Players tees

[Carl Johnson]

Finally, although the handicap system requires a score to be posted after each round, no one makes golfers use the system.  Players can go out and play all matches at scratch, make up their own handicap systems, or whatever.  They will, however, take themselves out of competitions that use the USGA system, which shouldn't bother them at all if they think the USGA system is a stupid, crappy system and don't want to take the time and effort to try to work with the USGA to improve it

Carl,

if I understand you correctly you are saying that a player can decide not to post a score every round by opting out but if this is done then they can have no official handicap nor play in comps. Here in the UK the vast majority of players want to play a social game most of the time but still want to enter official competitions sometimes. However, this would not be possible in the US so players are left to either not getting what they want or having to bend the rules.

Jon

I think you've got it, Jon!  Assuming that by "comps" you mean club handicapped competitions.  I don't know why a player who disdains the handicap system couldn't still play in the club's scratch medal play championship, for example, but I've never actually explored that (of no personal relevance to me).  Good question.

Carl,

as an amateur player I used to love going out with a couple of friends playing a few holes or even a round. We often used to have chipping competitions, leave certain holes and play multiple loops of others. I also liked playing in club comps (yes, competitions). As I understand it in the US I would have to chose between playing comps or playing my social golf as I like to. That really would put me off the game and I am sure would have made me say no to carrying on playing the game. I am not surprised that golf is losing players if that is the system.

Jon

Jon, you would not have to report any scores from "rounds" of less than 13 holes (a lesser number for 9-hole rounds), rounds not played under the rules of golf, or such things as your chipping competitions, playing loops, and so on.  It's always seemed to me that the "rounds not played under the rules of golf" exception leaves a lot openings for not posting, since if you get really picky about it most social rounds are played loosely.  There are those who just go out and "screw around," or "practice" with multiple balls in play, and wouldn't have to post.  On the other hand, in the low-dollar informal games I play regularly with friends, I (as all of us) do post scores for our rounds even though in four-balls, for example, one or two of us may "pick up" -- we usually do -- when we're "out of the hole."  The handicap system tells you what score to post when you don't finish a hole.  (Last week a four-ball partner of mine got mired in a bunker and finally picked up.  He "took a 7" for posting purposes though he said that if he'd actually finished the hole he'd probably had a 20.)  My sense is that our USGA handicap system, imperfect as it is and apparently downright goofy to some, is not the reason "golf is losing players" in the U.S.  As someone mentioned above, I expect most golfers play outside the handicap system in any case.

[Carl Johnson]

Carl

One of the biggest problems with the US handicapping system is that a very low percentage of golfers actually have an official handicap.  So the issue with USGA events for most is a non-issue.  Regardless, I am very confused as to why a "handicapping body" is interested in all scores...to the point that it claims it is necessary for accuracy.  

I never posted all my scores when living in the US as I didn't believe many of my rounds were a fair reflection of playing by the proper rules.  I much prefer only posting competitive scores as is the case in the UK.  However, one big drawback in the UK is the system isn't dynamic enough to reflect trends of 1, 3 or however many months.  I could be playing terribly for whatever reason and my cap will take ages to reflect this...sometimes years!    

Ciao  

I suppose the idea is that the idea of posting all scores is to help golfers keep their handicaps relatively current.  Revisions are issued on the first and the 15th of each calendar month.  It's also useful for those of us who like to have handicaps established "officially" for everyday play though we never enter competitions.  It seems to me there are advantages (and disadvantages) of both the U.K. and U.S. systems.  One important aspect of the U.S. system is the special consideration of tournament ("competition") scores.  If your tournament scores are substantially lower than what your normal handicap would indicate it should be, then your handicap can be dropped to your tournament score level for a year.  This happened to a friend who is 81 years old.  In last year's Senior Club Championship he shot some exceptionally low rounds (for him) and as a consequence the club reduced his handicap from 22 to 18 for a year, so he had to use the 18 in friendly games with the rest of the "boys" until his year was up.  The USGA handicap rules, including the tournament-reduction rule, are quite technical.  If you have lots of time on your hands, and interest, you can read the handicap manual.  http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Handicap-System-Manual/Handicap-Manual/

[Thomas Dai]

Thanks for this Carl.
I think there was a looong thread herein recently all about the US hcp system so I shall endeavor to search for it.
atb

[Jon Wiggett]

Carl,

that makes more sense. I was under the impression you had to post a score every time you stepped foot on to the course and played more than a set number of holes (13 it seems). It makes more sense that you can pick if you want to return a score.

