or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Courses and Architecture › course handicap index variances
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# course handicap index variances - Page 3

Instead of arguing, can one of you experts answer my question? :P

### TheSandTrap.com Top Picks

Quote:
Originally Posted by David in FL

You gave an example.  You're right, I shouldn't have assumed you would give me an accurate example with complete information.  I should have asked about the CR.

Doesn't make it any more difficult.......and I assure you, many of us continue to be amused by the things you find "difficult".

When someone fully understands how to do a computation, they KNOW if there is not enough information to accurately do the computation.  Believe it or not, I am way ABOVE AVERAGE when it comes to intelligence and have a pretty good understanding of some of the things that I say are more "difficult" than they need to be.

My guess is that you are ABOVE AVERAGE in intelligence and you obviously have played a lot of golf- HOWEVER, you still made a mistake in calculating how many shots the man should give the woman because you mistakenly assumed their CRs were the same (something I have never seen).  Having different CR/Slope based on sex adds complexity to the system.  Complexity is justified at times, and maybe it is warranted based on my second posting today.

Here is a question (that might belong in another thread)-

Why is 113 the "neutral" slope as opposed to 100?  AKA, when they created the slope system, why didn't the USGA call a course that currently has a slope of 113, 100?  Had they used 100, then slopes could just be percentages, something most of us learn in school.

i.e. a course with a slope of 124 could have been 110% so instead of multiplying your index by 124/113 you could just take 110% of your index to compute your course handicap

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slice of Life

I thought the course rating didn't affect handicappers, only scratch players. Can someone explain that to me then?

If 2 competitors are playing from different tees, the difference between their 2 course handicaps is adjusted to reflect the difference in course ratings.

Example:   Player A is playing from the blue tees with a course rating of 72.1.  Player B is playing the whites with a course rating of 69.8. The difference in course ratings is 72.1 - 69.8 = 2.3.  You round 2.3 down to 2 strokes.  Player A's course handicap is increased by 2 strokes to make up for the disparity.

If men and women are playing from the same tees and there's a difference in the men's and women's course ratings from those tees, the same adjustment is made.  In both cases if there's no difference in course rating, there is no additional adjustment to each course handicap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David in FL

If 2 competitors are playing from different tees, the difference between their 2 course handicaps is adjusted to reflect the difference in course ratings.

Example:   Player A is playing from the blue tees with a course rating of 72.1.  Player B is playing the whites with a course rating of 69.8. The difference in course ratings is 72.1 - 69.8 = 2.3.  You round 2.3 down to 2 strokes.  Player A's course handicap is increased by 2 strokes to make up for the disparity.

If men and women are playing from the same tees and there's a difference in the men's and women's course ratings from those tees, the same adjustment is made.  In both cases if there's no difference in course rating, there is no additional adjustment to each course handicap.

Ok good to know, thanks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slice of Life

I thought the course rating didn't affect handicappers, only scratch players. Can someone explain that to me then?

Handicap is based on both course rating and slope...when the slope is anything but 113 for either competitor and/or their are CR differences between the two competitors based their respective ratings for the tees they are playing, then their needs to be adjustments to their index.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slice of Life

You sure? I thought that's why the slope rating for those tees is different for both genders.

I don't believe so. If they were both men, or both women, neither would get a shot. But I'm no expert...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree

according to http://golf.about.com/cs/handicapping/a/hfaq_manvwoman.htm I have it right with the man/woman example.

You are correct that if the were BOTH men or BOTH women, then no shots would be given as they would have identical slopes/CRs when playing identical tees.  Not so when you mix the sexes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree

Handicap is based on both course rating and slope...when the slope is anything but 113 for either competitor and/or their are CR differences between the two competitors based their respective ratings for the tees they are playing, then their needs to be adjustments to their index.

Ah thanks, I somehow missed that post.

Here is an example of how it works with Men and Women of the same index.

