Handicaps: Which problem is worse? Vanity-capping or Sandbagging?

[Eric_Terhorst]

Reading through this whole thread this morning reminded me of John Updike's quote:


"Although I could not quite regret the time...that I had spent playing the game myself, I certainly did resent the time I had devoted to watching other men play."





A world without amateur stroke play events, GHIN's rules, and handicaps sounds like golf Nirvana.  It's match play, we agree on no more than 2-3 strokes a side, and the phrase "the rest is good" is used liberally.

[Carl Johnson]

In my experience at my club vanity handicapping is more prevalent.  It has a negative effect on team play -- e.g., my four ball partner is a vanity handicapper, so it hurts me.  It also hurts us in interclub handicapped competitions. It's also a negative for me, because I try to play it straight, and therefore am out of synch with a number of those I normally play with.  Is vanity handicapping a problem?  Only if you let it get to you.  The bottom line for me is that I'm satisfied with how it works at our club -- it's close enough.

[Pete Lavallee]

Again, grouping all tournament scores into a separate handicap would eliminate both the sandbagger and the vanity capper. Let people who don’t play in competitions use their casual handicap. What am I missing here?

[David_Elvins]

And you’re right; most golfers absolutely do NOT want to play tournament golf fully under the Rules.  Whether it’s because of stress, or fear of being exposed, or whatever, most clubs get only small fractions of the membership in club tournaments, especially championships.

A.G.


I am not sure it’s entirely about playing under the rules that golfers find unappealing.  One of my clubs does roughly 1,000 competition rounds a week under the rules of golf.


But there is a drop off on “medal days” or club championship days when the tees are all the way back and it’s a stroke competition.

[archie_struthers]

 


Vanity hurts the guys we play with a lot more in that we play for $ most every time. So for us the sandbagger is far more an issue but tends to get exposed pretty quickly!  Tougher to control in tournaments such as member guests.

[A.G._Crockett]

And you’re right; most golfers absolutely do NOT want to play tournament golf fully under the Rules.  Whether it’s because of stress, or fear of being exposed, or whatever, most clubs get only small fractions of the membership in club tournaments, especially championships.

A.G.


I am not sure it’s entirely about playing under the rules that golfers find unappealing.  One of my clubs does roughly 1,000 competition rounds a week under the rules of golf.


But there is a drop off on “medal days” or club championship days when the tees are all the way back and it’s a stroke competition.

A couple of questions for you.


1000 rounds a week?  I’m assuming you’re talking about games such as points and skins games, right?  If so, those are not scores that would typically carry the “C” designation when entered into GHIN.  And in such games, even with money at stake, players typically pick up when they are out of the hole, putts are given, etc.  But if [size=78%]your club is doing 150 true competition rounds a day, what in the heck is the format?[/size]
[/size]
[/size][size=78%]What do you think accounts for the drop off on “medal days”?  You mentioned the tees being back, but they’re back for everyone, right?  When you mention stroke play, I think we’re saying exactly the same thing; lots of players will play match play, points games, etc, that will NOT play stroke play fully under the Rules; i.e., putt everything out, finish the hole no matter how high the score, take full stroke and distance penalties, etc.  Some find medal play to be a relative grind, but many others know deep down that they are simply NOT the player their index says they are.[/size]

[Mark Pearce]

There seems to be a continued misunderstanding that UK golfers are somehow sandbagging if we don't record casual rounds.  The UK implementation of the WGH does not require all casual rounds to be recorded but does allow for players to choose to do so before the round in question (NOT afterwards).  I don't know anyone who has an established handicap (rather than playing for a first handicap) who has recorded a casual score.  I haven't and can't imagine doing so.  In 3 years I have recorded 60+ competitive rounds.  I'm happy that my index is a fair record of my ability.

[Rob Marshall]

There seems to be a continued misunderstanding that UK golfers are somehow sandbagging if we don't record casual rounds.  The UK implementation of the WGH does not require all casual rounds to be recorded but does allow for players to choose to do so before the round in question (NOT afterwards).  I don't know anyone who has an established handicap (rather than playing for a first handicap) who has recorded a casual score.  I haven't and can't imagine doing so.  In 3 years I have recorded 60+ competitive rounds.  I'm happy that my index is a fair record of my ability.

I thought the world handicapping system was set up so that everyone was using the same system. If you just use competition scores IMO your handicap is going to be higher that if you used all your scores. This is an observation on my part. However it would be more accurate as to your ability when playing in tournaments. Which is the goal I guess. I wouldn't say you are sandbagging. You have a more tournament accurate handicap than I do because I post ever score and by far the majority are casual rounds.


