Originally Posted by Golfingdad
Maybe I'm off here, but I think the reason why it's such a big disparity is because of the way the formula measures "potential" in us amateurs. It allows us to suck 50% of the time and still represent an "X" handicap. Pros (save for enigmas like John Daly) rarely "suck."
I feel like if you could modify the handicap system slightly, such that you use ALL 20 of your recent scores, not just the best 10, versus all 20 of the pros recent scores, then, perhaps, you'd have something close to resembling a "fair" match.
My cap would go up from 8 to, probably, something like 12 or 13, whereas (I imagine) a pro's would go from +6 to +3
I think you've hit the nail on the head there Golfingdad apart for the change in the Pro's HC.
I think the variance would be a lot less.
Depending on what type of Pro we are talking about as well, a Tour Pro's variance would be minimal.
What would be the average for a teaching Pro over there guys? +2, +3?
I'm laughing at the OP putting a +6 on Phil M (sorry OP)
He may have been +6 upon turning pro but he's gained a few shots since then!
If people are saying that a Teaching Pro is varying between +3 and +5 then you might as well slap a double digit + figure on a Touring Pro.
No way is Phil a +6.
My HC is based on average scores moreso than my potential score so I'd have a little edge over most on here, but even at that, I'd count my self very lucky to get to the 14th tee against a touring pro at my home course.