[Rich Goodale]

Sean

"Bogey" scores (in the olden sense) are currently printed on most cards--they just called them "course ratings" or "standard scratch."  For the more difficult courses these are usually 3-6 strokes higher than "par."

As to the modern sense of a "bogey" golfer being someone who is roughly a stroke a hole worse than a "scratch golfer," his olden time "bogey" (Bogey's bogey"?) will be more than a stroke a hole more than that of the "scratch" golfer and as much as 25-30 strokes higher than "par."  This is probably closely equivalent to the USGA "Bogey Rating."

To add to this is the question of means and dispersion.  All handicaps are based on the best 50% of your scores, so every golfer's average score is higher than what would be predicted by his or her handicap.  The average "scratch" player actually shoots about two over "bogey" on his average round (i.e. 5-8 over on difficult courses), whilst the average 18 HCP player shoots something like 25-30 over "bogey" from the tips on difficult courses (i.e. 28-36 over "par.").

The bottom line?  We are all crap!

Rich

[Sean_A]

Sean

"Bogey" scores (in the olden sense) are currently printed on most cards--they just called them "course ratings" or "standard scratch."  For the more difficult courses these are usually 3-6 strokes higher than "par."

As to the modern sense of a "bogey" golfer being someone who is roughly a stroke a hole worse than a "scratch golfer," his olden time "bogey" (Bogey's bogey"?) will be more than a stroke a hole more than that of the "scratch" golfer and as much as 25-30 strokes higher than "par."  This is probably closely equivalent to the USGA "Bogey Rating."

To add to this is the question of means and dispersion.  All handicaps are based on the best 50% of your scores, so every golfer's average score is higher than what would be predicted by his or her handicap.  The average "scratch" player actually shoots about two over "bogey" on his average round (i.e. 5-8 over on difficult courses), whilst the average 18 HCP player shoots something like 25-30 over "bogey" from the tips on difficult courses (i.e. 28-36 over "par.").

The bottom line?  We are all crap!

Rich

Rich

It is fairly rare for a course to be rated more than 2 strokes higher than par even in a decent wind.  You are essentially looking at courses set up for a championship - at least in the UK.  In fact, I would say there are probably more courses rated lower than par than 1 shot over par.  So its really not the same thing at all.  In the old days it was common for bogey scores to be 5 or 6 shots over par. 

Ciao

[Ian_L]

While we talk a lot about low slope being the ideal, how many good courses do you know with a slope rating below 113 from any men's tee?  Any great courses below 120?  Pacific Dunes is 125 from the green tees, but even that's not a piece of cake looking at the numbers.

[Tom Huckaby]

While we talk a lot about low slope being the ideal, how many good courses do you know with a slope rating below 113 from any men's tee?  Any great courses below 120?  Pacific Dunes is 125 from the green tees, but even that's not a piece of cake looking at the numbers.

It just seems logical to me that a low slope number would be ideal.

However, there are indeed VERY VERY few that meet this standard.  I am not certain as to why that is.  I truly believe that for whatever reason HIGH SLOPE is somehow seen as a good thing, and thus new courses seem to strive for this and market it when they have it.. when if fact it really should be something they were more ashamed of.

Thus when one does find a great course with a high course rating and low slope, I think it is to be cherished and ought to be celebrated.  There's one out here - Monarch Bay - and it's a pretty darn good course.... man if I were marketing director there I'd do an add celebrating the lowish slope.... explain WHY somehow....

Anyway, my guess is that if anyone can make high CR/low slope happen and/or has the will to do so, it would be Tom Doak.  Look to his courses for lowish slopes... which to me remains a great thing.  129 from tips at Pacific Dunes... compare to 143 from tips at Bandon Dunes... that's pretty signifcant to me.

TH

[Charlie Goerges]

I thought someone mentioned that 113 is the base slope and that everything goes up from there. I can't back that up with paperwork; so take it for what it is.

