Handicap

[SCfanatic35]

Originally Posted by iacas

Not quite.

Each nine holes has a course rating and slope that's unique to those nine holes.

You'd find the average of the two separate nine-hole slopes and average those.

That would make sense.  My home course front 9 is 35.2/123.  So they must add the course ratings together and then average the slopes, which would give me the 70.4/123 when I play the front 9 twice.

[dpgator33]

http://www.ghin.com/solutions.aspx?id=72&libID;=93

[sacm3bill]

Originally Posted by iacas

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacm3bill

Yep, that's correct.

Not quite.

Each nine holes has a course rating and slope that's unique to those nine holes.

You'd find the average of the two separate nine-hole slopes and average those.

You're right of course, but that's what I thought he was doing. He wrote: "If I play only 9, and then play another 9 at a different course, from my (minimal) understanding, I would add the course rating's and scores as if they were one round of 18 [and] average the slope".  I read that as "Add the two 9-hole ratings to get the rating, and average the two 9-hole slopes to get the slope."  I see now that's not was he was saying. Thanks for catching that.

[McMullenCPA]

Thanks guys!

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by iacas

Not quite.

Each nine holes has a course rating and slope that's unique to those nine holes.

You'd find the average of the two separate nine-hole slopes and average those.

I am curious as to why they do it this way.  It would make more sense to me for them to find the differential for that 9 holes using the 9 hole course rating and the slope.  Do this for each 9-hole round and then add the 2 differentials.  There would be no averaging involved.  Basically they would be using the same differentials that would be used if a Nine-hole handicap was being computed.

And idea why they do it the way you described (I am not disputing the accuracy of what you said as it is right there in 5-2d of the Handicap Manual)?

Thanks.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by turtleback

I am curious as to why they do it this way.  It would make more sense to me for them to find the differential for that 9 holes using the 9 hole course rating and the slope.  Do this for each 9-hole round and then add the 2 differentials.  There would be no averaging involved.  Basically they would be using the same differentials that would be used if a Nine-hole handicap was being computed.

And idea why they do it the way you described (I am not disputing the accuracy of what you said as it is right there in 5-2d of the Handicap Manual)?

I believe it's because they feel that you'd see inflated or inaccurate numbers if you added the nines as opposed to "blending" them.

An example: Guy shoots 45/45 on two courses: 34.3/100 and 37.6/141.

71.9/121 overall = 16.9 differential (not doing the 0.96 as that'll be the same in both cases).

- or -

12.1 + 5.9 = 18.0

So he shoots the same scores on the same nines, but has over one index higher doing it as two nines than as one 18.

Golf is an 18-hole game as far as handicaps are concerned. Imagine what handicaps would be like if we did one hole. They'd be even less accurate. More holes played will tend to bring things back to where they belong.

Imagine a course that's got nine holes on which a player scores well and nine holes on which he plays poorly. His best 10 out of his last 20 scores could all come from the easy nine, and he'd stand no chance playing the other nine in a match against someone.

Can a guy play a bunch of rounds on the "easy nine" and just keep adding those together for 18-hole rounds? Yes. But it's less likely. Computing them as 9-hole rounds and adding them together is more conducive to biases one way or the other than the current method.

P.S. In case "I believe…" didn't make it obvious, I'm making an educated guess here. You'd have to talk to someone at the USGA handicapping committee for more details.

[Slicer219]

What are everyone's thoughts about equitable stroke control?  Haven't seen that mentioned here yet.  A friend I play with is constantly picking up his ball when he hits his stroke limit, doesn't this keep his handicap lower than it should be?

[SCfanatic35]

Originally Posted by Slicer219

What are everyone's thoughts about equitable stroke control?  Haven't seen that mentioned here yet.  A friend I play with is constantly picking up his ball when he hits his stroke limit, doesn't this keep his handicap lower than it should be?

No. If he is a 20 handicap and he shoots a 10 on a hole, the highest score he can claim for that hole is an 8. At the end of the round he shoots a 100, but the score he punches in to the computer needs to be a 98, assuming he had nothing else over 8.  If he did have more holes over 8, then he would have to minus more strokes when posting.

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by iacas

I believe it's because they feel that you'd see inflated or inaccurate numbers if you added the nines as opposed to "blending" them.

An example: Guy shoots 45/45 on two courses: 34.3/100 and 37.6/141.

71.9/121 overall = 16.9 differential (not doing the 0.96 as that'll be the same in both cases).

- or -

12.1 + 5.9 = 18.0

So he shoots the same scores on the same nines, but has over one index higher doing it as two nines than as one 18.

Golf is an 18-hole game as far as handicaps are concerned. Imagine what handicaps would be like if we did one hole. They'd be even less accurate. More holes played will tend to bring things back to where they belong.

