Cap Patrol - Handicap Evaluation

[klaugh]

3 minutes ago, StuM said:

I have no data to contradict your statement but I personally doubt it is anywhere near 7-10%.  Of the golfers I know that do post HCP none of them game the system.

Sure, there have always been a few bad apples, but I doubt it is anywhere near this many.

Hard to say, maybe a better statement is that 7% to 10% have the wrong index based on the way cap patrol looks at player performances and the indexes they track & use to determine if a players index needs a possible modification.

Go Bucks! Hope you have a few fans to root with you on Saturday as you are in the land of Blue! 

[iacas]

43 minutes ago, klaugh said:

No surprise, you play lowest score wins, you don't have to deal with net play and you may not fully understand what the net players deal with just as most net players don't understand your world of stroke play.

I still coach and teach a lot of amateur golfers, man. And I operate an eClub for my AGA.

43 minutes ago, klaugh said:

My guest about 7-10%... 

What guess is that?

• If it's the number of people who don't fully follow the Rules of Handicapping, you're probably about 80% low. 🤣
• If it's the people you imagine are sandbagging… you're probably fairly high.

Sorry you feel that way.

43 minutes ago, klaugh said:

Good luck with your biz in Erie, hope your snow tires are ready.

That's a weird comment to make? 😄 

[klaugh]

5 minutes ago, iacas said:

I still coach and teach a lot of amateur golfers, man. And I operate an eClub for my AGA.

What guess is that?

• If it's the number of people who don't fully follow the Rules of Handicapping, you're probably about 80% low. 🤣
• If it's the people you imagine are sandbagging… you're probably fairly high.

Sorry you feel that way.

That's a weird comment to make? 😄 

Do any of your am's comment on any handicap issues in their net events? Slow play and bad indexes seem to be some of the challenges public and private golf face.

That guess would be 7% - 10% are what people show up with the wrong index. People who knowingly game the system would be less, say around 3-4%?

Your right about the 80% low... 

Good luck with your biz.  Winters coming and Erie winters can be brutal, so yes, snow tires!

[iacas]

 

27 minutes ago, klaugh said:

Do any of your am's comment on any handicap issues in their net events? Slow play and bad indexes seem to be some of the challenges public and private golf face.

Not really, no. I don't think it's the problem you believe it to be.

27 minutes ago, klaugh said:

That guess would be 7% - 10% are what people show up with the wrong index.

I think your definition of "the wrong index" is "someone who beats you at a net event." 😄 

27 minutes ago, klaugh said:

Good luck with your biz.  Winters coming and Erie winters can be brutal, so yes, snow tires!

Again, what a weird comment to make. You do realize I teach at an indoor academy, and have for 13+ years now, right? 🤣

Especially if you live in PA, too, as you claim to, despite IPs in FL. And what is your index, seeing as how you list "2 to 6" as yours in your profile, ha ha.

[StuM]

28 minutes ago, klaugh said:

That guess would be 7% - 10% are what people show up with the wrong index. People who knowingly game the system would be less, say around 3-4%?

I’m not sure I am following you.  If you do not enter bad data, aka “Game the System” then your HCP is what the formula says it is.  if only 3-4% game the system then why would 7-10% be wrong?

shooting a low score does not mean you HCP is wrong, just that you had a good round.  And since they use your 8 best of 20 rounds you really need to post a lot of rounds to push a good round out of the calculation.

 

[klaugh]

Just now, iacas said:

 

Not really, no. I don't think it's the problem you believe it to be.

I think your definition of "the wrong index" is "someone who beats you at a net event." 😄 

Again, what a weird comment to make. You do realize I teach at an indoor academy, and have for 13+ years now, right? 🤣

Especially if you live in PA, too, as you claim to.

Ok, that's your opinion but from what I've seen over the years it has and can be a problem, some places more so than others...

A Wrong index is just a wrong index, no matter where I finish, it is what it is, doesn't make it right. I don't mind getting beat, it happens most of the time, just want to get beat fairly, its that simple.

I know your facility, it's very nice, stopped by many years ago as I traveled NW PA, in the winer on I90 in the snow! 😉 Keep up the goo work. Cheers!

[iacas]

1 minute ago, klaugh said:

Ok, that's your opinion but from what I've seen over the years it has and can be a problem, some places more so than others...

And that's your opinion, my man! 🤣

1 minute ago, klaugh said:

A Wrong index is just a wrong index, no matter where I finish, it is what it is, doesn't make it right. I don't mind getting beat, it happens most of the time, just want to get beat fairly, its that simple.

