Are People Not Updating Their Handicaps or...

[rjfan91]

I always thought the same thing about the decimal points.

My only sub-80 round came as about a 21 handicap. It happens...

[DavidFehertysBike]

I forget to do that. I havent updated my handicap on here in several months. Mine doesnt move that much anyway, so i dont really see the need.

[enis750]

my handicap is a 36.0 but i shot a 59 once.

sure you did......

[MeanDeen]

This thread is funny. My lowest round is an 81 (11 yrs ago) but the way I'm playing since I started back up I'm lucky to break 95. I hate that I'm not as good as I used to be.

[golf_junkie27]

I always thought the same thing about the decimal points.

How much are you willing to bet that a single digit handicap can't shoot under par for nine holes?

[mdl]

A 9 something shooting in the 70s just isn't that unusual. Do the math. Handicap is your best 10 of your last 20 rounds (assuming you have that many). Say you're playing your rounds on courses with ratings between, say, 70-72 and slopes 115-125. To get a 9 handicap that means you'd need the best half of your rounds to average around 80/81. It's easy to imagine someone with a couple mid-70s rounds, a bunch of rounds around 80, and a bunch of rounds 85+ having a 9 handicap. If a 9 handicap has been improving and brought down their index recently, it's particularly unsurprising for a 9 handicapper to shoot mid 70s on a given day when they're feeling it.

[enis750]

How much are you willing to bet that a single digit handicap can't shoot under par for nine holes?

i'll take that bet......

my lowest 9 for the year is -2

[-BAMA-]

It has absolutely nothing to do with being "politically correct". Someday you may join a club or league, and those tournaments are naturally organized by skill level (handicap groupings). If that wasn't the case then there would be no avenues for the average golfer to play in a competitive environment. Within my club, the high handicappers almost never compete against lower handicappers. What carrying a handicap mostly does is identify the group (or flight) you belong in within the club.

those are all valid points... i guess i agree with you.

didnt take all that intio consideration...

[ElWagonne]

If a 9.7 broke 80 on me, I'd be scratching my head a bit, but if he shoots 74 or 75, I'd be mad enough to kick a puppy. I'd bet that a legit 9.7 has no chance in hell at shooting under par for 9,

Somedays it clicks...for instance I'm a 9.5 at the moment but on Friday I shot 36-44 on a course that's a 71.9/132 rating. Would've been better, but I got hungry on the back 9 & finished bogey, double, double. BTW, when the Buckeyes are ready to play an SEC school in the football, then we can discuss that as well...

[Fourputt]

i'll take that bet......

And my lowest 9 this year (or ever) is -3... with a course handicap of 13. It just isn't all that strange.

[golf_junkie27]

i'll take that bet......

I worded that incorrectly. My belief is that every single digit HC is more than capable of playing 9 holes under par. To think otherwise is lunacy.

[pivo]

do they have no idea how handicaps are calculated?

here is the USGA Odds of Shooting an Exceptional Tournament Score http://www.usga.org/playing/handicap...eanstable.html So if we use this chart to calculate the odds of a 10 handicap shooting a 74 on a example course with a rating of 72/130 would be: (74-72)*(113/130) = 1.7 - Handicap Differential Formula So the net differential would be 10-1.7 = 8.3 The odds of that happening is 1138:1 The odds of someone shooting a 74 and 75 on the same example course within there last 20 rounds would be 9716:1 Not the greatest odds but atleast they are better than winning the lottery.

[Happy Dragon]

here is the USGA Odds of Shooting an Exceptional Tournament Score

My man here is actually quoting an authority and is giving some analytical not anecdotal evidence. Thank you for that!

This was a really fun thread. Some people got pretty defensive. Sorry for that, I just like to have a little fun from time to time, especially at the expense of Michigan fans . I can poke fun at my neighbor, but can't say sh*t to the SEC or the Big12. To finish the point, a 9.7 is a good golfer, but his misses are still pretty penal... maybe taking 2 in a bunker, shanking a wedge shot, O.B.ing a drive, and 3-putting from 20 feet. That's why I think it's unlikely, maybe not impossible , to string 36 consecutive decent to great shots in a row. Let's put it this way... how many times do you hit 25 solid 6 irons in a row on the range? I sure as hell don't, and I certainly have my fair share of the shots mentioned above. In closing...have a nice day. I love you.

