• Announcements

    • iacas

      Visit FlagstickRule.com   03/13/2017

      Visit the site flagstickrule.com to read about and sign a petition for the USGA/R&A regarding the one terrible rule in the proposed "modernized" rules for 2019.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
atxpkrgolf

Ok, someone please explain this to me

19 posts in this topic

Handicaps are redone every 15 days in Texas by my 'home course'.  I have been playing a lot better recently and I'd consider myself a 5-7 handicap as I shoot between 74-82  95% of the time and the other 5% a 72-73  or 83-85 if I play awful.  I am by no means a 'scratch golfer' or even a 0.8 which is what my index now says. What the heck???

From Ghin.com Index for player    0.8

I 10/15/13 83 75.0/134 6.7 Falconhead Golf Club
AI 10/13/13 78 72.9/130 4.4 Falconhead Golf Club
I 10/10/13 76 75.4/126 0.5 Winstar Golf Course South/East
AI 10/9/13 80 75.4/126 4.1 Winstar Golf Course South/East
CI 10/8/13 75 76.2/128 -1.1 Winstar Golf Course South/West
AI 10/8/13 73 70.4/123 2.4 Winstar Golf Course South/West
AI 10/7/13 82 76.5/153 4.1 Oak Tree National
I 10/7/13 79 74.5/137 3.7 Tour 18 Dallas
I 10/3/13 78 73.0/123 4.6 Winstar Golf Course South/West
I 10/3/13 81 72.1/117 8.6 Winstar Golf Course East/West
I 10/1/13 74 74.8/124 -0.7 Winstar Golf Course East/West
I 9/27/13 83 72.7/124 9.4 Winstar Golf Course South/East
I 9/25/13 76 72.1/117 3.8 Winstar Golf Course East/West
CI 9/22/13 76 68.4/112 7.7 Winstar Golf Course West/East
I 9/17/13 75 75.4/126 -0.4 Winstar Golf Course South/East
I 9/13/13 75 74.8/124 0.2 Winstar Golf Course East/West
I 9/12/13 76 72.7/124 3.0 Winstar Golf Course South/East
I 9/11/13 84 75.6/126 7.5 Winstar Golf Course South/West
I 9/10/13 74 72.7/124 1.2 Winstar Golf Course South/East
9/9/13 79 75.4/126 3.2

Winstar Golf Course South/East

I did shoot a 72 and a few 73's the 2 week period before this but this just can't be right.  I am super excited over how much better I've gotten and my goal is to be a scratch golfer soon but I know some scratch golfers and I am not one of em. What gives?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Sign up (or log in) today! It's free (and you won't see this ad anymore)!

Your handicap index is based upon your best 10 of your last 20 differentials...NOT scores.  If you look at your differentials, you shot a 75 that calculated out to be a -1.1 differential and another 75 that calculated out to -0.4 differential. I used the handicap calculation in the USGA manual and yes, you are a 0.8 handicap index player.  Appears you are mixing up the tee boxes you play.  You might want to move back and play from the tougher tee boxes more often.  Congratulations on a very good handicap.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always play the back unless Im in a group where their are bets and everyone is playing up one.  Im not gonna give up $ to play 40 yds back  but I understand that. thx 4 reply, I knew it only took best 10 but to be a scratch I thought you'd have to shoot 10 scores of par out of last 20 but I clearly dont know anything about how handicap works

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always play the back unless Im in a group where their are bets and everyone is playing up one.  Im not gonna give up $ to play 40 yds back  but I understand that. thx 4 reply, I knew it only took best 10 but to be a scratch I thought you'd have to shoot 10 scores of par out of last 20 but I clearly dont know anything about how handicap works

you consider yourself a 5-7 handicap, yet you put 1.6 has your index in your profile?   i think you're simply posting to brag.  well, it worked...  jealous i am.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^^

What he said.  Let your game speak for itself and avoid tooting your own horn too much.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

you consider yourself a 5-7 handicap, yet you put 1.6 has your index in your profile?   i think you're simply posting to brag.  well, it worked...  jealous i am.

