Odds of Shooting an Exceptional Tournament Score

[Pepperturbo]

2 hours ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

I'd love thoughts on whether my performance qualifies... I'm currently sitting at a 21.6 index. 

 

My game is inconsistent. I typically play two 18-hole rounds a month. I have a pretty functional swing and making par is never a surprise, but I can easily also have blow-up holes (with NDB for ESC being a triple mostly, and a quad occasionally). So my typical round score is "how well did I limit the big numbers", not "how many GIR did I hit". My bad rounds have differentials up in the mid-high 30s. 

 

But as a 21.6, in my last 20 scores, I have a 17, a 16.9, and a 14.8 differential. The odds tables have 13-21 or 22-30 as handicap, so the odds of those scores (for either the higher or lower index) are 87/40:1, 87/40:1, and 323/130:1. To have three such scores out of 20 seems high.

 

I am certainly not a sandbagger. But it also seems like I put up exceptional scores more often than I statistically "should". 

 

Is this common for other high-caps simply because we are very inconsistent? 

If you're playing the ball down, and by the rules, don't bother yourself with what others may think.  High caps are inconsistent, and low scores may come about based solely on your body cooperating that day.

[nsxguy]

43 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

 

The problem is the CH calculation in the old system (Pre-WHS). Here in the US (and some other places) CH was simply Index*Slope/113 (in the simplest case). 

 

So take a case of a 10 handicap golfer who shoots his handicap (Diff = Index) at two different sets of tees at Pinehurst No. 6. From the back tees he shoots 87 (74.5/140 course) for a Diff of 10.1 (basically shot his index). Under the old system he gets 12 strokes so his Net score is 75. 

 

Then he plays the red tees (65.1/118) and shoots 76 (Diff = 10.4). Again he basically shot his index and his Net score (where he gets 10 strokes under the old system) is 66. 

 

The two net scores are 9 strokes apart even though the 'quality of the rounds' was basically the same. The WHS fixes that with an additional CR adjustment in the CH calculation. 

 

dave

 

The Course Handicap has nothing to do with sandbagging/exceptionally low rounds (differential). Neither do net scores, for the same reason.

 

"Exceptional round", i.e. a possible sandbagging incident, is strictly a differential vs. handicap index issue.

 

If your HI is 17.5 and your differential that day is ~17.5, there is no concern about sandbagging.

 

If your HI is 17.5 and your differential that day is 6, there is certainly a reason to suspect it could be a sandbagging incident.

 

As others have alluded to, the higher the handicap, the more likely a low(er) diff than index is NOT a sandbagging incident as higher index players are much more erratic.

 

 

[AzRoger]

On 7/29/2023 at 4:49 PM, Oops,_I_ bogeyed_again said:

I'm reading this string because I'm a 20 handucap and shot 80 today and won my E flight. 15 years ago, I used to shoot low-mid 80's, broke 80 once in a blue moon. Then, played less, some career and personal trauma, and simply lost my game. Now I regularly shoot 95-105. Today, I was relaxed, played less club to stay short of trouble, and chipped and putted well. I hope it continues, but more likely my future scores will be higher. I just hate to be the one people are likely thinking of as a sandbagger.

Your handicap won't be 20 for long, under the handicap system if you post a score and the differential is 10 strokes or more below your handicap index the differential for your last 20 posted scores will each get reduced by 2 and a new handicap calculated from that. If the differential is 7-10 strokes less then each differential will get adjusted by 1 stroke. I wouldn't call it sandbagging unless there's a trend, especially in tournament play, unusual scores happen.

 

Edited August 5, 2023 by AzRoger

[DaveLeeNC]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

The Course Handicap has nothing to do with sandbagging/exceptionally low rounds (differential). Neither do net scores, for the same reason.

 

"Exceptional round", i.e. a possible sandbagging incident, is strictly a differential vs. handicap index issue.

 

If your HI is 17.5 and your differential that day is ~17.5, there is no concern about sandbagging.