You still haven't defined what a "wrong index" is. You're just making stuff up at this point, and I still think you're going to be disappointed by what the USGA provides, because it can't:

• predict the future
• read people's minds
• enforce 100% compliance
• do magic

[klaugh]

4 minutes ago, StuM said:

I’m not sure I am following you.  If you do not enter bad data, aka “Game the System” then your HCP is what the formula says it is.  if only 3-4% game the system then why would 7-10% be wrong?

shooting a low score does not mean you HCP is wrong, just that you had a good round.  And since they use your 8 best of 20 rounds you really need to post a lot of rounds to push a good round out of the calculation.

 

If you are using GHIN there are 3 ways a 'current index' might not be accurate. 1. Players who play better in competitions than they play in their 'casual' rounds. Gamers, which is fine but when that happens that fact needs to be reflected in their current index. We'll see if the new USGA program will address this  2. GHIN does not take into account where you finish in net events, where you finish is important. Players who consitantly win or finish top 5 in net events, you have no way to account for their index in those events in this current system. Don't see the new system helping here  3. anybody can show up with any index they want up to 5 points over the LHI, which if you've been finishing top 5 over the last year or two might just be a problem.  Hard and Soft Caps only limit how high you can go or how fast you can go up. The USGA tracks your LHI and that is what they say is your demonstrated ability.  All this is complicated for sure...

8 minutes ago, iacas said:

And that's your opinion, my man! 🤣

You still haven't defined what a "wrong index" is. You're just making stuff up at this point, and I still think you're going to be disappointed by what the USGA provides, because it can't:

• predict the future
• read people's minds
• enforce 100% compliance
• do magic

Wrong index = any index that does not accuratly represent a players demonstrated ability.  Not making it up, it's defined in the rule book.

Predict, sounds like they are going to try! We'll see...

Read minds? not going to happen unless AI steps in! 🤣

Enforce, only peer review can help with that and it will never reach 100%

Magic, everyone posts their scores and does the right thing!

that's all we can hope for...

[iacas]

15 minutes ago, klaugh said:

1. Players who play better in competitions than they play in their 'casual' rounds. Gamers, which is fine but when that happens that fact needs to be reflected in their current index.

Whoa whoa whoa.

One could argue that doing anything beyond just posting their tournament score to their GHIN account is creating more of a "wrong index" than just posting the score.

15 minutes ago, klaugh said:

We'll see if the new USGA program will address this

I'll say it again: I think you're going to be disappointed.

15 minutes ago, klaugh said:

2. GHIN does not take into account where you finish in net events, where you finish is important.

No it's not. The score you shoot is important.

15 minutes ago, klaugh said:

Players who consitantly win or finish top 5 in net events, you have no way to account for their index in those events in this current system.

I've long said that vanity handicapping is a much bigger issue than sandbagging, so I know a lot of people who keep actual, real handicaps… who finish top five pretty often, because they're competing against a number of vanity caps.

15 minutes ago, klaugh said:

3. anybody can show up with any index they want up to 5 points over the LHI, which if you've been finishing top 5 over the last year or two might just be a problem.  Hard and Soft Caps only limit how high you can go or how fast you can go up. The USGA tracks your LHI and that is what they say is your demonstrated ability. All this is complicated for sure...

No, your demonstrated ability is your handicap index.

15 minutes ago, klaugh said:

Wrong index = any index that does not accuratly represent a players demonstrated ability.  Not making it up, it's defined in the rule book.

The word "wrong" does not appear on the definitions of the Rules of Handicapping.

https://www.usga.org/handicapping/roh/2020-rules-of-handicapping.html

"Demonstrated Ability" is, though:

Quote

Handicap Index

The measure of a player’s demonstrated ability calculated against the Slope Rating of a golf course of standard playing difficulty (that is, a course with a Slope Rating of 113) (see Rule 5.2 Calculation of a Handicap Index).

Your "demonstrated ability" is not what your index was a year ago. It's what it is right now. By definition.

[StuM]

5 minutes ago, klaugh said:

If you are using GHIN there are 3 ways a 'current index' might not be accurate. 1. Players who play better in competitions than they play in their 'casual' rounds. Gamers, which is fine but when that happens that fact needs to be reflected in their current index. We'll see if the new USGA program will address this  2. GHIN does not take into account where you finish in net events, where you finish is important. Players who consitantly win or finish top 5 in net events, you have no way to account for their index in those events in this current system. Don't see the new system helping here  3. anybody can show up with any index they want up to 5 points over the LHI, which if you've been finishing top 5 over the last year or two might just be a problem.  Hard and Soft Caps only limit how high you can go or how fast you can go up. The USGA tracks your LHI and that is what they say is your demonstrated ability.  All this is complicated for sure...

