Jump to content
Subscribe to the Spin Axis Podcast! ×

Recommended Posts

Posted

I've come across a unique situation for handicapping, and with the changes to 10-17 hole round posting, I'm not 100% sure how to handle it.

Right now, my home course is re-doing a few holes. 2 holes are playing to temporary greens (holes 4 and 9). I played in a match 2 days ago at this course, and the person that normally posts the scores has no idea how to handle this. I'm not entirely sure what he's thinking, but it seems like he's operating under the old rules where you'd just post par plus handicap strokes for any holes not played. 

I think the correct way to do this now is not post scores for holes 4 and 9 and the expected score algorithm will take care of this. Is that correct? I've poked around the handicap manual and that seems to make the most sense, but the clarifications to handicap rule 3.2b are tripping me up a bit. As far as I know, the course has not gotten the CGA to do anything like temporarily re-rate the course or to tell everyone to score net par on the closed holes. I think that means we're in expected score land, but I wanted to see what others thought here.

  • Informative 1

-- Daniel

In my bag: :callaway: Paradym :callaway: Epic Flash 3.5W (16 degrees)

:callaway: Rogue Pro 3-PW :edel: SMS Wedges - V-Grind (48, 54, 58):edel: Putter

 :aimpoint:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
1 hour ago, DeadMan said:

I think the correct way to do this now is not post scores for holes 4 and 9 and the expected score algorithm will take care of this.

This is how I understand it should be done, just treat those holes as not played.

  • Like 1

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
1 hour ago, DeadMan said:

I've come across a unique situation for handicapping, and with the changes to 10-17 hole round posting, I'm not 100% sure how to handle it.

Right now, my home course is re-doing a few holes. 2 holes are playing to temporary greens (holes 4 and 9). I played in a match 2 days ago at this course, and the person that normally posts the scores has no idea how to handle this. I'm not entirely sure what he's thinking, but it seems like he's operating under the old rules where you'd just post par plus handicap strokes for any holes not played. 

I think the correct way to do this now is not post scores for holes 4 and 9 and the expected score algorithm will take care of this. Is that correct? I've poked around the handicap manual and that seems to make the most sense, but the clarifications to handicap rule 3.2b are tripping me up a bit. As far as I know, the course has not gotten the CGA to do anything like temporarily re-rate the course or to tell everyone to score net par on the closed holes. I think that means we're in expected score land, but I wanted to see what others thought here.

That's what I'd suggest you do ,post hole-by-hole, post an "x" for the holes not played,  unless directed otherwise by a Handicap Committee with approval from your state golf association.  "Par plus.." is no longer used, unless specific instructions are given.  Note that Clarification 3.2b/2 says it should be used "only when approved by the Authorized Association".

  • Like 1

Dave

:callaway: Rogue SubZero Driver

:titleist: 915F 15 Fairway, 816 H1 19 Hybrid, AP2 4 iron to PW, Vokey 52, 56, and 60 wedges, ProV1 balls 
:ping: G5i putter, B60 version
 :ping:Hoofer Bag, complete with Newport Cup logo
:footjoy::true_linkswear:, and Ashworth shoes

the only thing wrong with this car is the nut behind the wheel.

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
4 hours ago, DeadMan said:

I've come across a unique situation for handicapping, and with the changes to 10-17 hole round posting, I'm not 100% sure how to handle it.

Right now, my home course is re-doing a few holes. 2 holes are playing to temporary greens (holes 4 and 9). I played in a match 2 days ago at this course.

As far as I know, the course has not gotten the CGA to do anything like temporarily re-rate the course or to tell everyone to score net par on the closed holes. I think that means we're in expected score land, but I wanted to see what others thought here.

Did you play the 2 holes with their temporary greens.  If so, I don't see why your score shouldn't count as it would normally.  I get the point that the hole does change but if everybody is playing the same conditions then I think it is fair

What's in the bag

  • Taylor Made r5 dual Draw 9.5* (stiff)
  • Cobra Baffler 4H (stiff)
  • Taylor Made RAC OS 6-9,P,S (regular)
  • Golden Bear LD5.0 60* (regular)
  • Aidia Z-009 Putter
  • Inesis Tour 900 golf ball
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
4 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

That's what I'd suggest you do ,post hole-by-hole, post an "x" for the holes not played,  unless directed otherwise by a Handicap Committee with approval from your state golf association.  "Par plus.." is no longer used, unless specific instructions are given.  Note that Clarification 3.2b/2 says it should be used "only when approved by the Authorized Association".