 

If your HI is 17.5 and your differential that day is 6, there is certainly a reason to suspect it could be a sandbagging incident.

 

As others have alluded to, the higher the handicap, the more likely a low(er) diff than index is NOT a sandbagging incident as higher index players are much more erratic.

 

 

 

I agree with the statements above. 

 

However you also said this and the italics stuff below is where our disagreement lies. 

 

The average player (~15 hdcp) and higher likely has no idea what constitutes an exceptional round, hence them exclaiming "Sandbagger" every time someone shoots a net 60 or so.

 

The KEY is the course/slope rating. Usually, just the course rating is "close enough" to give one an idea.

 

So the real question is, "What was the course rating from the tees you played when you shot your 80 net 60 ?

 

If the CR was around 65/66 or so, it ain't that big of a deal; odds of ~175:1. Sure, not a very common occurrence but as you yourself say, it was an exceptional round for you.

 

Now if the CR was 71 or higher, NOW we're getting into some seriously high odds, like once-in-a-lifetime territory - much more likely for "sandbagging" to be a topic of conversation. 

 

 

[bladehunter]

14 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

The average player (~15 hdcp) and higher likely has no idea what constitutes an exceptional round, hence them exclaiming "Sandbagger" every time someone shoots a net 60 or so.

 

The KEY is the course/slope rating. Usually, just the course rating is "close enough" to give one an idea.

 

So the real question is, "What was the course rating from the tees you played when you shot your 80 net 60 ?

 

If the CR was around 65/66 or so, it ain't that big of a deal; odds of ~175:1. Sure, not a very common occurrence but as you yourself say, it was an exceptional round for you.

 

Now if the CR was 71 or higher, NOW we're getting into some seriously high odds, like once-in-a-lifetime territory - much more likely for "sandbagging" to be a topic of conversation.

Course rating is 72.2 .  

[Dewdman42]

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

 

You can read many more articles from the pope of slope about the odds, etc.  Bottom line, if you look at the yellow highlighted cells in the table above, those are the tournament scores highly likely to be sandbagging.

 

 

It can theoretically happen that you hit a round in the yellow but it would really need to be the best round you'd had in the past 5-10 years or maybe ever.   Furthermore the odds of doing it twice within the past 20 rounds are much worse then that even.  It's quite ok and normal to play a 0 differential a few times every 20 rounds.  even to play -1 or even -2 could happen once or twice per 20 rounds.  But -3 should happen far less often, and when you get to -4 it's a once per every couple of years event, depending on how much golf you play per year.  -5 and -6 most probably a sandbagger in action.

 

Can it happen?  sure, a miracle round could happen, you don't know for sure if you are beating the odds unless it happens more than once within that many rounds.  For example, le's say you are a mid handicap, you get -4 differential on any round, including a tourney.  The odds say you should be able to do that once in 121 rounds of golf.  If it happens again before you have played 120 more rounds of golf...then you are beating the odds and probably sandbagging. 

 

There are sandbaggers everywhere in handicapped tourney play, it's part of why I don't even bother competing in them anymore, they are generally a waste of time. 

 

The above chart is based on USGA and WHS is changing some things the way course handicaps are calculated, so there could be slightly different data for WHS, but in general it still applies, odds of winning handicapped tournaments more then once every couple of years are extremely low unless you have an inflated index.  

 

I have played with a lot of mid handicappers over the years and watched what they do when they are scoring casual rounds.  As soon as they start scoring badly, they give up on the round, make lazy shots, poor decisions and generally much worse play then they are capable.  they may not even realize they are doing it, but they give up and at the end still register the round.  They drink when they play, and register the round.  etc.  They do this more than 3 out of 5 rounds, which means it affects some of their counted scores towards index.  They don't even realize it, because they think they are just playing and counting every round, but the truth is they aren't playing every round with the same fervor from start to finish.  Thus...their index becomes inflated.  Actually I think they realize and know bloody well they are inflating their index this way improving their odds to win a future tourney, but they justify it in their mind by saying they are just following the rules of golf and entering every round.