Jon

[Brent Hutto]

Jon,

At many clubs, the handicap committee gets its panties in a knot if they see someone frequently playing golf (i.e. see their name on the tee sheet) but not posting scores. If you post scores for less than, say, 80 or 90 percent of your rounds there is often an assumption that you are omitting your low scores to sandbag.

I'm exaggerating when I say "every time you set foot on the course" but the handicapping culture at most USA clubs is based on every round showing up in the computer. Anyone violating that culture is suspect. And that's where this particular conversation started. It's the culture of which the USGA Handicap System is part and parcel that leads to things like obsession with having three-decimal-place handicap ratings for every permutation of tee markers or the tendency to dismiss certain golf course features as unreasonable, unfair or just not right because they don't fit in well with the pursuit of handicap numbers.

[Rob Marshall]

Jon,

At many clubs, the handicap committee gets its panties in a knot if they see someone frequently playing golf (i.e. see their name on the tee sheet) but not posting scores. If you post scores for less than, say, 80 or 90 percent of your rounds there is often an assumption that you are omitting your low scores to sandbag.

I'm exaggerating when I say "every time you set foot on the course" but the handicapping culture at most USA clubs is based on every round showing up in the computer. Anyone violating that culture is suspect. And that's where this particular conversation started. It's the culture of which the USGA Handicap System is part and parcel that leads to things like obsession with having three-decimal-place handicap ratings for every permutation of tee markers or the tendency to dismiss certain golf course features as unreasonable, unfair or just not right because they don't fit in well with the pursuit of handicap numbers.

Brett, This happens at my club. We check to make sure scores are posted. I personally post every one of my scores. I use my handicap as a benchmark as to how I'm playing. My goal every year is to try and play better than the previous year. All of our club tournaments with the exception of the club championship are handicapped. At our club it seems like the same people win every tournament where handicaps are involved. Unfortunately I think it's that way at most clubs. I don't have any problem with someone not having a handicap or for that matter moving the ball in the fairway if that's what they have to do to have fun. If that's what you want to do fine. Just don't play in any tournaments.

In talking to players in Ireland it's my understanding that the only time you post a score is if it is in a "competition". If you are just playing a round with your friends you don't post a score. Is that correct or did I misunderstand what they were telling me?

[Brent Hutto]

Yes, that's how I understand the UK/Ireland handicapping system too Rob.

Their system system wants only valid, attested scores that reflect the golfers best attempt at the lowest possible score. The tradeoff is, such a system gets relatively few scores to work with and the system is unavailable to anyone who does not at least occasionally play in comps.

The USGA system wants as many scores as possible and wants to provide handicaps to every possible golfer, even those who never play in formal competitions. The tradeoff is that 99% of the scores entered in the GHIN computer on a given weekend are unvalidated and not necessarily reflective of a golfers best attempt at the lowest possible score.

There's no system possible which would not have tradeoffs. As a person who works with statistics and measurement professionally I find the "lots of not necessary comparable or valid numbers" choice repulsive. But as I'm not willing to forgo playing the daily dogfight games and what have you at my club, I participate as best I'm able with a system that I frankly to be based on more bullshit than reality.

[Carl Johnson]

Carl,

that makes more sense. I was under the impression you had to post a score every time you stepped foot on to the course and played more than a set number of holes (13 it seems). It makes more sense that you can pick if you want to return a score.

Jon

Jon,

You cannot actually just "pick."  Like golf generally, it's an honor system.  You have to decide whether, based on the system rules, you must post or may not.  Again, however, the rules are reasonable and not as onerous as I think you'd imagined.

Carl

[Jon Wiggett]

Thanks for the reply Carl. It is clearer now though I am afraid I find the system of shooting 20 but writing 7 because that is what your handicap says it would have been questionable for me. It leads to the handicap setting the score instead of the score setting the handicap. Still, I think I would need to look at it more closely before I condemn it out of hand.

Brent,



You are spot on with your understanding of the UK hcp system. In a lot of Europe handicaps are set through stableford which makes sense for high handicappers but I am old fashioned in believing that for lower handicaps (12 and below) it should be purely strokeplay. Also players have the option of nominating a round before starting as an 'extra day card' for handicap if they do not want to play competitions. I am not a great believer in slope and rating systems as there are just too many variables. I still think that the old fashioned variable SSS which moves according to the other results in the field.

