[Jim Franklin]

We just had the Seniors Players Championship at our club and we have all sorts of stats on the various holes. My question is should we change the individual hole handicaps to coincide with the tournament play? I called and asked the club because our ninth hole, a par 3, played the third hardest of any hole, but is the 15th handicap hole on our card. Anyone that has ever played BCC knows the ninth hole is a lot harder than 15th thoughest. And now we have the pros to prove it. Someone in our shop told me par 3s cannot be ranked harder than any 4 or 5. I called BS on that.

[Mike_Cirba]

Jim,

As I understand it, if a hole is hard for both the scratch and the handicap man, it generally should be a higher handicap (i.e. 14 thru 18) number.

It's the holes where the scratch man has a huge advantage over the duff that should rise to the top and be the lowest (i.e. 1-6)  handicap hole.

I'm sure some rules afficianado will correct me, but that's how I like to think of it.  

[wsmorrison]

Jim,

There are a lot of guys on here that do course ratings.  I don't know much about the process, but I do know that the handicaps aren't distributed based upon difficulty for scratch or a single subset of players but rather based upon some differential between scratch and the bogey golfer.  In other words, often times the most difficult par 3s have high handicap numbers because they are hard for scratch and bogey golfers.  It might be where there is the biggest stroke differential between scratch and bogey players.  Then again, I could be totally wrong    At least you didn't pay for the advice  

[Kyle Harris]

I've rummaged through a few scorecards here and there... the handicap assignments seem to be based almost purely on distance, with some exceptions for long par 4s over short par 5s... etc.

[Joe Bausch]

Wayne (and Mike),

You are correct about how the hole handicapping in done, at least the way it has been explained to me.  This is one topic where I would venture that 99% of golfers don't understand.  I've given up trying to explain to my golfing buds that the #1 handicap hole does not mean it is the most difficult hole on the course.  It means the difference between average score on that hole for the scratch golfer compared to the bogey golfer is the largest for the course.

[Jim Franklin]

Thanks so far for the input. I sure don't know the method to the hole handicap system.

Another discrepancy I found interesting was our #15 played as the toughest hole and is only listed as the 6 handicap hole.

[Mike_Cirba]

Jim,

Using your example, let's imagine that #9 had a large pond right in front.   The 200 yard uphill carry over the pond would be devastating to the higher handicapper but reasonable for the scratch man to carry.

However, it doesn't, so it plays reasonably the same (hard) for both groups, but not because of presenting some unreasonable challenge to the duff.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jim,
This will help, read section 17.
http://www.usga.org/playing/handicaps/manual/

[Doug Sobieski]

Wayne (and Mike),

This is one topic where I would venture that 99% of golfers don't understand.  

Joe:

I think you are underestimating that percentage  

This topic comes up about every 18 months here, along with slope vs. course rating and how can a course with a high slope have a low course rating (and vice versa).

[Tom Huckaby]

Jim Kennedy referred you to the right section - it's complex, but not that bad - that explains how hole handicapping is supposed to be done.  

One thing to remember is that hole handicapping is NOT done by the course raters, local association, or USGA.  Each club does that themselves - and they can and probably should follow those USGA guidelines - but they certainly don't have to.

Jim F, in your case, I'd be kinda reticent to lower the stroke allocation too much for a long par three.  Yes it is a very tough hole relative to par, without a doubt.  But the key concept as several have stated already is "where does the higher capper most need the strokes?"  And a long par three usually means the high capper makes a 4, the low capper does also... so the stroke isn't needed as much.  The other key concept is that the longer the hole, the more shots the higher capper has to hit, the more he screws up and the more distance he loses to the lower capper... so he needs the shots more on longer holes.  

Of course specifics of a given hole can change things - like 16 Cypress with the ocean in play - but in general, long par 3s, even being as tough as they are for the low capper - don't get the low handicap stroke allocations numbers.

TH

[JESII]

But my question to the USGA is...don't people generally play with others of comparable handicaps?