 

Also generally, most golfers don't know how to calculate ESC properly, much less their course handicap or how many strokes they get for net on any given course based on their current index.  etc.  The math is too much for the majority of players.

 

I don't know of any answer to this problem other then what knuth recommended from the get go which was for clubs to take responsibility for their members, keep track of how they are scoring and when they observe evidence of sandbagging using a systematic system to do so, then lower their indexes.  But the truth is nobody is really over seeing every player, it's an honor system and well....human beings are not honest...we are cut throat liars.   so I see no solution other then more oversight, but its a lot of overhead and effort involved, so it won't happen.  And there will always be sandbaggers, sometimes sandbaggers will win and sometimes you might get lucky and play on a day when none of the enrolled sandbaggers happen to have a decent round that day, in which case you might do ok with your legitimate index if you happen to have one of your best rounds in the past 20-30.  In my opinion, any score over -2 differential should have a decent chance of winning and it should be close, with the winner being -2 or -3, or sometimes rarely a -4.  Anything over that is sandbag city...  If its you, then think about how you're playing all the rounds you enter into the computer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 5, 2023 by Dewdman42

[PNWGuy]

54 minutes ago, DaveLeeNC said:

 

The average player (~15 hdcp) and higher likely has no idea what constitutes an exceptional round, hence them exclaiming "Sandbagger" every time someone shoots a net 60 or so.

 

Agreed!  The statement should be:

 

The average player (~15 hdcp) and higher likely has no idea what constitutes an exceptional round, hence them exclaiming "This person is more likely to be a Sandbagger" every time someone shoots a net 60 or so.

 

The flip side of this statement is:

 

The average player (~15 hdcp) and higher likely has no idea what constitutes an exceptional round, hence them exclaiming "This person is more likely to be a Sandbagger Vanity Cap" every time someone shoots a net 60 82 or so.

[Dewdman42]

net 60 is likely a sandbagger, that is true.  The odds of it not being a sandbagger are quite slim.  it could theoretically happen very very rarely.  It can happen, it's not impossible, but it's very improbable.   The 15 handicapper that says so is not wrong, they are very correct.   The odds that out of the hundred or so people playing that day, someone literally had the best round of a lifetime.  it's very slim odds that is that actual case.  It's far more likely their index is inflated.

 

 well actually....I would say the most likely scenario is that the person in question had a very good round, the best they have had in a long time....AND also an inflated index, resulting in a stratospheric net win.   In other words, they might still deserve to win...but to win by that many strokes means most likely...that they are also a sandbagger who happened to play one of the best rounds in a long time, which is a good reason to win.  Maybe.  There is no way to know for sure whether they deserved to win or not.

 

and well its a gentleman's game in general we should be good sportsmen and not label the winner as a cheater.  That is simply being a poor loser.  

 

But still, the sand bag label is quite likely to be correct in that situation.

 

 

 

Edited August 5, 2023 by Dewdman42

[nsxguy]

4 hours ago, DaveLeeNC said:

 

I agree with the statements above. 

 

However you also said this and the italics stuff below is where our disagreement lies. 

 

The average player (~15 hdcp) and higher likely has no idea what constitutes an exceptional round, hence them exclaiming "Sandbagger" every time someone shoots a net 60 or so.

 

The KEY is the course/slope rating. Usually, just the course rating is "close enough" to give one an idea.

 

So the real question is, "What was the course rating from the tees you played when you shot your 80 net 60 ?

 

If the CR was around 65/66 or so, it ain't that big of a deal; odds of ~175:1. Sure, not a very common occurrence but as you yourself say, it was an exceptional round for you.

 

Now if the CR was 71 or higher, NOW we're getting into some seriously high odds, like once-in-a-lifetime territory - much more likely for "sandbagging" to be a topic of conversation. 