[Tom Huckaby]

I thought someone mentioned that 113 is the base slope and that everything goes up from there. I can't back that up with paperwork; so take it for what it is.

113 is the number that is supposed to be what course of "average" slope would come out as - and yes there are many courses with slopes under 113 (usually very short ones).  Now how many GREAT ones are under that number (or even close to it), well therein lies the problem.

TH

[Garland Bayley]

There was another thread on this before. 113 is not the average slope. Not even close. It is well under average. www.popeofslope.com is one place you can find out the details.

[Tom Huckaby]

There was another thread on this before. 113 is not the average slope. Not even close. It is well under average. www.popeofslope.com is one place you can find out the details.

Correct.  I'm also not sure it was intended to be the average of all courses that have been rated.  It sure doesn't turn out that way.

In any case, anything 120 or less, with CR at or above par, would seem to be pretty ideal as I see things.

TH

[JohnV]

113 is not the "average" slope.  It is the slope of a course of standard playing difficulty.  Note that "standard playing difficulty" does not mean "average" playing difficulty.

Here are a couple of examples of courses.  They are taken from two resorts Arizona, each with two courses.

Resort 1
Course 1
Course Rating: 72.7  Slope: 123  Bogey Rating: 95.6
Course 2
Course Rating: 71.5  Slope: 125  Bogey Rating: 94.7

Resort 2
Course 1
Course Rating: 74.6  Slope: 138  Bogey Rating: 100.2
Course 2
Course Rating: 73.7  Slope: 146  Bogey Rating: 100.8

If you're a "bogey" golfer would you rather shoot 95 or 100?

I would be spending my time at Resort 1.

[Tom Huckaby]

BINGO!

Thanks again, John.

Interesting how Pacific Dunes and Bandon Dunes come out, huh?

[Mike Hendren]

Dadgummit.  I was thinking about publishing my ratings under the title "The Confidential Clyde" and now I hear the USGA beat me to the punch.

That, and the fact that this thread will make it virtually impossible for me to use this site's search function going forward.

Bogey

[Tom Huckaby]

Dadgummit.  I was thinking about publishing my ratings under the title "Confidential Clyde" and now I hear the USGA beat me to the punch.

That, and the fact that this thread will make it virtually impossible for me to use this site's search function going forward.

Bogey

Oh my, how thoughtless of me.  My humble apologies, my friend.

Can't wait to see Confidential Clyde, anyway.

TH

[Rich Goodale]

Sean

"Bogey" scores (in the olden sense) are currently printed on most cards--they just called them "course ratings" or "standard scratch."  For the more difficult courses these are usually 3-6 strokes higher than "par."

As to the modern sense of a "bogey" golfer being someone who is roughly a stroke a hole worse than a "scratch golfer," his olden time "bogey" (Bogey's bogey"?) will be more than a stroke a hole more than that of the "scratch" golfer and as much as 25-30 strokes higher than "par."  This is probably closely equivalent to the USGA "Bogey Rating."

To add to this is the question of means and dispersion.  All handicaps are based on the best 50% of your scores, so every golfer's average score is higher than what would be predicted by his or her handicap.  The average "scratch" player actually shoots about two over "bogey" on his average round (i.e. 5-8 over on difficult courses), whilst the average 18 HCP player shoots something like 25-30 over "bogey" from the tips on difficult courses (i.e. 28-36 over "par.").

The bottom line?  We are all crap!

Rich

Rich

It is fairly rare for a course to be rated more than 2 strokes higher than par even in a decent wind.  You are essentially looking at courses set up for a championship - at least in the UK.  In fact, I would say there are probably more courses rated lower than par than 1 shot over par.  So its really not the same thing at all.  In the old days it was common for bogey scores to be 5 or 6 shots over par. 

Ciao

Sean

You have misunderstood the maths.  Let's take Dornoch for an example:

1.  "Par" =70
2.  SSS = 73
3.  average CSS =74
4.  mean score of a "scratch" golfer over CSS at any UK course = 2 over handicap (source, CONGU)
5........so, the mean score of a scratch golfer at Dornoch will be ~76, which is 6 over"par," i.e. very comparable with the old concept of "bogey."