Your point #1 is referenced the cheaters.  I think they are a minority, sorry not to have facts to back that up.

Your point #2 is not valid.  I could shoot 1 over my HCP and finish in top 5 if others struggled and could shoot  -5 and be in the bottom if others scored well that day.  Where one finishes does not indicate a bad HCP.

Your point #3 is just a repeat of #1, cheaters.

Are there cheaters, of course there are.  But I simply do not buy your 7-10% guess.

[klaugh]

3 minutes ago, iacas said:

Whoa whoa whoa.

One could argue that doing anything beyond just posting their tournament score to their GHIN account is creating more of a "wrong index" than just posting the score.

I'll say it again: I think you're going to be disappointed.

No it's not. The score you shoot is important.

I've long said that vanity handicapping is a much bigger issue than sandbagging, so I know a lot of people who keep actual, real handicaps… who finish top five pretty often, because they're competing against a number of vanity caps.

No, your demonstrated ability is your handicap index.

The word "wrong" does not appear on the definitions of the Rules of Handicapping.

https://www.usga.org/handicapping/roh/2020-rules-of-handicapping.html

Right, we know wrong index does not appear in the rules, what the rules and guide book say is that your current index may or may not be reflective of your demonstrated ability. It's the HC responsiblity to review player indexes and make possible modifications when needed based on their guidelines, which we'll see how it's laid out for 2024.  In net events best net score wins but when you have the same players finishing on the podium all the time there might be issues that the HC might want to look at. GHIN doesn't use C scores to create a C index, which they should IMO, C scores count in your last 20, the same as casual rounds to create a current index. To that point, we have see players who play better in competition events, both net and stroke, than they do in casual rounds. And that fact needs to be accounted for in their current index, as stated in the guidebook.   

[iacas]

1 minute ago, klaugh said:

Right, we know wrong index does not appear in the rules

…

28 minutes ago, klaugh said:

Wrong index = any index that does not accuratly represent a players demonstrated ability.  Not making it up, it's defined in the rule book.

And for that reason (and others)…

[klaugh]

15 minutes ago, StuM said:

Your point #1 is referenced the cheaters.  I think they are a minority, sorry not to have facts to back that up.

Your point #2 is not valid.  I could shoot 1 over my HCP and finish in top 5 if others struggled and could shoot  -5 and be in the bottom if others scored well that day.  Where one finishes does not indicate a bad HCP.

Your point #3 is just a repeat of #1, cheaters.

Are there cheaters, of course there are.  But I simply do not buy your 7-10% guess.

we'll never have an accurate number...

Not a bad cap on the day, in CP, where you finish is taken into account, it is over X period of time, one or two years, and where you finish, it's tracked in the CP system with TPS points, if you read the Golf Digest article from May it might make better sense.  And you know the deal, you can play bad and win you can play great and lose.  

~5% with the wrong index in any given even, 3% who try to game the system...

[DaveP043]

13 hours ago, klaugh said:

  Just stirring the pot on this subject that few are willing to address... 

As one of the people who serve on a Handicap Committee, you're right, very few are willing to do the work.  Do you work on your club's Committee?

11 hours ago, klaugh said:

Right, we know wrong index does not appear in the rules, what the rules and guide book say is that your current index may or may not be reflective of your demonstrated ability. It's the HC responsiblity to review player indexes and make possible modifications when needed based on their guidelines, which we'll see how it's laid out for 2024.  In net events best net score wins but when you have the same players finishing on the podium all the time there might be issues that the HC might want to look at. GHIN doesn't use C scores to create a C index, which they should IMO, C scores count in your last 20, the same as casual rounds to create a current index. To that point, we have see players who play better in competition events, both net and stroke, than they do in casual rounds. And that fact needs to be accounted for in their current index, as stated in the guidebook.   

If a Committee doesn't keep track of who wins club events, looking for trends, then they're not doing their job.  GHIN certainly offers a number of reports, including only C scores, only Away Scores, etc, so a Committee can certainly look for outliers.  But to your point, some players just do better in serious play than in casual play, and our system doesn't suggest that they should be "penalized" for that.  This is where CP can be unfair, it could suggest a modification where none is warranted.  The only solution that I see is to minimize the number or impact of non-competition scores used in the calculation, but that goes to choices made by the national associations (like the USGA) who define what scores are acceptable.  

