Scorecard (Software) Question Re: Nine Holes

[iacas]

We're building Scorecard 2.0, and one of the most widely requested features (and thus one of our top features) is the addition of nine-hole rounds. We're also adding a graphing feature that allows you to graph virtually every statistic over time, including markers you can add (like "Changed grip" or "Took a lesson with John Doe" or "Bought new irons.")

We'll follow USGA guidelines for using the rounds to calculate your handicaps, and we'll accept not only nine-hole courses but also nine-hole rounds played on full courses.

But I have a question, a mini-poll of sorts (without the actual poll), re: how stats should be handled. We have three basic options: integrate the nine-hole stats, keep them separate, or merge nine-hole rounds into 18-hole rounds.

1) If we integrate, any of the stats which are percentages would show up the same (in graphs and the stats view). Stats which are counts - like # of putts, etc. - would need to be doubled for the purpose of stats and graphs to maintain consistency. Most courses are pretty symmetrical, so this should the vast majority of the time.

2) If we split the stats off and don't double the nine-hole counts, you're going to have two sets of stats and two sets of graphs. They'll be accurate, but you're going to have to look back and forth between two different views in BOTH the stats and graph windows to really get a sense of your stats. If you play primarily one length over the other, more than likely the lesser-played format will end up being ignored.

3) A third option would be to selectively combine or ignore nine-hole stats. If you play two nine-hole rounds within a certain time frame (perhaps three days) OR consecutively within a longer period of time (i.e. no 18-hole rounds in between), we can combine the two nine-hole rounds into a single 18-hole round that has completely accurate statistics. If you don't play a second nine holes within x days of the first nine, we ignore the first nine (and the second nine becomes the "first" nine for the next x-day period).

Bear in mind these are just for your statistics and graphs. We'll still calculate your handicap and anti-handicap properly, regardless of the option we end up using above.

I rarely play nine-hole rounds, and when I do, it's usually in bad weather or when I'm kind of out goofing around and perhaps working on something, so I personally favor the last version.

But I want to hear from all of you what you'd like to see. Maybe it's one of the three above, maybe it's a new idea you've thought of yourself. Let us know.

P.S. "Do all three and let the user choose" isn't an option, for a number of reasons.

[ERC7.5]

1. Would probably be fine for lower handicapped players due to them being more consistent across the board but may skew stats for higher handicapped players such as myself. I can have a great front side and totally blow up the back or vice versa. For me....14 putts on the front doesn't mean <35 putts on the back...let alone 14.
   
2. Just don't like this one....it starts to take away from the ease of use of the program itself.
   
3. Probably makes the most sense. This would be a more accurate approach IMO for the higher handicaps and adds nothing as far as input for the end user is concerned. Unless you'd want to add an option to set the range (1 day, 3 days, 5 days, etc....).
   
4. Add a way to link two sets of 9 together (checkbox or whatever) and don't include the stats until the user tells the program to do so.

My vote is for #3.

[ChiChiIsMe]

I'd vote #3 and let the user choose. You all ready have a choice for "include in stats" check box when entering rounds. How about a "combine with last 9 hole round" check box as well.

[iacas]

I'd vote #3 and let the user choose. You all ready have a choice for "include in stats" check box when entering rounds. How about a "combine with last 9 hole round" check box as well.

Playing devil's advocate against the "choosing" part:

a) Because if they're spread out too far, that's not nearly as meaningful. What do nine holes in March have to do with nine holes in May? b) Adding more checkboxes and buttons is rarely a good thing. And it's not just one checkbox: what if you delete one of the rounds? We have to figure out how to handle that - do we shift all the linked nine-hole rounds by one? Do we abandon that other nine-hole round? P.S. The "include in stats" feature may go away. That was in place primarily so you could include stats only for a calendar year or your golf season and exclude the rest. I think we added that feature around January, 2008.

[Puttin4Bird]

My vote would be for #1. That is how USGA handicaps are figured if you only play 9 holes right? I think the same measures applying would make sense.