You, as many others, forget the fact that a golfer's handicap under current systems refelects how he or she plays on average on his or her best 50% of rounds, not all rounds.

Comprende, compadre?

Rich

[David Ober]

I think a high slope spells trouble for BOTH types of golfers, both scratch and bogey.

Here's my thinking: Courses with high slope ratings tend to have lots of OB and plenty of difficulty around the greens. When a scratch player is playing well, the OB and trouble around the greens doesn't matter much, but when the scratch player is a bit "off," then a high slope rating is going to result in (significantly) higher scores for the scratch golfer as well.

In fact, I'd wager that the higher the slope (assuming a standard rating of 72.0), the higher the AVERAGE score of the scratch golfer -- even though the players "best 10 of the last 20" might still yield a scratch handicap.

Something like this:

Course A (72.0/139)

Scratch player's last 20 scores:

69
69
71
72
72
73
74
74
75
77
79
81
81
81
82
83
84
84
84
86


Course B (72.0/121)

Scratch Player's last 20 scores:

69
70
71
71
72
72
73
73
74
75
75
75
76
76
76
76
77
78
78
79

It's late, so someone correct me if I'm not making sense.... :-)

Essentially most golfers seem to think, and have for a long time, that a course's "Slope Rating" is the difficutly of the course for a good player (scratch player). It isn't.

The rating of a golf course for the scratch player is the "Course Rating" and that is almost always on course scorecards. (So basically probably way more than fifty percent of golfers think the "Slope Rating" is the same thing as a course's "Course Rating". Again, it isn't!   

The "Slope Rating" is a number calculated from a mathematical formula basically derived from the difference between a course's "Bogey Rating" and the course's "Couse Rating."

(Note: a "scratch" player is a golfer with a 0 handicap. A "Bogey" player for the purposes of these USGA Handicap System and course rating calculations is a figurative golfer with a handicap between app 17.6-22.1. A "Bogey" player is also assumed for course rating purposes to hit various shots or clubs certain fixed maximum distances).

Tom Huckaby's point is obviously that if a "Bogey Rating" is made more available to golfers they will begin to understand better what a "Slope Rating" REALLY is and isn't.

If courses would put on their scorecards the "Bogey Rating" along with the "Course" and "Slope" ratings which most all scorecards already have it would probably make things a lot clearer to a whole lot more people.

However, I fear that one of the primary reasons "Bogey Ratings" have never been put on scorecards is there really isn't much room left on most scorecards for it. 

[Sean_A]

Sean

"Bogey" scores (in the olden sense) are currently printed on most cards--they just called them "course ratings" or "standard scratch."  For the more difficult courses these are usually 3-6 strokes higher than "par."

As to the modern sense of a "bogey" golfer being someone who is roughly a stroke a hole worse than a "scratch golfer," his olden time "bogey" (Bogey's bogey"?) will be more than a stroke a hole more than that of the "scratch" golfer and as much as 25-30 strokes higher than "par."  This is probably closely equivalent to the USGA "Bogey Rating."

To add to this is the question of means and dispersion.  All handicaps are based on the best 50% of your scores, so every golfer's average score is higher than what would be predicted by his or her handicap.  The average "scratch" player actually shoots about two over "bogey" on his average round (i.e. 5-8 over on difficult courses), whilst the average 18 HCP player shoots something like 25-30 over "bogey" from the tips on difficult courses (i.e. 28-36 over "par.").

The bottom line?  We are all crap!

Rich

Rich

It is fairly rare for a course to be rated more than 2 strokes higher than par even in a decent wind.  You are essentially looking at courses set up for a championship - at least in the UK.  In fact, I would say there are probably more courses rated lower than par than 1 shot over par.  So its really not the same thing at all.  In the old days it was common for bogey scores to be 5 or 6 shots over par. 

