Handicap Ethics Question

[bkuehn1952]

There is one other option you might want to consider......recommend that everyone play off a % of everyone's handicap.  80% as an example.  That lowers higher handicap players by more strokes than those with lower hcps while retaining use of the official handicaps.

With a relatively small group, I don't like this idea.  The handicap formula is already a bit slanted in the better player's favor (ESC and .96 Reward for Excellence factor or whatever they call it).  Plus a very good player sometimes loses -0- strokes (80% of 2 is 1.6 and if the handicap is rounded, the result is 2).  If the handicaps are legit then play with the full handicap the first day and agree to adjust the handicap allotment each day based on prior play.

If you are playing 2-man teams or something like that, then I think the USGA has some guidelines on using only a percentage of the team's handicaps.

You are right, you don't want to show up with the highest handicap and run the table.  Better to aim for breakeven and take fewer strokes if you start off winning.

[cfritchie]

With a relatively small group, I don't like this idea.  The handicap formula is already a bit slanted in the better player's favor (ESC and .96 Reward for Excellence factor or whatever they call it).  Plus a very good player sometimes loses -0- strokes (80% of 2 is 1.6 and if the handicap is rounded, the result is 2).  If the handicaps are legit then play with the full handicap the first day and agree to adjust the handicap allotment each day based on prior play.

If you are playing 2-man teams or something like that, then I think the USGA has some guidelines on using only a percentage of the team's handicaps.

You are right, you don't want to show up with the highest handicap and run the table.  Better to aim for breakeven and take fewer strokes if you start off winning.

You really think the handicap system favors the better player? Now that is crazy! Go to any club tournament this week and and see how often a 2 shoots a net 65...but see how often a 18 handicapper does it!

[Lihu]

You really think the handicap system favors the better player? Now that is crazy! Go to any club tournament this week and and see how often a 2 shoots a net 65...but see how often a 18 handicapper does it!

I think the OP was hoping NOT to be placed in this category of sand bagger.

[cfritchie]

I think the OP was hoping NOT to be placed in this category of sand bagger.

I understand that...my comment was geared to the idea that the handicap system is better for the low handicapped player then the high handicap player....which just ins't the case.

[Golfingdad]

With a relatively small group, I don't like this idea.  The handicap formula is already a bit slanted in the better player's favor (ESC and .96 Reward for Excellence factor or whatever they call it).  Plus a very good player sometimes loses -0- strokes (80% of 2 is 1.6 and if the handicap is rounded, the result is 2).

True ... so since @newtogolf is the high capper of the group at 18, and the rest of them are in the 10-15 range, this sounds like it would be the perfect solution.

[Lihu]

I understand that...my comment was geared to the idea that the handicap system is better for the low handicapped player then the high handicap player....which just ins't the case.

I think that as a low handicap player, you might feel a little more pressure having to give an 18 handicapper 14 strokes when you see at a glance that his ball striking is not that much worse than yours.

You have the advantage of being a more seasoned player with a much better short game and probably less strokes lost per hole. At this point, I lose maybe 2 strokes to errant approach shots, and 4 strokes (2 drives) off my tee shots. I lose another 4 from 3 putts and 4 more from over hitting my bunker or pitch shots from the rough. That's easily 14 strokes. Then the 2 to 4 from careless playing, and is typical for my game.

However, I had a couple 9 hole rounds where I got 6 pars and nearly broke 40, but this is very rare.

So, if you give me 14 strokes, we would net the same most of the time. On the other hand, if I scored 6 pars and 3 bogies on a 9 hole fluke round I could win that one time out of dozens.

The odds of me scoring 14 over your score are much higher than the one time I could beat you on a 9. The odds are something like 1:3577.

[rkim291968]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bkuehn1952

With a relatively small group, I don't like this idea.  The handicap formula is already a bit slanted in the better player's favor (ESC and .96 Reward for Excellence factor or whatever they call it).  Plus a very good player sometimes loses -0- strokes (80% of 2 is 1.6 and if the handicap is rounded, the result is 2).  If the handicaps are legit then play with the full handicap the first day and agree to adjust the handicap allotment each day based on prior play.

If you are playing 2-man teams or something like that, then I think the USGA has some guidelines on using only a percentage of the team's handicaps.

You are right, you don't want to show up with the highest handicap and run the table.  Better to aim for breakeven and take fewer strokes if you start off winning.

You really think the handicap system favors the better player? Now that is crazy! Go to any club tournament this week and and see how often a 2 shoots a net 65...but see how often a 18 handicapper does it!

With 100% handicap applied, and with larger tournament participants, a higher handicappers is likely to win   But in a tournament with 4 players (see OP) for 4 rounds, maybe not as much.

Bring in 90% or 80% handicap system, and it may even  tilt the needle to the other side.

[Big C]

With 100% handicap applied, and with larger tournament participants, a higher handicappers is likely to win   But in a tournament with 4 players (see OP) for 4 rounds, maybe not as much.

Bring in 90% or 80% handicap system, and it may even  tilt the needle to the other side.