I posted myself as what Ghin.com said I was when I joined

^^^^^

What he said.  Let your game speak for itself and avoid tooting your own horn too much.

I expect this from a interent forum but not even close to what Im saying if u cared to read. I DON'T THINK I'M  a 2  by any stretch which is why I was curious how this is done or if it's even right  Sigh

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted myself as what Ghin.com said I was when I joined

I expect this from a interent forum but not even close to what Im saying if u cared to read. I DON'T THINK I'M  a 2  by any stretch which is why I was curious how this is done or if it's even right  Sigh

Please read up on course ratings and how handicaps are calculated.

You can be a scratch golfer without every shooting par or better if you play highly rated (course rating) courses.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Look at your scores compared to the course rating not par. However those courses have funky ratings. I've never seen a course here with that high of a CR and that low of a SR.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

When looking at your handicap, you need to consider the difficulty of the course (I.e. Course rating & slope rating). You play courses/tees that are rated more difficult than what is considered average. Look at your score on 9/10 versus 10/1. They are both 74, but the tee you played from on 10/1 is rated more difficult than the tee you played from on 9/1. So, your differential is going to be better. So compared to what is considered a perfectly average course, you are essentially a scratch golfer (or at least 0.8 from being so)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, never knew that HC was figd as it was from course rating and yes I do play courses that are generally tougher than average.  Okay, that makes a lot more sense. I was wondering what the heck. So if it is a 75.6  course rating and I shoot 77 that's +1.4 and then u take top 10 of 20.  Sorry boys, I was dropped on my head as a baby apparently

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at your scores compared to the course rating not par. However those courses have funky ratings. I've never seen a course here with that high of a CR and that low of a SR.

It's not that difficult, since course rating is mostly determined by length, while slope is determined by difficulty.  A very long course without a lot of unusual difficulty could achieve that quite easily.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

LOL, never knew that HC was figd as it was from course rating and yes I do play courses that are generally tougher than average.  Okay, that makes a lot more sense. I was wondering what the heck. So if it is a 75.6  course rating and I shoot 77 that's +1.4 and then u take top 10 of 20.  Sorry boys, I was dropped on my head as a baby apparently

Yup, it's the only reason I'm a 17. I haven't had a sub 90 round in three years.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

One of my favorite courses got re-rated a few years back when they added an additional set of tee markers (not tees, just markers) on most of the holes.  They did add a couple of tees boxes that made the course longer.  Not that it really matters but the tee designation was black (very back), then blue, white, gold and red (up front).  They had the spacing from tee to tee done as it should be when the rating was done.  Well, then the members started complaining about the length of the white tees so next thing you know they have moved the whites back to about where they originally were on most holes and then the blues got moved forward too.  Also, when the course was rated, the greens were reduced in size by simply not mowing them as wide and deep and letting the rough grow up around the greens.  The course got a more difficult rating.  Later, they increased the size of the greens back to around the size they originally were.  From the whites, the slope rating used to be 123.  Now it is 131.  The blues used to be 130, now they are 135.

Let me tell you, shooting a few good rounds there is a killer for your handicap.  It sure makes you look better than you really are and it makes for a handicap index that does not travel well.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not that difficult, since course rating is mostly determined by length, while slope is determined by difficulty.  A very long course without a lot of unusual difficulty could achieve that quite easily.

I understand how courses are rated and I don't think it's impossible it just seems odd. He's playing a facility with 3 9's so he's getting combined ratings. But when was the last time you saw a 7000 yard course with a sub 130 SR? Obviously his course are an exception but I can't think of any. Especially in the conservation era. Haven't seen a course that was just long since the 80's. Up here even with consideration for altitude the only course I play with a CR over 75 has a SR of 144 and it's 7700 yds.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

It's not that difficult, since course rating is mostly determined by length, while slope is determined by difficulty.  A very long course without a lot of unusual difficulty could achieve that quite easily.

I understand how courses are rated and I don't think it's impossible it just seems odd. He's playing a facility with 3 9's so he's getting combined ratings. But when was the last time you saw a 7000 yard course with a sub 130 SR? Obviously his course are an exception but I can't think of any. Especially in the conservation era. Haven't seen a course that was just long since the 80's. Up here even with consideration for altitude the only course I play with a CR over 75 has a SR of 144 and it's 7700 yds.