 

 

 

You basically re-print my entire post and say it's "where our disagreement lies" ?

 

What IS it you disagree with ? What is "wrong" with what I wrote about recognizing a score as possible sandbagging ?

 

Please be specific as I already TOLD you where I believed YOU were wrong; using CH and NET scores.

[nsxguy]

4 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Course rating is 72.2 .  

 

I have no idea what you're talking about.

[bladehunter]

22 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

I have no idea what you're talking about.

The course rating for the net 60 I saw and mentioned was 72.2.  I assumed you drew the example of net 60 from my post above yours. 

Edited August 5, 2023 by bladehunter

[nsxguy]

22 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

The course rating for the net 60 I saw and mentioned was 72.2.  I assumed you drew the example of net 60 from my post above yours. 

 

Ahhhh, OK. No, wasn't referring to your post, just a nice round number to calculate with.

 

BUT, YOU definitely have a case if that guy who shot 72, net 60 as a 12, was playing from the 72-rated tee set.

 

That is a differential roughly 12 shots better than his 'cap and the "chart" doesn't go past 10. Clearly suspicious.

[bladehunter]

40 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Ahhhh, OK. No, wasn't referring to your post, just a nice round number to calculate with.

 

BUT, YOU definitely have a case if that guy who shot 72, net 60 as a 12, was playing from the 72-rated tee set.

 

That is a differential roughly 12 shots better than his 'cap and the "chart" doesn't go past 10. Clearly suspicious.

Yep.  He’s new for this year , So I don’t have a history to really stake a claim to.  He had no handicap before ….  I just think it’s hilarious from my perspective.  It’s truly whack a mole.  There’s always 1 who breaks out by some unreachable number.    Alwasy.  
 

it’s not the losing that irritates me. It’s the realism side of my brain that can’t let go or the fact that there’s no real chance . I participate because I’m asked to. And because the events coincide with my weekly 4 hours of free  time.  I just count the money as spent before hand so I have no worry of it being lost.  
 

but I do bristle at anyone who disputes the above.  Let me rationalize it and go on doing the good deed of donating.  Don’t try to sell me on the idea of my having just as much chance of shooting net 60-65 as anyone 🤣 I’m too smart to buy that.  
 

that's not me accusing you.  Just me against the general idea.  

Edited August 6, 2023 by bladehunter

[DaveLeeNC]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

You basically re-print my entire post and say it's "where our disagreement lies" ?

 

What IS it you disagree with ? What is "wrong" with what I wrote about recognizing a score as possible sandbagging ?

 

Please be specific as I already TOLD you where I believed YOU were wrong; using CH and NET scores.

 

This started with your statement that low net scores should be judged differently on courses with low CR's vs. courses with high CR's. I disagree with that. 

 

Do the math on the following two cases. 

 

Golfer A (index = 4) plays a 76/146 course (par 72) and shoots a net score of -2 (70 in this case). His CH will be 9 and his gross score will be 79. His differential will be 2.4 which (surprise/surprise) rounds off to 2 strokes better than his index of 4. 

 

Golfer B (index =30) plays the same course from the most forward tees (65/105, par 72). His CH is 21 and he also shoots a net -2. This is a gross score of 91. His resulting differential is 28 which (surprise/surprise) is 2 strokes better his index of 30. 

 

It will always work that way (under the WHS system - not the old system). Low CR vs. high CR courses - does not matter. 

 

dave

[nsxguy]

2 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Yep.  He’s new for this year , So I don’t have a history to really stake a claim to.  He had no handicap before ….  I just think it’s hilarious from my perspective.  It’s truly whack a mole.  There’s always 1 who breaks out by some unreachable number.    Alwasy.  
 

it’s not the losing that irritates me. It’s the realism side of my brain that can’t let go or the fact that there’s no real chance . I participate because I’m asked to. And because the events coincide with my weekly 4 hours of free  time.  I just count the money as spent before hand so I have no worry of it being lost.  
 

but I do bristle at anyone who disputes the above.  Let me rationalize it and go on doing the good deed of donating.  Don’t try to sell me on the idea of my having just as much chance of shooting net 60-65 as anyone 🤣 I’m too smart to buy that.  