Yep, the smaller the field, the more the advantage tilts towards lower handicappers. In a heads up stroke play match between a 2 and an 18 handicapper, the 2 would be an overwhelming favorite and would win the vast majority of the time.

And just so that this thread doesn't veer too far off topic, I agree with the other posters - take your strokes and adjust later, if need be.

[David in FL]

True ... so since @newtogolf is the high capper of the group at 18, and the rest of them are in the 10-15 range, this sounds like it would be the perfect solution.

Yep. And that was the whole point of the OP.....

[bkuehn1952]

You really think the handicap system favors the better player? Now that is crazy! Go to any club tournament this week and and see how often a 2 shoots a net 65...but see how often a 18 handicapper does it!

One of the gentlemen who developed our current handicap system certainly thinks the system favors the better player in a head to head match.  Dean Knuth said:

"Although handicaps are supposed to equalize matches, it's not always true, is it?

Unfortunately not. The scale is tipped in favor of the better player.

The way the formula works, for every six strokes difference in handicap, the better player has a one-stroke advantage, because the lower handicapper is more likely to play at or near his handicap than the high handicapper.  In a match between an eight handicapper and a 14 handicapper, the better player is giving away six strokes, yet the odds are still 60-40 that he will win the match."

The balance of his article on the subject can be found here: http://www.popeofslope.com/guidelines/handicap103.html

I agree that in a large field event that is not flighted, there is a very high chance that one of the many higher handicapped players will have an unusally good outing.  With a small group that is not likely to happen each of the four days.

[iacas]

You really think the handicap system favors the better player? Now that is crazy! Go to any club tournament this week and and see how often a 2 shoots a net 65...but see how often a 18 handicapper does it!

It does favor the better player head to head. Not when you have 20 high handicappers.

[BuckeyeNut]

You really think the handicap system favors the better player? Now that is crazy! Go to any club tournament this week and and see how often a 2 shoots a net 65...but see how often a 18 handicapper does it!

I agree 100%

As a low HC player, I want no part of playing against an 18HC in a net score competition...   I can play great and shoot a 74 and lose by 10 shots...LOL

[iacas]

I agree 100%

As a low HC player, I want no part of playing against an 18HC in a net score competition...   I can play great and shoot a 74 and lose by 10 shots...LOL

Then that guy isn't an 18.

The simple facts are that the lower handicapper will win more matches than the higher handicapper. His scores don't fluctuate as much, and while the 18 can win some big, they'll lose even more more by big margins.

Higher handicappers have an advantage as a whole in a single event because it's easier for them to beat their handicap by 5 than for a 2 to do so.

[BuckeyeNut]

c'mon Erik.........What planet do you live on?

If I play in a net-tourney flighted with high HC players..............I get slaughtered every time.  If I play GREAT and shoot a gross 74/Net72........... the high HC guys will run "NET" circles around me.   Several will no doubt throw NET mid-low 60's at me which is something I have no defense against.   I appreciate your input but you are waaaaaay out in left field on this one.  What are you smoking?  LOL

[iacas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuckeyeNut

If I play in a net-event with high HC players..............I get slaughtered every time.  If I play GREAT and shoot a gross 74/Net72...........and the high HC guys will run "NET" circles around me.    I appreciate your input but you are waaaaaay out in left field on this one.

No I'm not.

Quote:

The way the formula works, for every six strokes difference in handicap, the better player has a one-stroke advantage, because the lower handicapper is more likely to play at or near his handicap than the high handicapper.

In a match between an eight handicapper and a 14 handicapper, the better player is giving away six strokes, yet the odds are still 60-40 that he will win the match.

[David in FL]

c'mon Erik.........What planet do you live on?

If I play in a net-tourney flighted with high HC players..............I get slaughtered every time.  If I play GREAT and shoot a gross 74/Net72........... the high HC guys will run "NET" circles around me.   Several will no doubt throw NET mid-low 60's at me which is something I have no defense against.   I appreciate your input but you are waaaaaay out in left field on this one.  What are you smoking?  LOL

If you play match play without a % adjustment, you get killed.  Just no way around it.  Stroke play, you're generally going to do very well, head-to-head .  The issue is that when there are a bunch of high hcp players, the odds are that someone will light it up (relative to their hcp) because high hcp players tend to have a lot more variance in their scores.

I'd also offer that for anyone, shooting net 72 isn't a "great" round and will likely get you an early ticket home.......

[cfritchie]

No I'm not.

I'd challenge you to contact 3 random clubs and look at the scoresheets from the last net event they held. I can promise you the flight with 18+ handicap players had an average net score higher then the flight with 5 or less as a handicap.

[Big C]

I'd challenge you to contact 3 random clubs and look at the scoresheets from the last net event they held. I can promise you the flight with 18+ handicap players had an average net score higher then the flight with 5 or less as a handicap.

Edited, because I'm trying to understand what argument you are making. In earlier posts, you seemed adamant that the handicap system favored high cappers in tournament play. Now you say I can promise you the flight with 18+ handicap players had an average net score higher then the flight with 5 or less as a handicap. That would indicate that the handicap system favors the low cappers, whose net scores would be lower on average, correct?