Are You a Vanity Capper?

[Hugh Jars]

44 minutes ago, klineka said:

There are people far more knowledgeable about this kind of stuff than I am but I'm pretty sure the two bullet points that I left in your quote are two that people can do and still submit valid rounds for USGA handicapping purposes. 

If the rules allow it then it's not cheating.

Again, it comes down to the differences in each respective country's handicapping systems. Submitting unmarked rounds can't happen in Australia. Even the online 'clubs' like Future Golf you need to submit photos of score cards that have been marked and signed by a playing partner with a GA handicap.

I am incorrect about assuming a score on each hole -  considering that all submitted scores are converted to stableford points on a per hole basis, and most formal comps here are in stableford format here under the Golf Australia system, then once you reach net double bogey on a hole you can pick up your ball (its worth zero points for that particular hole). But if you're playing a stroke play comp (like monthly medal events) you need to play out each hole. But assuming a score on a hole where you score points - no way. Big no no.

 

Edited July 26, 2022 by Hugh Jars

[Shindig]

6 minutes ago, Hugh Jars said:

I am incorrect about assuming a score on each hole -  considering that all submitted scores are converted to stableford points on a per hole basis, and most formal comps here are in stableford format here under the Golf Australia system, then once you reach net double bogey on a hole you can pick up your ball (its worth zero points for that particular hole). But if you're playing a stroke play comp (like monthly medal events) you need to play out each hole. But assuming a score on a hole where you score points - no way. Big no no.

Just so it makes some sense to you, in case it doesn't, assuming a score isn't "put me down for a birdie."  If you're playing not in a competition but otherwise a round that you'd post for a handicap, you can put down most likely score if you play enough of the hole to know that, and net par otherwise.  For the former case, suppose you putt to half a foot from the cup.   It is extremely unlikely that even I would miss that putt, so pronounce that one made (not the one that preceded it -- if you left your par attempt a half foot away, write a bogey).   For the latter case, suppose darkness interferes with your ability to play the 18th hole.  You obviously can't post the sum of 1-17 at a score either, so you put a net par for the 18th to complete the card. 

[iacas]

But you said this…

1 hour ago, Hugh Jars said:

But anyone who submits a score towards their official handicap (USGA, Golf Australia etc) and does the following:

So you weren’t just talking about Australia.

[Golfingdad]

1 hour ago, Hugh Jars said:

But anyone who submits a score towards their official handicap (USGA, Golf Australia etc) and does the following:

- takes mulligans

- takes gimmes, assumes two putts when in a certain distance of the hole (seriously who does that!)

- incorrectly takes stroke and distance penalties

is blatantly cheating as far as I'm concerned.

I disagree with these bullet points - at least as it pertains to this thread, I should say.  If you take mulligans or gimmes or illegal drops in a competition, well sure, that is cheating.  But mulligans, gimmes, and drops in non-competitive handicap rounds can't be cheating, IMO, by definition, because you're not gaining an advantage. 

[NM Golf]

I would say definitely not. Almost all my rounds I post are in a group where we play 100% by the rules, don’t give putts outside a tap in, and because it’s all net you’d have to be a complete idiot to have a vanity handicap. 

I have a hard enough time beating the high handicaps in my group, I certainly don’t need to make it worse. I should be sandbagging! 😁

[DaveP043]

11 hours ago, Hugh Jars said:

But anyone who submits a score towards their official handicap (USGA, Golf Australia etc) and does the following:

- takes mulligans

- takes gimmes, assumes two putts when in a certain distance of the hole (seriously who does that!)

- assumes a score on any hole

- incorrectly takes stroke and distance penalties

- submits a scorecard that hasn't been marked and signed off by a playing partner

is blatantly cheating as far as I'm concerned.

 

On 7/23/2022 at 7:12 PM, Hugh Jars said:

If the WHS is meant to standardise things across the globe then why do these discrepancies exist from country to country?

When the six different handicapping authorities met to work out the WHS, they quite rightly understood that some people around the world would be extremely resistant to some specific changes.  So they unified what they could, and allowed local authorities some leeway for cultural differences like these.  Just ask yourself, would you accept a system that required you to post every single time you play, that allowed match play and fourball scores to be used (without holing out), that follows what we are required to do in the USGA areas?  Similarly, lots of US players would HATE a system that requires pre-registration for posting casual rounds, that requires attestation, that doesn't allow fourball and match play scores to be counted.  I expect the WHS to continue to evolve, and we'll gradually get closer.  Exactly how or when, I don't know.