Also the majority competitions that I play in are scratch so what do I care what my handicap is? I use my handicap to gauge how I'm playing. That's about it.

[Mark Pearce]

And we need to be careful with the assumption that someone playing much better or much worse than handicap is a sandbagger or vanity handicapper.  I played a foursomes knockout match at The Northumberland on Friday evening and my 8.9 index and I (11.9) would have been playing off a 12 handicap.  As it was matchplay, we got 6 shots from our opponents.  We were level par after 10 holes and 5 up, winning 6/5.  They played, approximately, to handicap.  Fortunately we knew our opponents well and they have seen enough of our games to know that we just had one of those rare days but it would have been very easy to assume that we were sandbaggers.

[Ally Mcintosh]

There seems to be a continued misunderstanding that UK golfers are somehow sandbagging if we don't record casual rounds.  The UK implementation of the WGH does not require all casual rounds to be recorded but does allow for players to choose to do so before the round in question (NOT afterwards).  I don't know anyone who has an established handicap (rather than playing for a first handicap) who has recorded a casual score.  I haven't and can't imagine doing so.  In 3 years I have recorded 60+ competitive rounds.  I'm happy that my index is a fair record of my ability.

I thought the world handicapping system was set up so that everyone was using the same system. If you just use competition scores IMO your handicap is going to be higher that if you used all your scores. This is an observation on my part. However it would be more accurate as to your ability when playing in tournaments. Which is the goal I guess. I wouldn't say you are sandbagging. You have a more tournament accurate handicap than I do because I post ever score and by far the majority are casual rounds.

What I don’t understand with this argument is why you think anyone would shoot lower scores during casual rounds than they do in competition play?… Is it because of some perceived pressure?

[Sean_A]

There seems to be a continued misunderstanding that UK golfers are somehow sandbagging if we don't record casual rounds.  The UK implementation of the WGH does not require all casual rounds to be recorded but does allow for players to choose to do so before the round in question (NOT afterwards).  I don't know anyone who has an established handicap (rather than playing for a first handicap) who has recorded a casual score.  I haven't and can't imagine doing so.  In 3 years I have recorded 60+ competitive rounds.  I'm happy that my index is a fair record of my ability.

I thought the world handicapping system was set up so that everyone was using the same system. If you just use competition scores IMO your handicap is going to be higher that if you used all your scores. This is an observation on my part. However it would be more accurate as to your ability when playing in tournaments. Which is the goal I guess. I wouldn't say you are sandbagging. You have a more tournament accurate handicap than I do because I post ever score and by far the majority are casual rounds.

What I don’t understand with this argument is why you think anyone would shoot lower scores during casual rounds than they do in competition play?… Is it because of some perceived pressure?

Gimmies, loose rules, less pressure etc.


Ciao

[Mark Pearce]

There seems to be a continued misunderstanding that UK golfers are somehow sandbagging if we don't record casual rounds.  The UK implementation of the WGH does not require all casual rounds to be recorded but does allow for players to choose to do so before the round in question (NOT afterwards).  I don't know anyone who has an established handicap (rather than playing for a first handicap) who has recorded a casual score.  I haven't and can't imagine doing so.  In 3 years I have recorded 60+ competitive rounds.  I'm happy that my index is a fair record of my ability.

I thought the world handicapping system was set up so that everyone was using the same system. If you just use competition scores IMO your handicap is going to be higher that if you used all your scores. This is an observation on my part. However it would be more accurate as to your ability when playing in tournaments. Which is the goal I guess. I wouldn't say you are sandbagging. You have a more tournament accurate handicap than I do because I post ever score and by far the majority are casual rounds.

What I don’t understand with this argument is why you think anyone would shoot lower scores during casual rounds than they do in competition play?… Is it because of some perceived pressure?

Another US/UK difference?  I guess that 75% of my golf at home is "competitive" i that it is played in an official club handicap.  If I get to the 15th and have a good card going, then I may feel some pressure, otherwise it's just a round of golf.  If I played fewer competitive rounds I guess that might be different.

[Ken Moum]

What I don’t understand with this argument is why you think anyone would shoot lower scores during casual rounds than they do in competition play?… Is it because of some perceived pressure?

Another US/UK difference?  I guess that 75% of my golf at home is "competitive" i that it is played in an official club handicap.  If I get to the 15th and have a good card going, then I may feel some pressure, otherwise it's just a round of golf.  If I played fewer competitive rounds I guess that might be different.

Ally, the simple answer is that pretty much everyone who plays both "casual" golf and "tournament" golf will find that their scores are better when they are relaxed.