Ciao

Sean

You have misunderstood the maths.  Let's take Dornoch for an example:

1.  "Par" =70
2.  SSS = 73
3.  average CSS =74
4.  mean score of a "scratch" golfer over CSS at any UK course = 2 over handicap (source, CONGU)
5........so, the mean score of a scratch golfer at Dornoch will be ~76, which is 6 over"par," i.e. very comparable with the old concept of "bogey."

You, as many others, forget the fact that a golfer's handicap under current systems refelects how he or she plays on average on his or her best 50% of rounds, not all rounds.

Comprende, compadre?

Rich

Rich

If you read my previous post carefully it will become clear that I don't believe there are many courses in the position of Dornoch with a much higher course rating than par.  Furthermore, many of these clubs which do have high course ratings don't use the proper back tees for very many members' comps. so this rating isn't really a significant factor for the club player.  When I stated that many courses back in the day had bogey ratings up around 80 or higher it was the non-championship courses I was referencing. 

We must also remember that the concepts of bogey (usually set at 6 shots over par which would have been much higher back in the day and often based loosely on the best player in the club who was rarely of national standard), par and course rating weren't really sorted out til well after the turn of the century.  I think back at that time, par (non distinguishable from course rating at this time) was determined by the standard of the American Amateur Champion.  Of course, this essentially blew apart the idea of bogey so it died a slow death.  Eventually, when the standard of play, equipment and conditions improved, course rating had to be used (usually lower than par) because good players routinely broke par - we are talking somewhere just after WWI I think.  It wasn't too long before par dropped significantly because it was a largely meaningless number for the best players.  It wasn't until then that a decent system for handicapping could be employed. 

The odd thing about handicapping is that the main idea is to make it easy for two players to have have a competitive match.  But handicaps are traditionally based on medal rounds and these days stableford is used.  I don't know if the concept of handicap adjustment through general play is used now more than previously
 
Ciao 

 

[Rich Goodale]

Sean

The Dornoch example was from the medal tees, from which all competitions are played except for national ones.  In those cases where the blue (back) tees are used, the SSS is 74, so my argument still applies.  I'm sure this is the case at any other tough courses which has major tournament tees beyond the normal medal tees.  My main point, in any case, was to point out that the mean expected score for a scratch player at any course is 2 strokes over SSS, so even courses wher the SSS = par, the basic rule of 2-6 strokes as the "bogey score" is still true.

Rich

[Sean_A]

Sean

The Dornoch example was from the medal tees, from which all competitions are played except for national ones.  In those cases where the blue (back) tees are used, the SSS is 74, so my argument still applies.  I'm sure this is the case at any other tough courses which has major tournament tees beyond the normal medal tees.  My main point, in any case, was to point out that the mean expected score for a scratch player at any course is 2 strokes over SSS, so even courses wher the SSS = par, the basic rule of 2-6 strokes as the "bogey score" is still true.

Rich

Rich

I would like to have seen a bogey score from 100 years ago that was 72 (assuming that the average course rating these days in the UK is 70 - not anywhere near 74)!  They tended to be at 80 or higher!  Perhaps you are focusing on the last hold outs of courses with bogey score which had come down considerably over the years.

What makes you think that scratch players back in the day averaged a scratch score?  The logic escapes me.  Even with all your high fallutin examples using unusually high course ratings the difference between your course rating of today and bogey score of yesteryear is several shots.  My point remains, that the two are not the same, never were the same and were never intended to be the same. 

Ciao 

[Rich Goodale]

Sean

I'm not trying to (nor am I interested in) what the Bogey Score meant in the olden days.  Rather, I'm interested in its relevance to the topic, which relates to today's game.  I think if one plays Pine Valley, say as a Bogey 78 for the scratch player (and say as a BogeyBogey 110 for the average player), rather than 72/90 or whatever, I think players can enjoy more realistic expectations and more accurate handicapping of matches.  That's all.

Rich

[Tom Huckaby]

I think a high slope spells trouble for BOTH types of golfers, both scratch and bogey.