[Hugh Jars]

11 hours ago, Shindig said:

Just so it makes some sense to you, in case it doesn't, assuming a score isn't "put me down for a birdie."  If you're playing not in a competition but otherwise a round that you'd post for a handicap, you can put down most likely score if you play enough of the hole to know that, and net par otherwise.  For the former case, suppose you putt to half a foot from the cup.   It is extremely unlikely that even I would miss that putt, so pronounce that one made (not the one that preceded it -- if you left your par attempt a half foot away, write a bogey).   For the latter case, suppose darkness interferes with your ability to play the 18th hole.  You obviously can't post the sum of 1-17 at a score either, so you put a net par for the 18th to complete the card. 

Where does it end though? Rules are rules. In any sport you play to them. If you’re not playing to the actual rules of golf as far as I’m concerned you shouldn’t be counting them to your official handicap. A tap in gimme for one person or an assumed last hole score when it’s getting dark are subjective matters and might differ to another. 

Edited July 26, 2022 by Hugh Jars

[DaveP043]

20 minutes ago, Hugh Jars said:

Where does it end though? Rules are rules. In any sport you play to them. If you’re not playing to the actual rules of golf as far as I’m concerned you shouldn’t be counting them to your official handicap. A tap in gimme for one person or an assumed last hole score when it’s getting dark are subjective matters and might differ to another. 

But we ARE playing to the specific Rules of Handicapping in our area.  We are REQUIRED to post scores even if we don't hole out.  To choose not to post would be to cheat, as defined here.

[chspeed]

I put "definitely not."

However, like most golfers, I don't 100% stick to the rules all the time.

For example, since we play on urban public courses, the conditions are simply not fun sometimes. We may:

a) Hit a breakfast ball when we tee off at 5AM without a warm-up swing

b) Agree to play preferred lies if the course is very muddy or in really lousy shape

c) If a bunker is a complete mess, filled with footprints, or beer cans (yes, beer cans), not much sand, etc. we'll give ourselves preferred lies in

That said, we follow the vast majority of the rules, like many obsessive golfers do. And since I'm trying, within reason, to get an accurate handicap, I don't consider mine a vanity handicap.

 

 

[Shindig]

40 minutes ago, Hugh Jars said:

Where does it end though? Rules are rules. In any sport you play to them. If you’re not playing to the actual rules of golf as far as I’m concerned you shouldn’t be counting them to your official handicap. A tap in gimme for one person or an assumed last hole score when it’s getting dark are subjective matters and might differ to another. 

The rules of golf, for competition, and rules of golf, for purposes of posting a score for handicap, are similar but not the same.  

Sure, you'll see some people take overly generous gimmes, but as long as they are doing so in a round only meant towards computing their handicap (i.e., they aren't playing in a competition during the round), I'm fine with it, as long as they aren't my fourball partner.  I'd love it if my upcoming opponents in net competition take such gimmes, as long as they know they can't do so in competition. 

[billchao]

45 minutes ago, Hugh Jars said:

Where does it end though? Rules are rules. In any sport you play to them. If you’re not playing to the actual rules of golf as far as I’m concerned you shouldn’t be counting them to your official handicap. A tap in gimme for one person or an assumed last hole score when it’s getting dark are subjective matters and might differ to another. 

As @DaveP043 pointed out, those of us in the US are playing under the rules of the USGA for handicap.

Quote

A most likely score is a reasonable assessment made by you based on the score you are most likely to make from that spot more than half the time. The following guidelines should be used to determine a most likely score: 

• If the ball lies on the putting green no more than 5 feet from the hole, add one stroke.
• If the ball lies between 5 feet and 20 yards from the hole, add 2 or 3 additional strokes depending on the position of the ball, difficulty of the green and your ability.
• If the ball lies more than 20 yards from the hole, add 3 or 4 additional strokes depending on the position of the ball, difficulty of the green and your ability. 

(Rule 3.3, Rules of Handicapping)

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/handicapping/world-handicap-system/world-handicap-system-usga-golf-faqs/faqs---what-score-do-i-post-when-hole-is-not-completed-.html

[Hugh Jars]

14 hours ago, billchao said:

As @DaveP043 pointed out, those of us in the US are playing under the rules of the USGA for handicap.

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/handicapping/world-handicap-system/world-handicap-system-usga-golf-faqs/faqs---what-score-do-i-post-when-hole-is-not-completed-.html

"Most likely score" is a rule in the US? Well I stand corrected.

An apparent 14 handicapper shoots 76 over par (including one hole where he picked up after 11 shots).

An apparent 3 handicapper shoots 15 over par.