The Nicklaus designed Old Works course in Montana is over 7700 yards from the tips and is a 75.8 rating with 135 slope.  It purely depends on the length vs. the overall difficulty.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I agree...that slope rating is insanely low considering the CR.  When I read the initial post, my first thought was this course must be built in a wide open field.............. I went to the course website and this was a featured pic:

Talk about spray and play!  I'm sure the whole course isn't like this, but if the course chose this pic to be a feature pic on he website.............that says something!   The course looks pretty damn wide open...... It looks like a nice quality golf course, in spite of the wide open spaces.  I'm sure it will be toughened up over the years to come...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree...that slope rating is insanely low considering the CR.  When I read the initial post, my first thought was this course must be built in a wide open field.............. I went to the course website and this was a featured pic:

Talk about spray and play!  I'm sure the whole course isn't like this, but if the course chose this pic to be a feature pic on he website.............that says something!   The course looks pretty damn wide open...... It looks like a nice quality golf course, in spite of the wide open spaces.  I'm sure it will be toughened up over the years to come...

Dude, it's wide open. I mean if u spray it u are dead but there is only 3 holes where u can't play to safety. In all honesty I could hit a 3 wood off of most tees and be fine.  The part that makes it tough is the wind and the greens as the wind in the prairie is blowing > 20 mph every dang day & it seems to never help