Here's my thinking: Courses with high slope ratings tend to have lots of OB and plenty of difficulty around the greens. When a scratch player is playing well, the OB and trouble around the greens doesn't matter much, but when the scratch player is a bit "off," then a high slope rating is going to result in (significantly) higher scores for the scratch golfer as well.

In fact, I'd wager that the higher the slope (assuming a standard rating of 72.0), the higher the AVERAGE score of the scratch golfer -- even though the players "best 10 of the last 20" might still yield a scratch handicap.

Something like this:

Course A (72.0/139)

Scratch player's last 20 scores:

69
69
71
72
72
73
74
74
75
77
79
81
81
81
82
83
84
84
84
86


Course B (72.0/121)

Scratch Player's last 20 scores:

69
70
71
71
72
72
73
73
74
75
75
75
76
76
76
76
77
78
78
79

It's late, so someone correct me if I'm not making sense.... :-)

Essentially most golfers seem to think, and have for a long time, that a course's "Slope Rating" is the difficutly of the course for a good player (scratch player). It isn't.

The rating of a golf course for the scratch player is the "Course Rating" and that is almost always on course scorecards. (So basically probably way more than fifty percent of golfers think the "Slope Rating" is the same thing as a course's "Course Rating". Again, it isn't!   

The "Slope Rating" is a number calculated from a mathematical formula basically derived from the difference between a course's "Bogey Rating" and the course's "Couse Rating."

(Note: a "scratch" player is a golfer with a 0 handicap. A "Bogey" player for the purposes of these USGA Handicap System and course rating calculations is a figurative golfer with a handicap between app 17.6-22.1. A "Bogey" player is also assumed for course rating purposes to hit various shots or clubs certain fixed maximum distances).

Tom Huckaby's point is obviously that if a "Bogey Rating" is made more available to golfers they will begin to understand better what a "Slope Rating" REALLY is and isn't.

If courses would put on their scorecards the "Bogey Rating" along with the "Course" and "Slope" ratings which most all scorecards already have it would probably make things a lot clearer to a whole lot more people.

However, I fear that one of the primary reasons "Bogey Ratings" have never been put on scorecards is there really isn't much room left on most scorecards for it. 

David:  no one ever said high slope would be anything but trouble for either golfer.  However, the point is that slope measures relative difficulty (bogey to scratch) whereas course rating attempts to measure raw difficulty for scratch, just as bogey rating does the same for the bogey player.

So high slopes ought to be indeed utterly cryit downe.  I never said otherwise.  My point here is that the scratch already tends to have a number he can look at if he wants to know what to expect from a course:  course rating.  Bogey also has always had such - bogey rating - but I was unaware such were published anywhere.  Now here they are.

Either way slope should not be looked at as any measure... but yes, high slope ought to be seen warily by all golfers outside of the masochistic.

TH

[Jim Nugent]

They used to define bogey as someone who drives the ball 200 yards, and can hit a 350 yard hole in 2.  Is that still the case?

[Tom Huckaby]

Jim - from the web page I referenced:


Scratch Golfer
Is one who can play to a Course Handicap™ of zero on any and all rated golf courses. He (she) can hit tee shots an average of 250 (210) yards and reach a 470 (400)-yard hole in two shots.

Bogey Golfer
Is one with a Course Handicap of 20 (24). He (she) can hit tee shots an average of 200 (150) yards and can reach a 370 (280)-yard hole in two shots. 
 

[Ian_L]

While we talk a lot about low slope being the ideal, how many good courses do you know with a slope rating below 113 from any men's tee?  Any great courses below 120?  Pacific Dunes is 125 from the green tees, but even that's not a piece of cake looking at the numbers.

It just seems logical to me that a low slope number would be ideal.

However, there are indeed VERY VERY few that meet this standard.  I am not certain as to why that is.  I truly believe that for whatever reason HIGH SLOPE is somehow seen as a good thing, and thus new courses seem to strive for this and market it when they have it.. when if fact it really should be something they were more ashamed of.