Thank you. That's probably what I'll respond with.

1 hour ago, pganapathy said:

Did you play the 2 holes with their temporary greens.  If so, I don't see why your score shouldn't count as it would normally.  I get the point that the hole does change but if everybody is playing the same conditions then I think it is fair

Yes. For the match, we played the temporary greens and counted those scores. Not ideal, but it worked (and we split the holes, so no damage done really). For handicap posting, it changed a 520 yard par 5 into a ~400 par 4 and a 380 yard par 4 into a 130 yard par 3. That's why I'm asking about handicap posting (and did not put this in the rules of golf subforum).

-- Daniel

In my bag: :callaway: Paradym :callaway: Epic Flash 3.5W (16 degrees)

:callaway: Rogue Pro 3-PW :edel: SMS Wedges - V-Grind (48, 54, 58):edel: Putter

 :aimpoint:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Posted
5 hours ago, pganapathy said:

Did you play the 2 holes with their temporary greens.  If so, I don't see why your score shouldn't count as it would normally.  I get the point that the hole does change but if everybody is playing the same conditions then I think it is fair

It's not about what individuals think is fair — it's about following the established rules of handicapping.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I figured out the issue. The guy in charge of match play was trying to post these through golf genius. But when he leaves the scores for holes blank, it defaults to net double bogey. So he was trying to post +10 for 18 holes instead of +5 for 16 holes. There is probably a way to do this correctly in golf genius, but he’s not going to figure it out.

I posted the score manually, and it passes the sanity test: 

IMG_5901.thumb.png.7f977aa5309109dde33cb205fd7beec7.png

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 2
  • Informative 1

-- Daniel

In my bag: :callaway: Paradym :callaway: Epic Flash 3.5W (16 degrees)

:callaway: Rogue Pro 3-PW :edel: SMS Wedges - V-Grind (48, 54, 58):edel: Putter

 :aimpoint:

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

My course had 3 holes damaged by Hurricane Helene. All my rounds this year have been 15 hole rounds. Handicap is probably better than if I had played them!

  • Funny 1
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted

I don't know what the handicap manual says now, but it used to be that the course could get a new temporary slope and course rating taking into account the temporary greens.

My Weapons of Grass Destruction:

:titleist: TS2 10.5*;  917F2 15*;  818H1 19*;  716 AP2 4-P;  Pro V1x

:vokey: SM7's - 50.12 F, 56.14 F, 60.08 M

:odyssey: Black Series 3

  :footjoy:  :oakley: 

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Day 24 (4 Dec 25) - Spent about an hour working with the new 55° wedge in the backyard.  Kept all shots to under 20yds.  Big focus - not decelerating thru downswing and keeping speed up with abbreviated backswing.  Nothing like hitting a low flighted chip with plenty of check spin and then purpose to float a pitch of similar distance.  
    • Day 114 12-4 Put some work in on backswing, moving the hips correctly, then feeling over to lead side. Didn't hit any balls was just focused on keeping flowy and moving better. I'll probably do another session tonight and add in some foam balls.
    • Didn't say anything about your understanding in my post.  Well, if you are not insisting on alignment with logic of the WHS, then no.  Try me/us. What do you want from us then?? You are not making sense. You come here and post in an open forum, question a system that is constructed with logic, without using any of your own and then give us a small window of your personal experience to support your narrative which at first sight does not makes sense.  I mean, if you are a point of swearing then I would suggest you cut your losses and humor a more gullible audience elsewhere. Good heavens.
    • I have access to far more data (including surveys and polls) than you do with your anecdotes. I mean this as plainly and literally as possible: you’ve demonstrated that you do not. They would, one way or the other.
    • Yes, but you don't live in the UK, so you have no idea what we think about it here. It's a very different mindset here, to demonstrate the fact you should consider 9 out of 10 games we play here are Stableford, whereas you you almost solely play medal. Neither is right or wrong, it's just different  I'm trying to avoid swearing here. Once again, and for the 1000th time, I understand the system, I just don't agree with it. Is there anything wrong with that? PS, I do not have the time or patience to post my results, especially as they prove nothing  That's because 99% of the posters are Yanks
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.