An apparent 4/5 handicapper shoots 29 over par.

All shoot well, well above their net handicap differential in respect to the slope rating of these courses and tees.

Please explain how the USGA handicapping system is a fair representation of golfer ability when it produces results like this,

Is the system designed to give a false sense of bravado when can stand around with your buddies and have a pissing contest?

I would put money on myself as an 18,8 handicapper under the golf Australia system to beat any USGA 10 handicapper off the stick.

Edited July 27, 2022 by Hugh Jars

[DaveP043]

7 hours ago, Hugh Jars said:

Please explain how the USGA handicapping system is a fair representation of golfer ability when it produces results like this,

Do you actually understand the differences between Golf Australia and the USGA handicapping systems?  Do you understand that in many ways they are identical?

[NeilV]

Every score I'm able to enter even for general play goes in. There's only one other member of our regular group that maintains a handicap though, so if he's not there or not playing in my 4 ball I don't register to enter the score.

The handicap is bouncing all over the place though, as i haven't yet got to the full 20 rounds.

[billchao]

9 hours ago, Hugh Jars said:

Please explain how the USGA handicapping system is a fair representation of golfer ability when it produces results like this,

You’re cherry picking results based on average golfers who aren’t used to playing in tour conditions on championship courses. This doesn’t support your argument the way you think it does.

I’m not entirely sure you understand how handicap index works at this point. A 14 handicap is only going to shoot a 14 differential or lower 25% of the time. And that’s differential, not strokes. My low round this year is a 12 over par 84 for a 10.3 differential on a course where my course handicap is 16. At The Stadium Course at TPC Sawgrass, from the TPC tees, my course handicap is 23.

9 hours ago, Hugh Jars said:

I would put money on myself as an 18,8 handicapper under the golf Australia system to beat any USGA 10 handicapper off the stick.

I’d take that bet and I’m a 13.

[Big Lex]

10 hours ago, Hugh Jars said:

An apparent 4/5 handicapper shoots 29 over par.

All shoot well, well above their net handicap differential in respect to the slope rating of these courses and tees.

Please explain how the USGA handicapping system is a fair representation of golfer ability when it produces results like this,

Bill basically covered most of the points, but I'll give it a shot as well:

I watched some of the guy who played Brookline. Didn't see his actual handicap listed, just "single digit." 

If he is a 4.5 index, he would be an 12 course handicap according to that scorecard (rating 76.1, slope 150). 

Course Handicap™ Calculator (usga.org)

So if this handicap is 12, and we assume that's a number related to par, but he shoots over 2x that number relative to par, your  conclusion is the system is flawed. 

But the system isn't designed to predict average score or typical score. And it certainly isn't designed to predict scores on US Open-difficulty set ups.

As @billchao said, handicaps give a potential best score, which you will shoot only about 20-25% of your rounds. Most of the time you're going to shoot 3 or more strokes over your course handicap. 

And then there is the difficulty part. Handicaps presume "normal playing conditions." I'm not sure how to factor that in to his scoring, but I think everyone would agree that the conditions he played in were not even close to normal playing conditions. I don't have the time to go through the number of rounds shot at par or better in the June US Open on this course, but only 11 of over 100 qualifiers finished their tournament under par, and the average handicap of players in the field would certainly be comfortably in the plus-range.

So that course was playing far, far more difficult than "ordinary" conditions. And if a field which averages, say +4 handicap, less than 10% of the players can break par, what is that saying about the difficulty? 

I think the guy's round is completely predictable. I, as a 11, and you as an 18, would probably shoot 110-120 on that course, following USGA rules. 

The handicap system designed by Dean Knuth made several compromises, and all of these distort the results somewhat away from being a perfect predictor of score. It necessarily errs on the negative side (i.e., it doesn't _completely_ compensate our difference from par), for several reasons, among them statistical controls like equitable stroke control, and, I think, a decision that lower handicap players should still maintain some marginal advantage, even in a handicapped setting. 

 

 

Edited July 27, 2022 by Big Lex
clarification

[Shindig]

If we're going to discuss whether a particular ten handicap is a vanity handicap or not, let's not forget that some very real ten handicap players didn't break 100 on U.S. Open setups in 2008-10 when Golf Digest did the challenge.  

One round does not measure whether your handicap is legitimate or not within that bound.  If a plus handicap failed to break 110, that might mean something, but a ten handicap putting together a round in the 90s on a tough course is very expected. 

[ChetlovesMer]

4 hours ago, Big Lex said:

lower handicap players should still maintain some marginal advantage, even in a handicapped setting. 

THIS