Handicap With an 'R' at the End...

[Fairway_CY]

I received my handicap revision today, and when I looked at it... the posted handicap was 22.8R currently.

Based on my calculations... it should have been 23.8 following my most recent scores.

I looked it up, and apparantly the 'R' denotes a reduction based on my tournament scores. Up until recently, my scores have been between 104 and 110. My last few posted rounds were (with ESC) 91, 95 and 91. Just happened to be that they were tournament play scores... which I tend to concentrate more on and don't have the typical (although they still exist) blow-up holes... mostly because tournament play is MUCH slower due to groups ahead and I have more time to think about the proper shot and read putts, etc.

I do have posted tournament scores from earlier in the year of 95 and 107... so it's not like I ALWAYS shoot that well (91) during tournaments, but... I feel like someone seeing that 'R' is going to label me a sandbagger.

Would you?

Should I even worry about it or should I view it as a 'badge of honor' saying that I play 1 stroke (based on the reduction) better during tournament play than I do when I am out playing a casual round?

It just bothers me... it's like a scarlet letter to me.

CY

[chriskzoo]

Sorry to say, but if you ALWAYS play better in tournaments, you are a sandbagger, whether it is by chance or by deisgn. You should really only shoot your handicap about 1 out of every 5 times you play and the fact that you would seem to always shoot your best scores in tournaments is naturally suspicious. My scores range from 74 to 84 (8.9 index) so even if I shot a 72, they probably wouldn't make note of it.

[Motley01]

sandbaggers = ftl

[Fairway_CY]

Damn... I figured those were the responses I'd get, and I understand why they'd be that way... but - it bothers the hell out of me. I'm honest to a FAULT on the golf course.

For the past 4+ years, I've played golf maybe 6-7 times between April and September. This year, I was let go from my position at work on February 5th. This has given me a lot more time to play golf, and I've played 10 times already this year.... mostly since July.

So, my scores from 2007 and 2008 are still accounted for in my handicap calculation. Among those ESC scores are a 112 and a 116... but they aren't counted in my calculation.

My last five rounds are all counted in my calculation with differentials listed as:

18.3 - 21.3 - 17.8 - 28.6 - 29.3

And then the other five that are counted in my calculation have differentials of:

24.4 - 26.0 - 26.4 - 30.0 - 26.8

The bold numbers are tournament scores... and the last three (26.4 - 30.0 - 26.8) are all from 2007 and 2008. If you take the first seven differentials and add them, divide by seven and multiply by .96 you get 22.7 which is still lower than the 22.8R I've been given. I know that when I add another 3-4 scores to this, the 'R' tag will be removed... but in the mean time, it bothers the hell out of me.

CY

[chriskzoo]

You might find this interesting:

http://www.usga.org/handicapping/art...rnament-Score/

What was your handicap before the tournaments? Let's assume your course handicap was 24. Assuming a par 72, "par" for you based on your handicap would be a 96. Your chances of shooting:

91 (-5): 72:1
95 (-1): 8:1
91 (-5): 72:1

Based on your handicap - assuming it was true, your chances of shooting those 3 rounds consecutively would be 41,472 to 1. Now you see why they are suspicious.

[alf174]

Looks like you're going to get reviewed. See section 10-3 of the USGA Handicap Manual (too big to post here). You smoked the odds.

[Fairway_CY]

Based on your handicap - assuming it was true, your chances of shooting those 3 rounds consecutively would be 41,472 to 1. Now you see why they are suspicious.

It's even worse than that... my course handicap for those rounds was 28... so, the odds were probably a much higher amount.

At any rate... I absolutely see WHY they are suspicious, but I'd think they'd take into account the fact that since April 1, 2007 only 20 scores had been posted and that the three low scores were played in quick succession when MOST of my rounds in the previous three years were posted almost 3 weeks apart, some as far apart as 2 months (not counting winter months). I attribute my good scores to having time to practice and improve... not to sandbagging. But, again... I can see why they'd suspect sandbagging. Just wish I didn't have that stigma attached to my name right now. Especially since, until I got the revision, I'd been extremely proud of how I've played in recent weeks. *shrug* CY

[Fairway_CY]

Also, the funniest part to ME is that these tournaments are flighted... and the flight I qualify for is the HIGHEST flight... which is anybody 16+ on the handicap index... so even WITH my revised index, I'm STILL nearly 7 strokes above the LOWEST person in our flight.