 

Last things first. With all the discussion on the subject, I don't recall anyone saying you, as a scratch player, had just as much chance of winning/shooting net 65, as "anyone".

 

It's been said MANY times around here that high handicappers have a MUCH better chance at shooting a low net score than someone at scratch.

 

If those tables shown earlier say anything at all, that is it. Add the fact that higher caps usually outnumber lower caps by a wide number in any given net tourney, and there you have it. YOU are playing for the fun of it. Been there, done that.

 

He's new ? Never had a handicap before ? How new ?

 

Handicap committees have some latitude in quickly adjusting a new player's cap if necessary. I forget how it's done but it's recognized that new players sometimes improve rapidly; faster than the handicap system can account for - and in those cases the committee is tasked with adjusting the 'cap.

 

Don't know this fellow's case but,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[Shilgy]

59 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

Ahhhh, OK. No, wasn't referring to your post, just a nice round number to calculate with.

 

BUT, YOU definitely have a case if that guy who shot 72, net 60 as a 12, was playing from the 72-rated tee set.

 

That is a differential roughly 12 shots better than his 'cap and the "chart" doesn't go past 10. Clearly suspicious.

Suspicious yes…..but the GHIN “chartl-I realize you were referring to the Pope of Slope chart- does.  Meaning if you score 10 or more better than your index you are facing a drop of 2 strokes from all of your last 20 posted score.  So clearly they know those type of rounds do occur on a regular enough basis to have a handicap impacting adjustment to your handicap.  A score 10 lower than your index would essentially drop you three strokes on your handicap.  Could even drop four.

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, nsxguy said:

 

Last things first. With all the discussion on the subject, I don't recall anyone saying you, as a scratch player, had just as much chance of winning/shooting net 65, as "anyone".

 

It's been said MANY times around here that high handicappers have a MUCH better chance at shooting a low net score than someone at scratch.

 

If those tables shown earlier say anything at all, that is it. Add the fact that higher caps usually outnumber lower caps by a wide number in any given net tourney, and there you have it. YOU are playing for the fun of it. Been there, done that.

 

He's new ? Never had a handicap before ? How new ?

 

Handicap committees have some latitude in quickly adjusting a new player's cap if necessary. I forget how it's done but it's recognized that new players sometimes improve rapidly; faster than the handicap system can account for - and in those cases the committee is tasked with adjusting the 'cap.

 

Don't know this fellow's case but,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Nope. Not accusing you.  
 

Just making a statement.  In fact I had this conversation while playing this morning with a 10 handicap guy.  It was him asking a question  about the year long points championship those net events eventually lead to.  I said “ I don’t pay attention to those points because I have no chance of accumulating enough to win the overall “. And he argued to the death that I had a better chance than others to win.  Just drives me nuts that most don’t understand how stacked the deck is. . 

[ChaosTheory]

8 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Nope. Not accusing you.  
 

Just making a statement.  In fact I had this conversation while playing this morning with a 10 handicap guy.  It was him asking a question  about the year long points championship those net events eventually lead to.  I said “ I don’t pay attention to those points because I have no chance of accumulating enough to win the overall “. And he argued to the death that I had a better chance than others to win.  Just drives me nuts that most don’t understand how stacked the deck is. . 

Over the longer run, it seems to me that the low capper should prevail.  Maybe not, I dunno.

 

 I once read a convincing article or book chapter which argued that mid caps are in the hell position.  Basically low caps take care of themselves and there is always a high cap with a good score.  I guess we can all agree that on a given day, some high cap guy is likely to have the best net.

[bladehunter]

2 hours ago, Snowman9000 said:

Over the longer run, it seems to me that the low capper should prevail.  Maybe not, I dunno.