[klaugh]

On 11/21/2023 at 10:02 AM, DaveP043 said:

As one of the people who serve on a Handicap Committee, you're right, very few are willing to do the work.  Do you work on your club's Committee?

If a Committee doesn't keep track of who wins club events, looking for trends, then they're not doing their job.  GHIN certainly offers a number of reports, including only C scores, only Away Scores, etc, so a Committee can certainly look for outliers.  But to your point, some players just do better in serious play than in casual play, and our system doesn't suggest that they should be "penalized" for that.  This is where CP can be unfair, it could suggest a modification where none is warranted.  The only solution that I see is to minimize the number or impact of non-competition scores used in the calculation, but that goes to choices made by the national associations (like the USGA) who define what scores are acceptable.  

Yes, I do. We use CP, do you? What is your feedback on it? Or do you manage players in your own way?  It will be interesting to see what the new USGA/GHIN reports look at and suggest.  A CP modification is driven off of the cap score. Given the data it looks at we don't see much of a problem with that other than making sure all rounds posted are properly coded in GHIN.  We feel C scores are important, especially when you see a player whose C/Potential index is lower than their LHI. So in that case if their cap score is less than 50 we have no issue going with a modification if CP suggests that be the case.

[bkuehn1952]

I am our club's handicap chairman. We use a variation of Dean Knuth's "Tournament Point System." Members accumulate points based on their finishes in our 15-20 handicapped tournaments. We typically cut 5-6 member's playing handicaps each year. It takes me about 30 minutes a week to update our spreadsheet-based calculation. If I was a better typist and more tech savvy, I would probably do it in 15 minutes.

We do not change anyone's GHIN index. Any adjustments are solely for our club's events.

I am interested to see what the USGA will provide Handicap Committees in the way of further support in analyzing member's handicap indexes.

[klaugh]

2 hours ago, bkuehn1952 said:

I am our club's handicap chairman. We use a variation of Dean Knuth's "Tournament Point System." Members accumulate points based on their finishes in our 15-20 handicapped tournaments. We typically cut 5-6 member's playing handicaps each year. It takes me about 30 minutes a week to update our spreadsheet-based calculation. If I was a better typist and more tech savvy, I would probably do it in 15 minutes.

We do not change anyone's GHIN index. Any adjustments are solely for our club's events.

I am interested to see what the USGA will provide Handicap Committees in the way of further support in analyzing member's handicap indexes.

 

2 hours ago, bkuehn1952 said:

I am our club's handicap chairman. We use a variation of Dean Knuth's "Tournament Point System." Members accumulate points based on their finishes in our 15-20 handicapped tournaments. We typically cut 5-6 member's playing handicaps each year. It takes me about 30 minutes a week to update our spreadsheet-based calculation. If I was a better typist and more tech savvy, I would probably do it in 15 minutes.

We do not change anyone's GHIN index. Any adjustments are solely for our club's events.

I am interested to see what the USGA will provide Handicap Committees in the way of further support in analyzing member's handicap indexes.

Same here on the committee... We thought about doing the same thing, using our own version of Knuth's TP System but opted for Cap Patrol 3 years ago. We've reduced the number of events & TPS points each year, 19 events this year down from 27.  Our number of modified members has dropped, we had 15 this season out of 600+ full golf members.

Next year we are not going to modify in GHIN as we've done the past 3 years. We'll go with our events only. Come to find out USGA only 'suggests' that you modify indexes in GHIN, not require, so we'll see if that changes on Jan 1st.

It will be interesting, 9 hole scores are going to created a full score net diff based on ESC. Same when you play 10-17 holes. I hope they make it ease for everyone to post their scores by hole, that might be an issue with quite a few members and it sure seems it will cause some confusion. And how they will determine if an index is out of line with previous scores. Since they don't track finishes that's where the HC steps in.  

 

[iacas]

24 minutes ago, klaugh said:

Next year we are not going to modify in GHIN as we've done the past 3 years. We'll go with our events only. Come to find out USGA only 'suggests' that you modify indexes in GHIN, not require, so we'll see if that changes on Jan 1st.

It will be interesting, 9 hole scores are going to created a full score net diff based on ESC. Same when you play 10-17 holes. I hope they make it ease for everyone to post their scores by hole, that might be an issue with quite a few members and it sure seems it will cause some confusion. And how they will determine if an index is out of line with previous scores. Since they don't track finishes that's where the HC steps in.

Two quibbles:

1. No such thing as ESC anymore.
2. It's already pretty easy to enter hole-by-hole scores. They can't make it much easier unless they send someone to do it for you.