Both playing Keystone River White tees:

 Male Female Course Rating 67.2 72.3 Slope 122 141 Index (both players) CH Male CH Female CR Delta Female Gets 0 0 0 5.1 5 5 5 6 5.1 6 10 11 12 5.1 6 15 16 19 5.1 8 20 22 25 5.1 8 25 27 31 5.1 9 30 32 37 5.1 10 35 38 44 5.1 11

Male playing Copper Creek Gold, Woman playing Red- NOTE the negative numbers in the "Female Gets" column means the MAN gets strokes

 Male Female Course Rating 66.8 62.4 Slope 117 111 Index (both players) CH Male CH Female CR Delta Female Gets 0 0 0 -4.4 -4 5 5 5 -4.4 -4 10 10 10 -4.4 -4 15 16 15 -4.4 -5 20 21 20 -4.4 -5 25 26 25 -4.4 -5 30 31 29 -4.4 -6 35 36 34 -4.4 -6

Man playing Copper Creek White, Woman playing Red:

 Male Female Course Rating 62.6 62.4 Slope 103 111 Index (both players) CH Male CH Female CR Delta Female Gets 0 0 0 -0.2 0 5 5 5 -0.2 0 10 9 10 -0.2 1 15 14 15 -0.2 1 20 18 20 -0.2 2 25 23 25 -0.2 2 30 27 29 -0.2 2 35 32 34 -0.2 2

So at Copper Creek, a man with the same index as a woman will give her shots when playing from the whites when she is on the reds, but will get shots from her if he moves back to the golds.

Of course, Copper Creek may be a bad example because in our league play, they ignore slope and course rating differences and simply round off everyone's index.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree

Of course, Copper Creek may be a bad example because in our league play, they ignore slope and course rating differences and simply round off everyone's index.

Well, that keeps it simple.

Extraordinarily unfair, but simple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by David in FL

Well, that keeps it simple.

Extraordinarily unfair, but simple.

Fully agreed- I only try to advocate simpler when it is still fair.  With the handicap system, more complex makes it more fair.  The problem with that is that fewer people understand/follow more complex systems/rules.

well, I have a tee time on Monday at one of the courses I mentioned above. I have not played there for about 6 years. It is about 300 yards longer than the courses I frequent lately. I will more than likely play from whatever tees the others players choose as the starter said I could go out with a twosome at 7:04.  If I can match my last two rounds, my handicap will drop a few points as I am still in the range where I take the average of the best three.  I am looking forward to it as I usually do a little better on a course I have not played before. We shall see.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hacker James

well, I have a tee time on Monday at one of the courses I mentioned above. I have not played there for about 6 years. It is about 300 yards longer than the courses I frequent lately. I will more than likely play from whatever tees the others players choose as the starter said I could go out with a twosome at 7:04.  If I can match my last two rounds, my handicap will drop a few points as I am still in the range where I take the average of the best three.  I am looking forward to it as I usually do a little better on a course I have not played before. We shall see.

Please don't feel pressured to play tees further back than you're comfortable with. There's absolutely nothing wrong with splitting tees.....and you'll likely have more fun too!

Thanks, I won't.  A lot will depend on the demeanor of the other players. My choice would be the middle tees with a slope of 125 but only 6035 yards. The back tees are 6537 and 133 slope. The longest hole is 529/514. The greens are all in excellent shape as far as I could tell.

Oh, forgot to mention the "affordability index"  \$28 w cart...That's less than the one on the base and much nicer course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hacker James

Thanks, I won't.  A lot will depend on the demeanor of the other players. My choice would be the middle tees with a slope of 125 but only 6035 yards. The back tees are 6537 and 133 slope. The longest hole is 529/514. The greens are all in excellent shape as far as I could tell.

Oh, forgot to mention the "affordability index"  \$28 w cart...That's less than the one on the base and much nicer course.

6000+ yds at 71? That ain't too shabby Jim!

Thank you. I am in half way decent shape for my age and often times men much younger. I manage to keep up with most players, on those days that I am hitting fairways, they struggle to keep up with me!   I may not bomb it out there 280+  but I don't have to venture far into the rough to find my ball either.  I have not played an executive course saving more than four or five times in my life. Not that there is anything wrong with them, and in a lot of cases, you have to have a damn good short game to score. I just prefer 18 hole courses.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Return Home
Back to Forum: Golf Courses and Architecture

### TheSandTrap.com Top Picks

TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Courses and Architecture › course handicap index variances