or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Rules of Golf › Aerated Greens and Fairways
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Aerated Greens and Fairways - Page 2

post #19 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by David in FL View Post


Thank you no.
I prefer to know that handicaps are at least relatively current and somewhat representative of what a player is capable of playing now......not what they may have played to three years ago.
But that may just be me......

It may just be me but I prefer handicaps to relate to scores actually achieved and verified in competition rather than what a player chooses to record as and when. 'Enter the score you think you would have got' Wow!

Incidentally, the formal review system takes care of inactivity.

post #20 of 43

curious if you guys (when not in a competitive round) give yourself a break when greens have been aerated ?     Meaning, if the ball is visibly bouncing left and right towards the hole and just misses, when under normal circumstances, it surely would have gone in under a smooth roll - I'll give it to myself.     Never been sure how to handle freshly aerated greens - it really is a huge disadvantage if you play them honestly ...

post #21 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rulesman View Post

It may just be me but I prefer handicaps to relate to scores actually achieved and verified in competition rather than what a player chooses to record as and when. 'Enter the score you think you would have got' Wow!
Incidentally, the formal review system takes care of inactivity.

As with any statistical analysis, the larger the representative sample, the more accurate the statistic.

I'm not talking so much about inactivity though as the relatively few competitive rounds the average golfer plays each year. As a result, their handicap tends to lag far behind any improvements (or decline) in actual ability.

Make no mistake though, the USGA system has its own problems too, no argument there.
post #22 of 43

As it happens, the R&A together with the USGA, CONGU, the European Golf Association and the national bodies of South Africa, Australia and Argentina are now looking into the possiblity of a universal system. I told by colleagues involved that the expectation is that there will be suffiecient flexibility to satisfy various local needs and cultures. But sufficient commonality to allow transportation from one authority to another.

post #23 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rulesman View Post

As it happens, the R&A together with the USGA, CONGU, the European Golf Association and the national bodies of South Africa, Australia and Argentina are now looking into the possiblity of a universal system. I told by colleagues involved that the expectation is that there will be suffiecient flexibility to satisfy various local needs and cultures. But sufficient commonality to allow transportation from one authority to another.

Long overdue!
post #24 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rulesman View Post

As it happens, the R&A together with the USGA, CONGU, the European Golf Association and the national bodies of South Africa, Australia and Argentina are now looking into the possiblity of a universal system. I told by colleagues involved that the expectation is that there will be suffiecient flexibility to satisfy various local needs and cultures. But sufficient commonality to allow transportation from one authority to another.

 

That would be a good thing if they can get it together.  It will be a chore to find something that makes everyone happy. The thing its that most handicap clubs in the US don't play regular, weekly comps, don't use Stableford.  My home tournament club (not a golf club but a Men's club which plays at a public, municipal course) played 15 scheduled tournament days each season, usually between April 1 and September 30.  With only 15 tournament days possible, and a small handful of match possibilities - and most guys didn't play every tournament - handicaps would not change fast enough to reflect the amount of golf actually played, and the true scores being shot.  

 

I realize that using non-competition scores creates the opportunity for abuse, but at the same time, when a player plays more casual golf than competition, his actual game has the potential to change faster than the the tournament scores are capable of reflecting.  That is why the USGA instituted the system like it is, and put the onus of management on the individual clubs and associations.  My club took that job seriously, but not all of them do.

post #25 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by inthehole View Post

curious if you guys (when not in a competitive round) give yourself a break when greens have been aerated ?     Meaning, if the ball is visibly bouncing left and right towards the hole and just misses, when under normal circumstances, it surely would have gone in under a smooth roll - I'll give it to myself.     Never been sure how to handle freshly aerated greens - it really is a huge disadvantage if you play them honestly ...

Actually the group I play with concedes all putts shorter than the putter head to the bottom of the grip in non-competitive rounds, the comps are generally at the weekend and the aeration occurs on a Monday when it needs to be done so is rarely a real problem come the following Saturday.

 

We have comps most Saturdays from the end of March to end of September so number of counting comps shouldn't be a problem, anyone getting drastically worse will get reviewed by the committee.

 

Actually the biggest issue with the system is doesn't sort out "bandits" - not really bandits - but new to the game players who get a relatively high handicap to start with but improve rapidly and the handicap process doesnt keep up. Again the committee can help this but usually not by enough

post #26 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

It really doesn`t seem that hard to re-rate a course...we were asked to do this in the forward tees experiment and given the yardage guidelines to do so.  That was potentially harder because some people were playing in front of the shortest men`s tees.  In the example I gave, I was playing BETWEEN two sets of rated tees, so I knew the range that the rating should fall in.  Adjusting rating for yardage changes seems much easier than using your best judgement to decide whether a course is playing differently enough to justify not turning in scores.

 

So it which of the following situations would you NOT turn in a score because the conditions change the way the course plays?  (I know you answered some already, but wanted to try to make as comprehensive a list as possible)

 

1.  Aerated greens

2.  Aerated fairways

3.  Early season bumpy greens

4.  Early season fairways that are not in good conditions

5.  Wet fairways- not casual water, but much wetter than normal

6.  Rock hard fairways

7.  Wet greens- not casual water, but holding much more than normal

8.  Rock hard greens (either from lack of water or because they are frozen under the surface layer, something I have experienced recently)

9.  Much stronger winds than normal

10.Much lighter winds than normal

11.Much colder temps than normal

12.Much hotter temps than normal

13.Heavy rain, hail or other severe weather

14.Much harder pin placements than normal

15.Much easier pin placements than normal

16.Much longer rough than normal

17.Much shorter rough than normal.