 

 I once read a convincing article or book chapter which argued that mid caps are in the hell position.  Basically low caps take care of themselves and there is always a high cap with a good score.  I guess we can all agree that on a given day, some high cap guy is likely to have the best net.

In match play maybe.  That’s 1 v 1 odds.  When it’s 3v 50 there’s not much of a chance that none of the mid or high caps go low.  At least one always will.  Folks say “ well one of those handful of low caps should also go low “.  Not really.  It’s infinitely harder for a scratch player to make 3/4 birdies and go bogey free to shoot 68 …. Vs a 12 handicap making 1 birdie , and getting on the par train for a side and somehow not hit the OB driver on the back 9. To shoot net 68. 
 

I think 3-9 handicaps are the hell position. Not able to compete in gross events unless flighted. And not really likely to compete often in net events.  

[North Butte]

3 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

I think 3-9 handicaps are the hell position. Not able to compete in gross events unless flighted. And not really likely to compete often in net events.  

I think anyone playing in a large field, un-flighted event is in hell position. Just no reason to do it, it's a silly format. 

[bladehunter]

17 minutes ago, North Butte said:

I think anyone playing in a large field, un-flighted event is in hell position. Just no reason to do it, it's a silly format. 

I agree. But around here getting them to flight it , is a once a year thing.  Club championship only.  And that’s only after the first day which is basically a qualifier.  Want to experience true hell on a golf course ?  Play bad the first day and get put in the wrong flight for your skill level.  Ive done that twice.  And shot under par the next day ….. it’s a win you don’t  want and it causes hate to flow from the other people in that flight.  I’ll absolutely WD if I ever do that again.  Why it’s  not flighted from day 1 by handicap I’ll never know. 

[betarhoalphadelta]

23 hours ago, mark m said:

Higher handicap players tend to have more variance in their scores. But most of us do have ups and downs and our handicap can ebb and flow. As you know, the three good scores will have the effect of lowering your Index. The important question is: are these 3 scores from competitions?

 

 

If by "competition" you mean the $1 skins game I play with the same buddies, then yes, it's "competition" 😉

 

But in general, no. I don't play in sanctioned comps so in essence my handicap doesn't matter, and my buddies know I can be ALL over the map so it's not like they will ever accuse me of sandbagging. 

 

I was just wondering more whether my variance was an outlier, because 3 out of 20 rounds were declared as being 40:1 odds or worse against. So I should theoretically have less than one in my past 20 rounds, right? 

 

[Dewdman42]

According to knuth, out of 20 rounds pretty much all players will be remarkably in line with the statistical odds he quoted.

 

at one point I made a spreadsheet to track my own games beyond index, I wanted to know not only my index but also my average differential across all 20 rounds.  My average turned out to be just like he said it would be, about 2-3 strokes higher than the index.  That included some blow up rounds.  This eventually gave me some solace knowing that when I played 2-3 over my index it was not a terrible round but an average round.  And anything under that was actually a better than average round!  But I really didn’t have any super rounds way below my index.  It just doesn’t happen other then perhaps for a golfer who is rapidly improving.

 

The odds that a golfer will play 20 earnest rounds where they were legitimately trying their best for all 18 holes of every round and then out of the blue shoot a score 5 below that established index….see the odds chart.  It’s slim slim chances that it should happen.  It’s much more likely that the casual rounds were not played earnestly to the same level as the golfer is capable or some other aspect of playing, scoring and posting was questionable.  The only exception would be a golfer who is rapidly improving

[Dewdman42]

The most common thing I observe is that when players get a duff shot or penalty, they give up on the hole.  They realize they aren’t making par and will have to work hard to make bogey even, but they give up on it in disgust and end up with double or perhaps even a triple when they might have stayed in the game, sometimes even saving par and definitely saving bogey.  Well these add up.  And in casual rounds they add up a lot because in casual rounds nobody likes getting a bogey, even bogey golfers complain about their bogeys.  Can’t get a par?  Ah screw it then, and they hole goes to hell.  They can just say it was a blow up hole rather then try super hard to close down a worked for bogey and maybe even sometimes still scramble for par!