Jon

[Joe Sponcia]

Ironic, I just wrote about this a week ago:

http://thegrilleroom.wordpress.com/2014/11/06/homogenizing-the-game/

[Jason Thurman]

Well stated, Joe. I don't get the preoccupation with playing every course from the same length, and it's especially depressing when it filters down to individual holes so that every approach is hit with the same three or four clubs. There should be an equal joy gained from trying to shoot a low score on a shorter or easier course as there is from trying to grind out a decent score on a longer or tougher course.

[jeffwarne]

Well stated, Joe. I don't get the preoccupation with playing every course from the same length, and it's especially depressing when it filters down to individual holes so that every approach is hit with the same three or four clubs. There should be an equal joy gained from trying to shoot a low score on a shorter or easier course as there is from trying to grind out a decent score on a longer or tougher course.

+1
I can't tell you how many times I get a member who comes up with a total yardage hybrid set of tees he wants sloped, rated and on the scorecard.
example:we play the blues but the blacks on threes and fives-
My response? Go play any tees you want, circle what tee you played and I'll give you a rating and slope for posting-and if you tell me in advance I'll figure out your handicap for that day. Just don't make me clutter the scorecard anymore-the course is cluttered enough with four-five sets of tees.

[Sean_A]

Jeff

I still enjoy matchplay where the man with honour chooses the colour.  Its really fun when guys give the decision some thought.  One never knows which course will be played.  I have learned some cool things about Burnham this way.

Ciao

[Carl Johnson]

Thanks for the reply Carl. It is clearer now though I am afraid I find the system of shooting 20 but writing 7 because that is what your handicap says it would have been questionable for me. It leads to the handicap setting the score instead of the score setting the handicap. Still, I think I would need to look at it more closely before I condemn it out of hand. . . .

Jon

Jon, the "20" was hyperbole when he said "20" -- sorry for the confusion.  Here are the facts.  We were playing a 4-ball.  I was on the green in three (par 5) with a 10 footer and my partner was in a bunker, up against the face, 20 yds. short of the green in 3.  Unlikely he'd help, but he took a whack to try to get on the green, but stayed in the bunker.  Then several more forward whacks, with increasing frustration, and finally picked up out of the bunker.  (For the record, his handicap is lower than mine, but on this hole he encountered some difficulty, as happens to all of us from time to time.)  If he'd been in medal play competition, he'd have safely come out of the bunker sideways the first time, then onto the green for maybe a 6, but most likely a 7.  Under the handicapping rules he must post the score he'd most likely have gotten had he finished the hole, but since is handicap is in the 10 - 19 range, he can never post more than a 7 on any hole for handicap purposes.  So, that's why he wrote down a 7 (for posting purposes only).  That was correct under the USGA handicap system.  Although sometimes handicaps are used in medal play, in my view the USGA system is designed with match play in mind and really only "works" for match play.

Carl

[jeffwarne]

Jeff

I still enjoy matchplay where the man with honour chooses the colour.  Its really fun when guys give the decision some thought.  One never knows which course will be played.  I have learned some cool things about Burnham this way.

Ciao

love it-great game
just don't make me print it on the permanant card

[Carl Johnson]

Jeff

I still enjoy matchplay where the man with honour chooses the colour.  Its really fun when guys give the decision some thought.  One never knows which course will be played.  I have learned some cool things about Burnham this way.

Ciao

love it-great game
just don't make me print it on the permanant card

Jeff, what about just putting the rating and slope numbers for each tee somewhere, like on a physical bulletin board or the club's website?  Or similarly just put the data for a couple of hybrids.  No need to have special cards if players have the data to put their own "cards" together before or after the round for handicap posting purposes.  Or, is this not, in your opinion, a practical solution?

Carl

[Joe Sponcia]

Sean,

I love the idea of choosing tees after each win.  I have never done that before, but think it would be really fun. 

Carl,

I like the thought of having ratings for each hole so the anal types could justify playing different tee boxes.  At most clubs, members are force-fed into medal play for every round so they can post their scores, so they in turn aren't accused of bagging' for member-guest or men's league.  It has taken the fun out of the game, but I don't like getting pencil-whipped any more than the next guy, so I can argue both sides.

[jeffwarne]

Jeff

I still enjoy matchplay where the man with honour chooses the colour.  Its really fun when guys give the decision some thought.  One never knows which course will be played.  I have learned some cool things about Burnham this way.

Ciao

love it-great game
just don't make me print it on the permanant card

Jeff, what about just putting the rating and slope numbers for each tee somewhere, like on a physical bulletin board or the club's website?  Or similarly just put the data for a couple of hybrids.  No need to have special cards if players have the data to put their own "cards" together before or after the round for handicap posting purposes.  Or, is this not, in your opinion, a practical solution?

