IGNORED
FS/ (RARE) ZEN "RDE" ZM-1 mallet BRAND NEW uncutt/ungripped***SOLD***
By
LBlack14
in Marketplace
Note: This thread is 5088 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!
-
Topics Being Discussed Right Now on The Sand Trap
-
- 11,945 replies
- 1,115,671 views
-
- 3 replies
- 181 views
-
- 8 replies
- 397 views
-
"5 Minutes Daily" Practice Challenge 1 2 3 4 1061
By iacas, in Instruction and Playing Tips
- 5 minutes daily
- dedication
- (and 6 more)
- 19,083 replies
- 2,065,362 views
-
- 19,726 replies
- 1,724,600 views
-
Announcements
-
TST Partners
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
-
-
Couple of things. In the UK they play a lot of stableford competitions. 2 points for a net par, 1 for a bogey, 3 for a birdie, 4 for an eagle, 0 for a double bogey or worse. Playing to your handicap typically means getting 36 points, being 18 x 2 points. If your course rating is a long way different from par, then playing to your handicap would mean getting 32 points or 40 points or some such. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that input from the R&A is the reason for the CR-Par adjustment, which brings it to 36 points is playing to your handicap. A round of net pars really should be playing to your handicap. Now it is. Yay. I would think the people most likely to be upset about the CR-Par adjustment would be 6 or 7 indexes whose course is par 72, with a 74/140 rating. 6.5 x 140/113 + 74 - 72 = 10. So the "single figure" golfer who has probably defined himself that way for a long time is now a 10 and getting double digit strokes. Oof. I must admit I'm a 0.0 right now (sure makes the math easy) and if I play Bethpage Black from the blues, suddenly I'm a 7. That takes a little bit of getting used to. It also means I do have to pay attention to the stroke indices to be sure of whether I'm making the net double bogey adjustment properly. I do think it's much less likely that NDB is applied properly vs the old system where it was max double bogey or max 7 depending on handicap (I think anyway - I know it was max double bogey at my handicap level - I didn't much care about where it changed or what it changed to). NDB is clearly better, but it does mean people either have to adjust it themselves accurately (questionable) or input their hole by hole scores (also questionable). I do it, because I care about it (and don't tend to make too many scores worse than double and also rarely play courses where I'm giving strokes back to the course and would therefore have max bogey on some holes). I'm sure there are many who don't and will just guess or assume. Under the old system, if I was playing a scratch tournament (which is most of my golf), I didn't care what my course handicap or stroke allocations were. They didn't affect my posted scores at all. Now they do (although the MGA and LIGA post all scores at their events themselves directly - something I am very happy about). That is a complication under the new system - one I think is worth it given the benefits, but a complication all the same. -
.thumb.JPG.640dd6f31fe7f6aef91f879119bae1d9.JPG)
-
-
-
Recommended Posts