Why would you think that pressure to perform doesn't affect golfers.  I recall that our former participant here Shivas, called it 'Calligraphy Golf,"

For someone in Scotland where it's common to do as Mark says, have 3/4 of their golf in club competition, that becomes the norm and there isn't any pressure.  But step it up a level or two and see what happens.

In the winter I play in three competitions a week under the ROG, without any gimmees. (I've missed a couple of 2-inchers, FWIW)  These are not pressure-packed.

But we do have 4-5 bigger club competitions and there's no doubt the pressure is slightly higher.  Because I play that regular game, I do pretty well in the club comps.

I have also played in City Championships over the years, they're definitely higher pressure.  And I have played in 15 or 20 State Championships, At every level, it's hard to deliver the shot making and mental stability that you know you're capable of.

Grantland Rice said, "There are three types of golf - golf, tournament golf and major championship golf."

[Michael Felton]

Different people react differently to casual vs tournament play. There will be a certain amount of variance in strategy. Casual play people are more likely to play riskier shots, which might result in higher scores. In a tournament going through the 2 yard gap in the trees could be a dumb decision, but if you're just playing for fun then why not? Conversely some people tighten up and don't swing as freely in competition, which could result in higher scores. My scores are a little higher in tournaments than regular play. Partly that's because competition rounds are most of the time played on courses I don't know where my non-competition rounds tend to be played on courses I'm more familiar with.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I thought the world handicapping system was set up so that everyone was using the same system.

It's a step in the process of unifying. The rest of the world now has course ratings and slope, for example, instead of a daily calculated Standard Scratch Score… and some other things. There are still some differences in how they implement them, but the systems are much more aligned now.

[Bruce Katona]

IMHO, I am a 100% advocate for match play for all play here in the US, outside of the club championship and member/guest events.


Why?


Speed of play.


In match play putts and even holes can be conceded, drawn, etc. and the group can move along to the next hole. 


I and many of my friends can walk & play 18 holes in 3:30-3:45 putting everything out, but most players here in The States can't; thus a round putting everything out can takes 5+ hours - which will not grow the game.


I recently played in my 1st 3 day member/guest.  My scores in competition were in line with my handicap, so no one questioned my GHIN one way or the other.

[Michael Felton]

I thought the world handicapping system was set up so that everyone was using the same system.

It's a step in the process of unifying. The rest of the world now has course ratings and slope, for example, instead of a daily calculated Standard Scratch Score… and some other things. There are still some differences in how they implement them, but the systems are much more aligned now.

Agreed - the two things that I think are superior under the new system vs CONGU are the two pronged rating system and the speed with which it catches up with changes in ability. Course and slope ratings are a better system than just the SSS and CSS. Both of those are applied to all systems now. The differences in how the systems are applied within countries I think are very rarely going to apply to anyone.

[Jason Topp]

Mr. Mayhugh once said to me “If I play well I win and if I don’t I lose.”   I have found that to be true in 98% of the rounds I have played. 



The exceptions suck.  I once played a guy in Fort Worth who hit iron off the tee and drummed me even though I played quite well.  After he closed the match, he pulled out driver on the remaining holes and made big numbers on each because he had no control over the club.  As we played the holes he told me he used his driver most of the time except in competition.  I am not sure he knew he was a sandbagger but he was. 


More common is a low handicapper who is bitter because he lost to someone he was giving a lot of strokes to.  Sometimes the low capper will have no chance in such matches but if one backed the low handicap in each match, I am pretty sure she would earn a tidy profit. 

[Brad Lawrence]

I learned in my decade as a club pro that handicapped events are little more than a cheating contest.  Before that, I wasn’t so jaded. I’m not sure why so many people are willing to use dishonesty to earn a little shop credit. If you win a handicapped event with a bunch of dots, please stop boasting as if it’s an accomplishment. And please stop complaining to the shop staff.  I assure you they don’t care and your opponent has made the same complaint five minutes earlier about you.  That reminds me of the other thing I learned - everyone thinks they’re getting screwed.

[Ben Attwood]

Again, grouping all tournament scores into a separate handicap would eliminate both the sandbagger and the vanity capper. Let people who don’t play in competitions use their casual handicap. What am I missing here?

This was sort of the case in the UK under the old system for handicaps 5 and less. Scores could only be entered in qualifying competitions.


So it was tough to get there but there were also many players who couldn't make the dates for competitions and only put in 1 or 2 cards a year. Often handicap at the low end would be described to represent potential rather than current form. It was tough to go up in the old system and people would often write to the committee explaining that they needed an adjustment upwards, for whatever reason.

