.

 

If a 0 handicap female plays from the back tees, competing against men, the difference between the men's course rating and the women's course rating from the same tees is added to her handicap to make it a fair match.

 

Edit for aggravating phone auto-correct!

 

I know about men's vs women's handicap. That's not what I was referring to, although I admit I wasnt clear. I was trying to say there is no such thing as "I'm a scratch but only from X tees", which is said all the time. Scratch is scratch, means essentially you are shooting the men's rating if a guy on average for top 50% of scores. If that player moved back a set of tees, the rating would go up, so the worse course that said golfer shoots should still be around the (higher) rating and keep them at scratch. I admit I was less than clear.

 

The reason I pointed this out is that in my experience most are unaware of this stipulation when it comes to handicapping.

 

When a female player posts a score from the middle or back tees, the course rating is entirely different than for a male player posting from the same tees. In many cases it's a 5,6, and even 7 shot difference.

 

The end result is seen in the differentials. So, a man and a woman play the tips and both shoot the same score, the effects on their handicap index are completely different. The woman's index will end up being much lower than the man's.

 

Exactly. For example, the white tees at our course play 6607. The men's course rating is 71.0. But for women it is 78.5

[PixlPutterman]

Wow! Can't believe this thread is on page 10 and still going. Actually I can. Sorry women. About 80% of golfers are men, and a large percent of those men are of a privileged lot. They think that they're just talking facts. They don't even realize how insulting they're being to LPGA golfers...

 

If it is true, it isn't insulting. It is just a fact.

 

Being a fact and being insulting are not mutually exclusive.

 

You're statement is wrong.

 

It is not incorrect. The way a fact is presented can be insulting, but the fact itself is not insulting.

 

If you are insulted by facts it is because you are not seeking the truth, you are seeking attention.

 

If a person is by definition obese, that is a fact. If you call them lard Word not allowed, why that may technically be correct, it is insulting, fact remains though....

[chrismikayla]

By the way where is everyone getting that the courses for women are set up "benign"? I am being serious because a few years ago I played the RTJ golf course in Prattville, AL a few days after the Navistar Classic. There was definitely deep rough and the greens were lightning fast. The top finishers were high double digits under par and they made mincemeat of that course. I knew at that point that the lady pros play a different game than even scratch amateur men.

 

EDIT: It was 2010 and the winner Katherine Kirk was -19 and Brittany Lincicome was -18.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiEtdii9dzOAhVEGR4KHWZnDPsQFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxsports.com%2Fgolf%2Fleaderboard%3Fassociation%3D3%26season%3D2010%26eventId%3D2139&usg=AFQjCNHKdwE-b2C1UYbGRefApJ9MzMFs4g&sig2=H0fslpB7B5oPhyieLN1yfw

[chrismikayla]

A lot of people don't understand the gap between a professional, and an amateur.

 

Even bottom of the barrel pros are leaps and bounds better than the best amateurs.

 

Golf is no different than other sports. I played hockey against a guy who played "low-level" hockey in Europe, but probably could have made the NHL if not for injuries.

 

I wasn't even playing the same game as him.

 

You can wonder what 'cap a man has to be in order to beat a pro, but at the end of the day, it's really a moot point. Everybody knows there are physical differences that prevent the top women from competing against the top men in 99% of situations.

 

So to compare any 'cap to a pro seems silly. They get paid to play golf, you don't, they win, even if by some chance, you eek out a win.

 

 

This is so true and amazingly it is the same for pretty much every sport. I may be able to outdrive some of the women but they hit lasers with every club. I don't know if any of you remember Lisa Leslie but she is pretty much one of the greatest female basketball players ever and was pretty much a pioneer of the WNBA. I've seen her in the gym embarrassing really good high school and lower division college men and it really was no contest. Brian Scalabrine was basically an NBA "scrub" who was the twelfth man on a few teams in his career and averaged about four points per game. So anyway some local guys in the area challenged him one on one a few years after he retired. Many of these guys were former and current college players. He played four or five guys and gave up a TOTAL of two points aginst every challenger. He looked like a combination of Lebron and MJ against these guys and we are talking about an end of the bench NBA player AFTER he retired. It was called the "Scallenge" for anyone interested in looking that up on youtube.

[Petunia Sprinkle]

Is there a difference between men's and women's handicaps, or are all 4s equal regardless of sex?

[North Texas]

By the way where is everyone getting that the courses for women are set up "benign"? I am being serious because a few years ago I played the RTJ golf course in Prattville, AL a few days after the Navistar Classic. There was definitely deep rough and the greens were lightning fast. The top finishers were high double digits under par and they made mincemeat of that course. I knew at that point that the lady pros play a different game than even scratch amateur men.

 

I'm with you. I don't buy the idea that the courses for women are set up "benign".

[dpb5031]

I came into this thread expecting lots of people completely misunderstanding the handicap system. Was not disappointed. The USGA really needs to do a better job explaining to people what a handicap index actually is and how it's calculated because it's clear that like 90% of golfers have no clue (I.e. it's NOT average score in relation to par and it should not go up or down based on what tees you play).

 

You're last statement is incorrect. Handicaps do go up and down based on which set of tees you play. Especially men v. women.

 

Course ratings are very different for women than they are for men.

 

If a 0 handicap female plays from the back tees, competing against men, the difference between the men's course rating and the women's course rating from the same tees is added to her handicap to make it a fair match.

 

Edit for aggravating phone auto-correct! ��

 

I know about men's vs women's handicap. That's not what I was referring to, although I admit I wasnt clear. I was trying to say there is no such thing as "I'm a scratch but only from X tees", which is said all the time. Scratch is scratch, means essentially you are shooting the men's rating if a guy on average for top 50% of scores. If that player moved back a set of tees, the rating would go up, so the worse course that said golfer shoots should still be around the (higher) rating and keep them at scratch. I admit I was less than clear.

 

The reason I pointed this out is that in my experience most are unaware of this stipulation when it comes to handicapping.

 

When a female player posts a score from the middle or back tees, the course rating is entirely different than for a male player posting from the same tees. In many cases it's a 5,6, and even 7 shot difference.

 

The end result is seen in the differentials. So, a man and a woman play the tips and both shoot the same score, the effects on their handicap index are completely different. The woman's index will end up being much lower than the man's.

 

Exactly. For example, the white tees at our course play 6607. The men's course rating is 71.0. But for women it is 78.5

 

BINGO!

[KnightPS]

I play with a current 3.6 as my partner in our league and he hits the ball a mile. His ex-wife was a pro golfer on the Symetra Tour, and when they were married he was almost down to a 1. I asked him this exact question on the range before league and he just started laughing. He told me that over all of rounds with his wife from the same tees (~6400 yds), he beat her less than 5 times, and those wins came from the perfect storm of her having an off day (73) and he was playing as best he could.

 

My takeaway is that a 4 cap has ZERO chance against an LPGA player.

[North Texas]

Is there a difference between men's and women's handicaps, or are all 4s equal regardless of sex?

 

With a current index of 8.9, from the white tees at my course, I am a 10 handicapper.

With a current index of 8.8, from the red tees at our course, my wife is a 10 handicapper.

On average, she beats me by a stroke.

If she played the white tees, I would beat her on average by 7.5 strokes.

If I played the red tees, I would beat her on average by 5 strokes.