 

I have even heard them utter the words in those moments “handicap maintenance”

 

but in competition they will not give up a hole so easily.  

Nobody should post scores where they haven’t earnestly played every hole as if it were a competition and every strike matters no matter what.  But thet is simply not what people do in their casual rounds 

Edited August 6, 2023 by Dewdman42

[mark m]

34 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

If by "competition" you mean the $1 skins game I play with the same buddies, then yes, it's "competition" 😉

 

But in general, no. I don't play in sanctioned comps so in essence my handicap doesn't matter, and my buddies know I can be ALL over the map so it's not like they will ever accuse me of sandbagging. 

 

I was just wondering more whether my variance was an outlier, because 3 out of 20 rounds were declared as being 40:1 odds or worse against. So I should theoretically have less than one in my past 20 rounds, right? 

 

Random thoughts:

 

IMO the charts are most helpful in showing the rarity of scores which are truly extraordinary and basically off the charts. 

 

Based on 30 years in the same club and also a participant in a group game which includes some erratic “Wild Willie” types, it is not unusual to see a variance of 5-6 in CH over the course of a season.

 

What tends to happen in our area with a 7 month season, is most play a little worse at the start of the season, and again towards the end. This is the result of course conditions (especially greens), less frequent play, lack of practice, weather, etc.   The result is guys are at a high point in May because their good scores from the previous summer have been bumped out and then their game and the course improves at the same time. 
 

This area of “potential” is tricky. Example: we had a member who when he played well would play to around 11. So a CH of 13 would be about correct for him. But sometimes he would get up to 17-18. Now, would you be surprised if he shot 79 in a tournament from a course rated 69.0? I wouldn’t be. He had done it before numerous times over the span of 25-30 years.  IMO it’s not a “one-off.” But it is also hard for a HC to adjust him prior to a tournament. He was a nice guy, a competitor, and was otherwise a good and active member. 

[betarhoalphadelta]

28 minutes ago, Dewdman42 said:

 

The odds that a golfer will play 20 earnest rounds where they were legitimately trying their best for all 18 holes of every round and then out of the blue shoot a score 5 below that established index….see the odds chart.  It’s slim slim chances that it should happen.  It’s much more likely that the casual rounds were not played earnestly to the same level as the golfer is capable or some other aspect of playing, scoring and posting was questionable.  The only exception would be a golfer who is rapidly improving

 

I dunno... Maybe I'm an outlier exception then... When I came back to the game in 2020, I established a cap and was up around 24. Bear in mind, it's not like I came back as someone who had previously been "good". I've never played enough to be good. Breaking 100 on a regulation course was always a good day. 

 

Then in June 2021, still at a 24 handicap, I dropped a 10.3 differential. Just was playing out of my mind. +4 through the first 3 holes, then even par from holes 4 through 15 (3 bogeys, 3 birdies, first time I've ever had a multi-birdie round), then +5 through the last 3 holes. Same course, the previous round was a 22.9 differential and next round at that same course was a 35.2 differential. I wasn't rapidly improving. That round dropped my cap by 4 strokes. 

 

If I scroll through my scores since then, again playing basically 2 times a month (3 on a good month), so maybe 30 times a year, I can see differentials sprinkled in of 15.9, 13.6, 13.0, 17.0, 14.8, and 16.9. Prior to that in Jan 2021 I had a 17.7 (while still a 24 cap). 

 

Again, I'm not concerned with being called a sandbagger. My playing partners are the same pretty much every round, and they've seen me shoot trash golf and seen me randomly go low when it's all clicking. 

 

I'm just wondering if other high-caps have this many exceptional scores, or if I really am an outlier. 