[ChiChiIsMe]

So the question becomes what metrics do you use to combine the rounds if you're going to do so without user intervention? I know GHIN for example combines 9 hole rounds to 18 for handicap purposes, however I don't know if there is a cut off time wise or not. It does show up as a "C" tho.

P.S. The "include in stats" feature may go away. That was in place primarily so you could include stats only for a calendar year or your golf season and exclude the rest. I think we added that feature around January, 2008.

I've been meaning to ask if there is a way to separate out the years stat wise. I'd like to be able to look at my '08 stats vs my '09 to see if I've improved at all year to year. Sounds like this will be something in v2.

[Mats++]

I'll go with #3.

[georgep]

Another vote for #3. Just doubling the nines will skew the results. It wouldn't be a big deal over time, but it could be really screwy in the short term.

[iacas]

My vote would be for #1. That is how USGA handicaps are figured if you only play 9 holes right? I think the same measures applying would make sense.

The USGA combines nine-hole scores, it doesn't double them. Section 5-2 of the handicapping manual, if memory serves...

I've been meaning to ask if there is a way to separate out the years stat wise. I'd like to be able to look at my '08 stats vs my '09 to see if I've improved at all year to year. Sounds like this will be something in v2.

We won't really be offering a way to "compare" groups of stats like that, no. You can compare stats now by enabling your 2008 stats, looking at them (or dragging them into Excel or something), and then turning on your 2007 stats, and comparing that way.

[joshiemac25]

I personally like the third option. I play in a once a week league where we typically switch sides every other week, but not always. So inherently, I would like the third option with the time between rounds to be 7 days. If it doesn't happen, the next round begins the 7 day period.

[ChiChiIsMe]

We won't really be offering a way to "compare" groups of stats like that, no. You can compare stats now by enabling your 2008 stats, looking at them (or dragging them into Excel or something), and then turning on your 2007 stats, and comparing that way.

I just figured out that I could select multiple rounds in the main window, right click and turn them on/off.

It would be cool if you could (maybe you can and I don't know how) output stats to a webpage or something, but that's for another thread. now back to your regularly scheduled 9hole discussion.......

[Puttin4Bird]

3) A third option would be to selectively combine or ignore nine-hole stats. If you play two nine-hole rounds within a certain time frame (perhaps three days) OR consecutively within a longer period of time (i.e. no 18-hole rounds in between), we can combine the two nine-hole rounds into a single 18-hole round that has completely accurate statistics. If you don't play a second nine holes within x days of the first nine, we ignore the first nine (and the second nine becomes the "first" nine for the next x-day period).

Erik, the more I think about it I do like this option #3 the best.

[lumpuckeroo]

I would say let the user choose. I play a 9 hole league, sometimes we play the front sometimes the back.

[iacas]

I would say let the user choose. I play a 9 hole league, sometimes we play the front sometimes the back.

I think you may have misread the question. Which nine holes you play is irrelevant to the question.

If you didn't misread, I already commented (briefly) on "let the user choose."

[TourSpoon]

I have a question...

I am playing a facility that has 27 holes...should I enter the 3 "nines" as seperate courses?  What is the best way to handle that situation?  I know that of the three, we will be playing two so there has to be a way to combine.  Advice?

[iacas]

Hiya,

Quote:

Originally Posted by TourSpoon

I have a question...

I am playing a facility that has 27 holes...should I enter the 3 "nines" as seperate courses?  What is the best way to handle that situation?  I know that of the three, we will be playing two so there has to be a way to combine.  Advice?

Two ways of doing it...

1. Enter the two rounds as nine-hole rounds and with three nine-hole courses.
2. Enter three courses as "AB" and "BC" and "AC" combinations. It's irrelevant which nine you play first, but if you tend to play one first put it first.

I prefer the second option, personally. That way the courses are still 18 holes, you can still enter nine-hole rounds by choosing to play the "front nine" or "back nine" of either of two appropriate courses, and your score is entered in properly as an 18-hole score so your first 9 holes won't be combined with a previous 9-hole round when it was part of an 18-hole round.