18.Temporary greens

 

In some cases, I would imagine that it depends on how many holes are affected.  I tend to turn in all my scores except with a lot of temp greens (which I have not encountered in recent years)...is this wrong?

 

I'm guessing you are an attorney?

post #27 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourputt View Post

 

 

HOWEVER...  I don't return such scores for handicap because I don't consider the course to be in proper playing condition to play to its rating.  

 

 

My crowd we play them as they lay unless there is a local rule, but as above don't turn in the scores for handicap.  Same when on overseeded greens you need a driver to make a 30' putt.  I don't turn in those scores either.

post #28 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghalfaire View Post

My crowd we play them as they lay unless there is a local rule, but as above don't turn in the scores for handicap.  Same when on overseeded greens you need a driver to make a 30' putt.  I don't turn in those scores either.

 

In our groups, we say "move them if you think you need to" and it's amazing how often it's not needed!  Egos do kick in regularly.

post #29 of 43
I guess that I am fortunate in the way they now punch our greens, the holes are so small that I did not realize that they were punched until the superintendent told me half way through our round. (I was playing with him that day)
post #30 of 43

They are 'micro tines'

There different sizes (diameter) for different purposes and different weather and seasons. And there are solid and hollow tines.

post #31 of 43

I think you just have to use your best judgement.  One of my local courses (which is very very old and quite terrible actually) has the worst greens to begin with and when you add aeration into the equation it is nearly impossible to not 3 putt when you're within 20 feet.  So 4 footers are usually a gimme although we still make an attempt to putt. 
 

post #32 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

It really doesn`t seem that hard to re-rate a course...we were asked to do this in the forward tees experiment and given the yardage guidelines to do so.

 

I'm on a ratings committee. The number and depth and breadth of the things that goes into a course rating would likely amaze you.

 

The approximations done when playing bizarrely short courses are just that - approximations. They're good for our little experiment, and are based solely on a change of yardage.

post #33 of 43
Thread Starter 

Off the original topic, but I am curious to know how they factor in variable conditions like wind, the condition of the course (i.e. length of rough, smoothness and speed of the greens), etc.  Do they use a most likely case scenario?

Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post

 

I'm on a ratings committee. The number and depth and breadth of the things that goes into a course rating would likely amaze you.

 

The approximations done when playing bizarrely short courses are just that - approximations. They're good for our little experiment, and are based solely on a change of yardage.

I was talking about re-rating solely based on a change of yardage also...seems like using a rating between the back and forward tee is more accurate than using either the rating for the back tee or the front tees when you are playing from between the two.  My comment was in response to Fourputt who said he simply doesn`t turn in scores when the course is not playing as it is suppose to...my reading of the handicap rules is that not using a score is a decision for the committee, not the player to make.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

...The only part of the course that seemed inconsistent with how it would typically play was that most/all of the tees were on the front part of the tee box (probably because they had been recently aerated.  Although we were playing the "back" tees, the actual distance we played the course from was shorter than what the backs measure but longer that what the front tees officially measure.  In this case would it be permissible to manually enter a course rating/slope that is between the rating of the front and back tees?

 
post #34 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

Off the original topic, but I am curious to know how they factor in variable conditions like wind, the condition of the course (i.e. length of rough, smoothness and speed of the greens), etc.  Do they use a most likely case scenario?

 

You're right. It is off the topic. :)

post #35 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

I was talking about re-rating solely based on a change of yardage also...seems like using a rating between the back and forward tee is more accurate than using either the rating for the back tee or the front tees when you are playing from between the two.  My comment was in response to Fourputt who said he simply doesn`t turn in scores when the course is not playing as it is suppose to...my reading of the handicap rules is that not using a score is a decision for the committee, not the player to make.

 

My comments were about an extreme case.  All or almost all temp tees or greens - the fairways and rough all a pincushion of aeration holes (in that case we take relief from holes in the fairway, so it would be like playing LCP, thus reverse sandbagging and detrimental to our own chances in a competition).  My home course had a season where half the greens had to be resodded because they were partially killed by a batch of contaminated fertilizer.  That season the course rating was temporarily adjusted by a CGA rating team, but prior to that that re-rating, no scores were accepted by my Men's club for handicap.  Basically if the course is playing abnormally from something other than weather conditions, then it would unfairly skew ones handicap one way or the the other.  It's not like every time I see a temp tee I'm going to take the radical step to not turn in a score.  The handicap system takes such common variations into consideration.  You're still trying to make everything seem more difficult than it really is.  

 

Inventing your own rating is simply not acceptable in my experience.  The club which maintained my handicap would never consider allowing such liberties.  Unless you've been trained, you  really have no idea how to go about it, and the CGA uses a team so that one person's subjectivity doesn't overly influence the rating.  There is more to it than just balancing the length change.  You have to consider how that change affects other things.  Does it take hazards out of play?  Turn a reachable par  into a par 4?  Bring hazards into play?  These are all things that might affect both the slope and rating, and they have to be considered.  Here is where the job really is more difficult that you make it out to be, and it can't be done properly by an untrained, unqualified person.

post #36 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

With the season coming to an end, I have been playing a lot of golf on aerated greens and fairways.

 

When your ball comes to rest in an aeration hole on the green or fairway, do you have to play it from the hole?  Assume that the greens have been sanded, but not the fairways.

 

Today, in the fairway or short rough my ball had an aeration plug directly behind and touching my ball...no way to move the plug without the ball moving.  What are my options?

 

Thanks.

It depends. We always impose a local rule of "winter rules" when we aerate. Are you playing in a tournament and are others facing the same conditions? Are you posting the score for a handicap? There are a lot of variables.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rules of Golf
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Rules of Golf › Aerated Greens and Fairways