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that picture is amazing.  my home course is short but damn does it punish you if you are out of its narrow fairways.  Even a gentle slice or hook usually requires some kind of sideways (or even backwards) second shot unless you roll the dice and try to hit through the trees/bushes/etc.  Also lots of leaning and overhanging trees that force you to play one side of the fairway to have an angle to the green.  I think I could pass myself off as a decent golfer at ATXPKR's track.  Love it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2017 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    Leupold Golf
    Snell Golf
    Talamore Golf Resort
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • There are several statements that I disagree with which I feel are important to discuss: All golf balls do not go about the same distance.  A low compression, 2-piece Surlyn covered model will launch higher and with less spin than a 5-piece, high compression urethane covered model which will result in a noticeable difference in distance off the tee.  Dean even stated in another answer "The soft golf ball market has taken off due to the lower spinning balls means players can be longer in distance." Regarding balls for different swing speeds and compression:  3) Bridgestone (and I think Callaway) has come out with tour caliber balls for players who swing under 105mph. Is it possible to design a tour caliber ball for a specific segment of swing speed or is this just mostly a marketing thing?  DEAN: The whole swing speed story to me is one of the most over-rated stories in golf. Companies force or teach golfers to play low compression balls so their low swing speed can compress the ball. The problem with this is that low compression balls have the lowest spin in all shots, so they are pushing players to play a ball with no performance at all… and when you need that spin around the green, it's not there…            I almost don't know where to start on this one.  The concept of designing golf balls based on swing speeds doesn't teach or force players to use a low compression ball...it's about using a ball that has the appropriate compression for your swing speed.  Some players will have better results with a higher compression ball, others will have better results with a lower compression.  Keep in mind, there is a difference between "lower compression" and "low compression".  Most of the urethane tour balls have a compression rating somewhere between the mid 70s to mid 90s.  Tour models like the Chrome Soft, B330-RX and B330-RXS are in the mid 60s, which is lower.  Balls like the Supersoft and e6 are in the upper 30s and 40s, which is considered low.  Dean's statement that "low compression balls have the lowest spin on all shots" is somewhere between a little misleading and flat-out wrong.  It's true that a lower compression ball will spin less (and launch higher) than a firmer ball on full shots.  But on short game shots around the green, the ball is not compressed.  On pitch shots, chip shots, and greenside bunker shots for example,    the only part of the ball that is being activated is the cover. Notice on this chart that the lowest compression ball is very close to the highest spinning, and the lowest spinning ball has almost the same compression rating!  The point is, compression has little to no affect on short game shots...the cover is the main factor.  All 4 of these models have a urethane cover, but the two that provide the most spin have softer covers.  To put this in context, the chart below was a test Golf Digest did in 2015 which shows the performance on a partial wedge shot (I think it was 40 yds) with most of the balls on the market at the time The different colors represented the price point.  These results don't match the first chart I posted exactly which can happen when player testing (this one shows the B330 has higher spin than the RXS). Is there a difference between the lower spinning "red dots" and the highest spinning?  Sure.  There should be though.  Golf balls are designed to have different types of performance for different types of players.  The B330-RX has the lowest spin among the red dot models, but that doesn't mean it's lacking in performance...it spins exactly how the ball designers intended it to, because not everyone wants/needs maximum spin.  Notice the e7...this is a high compression ball very comparable to the B330, but has very different spin characteristics. So again, higher compression doesn't mean higher spin around the green and lower compression doesn't necessarily mean low spin.  About the only thing that I could agree with Dean's comment on would be that all the ultra-low compression balls are Surlyn covered models designed for distance, so it's true that these balls have low spin on all shots and will not offer the same level of performance around the greens, but again, that has more to do with the cover than the compression.  The fact is, there are lower compression balls that perform at the highest level. The B330-RXS is the same type of ball as the Pro V1 in many respects, and performs just as well as, or even better for many players, so I'm surprised by his comments that fitting for swing speed is over-rated and lower compression balls have no performance.  That's like saying getting fit for the correct shaft flex is over-rated, and softer flex shafts don't perform as well as stiffer shafts!  Does anyone consider the Dynamic Gold S-300 to be a lower performing shaft than the Dynamic Gold X-100?  No, of course not. They are designed to do the same thing, but because some players don't swing as fast as others the softer flex will give them better results, just like the B330-RXS is the equal to the B330-S, but will fit players who don't swing as hard better. I'm also not on-board with the opinion that fitting with a driver is a "mistake" and when testing to choose a ball based on 100 yds and in.  I'm not saying that short game performance isn't important, but wow...to claim that testing with a driver is a mistake is ridiculous.  I'll make a simple point on this...anyone can hit good wedge shots with a Pro V1 or B330 or Z-Star.  Fast swingers, slower swingers, high handicappers, low handicappers...it doesn't matter, they can all get good results on wedge shots.  Does that mean that's the ball they should play, and it will work equally as well for the other aspects too?  No.  A wedge can mask any issues in performance because of the loft and backspin, but the driver exaggerates issues.  The same players who hit respectable wedge shots with various tour balls might struggle to keep shots in play or lose potential distance. And before anyone tries to use the old "the driver is used 14 times a round, but half of the shots are inside of 100 yds" argument...save it.  If you play a high spin ball and you're struggling to hit the fairway with your tee shots, that ball will not help you save shots around the green.  Too much spin for players who can't control it is worse than a lower spinning model. Sorry Dean...not trying to blast you or anything, just putting in my two cents.  Ok, maybe more like four cents!
    • So......Is this your point @Jack Watson?
    • https://thesandtrap.com/b/clubs/titleist_716_ap1_review My review for the site is above. I've been using them since writing this review. Excellent clubs. One watch out is with short game shots with the PW and GW. They will go a bit farther than a corresponding chip or pitch with the equivalent wedge. The ball feels like it jumps off the face with good contact. So be careful with that.
    • Thanks for all the comments. I realize change is always hard but single length, lie and weight make so much sense to me. I am going to build a set of Value Golf clubs and see what happens. As improve I may go back to normal but who knows.  I think it will be better for learning the overall game. Which in my opinion and observance needs a lot of help. In my other hobbies that required learned skills it was easy to find groups to help you with the skills and drills to improve them. Businesses that the hobby supported held seminars and workshops covering all aspects. Trying to find help, other than paid lessons, is impossible, at least in my area. 
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Golfgirl10543
      Golfgirl10543
      (43 years old)
    2. jkettman
      jkettman
      (28 years old)
    3. old man1953
      old man1953
      (64 years old)
  • Get Great Gear with Amazon