If so, the greatest disparity between a 3 and a 15 means little...where should the stroke fall when two buddies are one stroke apart? Should it fall on the easiest hole? The toughest hole? Or should handicapping be based on a reasonable dilution of strokes throughout the round (ie: not having three consecutive holes listed as consecutive handicap numbers...)

[Jim Franklin]

So our club can change the handicaps as we see fit? I remember that our West Course changed the handicap on its #18 recently from 2 to 8 because some of our low handicap whiners did not like giving strokes on teh last hole of a match. It is a 599 yard par 5 and should be the #2 hole on the course.

Maybe #9 should not be the 3 handicap, but it certainly should be closer to 9 or 11. 202 uphill to a severely sloping green is tough no matter how you slice it.

[Tom Huckaby]

But my question to the USGA is...don't people generally play with others of comparable handicaps?

If so, the greatest disparity between a 3 and a 15 means little...where should the stroke fall when two buddies are one stroke apart? Should it fall on the easiest hole? The toughest hole? Or should handicapping be based on a reasonable dilution of strokes throughout the round (ie: not having three consecutive holes listed as consecutive handicap numbers...)

Lazy Tom here - isn't that questioned answered on the website?

If not, send them an email... they're pretty darn good about responding to this stuff.

My sense was it the stroke still falls on the longest hardest hole.

TH

[JESII]

I was merely asking this esteemed group Tom...if I wanted THE ANSWER I surely would have gone straight to the USGA...I thought what we did here was come up with what the answers SHOULD BE...

[Tom Huckaby]

So our club can change the handicaps as we see fit? I remember that our West Course changed the handicap on its #18 recently from 2 to 8 because some of our low handicap whiners did not like giving strokes on teh last hole of a match. It is a 599 yard par 5 and should be the #2 hole on the course.

Maybe #9 should not be the 3 handicap, but it certainly should be closer to 9 or 11. 202 uphill to a severely sloping green is tough no matter how you slice it.

Yes - handicap strokes are up to the club, and you need answer to no one.  They have zero effect on course rating or slope or any gross events.  I suppose if you hold regional net match play events and they got too weird, the local association would ask some questions... but outside of that, it's the club's call to make.

So.. in the case of a long tough par 3, well... 9 or 11 seems to me to be about as low as you should go, absent hazards.  Throw in hazards and that changes things.  I still see a lot of holes tied in gross fours there, Jim....

TH

[Jim Franklin]

But my question to the USGA is...don't people generally play with others of comparable handicaps?

If so, the greatest disparity between a 3 and a 15 means little...where should the stroke fall when two buddies are one stroke apart? Should it fall on the easiest hole? The toughest hole? Or should handicapping be based on a reasonable dilution of strokes throughout the round (ie: not having three consecutive holes listed as consecutive handicap numbers...)

The USGA website says the number 1 handicap should fall on teh hardest hole because people of similar handicaps generally play together.

[Tom Huckaby]

I was merely asking this esteemed group Tom...if I wanted THE ANSWER I surely would have gone straight to the USGA...I thought what we did here was come up with what the answers SHOULD BE...

LOL
Well, on this stuff I tend to trust the USGA far more than this esteemed group.  

But here's my answer:  the stroke goes on the longest toughest hole.  That is, the one that seems toughest that is also the longest out of the possible choices.  

TH

[JESII]

OK good...the #1 handicap on each of our three nines is the toughest hole on that nine...but I just thought it was a coincidence...but the guys that I give 10 shots to get seven in a row from 8 - 14...seems a little screwy to me.

[Ken Moum]

So our club can change the handicaps as we see fit? I remember that our West Course changed the handicap on its #18 recently from 2 to 8 because some of our low handicap whiners did not like giving strokes on teh last hole of a match. It is a 599 yard par 5 and should be the #2 hole on the course.

Maybe #9 should not be the 3 handicap, but it certainly should be closer to 9 or 11. 202 uphill to a severely sloping green is tough no matter how you slice it.

