Matt... Wow, someone had Wheaties for breakfast
Listen, any time you end up in AZ, let me know & we can get a game at Desert Mountain Outlaw. You can even pay the guest fee...
You see, I agree with you guys that the system is flawed. It's based on potential, thus the 96% of the average of the low-10 differentials. Which are based on rating & slope. Which are based on length, hazards, difficulty of play for both a scratch & a not so scratch player, etc. I have spoken with Kevin O'Connor, Dir. of Handi. USGA many times in a previous profession as it is not perfect, and doesn't travel well. I have gotten into more than a few threads on GCA.com to the same effect. Still, engineers from NASA came up with the equations (seriously, cliches aside) so there must be something there. Kind of like Democracy. Not perfect, but...
The bottom line is that there is a reason that most tournaments require an USGA index to compete. It's so everyone is on the same page, so you are comparing apples to apples... If not, those of us with indexes that tend to trend low due to the questionable "accuracy" of the system end up saying that we are a 6 on the tee when asked. Then Matt says he's a 10 'cause that's what he thinks it should be. Then Matts takes our money due to the 4 extra pops that Matt got with his handicap that he thinks he should have. And yes, Matt, I know that those 4 extra pops didn't matter cause you bombed it down the middle of the fairway all frickin day