Carl

I thought it was a great solution
I implemented it years ago-right next to handicap computer.

I also have CR and slope for each hole, and each tee posted.
and by the way, we have CR and slopes for 4 tees on the card already, so it's not like they're lacking.(will ad a 5th now that we've added senior tees)
They want combos from every tee with every tee on the card-pretty infinite
i have people bringing in hybrid cards all the time that are like booklets-no way they fit in a walking pocket

[Sean_A]

Jeff

I still enjoy matchplay where the man with honour chooses the colour.  Its really fun when guys give the decision some thought.  One never knows which course will be played.  I have learned some cool things about Burnham this way.

Ciao

love it-great game
just don't make me print it on the permanant card

Card???  I still don't know the indexes of my course...so I guess a card is good for something    Although, the best use of a card I saw was as a measurement for stymies.  

Joe

I have a few playing partners that really scrutinize a hole, the shots an try to figure the best advantage.  Me, I usually choose the closest tee to the previous green unless something special is on offer.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

One of the tricks of the winner of the last hole picking the colour of tees to play from on the next hole is that the canny player will suss out well in advance which holes he has shots on or which holes favour his game and which holes the other players have shots on or which holes favour their game and will choose the colour of tee for the next hole accordinlgly.

And, if players handicaps are not calculated the same way, this can lead to some, well let's just say, interesting matches, especailly if there's some £$ on the line.



atb

[Jon Wiggett]

Carl,

I kind of got '20' was hyperbole

Thanks for the reply Carl. It is clearer now though I am afraid I find the system of shooting 20 but writing 7 because that is what your handicap says it would have been questionable for me. It leads to the handicap setting the score instead of the score setting the handicap. Still, I think I would need to look at it more closely before I condemn it out of hand. . . .

Jon

Jon, the "20" was hyperbole when he said "20" -- sorry for the confusion.  Here are the facts.  We were playing a 4-ball.  I was on the green in three (par 5) with a 10 footer and my partner was in a bunker, up against the face, 20 yds. short of the green in 3.  Unlikely he'd help, but he took a whack to try to get on the green, but stayed in the bunker.  Then several more forward whacks, with increasing frustration, and finally picked up out of the bunker.  (For the record, his handicap is lower than mine, but on this hole he encountered some difficulty, as happens to all of us from time to time.)  If he'd been in medal play competition, he'd have safely come out of the bunker sideways the first time, then onto the green for maybe a 6, but most likely a 7.  Under the handicapping rules he must post the score he'd most likely have gotten had he finished the hole, but since is handicap is in the 10 - 19 range, he can never post more than a 7 on any hole for handicap purposes.  So, that's why he wrote down a 7 (for posting purposes only).  That was correct under the USGA handicap system.  Although sometimes handicaps are used in medal play, in my view the USGA system is designed with match play in mind and really only "works" for match play.

Carl

Sort of proves the point I was making.

Jon

[Carl Johnson]

Carl,

I kind of got '20' was hyperbole

Thanks for the reply Carl. It is clearer now though I am afraid I find the system of shooting 20 but writing 7 because that is what your handicap says it would have been questionable for me. It leads to the handicap setting the score instead of the score setting the handicap. Still, I think I would need to look at it more closely before I condemn it out of hand. . . .

Jon

Jon, the "20" was hyperbole when he said "20" -- sorry for the confusion.  Here are the facts.  We were playing a 4-ball.  I was on the green in three (par 5) with a 10 footer and my partner was in a bunker, up against the face, 20 yds. short of the green in 3.  Unlikely he'd help, but he took a whack to try to get on the green, but stayed in the bunker.  Then several more forward whacks, with increasing frustration, and finally picked up out of the bunker.  (For the record, his handicap is lower than mine, but on this hole he encountered some difficulty, as happens to all of us from time to time.)  If he'd been in medal play competition, he'd have safely come out of the bunker sideways the first time, then onto the green for maybe a 6, but most likely a 7.  Under the handicapping rules he must post the score he'd most likely have gotten had he finished the hole, but since is handicap is in the 10 - 19 range, he can never post more than a 7 on any hole for handicap purposes.  So, that's why he wrote down a 7 (for posting purposes only).  That was correct under the USGA handicap system.  Although sometimes handicaps are used in medal play, in my view the USGA system is designed with match play in mind and really only "works" for match play.

Carl

Sort of proves the point I was making.