ALL of these issues are addressed in this:
http://www.usga.org/playing/handicaps/manual/sections/section_17.html#17-2

For instance, the issue of those first strokes falling at the end of a nine are here:

Importance of Low Strokes

The first handicap stroke should be allocated so that this stroke is most useful in matches between players of almost equal ability, such as matches involving players with a Course Handicap of 0 and 1, 10 and 11, or 29 and 30. In such matches, the first handicap stroke will be of the greatest importance as an equalizer to the player receiving the stroke.

In allocating the second handicap stroke, matches between players having a slightly greater difference in Course Handicap should be given the most consideration, such as matches involving players with a Course Handicap of 0 and 2, 10 and 12, or 29 and 31. This process should be continued until the first six strokes have been assigned.

Without substantially deviating from the above principles, allocating low-numbered strokes to holes near the end of each nine should be avoided, so that players receiving strokes will have the opportunity to use these strokes before either nine or 18-hole matches are decided. Lower-numbered strokes should not be allocated to the first and second holes of a course in the event that a hole-by-hole playoff is necessary.

Also, the purpoose of the stroke is allow a person to tie a hole they'd normally lose. Since there's very little difference in the scores between handicaps on a png par three, it's simply not going to get the stroke.

Now, the USGA manual also offers the suggestion that holes should be ranked by difficulty alone for net fourball competitions. The pro at my club I used difficulty for our stroke allocations several years ago, and they make no sense at all in match play.

FWIW, I have NEVER seen a course that had them done both ways, which makes the most sense to me.

Ken

[Adrian_Stiff]

The English Golf Union made some recomendations on how to allocate the stroke index. It has more to do with position in the round than hole difficulty. Essentially if Player A is giving Player B 2 strokes he should give them in the middle of each nine. Stroke Index below 8 should not be considered for holes 1 or 18 or 9 and 10 if rounds are started from the 10th. A Player receiving 6 strokes should not receive them on back to back holes and one receiving 9 strokes should never get three on the spin. This is not law in the UK although most courses are adopting the guideline. It may be totally how you dont do it in the states.

[Adrian_Stiff]

OK good...the #1 handicap on each of our three nines is the toughest hole on that nine...but I just thought it was a coincidence...but the guys that I give 10 shots to get seven in a row from 8 - 14...seems a little screwy to me.

I guess thats the reason of the guideline, as you say 7 in 7 holes makes it hard... you can build a big lead and your opponent never gets shots, or you simply cant compete as your partner reels out lots of pars and you lose the match by 14.
Ken - I agree two indexes, handicap and stroke allocation makes sense. They use to do this in Spain & Portugal.

[JohnV]

One thing to remember is that hole handicapping is NOT done by the course raters, local association, or USGA.  Each club does that themselves - and they can and probably should follow those USGA guidelines - but they certainly don't have to.

I don't know how we do it in NCGA, but in the WPGA we would help a club by calculating the handicap allocations if they collected the cards.  Even so, the club's Handicap Committee has the final say and can change it if they want.

It only matters for match play (and four-ball stroke play) and since most competitions these days are stroke play, it probably only matters for the average Saturday game between some friends, not that that isn't important.

[TEPaul]

Jim:

If a club wants to do handicap hole allocations the way the USGA recommends, the method of the entire procedure can be found in the USGA's handicap manual which is also online on the USGA website. The process includes using a representative scorecard sampling for an entire year, I believe.

The interesting thing about hole handicap allocations is if a club and the USGA wanted to use the power of the computer they could require that all members of a club post their scores hole by hole.

If that was done theoretically the computer could actually tailor make hole handicap allocations for individual golfers against any other individual golfer at that club and they might even be quite different from other golfers of even the same handicap.

It's just amazing what computers can do if you allow them to crunch the proper data, and in golf handicapping hole by hole posting provides the proper data for a computer.

[Tom Huckaby]

JV - I was told NCGA will do that also, if asked.

But the main point is it's up to the clubs - the local associations do NOT routinely set these, nor is it any part of the course rating process - and that is the assumption by damn near all golfers who ask (that is, that the local association DOES do hole allocations).

TH

[TEPaul]

Tom Huckaby:

Most of the regional golf associations today are looking to increase the services they provide their member clubs or their constituency. They feel it helps the associations maintain  or increase their relevence.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()