[Golferpaul]

5 hours ago, Snowman9000 said:

 I once read a convincing article or book chapter which argued that mid caps are in the hell position.  Basically low caps take care of themselves and there is always a high cap with a good score.  I guess we can all agree that on a given day, some high cap guy is likely to have the best net.

But only in events with a large number of high cappers.   The larger the group, the more likely a high capper will win.

[Dewdman42]

@betarhoalphadelta your 24 is too high.  You may not be intentionally sandbagging, but if you have an unfair advantage going to any tournament or gambling using 24 index.

 

How are you going to feel when you win an actual tournament scoring let’s say a 19 differential?  Like a class act cheater.

 
You should be a 19 or maybe a 20.  You should take  a very close look at how you are playing and scoring your rounds in order to come to such an inflated index when you appear to be perfectly capable of scoring 15.  If you never compete anyway then it doesn’t really matter.  Use whatever you like to make yourself feel good 

 

 

Edited August 6, 2023 by Dewdman42

[betarhoalphadelta]

1 minute ago, Dewdman42 said:

@betarhoalphadelta your 24 is too high.  You may not be intentionally sandbagging, but if you have an unfair advantage going to any tournament or gambling using 24 index.

 

How are you going to feel when you win an actual tournament scoring let’s say a 19 differential?  Like a class act cheater.

 
You should be a 19 or maybe a 20.  You should take  a very close look at how you are playing and scoring your rounds in order to come to such an inflated index when you appear to be perfectly capable of scoring 15.  If you never compete anyway then it doesn’t really matter.  Use whatever you like to make yourself feel good 

 

 

I'm currently a 21.6. According to GHIN my low was 18.9 around the end of 2022, until the 15.9, 13.6, and 13.0 started to age out. It then crept up into the 22+ range before the 17, 14.8, and 16.9 rounds which are in my current index calculation.

 

I don't appreciate calling my integrity into question. I actually try to play VERY close to the RoG (we do in our group roll out of divots or out of unmarked GUR as our usual course doesn't mark anything, and we do give putts but only within about 18" for pace of play), including 2-stroke MLR E-5 penalties for OB or lost ball. And per your previous post I don't "give up" on rounds when playing badly. 

 

I'm just horribly inconsistent. Yesterday I shot +21 on the front nine followed by +7 on the back. Didn't do anything differently. Just a bunch of compounded mistakes on the front and a (mostly) clean back. The front was one par and nothing else better than double. The back was 4 pars, 4 bogeys, and a triple. 

 

I do perhaps agree that the handicap system, which is based on potential, maybe doesn't accurately capture my game. But I'm not cheating anything. As mentioned, it's a casual skins game with my buddies, so it's not like I'm playing trash in a bunch of $1 skins rounds just to inflate my cap to play well in the rare and random $1 skins game. 

 

But I contributed to this thread as my ability to shoot the occasional exceptional round seems statistically unlikely, but it's very real and not based on me actively trying to manipulate anything. So I was asking if I am truly an outlier or representative of other high-caps...

[Dewdman42]

I am not calling your integrity into question I said carefully that you may not be internationally doing it.  Just saying if you go into any tournament with an index five or higher then your best game in the past year, you have an unfair advantage whether you intentionally arranged it or not.  Not intentionally cheating perhaps but if you end up winning a round with a score thet you know in your heart is not your very best, then you will FEEL like a cheater.  How much fun is that?  You will have also unwittingly deprived someone else of a deserved win.
 

as I said, look carefully at how and why you are scoring and posting so poorly during your casual rounds so often.  Hey this will help your game trust me.  Never give up any shot of any hole ever.   Live by the motto there is always a chance until you sink the putt on the 18th hole.  If you aren’t thinking that way then don’t post the score.

 

in terms of simple fun you will have more fun if you figure  out why you blow up so often and look at course management probably.  You should be able to hit close to bogey golf most of the time and have an index that reflects it

 

Edited August 6, 2023 by Dewdman42