Damnit... this is really going to bother me.

CY

[alf174]

I wouldn't fret. But I wouldn't be surprised to see your HI dropped by a significant amount now that you've shown you're capable of "going low".

[zeg]

Take the stats on the USGA page with a grain of salt: they make a number of completely unrealistic assumptions when they compute those. It ignores the fact that players improve and go on streaks (especially relevant given the timing of your rounds), that a simple "course rating" is a poor measure for how a particular golfer will play on a particular course on a particular day. It also ignores that you play different rounds with different degrees of concentration and attention. In other words, those are statistics that might be true for the population of all golfers over a year, but there are plenty of reasons to doubt them for a particular golfer on a particular day (or week).

Personally, I wouldn't give a whit about the R on your handicap index. You know whether or not you're sandbagging, and if you're not, you're not.

[sacm3bill]

There's nothing to feel bad about, IMO. I think most people who might see the "R" understand that sandbagging is not the only possible explanation for a string of exceptional tournament scores.

[iacas]

Hey, if I were you, I'd be glad they didn't lower it even more. You averaged 27.85 outside of tournaments and 20.45 in tournaments? Be glad you're not a 20.5 index or so.

[Fairway_CY]

Hey, if I were you, I'd be glad they didn't lower it even more. You averaged 27.85 outside of tournaments and 20.45 in tournaments? Be glad you're not a 20.5 index or so.

Ha! I'd LOVE to have my handicap lower... I'm happy as anything that it's dropping... but I don't want that 'R' tag next to my name!

And, technically... my tournament scores (there was one NOT used in the handicap calculation) work out to a differential average of 22.94 for the five of them... so the 22.8 that I was assigned is accurate based on T scores. But, at any rate... my goal is to HAVE my handicap lowered. I'd love to be below 20 by the end of this season (I've probably got about 5-7 rounds left in me before the end of October). I don't want to have a high handicap anymore. By the club championships next season, I want to be in the B Flight (10.0 - 15.9) category. CY

[Fat Slice]

Don't pay any attention to handicap, restricted or normal. The system is there to try and make it fair for everyone. Sometimes the system works, sometimes, not so much, *in individual cases*...but as a whole, it works.

I play about 10 times a month, and 1 time it's a tournament. I tend to score better on that day, and here's why...

1. I play the course once or even twice before the competitive round to learn the angles, greens, etc. I take mental notes and use them. I typically get better each time.

2. I get to the course 90 minutes early to relax, warm up, putt, hit balls, stretch, have something nice to eat, and relax. I said relax twice because that's really important. Usually, I rush to the course, slam on my shoes, and head to the first tee.

3. I lay up more often in a match play situation when I know that conservative play will win me the hole (opponent went OB, for example). Surprising how this ends up with a better score.

If I get put on restiction, so be it. I have no problem with that. My only job is to go out and play golf and not break any rules and enjoy myself. Let the handicap people do what they must - it's OK!

[iacas]

And, technically... my tournament scores (there was one NOT used in the handicap calculation) work out to a differential average of 22.94 for the five of them... so the 22.8 that I was assigned is accurate based on T scores.

You bolded four of them. I used the bold ones.

[Fairway_CY]

You bolded four of them. I used the bold ones.

Yeah, I know... one of the tournament scores wasn't one of the 10 differentials used in calculating my handicap. I only posted the 10 differentials used there, and of those 10... only 4 were tournament scores.

But, I know what you were getting at... and, again... I'd be happy to be near a 20 handicap. I'd love it more if I was below 5 like you and a bunch of others here, but... for me, that's not realistic for awhile. CY

[fredloves2golf]

Take the stats on the USGA page with a grain of salt: they make a number of completely unrealistic assumptions when they compute those. It ignores the fact that players improve and go on streaks (especially relevant given the timing of your rounds), that a simple "course rating" is a poor measure for how a particular golfer will play on a particular course on a particular day. It also ignores that you play different rounds with different degrees of concentration and attention. In other words, those are statistics that might be true for the population of all golfers over a year, but there are plenty of reasons to doubt them for a particular golfer on a particular day (or week).

Yep, it's not a perfect system. Your handicap committee could even remove the R if it bothers you that much and you make a good case for doing so. As handicap chairman at my club, I've only made that decision one time and it was for a steadily improving player that posted exceptional tournament scores and then had surgery and couldn't compete at the restricted level. All we're looking for is fairness of competition...