[wolverine_man]

do they have no idea how handicaps are calculated?

Also, for your information, a month ago I had come to accept the realization that I was no longer as good as I was in high school when I first started using blades, and so I purchased my current MacGregor set of cavity back irons.

It took me just a bit to get used to them, but I think the switch from MP-14 blades to players cavity backs has helped tremendously with my consistency and greens in reg. I hit 14 greens in reg on Sunday (counting three which I was on the fringe). You better hope I don't switch to game improvement irons, or I'm gonna come down to Georgia and whoop your OSU loving a--! lol

[wolverine_man]

And I had zero O.B. shots, one chunked chip shot on the first hole which I doubled, zero sand shots or lost balls.

[flanagan]

My man here is actually quoting an authority and is giving some analytical not anecdotal evidence. Thank you for that!

So in closing, we can agree you didn't know what you were talking about when you started this thread.

[brgolf]

I always thought the same thing about the decimal points.

This is a good discussion and the statistical probabilities make it very interesting but you can't dismiss 6 pages of anecdotal evidence which if truthful is as valuable as any other evidence and maybe the reason you are getting a hard time. You make multiple claims here. The statistics regarding exceptional tournament score probability are based on "15 years of data". This implies to me that the assumptions implicit in these odds are that they are based on the performance of the average golfer. But people on this forum are anything but average. You said: Odds said 1/ 9.7 breaking 80 a head scratcher. 121:1 2/ 9.7 shoots a 74/75. 1168:1 3/ 9.7 under par for 9. ????.? A 9.7 beating 80. 121:1 would indicate this should be an irregular occurance, which it is for a certain brand of 9.7 handicap golfer but then not all golfers were made the same. A 9.7 shooting 74/75 is really unlikely. According to the odds this might be accomplished once every 10 seasons. The anecdotes in this topic would suggest once or twice a season which is inconsistent unless you see the odds in context. (More later). 9.7 shooting under par for 9 holes. This seems more unlikely still. Some people say they have done it, I have played 9 holes level par and +1 over in successive weeks while at a medium handicap. So how do you explain such rounds if you encounter such a player? Situation 1/ The player is a solid, well known and trusted 9.7 handicap for countless years practicing moderately and playing a weekly round. In that case he has probably just been extremely lucky as the odds suggest. Situation 2/ The player is an unknown, new member who claims a 9.7 handicap(You get where i am going). Sandbagger Situation 3/ Forum handicap not updated. If a person has improved their handicap without letting us know then that would explain lower scores as this topic suggests. Situation 4/ Unofficial handicap improperly evaluated eg average score taken. Easily done by players who don't have a club but are still serious about their game and wish to estimate a handicap. Situation 5/ Improving or rapidly improving 9.7 handicap. Unlike situation 1 this is a player whose handicap has not plateaued. Their handicap has already come down by a few points this year and it has done so at a steady rate. Alternatively a player with a 9.7 handicap for a while, has had a change in circumstances and now practices twice as much. Alternatively a player has come to the sandtrap and read that he must completely change his practice and focus on the short game which has helped him knock strokes off his card. The "exceptional score odds" that are presented barely take into account improving players. From what I have read they are based on 15 years of data. This will surely include people getting past it, whose handicap are increasing, people who play the odd round and don't really try to improve. Improving players will also be in that group but they will be a minority compared to the average golfer. Is the suggestion that an improving 9.7 will break 80 1 round in 122 (the scenario that would leave you scratching your head)? That is way, way off the mark as few people would complete 122 rounds in 2 years yet their handicap may decrease substantially from 9.7. Moreover it is clear from the anecdotal evidence that for improving players the idea of an improving 9.7 hitting a 74/75 is not unknown. People might do this once or twice a season. There is no doubt that people shooting well under their handicap will be due a reduction in their handicap but thats golf. Improvement happens, especially to people crazy enough to read a golf forum.

[wolverine_man]

I think I can be best described as Situation 5, fyi. Again, I believe that the switch from forged blades to forged cavity backs has dramatically helped my game. We shall see if I can keep up my scoring.