Handicapping and competition

[Tom Huckaby]

Brent - no, I think you have it correct.  The issues here arise only when doing skins or some other game where all four compete against each other.  In separate head-to-head matches it's all a non-issue, obviously.  But I too have never heard of playing such a thing... Then again I don't play many wild betting formats very often.

We need shivas.  But then again maybe not.  I doubt he plays much NET golf period.

TH

[JohnV]

The following Decision can be found in the online version of the USGA Handicap System Manual.  Perhaps it will help:

9-4a/1. Players Choose to Use Full Handicaps in Singles Match Play

Q: In singles match play, player A has a Course Handicap of 17 and player B has a Course Handicap of 13. Based on Section 9-4a(i), player A may receive four strokes from player B on the holes allocated as the first four handicap-stroke holes. However, the players decide to play the match with their full Course Handicap, A taking a handicap stroke on 17 holes and B taking a handicap stroke on 13 holes. Is this procedure equitable?

A: No. Handicap-stroke holes are established to maximize the number of halved holes in a match by assigning strokes where player A most needs four strokes in order to obtain a half on those holes. If both A and B receive strokes on those four holes, the better player (B) will have a greater chance of winning those holes. On holes allocated 14, 15, 16, and 17, A will receive strokes and B will not. A will have a greater chance of winning those “easier” holes. The result will be more holes won and lost than halved and the better player (B) will have an unfair advantage in the match.

Brett,  You have it correct.  In a three-ball match (three separate matches), 0 vs 4 strokes 1-4, 0 vs 14 strokes 1-14, 4 vs 14 stroke 1-10.

As I tried to answer Ryan last night, I was going to use that example, but I didn't think that was what he was talking about.

[Andrew Summerell]

I still don't understand why a 'Match' index doesn't solve the problem for all matches. If the difference between handicaps is 10 shots (no matter what the handicaps are) then the lesser player gets a shot on the 1 to 10 listed holes as signified by the match index. That's why match indexes are spread out over the 18. That is also why the 1st hole is rated 18, no matter how hard. A match index should have no correlation to the difficulty or par of a hole.

I have played rounds where I was playing in a stroke/stableford/par event, but playing match play against my opponent as well. We use the match index for the match & the hole rating index for the stroke/stableford/par event. It works quite simply.

[Andrew Summerell]

On the other handicap thread (following my mis-post), Tom H. asked about 'match' index.

Match index is simply an index used when playing matchplay. The strokes are spread out evenly to allow the strokes to effect the match evenly. Noel Bartell (whom I referred to in my first post) explained to me that during the mid 1950's, he noticed that many of the handicap matchplay matches would end quite early, often by the 13th or 14th, with the better player winning almost everytime.

The 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th at NSWGC are rated in difficultly 5, 7, 1, 3. This meant that the lesser player never got the full advantage of their handicap, because the tougher holes were at the end of the round. Hence he devised the matchplay handicap index system.

As listed in my first post, most courses in Australia have exactly the same matchplay index, disregarding the difficulty of the holes. It has been adopted widely because it works so well. Most Australian cards will list a par index (used for stroke, par, stableford etc. event) & a Match index (often on the back of the card) for match play.