Jon

No question but that the existing handicap -- by establishing the max. score that may be posted -- comes into play. Of course, it's not the only factor.  Your uncapped scores have a much greater impact.  Moreover, many times your cap won't come into play at all, or only one or two times per round (mostly).  It has a smoothing effect, is somewhat of a guard against sandbagging, and for match play, eliminates the random high hole that you'd almost never (looking forward) win anyway.  That's my explanation, not the USGA's.  Also, I can assure you that handicaps move from one bracket to another regardless of the rule.  Here are the brackets and caps for course handicaps: 9 or less = double bogey; 10 - 19 = 7; 20 - 29 = 8; 30 - 39 = 0; and 40 or higher = 10.  The other thing to keep in mind is that the USGA system is not to equalize players of different abilities, but to improve the odds of a less-skilled player beating a more-skilled player.

[Jon Wiggett]

No question but that the existing handicap -- by establishing the max. score that may be posted -- comes into play. Of course, it's not the only factor.  Your uncapped scores have a much greater impact.  Moreover, many times your cap won't come into play at all, or only one or two times per round (mostly).  It has a smoothing effect, is somewhat of a guard against sandbagging, and for match play, eliminates the random high hole that you'd almost never (looking forward) win anyway.  That's my explanation, not the USGA's.  Also, I can assure you that handicaps move from one bracket to another regardless of the rule.  Here are the brackets and caps for course handicaps: 9 or less = double bogey; 10 - 19 = 7; 20 - 29 = 8; 30 - 39 = 0; and 40 or higher = 10.  The other thing to keep in mind is that the USGA system is not to equalize players of different abilities, but to improve the odds of a less-skilled player beating a more-skilled player.

Carl,

thanks again for the explanation. I have to confess, I am at a loss to understand what this system supposed to achieve!

Jon

[jeffwarne]

No question but that the existing handicap -- by establishing the max. score that may be posted -- comes into play. Of course, it's not the only factor.  Your uncapped scores have a much greater impact.  Moreover, many times your cap won't come into play at all, or only one or two times per round (mostly).  It has a smoothing effect, is somewhat of a guard against sandbagging, and for match play, eliminates the random high hole that you'd almost never (looking forward) win anyway.  That's my explanation, not the USGA's.  Also, I can assure you that handicaps move from one bracket to another regardless of the rule.  Here are the brackets and caps for course handicaps: 9 or less = double bogey; 10 - 19 = 7; 20 - 29 = 8; 30 - 39 = 0; and 40 or higher = 10.  The other thing to keep in mind is that the USGA system is not to equalize players of different abilities, but to improve the odds of a less-skilled player beating a more-skilled player.

Carl,

thanks again for the explanation. I have to confess, I am at a loss to understand what this system supposed to achieve!

Jon

Jon,
All you need to know is that a UK 10 handicap will kick a US 10 handicap all day long.
One is real, the other is a bogged down hypothetical mess of statistics and assumptions

[Carl Johnson]

Jeff

I still enjoy matchplay where the man with honour chooses the colour.  Its really fun when guys give the decision some thought.  One never knows which course will be played.  I have learned some cool things about Burnham this way.

Ciao

love it-great game
just don't make me print it on the permanant card

Jeff, what about just putting the rating and slope numbers for each tee somewhere, like on a physical bulletin board or the club's website?  Or similarly just put the data for a couple of hybrids.  No need to have special cards if players have the data to put their own "cards" together before or after the round for handicap posting purposes.  Or, is this not, in your opinion, a practical solution?

Carl

I thought it was a great solution
I implemented it years ago-right next to handicap computer.

I also have CR and slope for each hole, and each tee posted.
and by the way, we have CR and slopes for 4 tees on the card already, so it's not like they're lacking.(will ad a 5th now that we've added senior tees)
They want combos from every tee with every tee on the card-pretty infinite
i have people bringing in hybrid cards all the time that are like booklets-no way they fit in a walking pocket

Jeff,

Without going into the argument about whether mixed or combo tees are necessary, appropriate, or whatever, and although I'm on the combo side, I am not advocating that the "regular" card be cluttered with them, or that special combo cards be printed.  I think you get that.

At our club we have four tees, black, blue, white and green, back to front.  We also have a blue-black on the score card, as well as blue-white and a green-white, rated and sloped, that aren't on the card, but are posted for those that want to play them.  (Incidentally, some of the Blue-Black are combo, and some are completely separate tees, in which case the tee pads have five markers.  No doubt this confuses some players, but not me, as pure white tee player.)  Right now we're resetting some of blue-black, blue and white tees, which will mean the other two combos should be reconsidered as well.  I'm involved on the fringe of the process.

Carl