Imagine a course that's got nine holes on which a player scores well and nine holes on which he plays poorly. His best 10 out of his last 20 scores could all come from the easy nine, and he'd stand no chance playing the other nine in a match against someone.

Can a guy play a bunch of rounds on the "easy nine" and just keep adding those together for 18-hole rounds? Yes. But it's less likely. Computing them as 9-hole rounds and adding them together is more conducive to biases one way or the other than the current method.

P.S. In case "I believe…" didn't make it obvious, I'm making an educated guess here. You'd have to talk to someone at the USGA handicapping committee for more details.

What you say makes sense.  Thanks.

[sacm3bill]

Originally Posted by iacas

Quote:

Originally Posted by turtleback

I am curious as to why they do it this way.  It would make more sense to me for them to find the differential for that 9 holes using the 9 hole course rating and the slope.  Do this for each 9-hole round and then add the 2 differentials.  There would be no averaging involved.  Basically they would be using the same differentials that would be used if a Nine-hole handicap was being computed.

And idea why they do it the way you described (I am not disputing the accuracy of what you said as it is right there in 5-2d of the Handicap Manual)?

I believe it's because they feel that you'd see inflated or inaccurate numbers if you added the nines as opposed to "blending" them... Golf is an 18-hole game as far as handicaps are concerned. Imagine what handicaps would be like if we did one hole. They'd be even less accurate. More holes played will tend to bring things back to where they belong.

Hope it's ok to resurrect this thread, because I just had an epiphany. What Erik said above explains a phenomenon with my golf league at work that has always bothered me:

The nature of handicaps is that you should only shoot net par 20% of the time. (See http://www.usga.org/playing/handicaps/understanding_handicap/articles/deanstable.html - the percentage varies a bit depending on your handicap, but it's a ballpark.)  But every single week in my work league, 40-50% of the 80 or so people who play in any given week shoot not just net par, but net par *or better*. Many are 4-6 strokes under, and the odds of that are less than 1%.  The league uses what they call a "modified" handicap formula but it's essentially what the USGA uses, including ESC and adjustments for exceptional scores. So it's always bugged me that I couldn't figure out why so many people beat their handicap by so much on a weekly basis.

But now I think I know: It's a 9-hole league. So by it's nature, scores are going to be more widely varied than they would be in an 18-hole league. The abnormally low scores are probably matched by abnormally high scores.

(I wonder if there is value in the USGA tweaking the handicap formula for cases where only 9-hole rounds are used? Just a thought.)

[iacas]

Originally Posted by sacm3bill

(I wonder if there is value in the USGA tweaking the handicap formula for cases where only 9-hole rounds are used? Just a thought.)

I know of some leagues that will automatically take your handicap index and knock it down to 80% or so in these kinds of situations.

[sacm3bill]

Originally Posted by iacas

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacm3bill

(I wonder if there is value in the USGA tweaking the handicap formula for cases where only 9-hole rounds are used? Just a thought.)

I know of some leagues that will automatically take your handicap index and knock it down to 80% or so in these kinds of situations.

Interesting.

[marmooskapaul]

I've used myscorecard.com for 3 or 4 years. I think it was a one time 30$ payment. It is a certified hdcp and I just enter my scores and slope/ratings for the courses and it does the rest. I use eqs. on my own but it calculates my eqs for every course I play. Paul

[saturday]

I thought I'd search up a handicap thread to respectively post my question here... I've been calculating my handicap index via sandbagger and it gives me my unofficial handicap of 20.5 and USGA handicap of 16.9..... which one do I use as my default handicap? Even in our profiles....

[SCfanatic35]

Originally Posted by saturday

I thought I'd search up a handicap thread to respectively post my question here... I've been calculating my handicap index via sandbagger and it gives me my unofficial handicap of 20.5 and USGA handicap of 16.9..... which one do I use as my default handicap? Even in our profiles....

The USGA one.  Since the app or website is called sandbagger, I would imagine it is incorrect to help you win money.

[saturday]

lol thanks

[muttbag]

After reading this thread, I'm removing my handicap index that I self-estimated.  I have no clue.  I've never turned scorecards in to my home course, but I'm going to start.   Would be nice to have a real number assigned the proper way.  The more I read about handicap indexes, the more that I feel mine makes me appear to be a much better golfer than I currently am.

[PDXguy]

Originally Posted by McMullenCPA

If I play only 9, and then play another 9 at a different course, from my (minimal) understanding, I would add the course rating's and scores as if they were one round of 18. Would I average the slope as well then? I don't have an official, but I track my handicap using a spreadsheet and compare to GolfShot GPS to make sure my spreadsheet isn't way off base.

That sounds a bit complicated. Why not just double your 9 hole score? If you shot 41 on the front, just enter it as a 82 (for your own records, of course, not the official stuff). That way you don't have to mess about with averaging slopes and ratings and whatnot.

J