[Mark Pearce]

Again, grouping all tournament scores into a separate handicap would eliminate both the sandbagger and the vanity capper. Let people who don’t play in competitions use their casual handicap. What am I missing here?

This was sort of the case in the UK under the old system for handicaps 5 and less. Scores could only be entered in qualifying competitions.


So it was tough to get there but there were also many players who couldn't make the dates for competitions and only put in 1 or 2 cards a year. Often handicap at the low end would be described to represent potential rather than current form. It was tough to go up in the old system and people would often write to the committee explaining that they needed an adjustment upwards, for whatever reason.

?


Under the old system in the UK scores for any handicap were only entered in qualifying competitions.  Most clubs had several of those a moth.  Category 1 golfers (<6 handicap) could play those.  Writing to the committee asking for an increase is not something I have ever heard of but, in fact, lower handicappers went up much faster, relatively, than lower handicappers.

[Michael Felton]

Again, grouping all tournament scores into a separate handicap would eliminate both the sandbagger and the vanity capper. Let people who don’t play in competitions use their casual handicap. What am I missing here?

This was sort of the case in the UK under the old system for handicaps 5 and less. Scores could only be entered in qualifying competitions.


So it was tough to get there but there were also many players who couldn't make the dates for competitions and only put in 1 or 2 cards a year. Often handicap at the low end would be described to represent potential rather than current form. It was tough to go up in the old system and people would often write to the committee explaining that they needed an adjustment upwards, for whatever reason.

?


Under the old system in the UK scores for any handicap were only entered in qualifying competitions.  Most clubs had several of those a moth.  Category 1 golfers (<6 handicap) could play those.  Writing to the committee asking for an increase is not something I have ever heard of but, in fact, lower handicappers went up much faster, relatively, than lower handicappers.

Rule 19 covered additional changes. The club handicap committee could take extra cards and adjust handicaps. It would tend to be used for someone whose ability had gone down significantly to increase their handicap. People might have surgery or something which would permanently harm their ability to play. The old system would only ever go up 0.1 per round, so if you got 10 shots worse in one go, you'd have to play at least 100 tournament rounds for it to catch up to that.


Technically Rule 19 could also be applied to category 1 players (5.4 or less), but it would need to be approved by the county, not just the club. It occasionally would get used to lower someone's handicap too, but I think less often.

[Peter Pallotta]

Reading through this whole thread this morning reminded me of John Updike's quote:

"Although I could not quite regret the time...that I had spent playing the game myself, I certainly did resent the time I had devoted to watching other men play."

A world without amateur stroke play events, GHIN's rules, and handicaps sounds like golf Nirvana.  It's match play, we agree on no more than 2-3 strokes a side, and the phrase "the rest is good" is used liberally.

I read that Dean Martin, when he was playing someone for the first time, with a little money on the line, would ask 'If you played really good today, what do you think you'd shoot?" If the guy said, "If I play well, I'll probably shoot about a 78, 80", Dean would say, "Okay, pal, so then I'll give you 2 shots a side, 'cause if I play good I should score around 74, 75, 76"

[Ben Attwood]

Again, grouping all tournament scores into a separate handicap would eliminate both the sandbagger and the vanity capper. Let people who don’t play in competitions use their casual handicap. What am I missing here?

This was sort of the case in the UK under the old system for handicaps 5 and less. Scores could only be entered in qualifying competitions.


So it was tough to get there but there were also many players who couldn't make the dates for competitions and only put in 1 or 2 cards a year. Often handicap at the low end would be described to represent potential rather than current form. It was tough to go up in the old system and people would often write to the committee explaining that they needed an adjustment upwards, for whatever reason.

?


Under the old system in the UK scores for any handicap were only entered in qualifying competitions.  Most clubs had several of those a moth.  Category 1 golfers (<6 handicap) could play those.  Writing to the committee asking for an increase is not something I have ever heard of but, in fact, lower handicappers went up much faster, relatively, than lower handicappers.

Golfers could enter 'supplementary scores' under CONGU. This was a pre-declared round and was for people to help keep an accurate handicap who couldn't make the comps. I was under the impression cat-1 players couldn't do this but having googled it now it seems they could but perhaps with more restrictions.


Handicap adjustments were somewhat common, but it depended on the club culture, handicap committee and in some amusing situations, the secretary! Practically, as Michael described, it was those players realisti

[Ben Attwood]

...realistically could not play to their handicap but would take more years than they had to get to an accurate one. The more amusing versions were often of a strict secreatry making on the spot adjustments after witnessing a good swing or ball strike