Thus when one does find a great course with a high course rating and low slope, I think it is to be cherished and ought to be celebrated.  There's one out here - Monarch Bay - and it's a pretty darn good course.... man if I were marketing director there I'd do an add celebrating the lowish slope.... explain WHY somehow....

Anyway, my guess is that if anyone can make high CR/low slope happen and/or has the will to do so, it would be Tom Doak.  Look to his courses for lowish slopes... which to me remains a great thing.  129 from tips at Pacific Dunes... compare to 143 from tips at Bandon Dunes... that's pretty signifcant to me.

TH

Tom, great point on Monarch Bay.  It's fun to play even if you're not at your best because you won't lose many balls and the course is wide open.  I think #14 especially is a great hole.

Thinking about it, couldn't the slope at Pacific Dunes be reduced even more pretty easily without taking away the strategy and fun of the holes?  Removing gorse at holes like 2, 3, and 15 would make it a bit easier on the errant driver.  Do these kinds of things go under the designer's (or superintendent's) radar, since they don't affect the strategy of the hole but come into play for many players (like me) who have the occasional wild shot?  How much is the result of a wild tee shot taken into account when coming up with a slope rating?

[Tom Huckaby]

Ian - your questions about Pacific Dunes need to be answered by Tom Doak, re the whys and what fors.

But as for this:

How much is the result of a wild tee shot taken into account when coming up with a slope rating?

Wild tee shots that result in strokes lost are taken into account in course rating for sure.  As for how they would effect a slope rating, it depends on where the hazards/extreme rough occur... are they in a place a scratch player is likely to hit an errant shot?  Or is it only the realm of the bogey player?

Typically its the latter... but if you have very close in extreme rough, then both players will find it, so slope (remember, based on the difference between course rating [scratch expectations] and bogey rating) won't be that high just because of it.

Thinking about Pacific Dunes... seems to me in most if not all instances the fairways are very wide... gorse is pretty far off to the sides.  Not that people don't get into it - of course they do - but given the great width, it doesn't have THAT much effect.   Any effect it does have would be more on the bogey than the scratch,

So removing it all would likely make bogey rating drop, and thus slope as well.

I just don't think it would have THAT much effect.... we need JV to calculate what it might be.  Not sure if the end would justify the means... Doak wants a great course more than he wants a low slope course.

TH

[Bob Harris]

Ian - your questions about Pacific Dunes need to be answered by Tom Doak, re the whys and what fors.

But as for this:

How much is the result of a wild tee shot taken into account when coming up with a slope rating?

Wild tee shots that result in strokes lost are taken into account in course rating for sure.  As for how they would effect a slope rating, it depends on where the hazards/extreme rough occur... are they in a place a scratch player is likely to hit an errant shot?  Or is it only the realm of the bogey player?

Typically its the latter... but if you have very close in extreme rough, then both players will find it, so slope (remember, based on the difference between course rating [scratch expectations] and bogey rating) won't be that high just because of it.

Thinking about Pacific Dunes... seems to me in most if not all instances the fairways are very wide... gorse is pretty far off to the sides.  Not that people don't get into it - of course they do - but given the great width, it doesn't have THAT much effect.   Any effect it does have would be more on the bogey than the scratch,

So removing it all would likely make bogey rating drop, and thus slope as well.

I just don't think it would have THAT much effect.... we need JV to calculate what it might be.  Not sure if the end would justify the means... Doak wants a great course more than he wants a low slope course.

TH

Removing the ob/extreme rough would have a marginal effect on the rating and slope.  90% of a course's rating and slope is determined by the "effective playing length" and 10% by obstacle values.  Of that 10%, ob/extreme rough accounts for 10% for scratch and 9% for the bogey golfer.

[Tom Huckaby]

Agreed - thanks for the numbers, Bob.  It's the off-season for such things and my manual is at home.

 

So in the end Ian, in the case of Pacific Dunes, you'd remove a lot to gain only very little.

TH

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()