Average Handicap

[RayG]

Yes, I also think the number of people playing legitimately in the 70s is a lot lower than 2% more like <0.5%.

Less than 2 percent in the 70's? Do you even play? Go to the course when it's 50 degrees and nobody's out. But in the 70's, you can't find a tee time at all! I'd say 95% percent play in the 70's... Unless of course you mean fashion wise with the Johnny Miller pants and white belts- then yes... :-D

[Lihu]

[quote name="Lihu" url="/t/74194/average-handicap#post_984811"

Yes, I also think the number of people playing legitimately in the 70s is a lot lower than 2% more like [/quote]

Less than 2 percent in the 70's?

Do you even play? Go to the course when it's 50 degrees and nobody's out. But in the 70's, you can't find a tee time at all! I'd say 95% percent play in the 70's... Unless of course you mean fashion wise with the Johnny Miller pants and white belts- then yes...

Okay, I stand corrected.

[acerimusdux]

Yes, I also think the number of people playing legitimately in the 70s is a lot lower than 2% more like <0.5%.

He did say "will ever" though, so I take that as meaning if a guy will even shoot a 78 once on the best day in his life, he's in that 2%.  That could be a guy currently shooting in the upper 90s, either one who will get there years from now after much practice, or one who got there many years ago and has aged and now plays much less.

[Lihu]

He did say "will ever" though, so I take that as meaning if a guy will even shoot a 78 once on the best day in his life, he's in that 2%.  That could be a guy currently shooting in the upper 90s, either one who will get there years from now after much practice, or one who got there many years ago and has aged and now plays much less.

True, but. . . I also looked it up, it appears that 31% of golfers with a USGA handicap are in the single digits . http://www.usga.org/handicapping/articles_resources/Men-s--Handicap-Indexes/

I must be playing the wrong courses, because this has definitely not been my experience. I guess it's incentive to improve.

[Dave2512]

3 out of 10 is probably pretty close. The reason you don't see them often is the odds say most of golfers are worse than that are far more common. And unless you ask you may not see them on a good day. I rarely have people ask what my index is. I played in the 8-11 range most of 2013. If you got paired with me the day I shot 86 or something like that and I hit the ball unusually bad you probably wouldn't believe it if I said I was an 8 at that time. My dispersion of scores isn't massive or anything but my anti-index is probably something like 13-14 currently. If you caught me on the day I shot an even 36 on the front of my home course you may think I was better than I really am. I played 12 holes before it got dark and I was even when it was said and done. The next day I put up a 46 on the same course.

[rkim291968]

Like Lihu & Dave2512 mentioned, there is a big difference between USGA members and casual golfer handicap.   Average golfer score I've seen if they count all the strokes (no mulligans, gimmies, ...) is closer to 105 on average course.    My club members, all with official GHIN, would average about 85 on the same course.   YMMV as difficult course will attract better players.

[Lihu]

3 out of 10 is probably pretty close. The reason you don't see them often is the odds say most of golfers are worse than that are far more common. And unless you ask you may not see them on a good day. I rarely have people ask what my index is. I played in the 8-11 range most of 2013. If you got paired with me the day I shot 86 or something like that and I hit the ball unusually bad you probably wouldn't believe it if I said I was an 8 at that time. My dispersion of scores isn't massive or anything but my anti-index is probably something like 13-14 currently. If you caught me on the day I shot an even 36 on the front of my home course you may think I was better than I really am. I played 12 holes before it got dark and I was even when it was said and done. The next day I put up a 46 on the same course. (I presume you mean on the front 9?)

This would only reduce the chances of meeting by roughly 50% (10 worst versus 10 best rounds). The number of people I see on the course who play that well are in the sub 15.5% range of all the golfers I play. Maybe I just go at the wrong tee times, and all the bad players go when I go. I'm not limiting my observations to my immediate partners, but to people I see in front of us as well as behind us.

It still surprises me that this many people shoot 70s scores.

Like Lihu & Dave2512 mentioned, there is a big difference between USGA members and casual golfer handicap.   Average golfer score I've seen if they count all the strokes (no mulligans, gimmies, ...) is closer to 105 on average course.    My club members, all with official GHIN, would average about 85 on the same course.   YMMV as difficult course will attract better players.

Makes sense, but that's still borderline single digits assuming tough course/slope ratings.

[Dave2512]

It still surprises me that this many people shoot 70s scores.

For the golfers in the 7-9 range they may not be all that often, course rating plays a part. Golfers playing easier courses could break 80 often and still carry an index over 10.

[Lihu]

For the golfers in the 7-9 range they may not be all that often, course rating plays a part. Golfers playing easier courses could break 80 often and still carry an index over 10.

I think we are limiting this particular sub-discussion to 72/113 rated courses.

Although, the 113 slope rating makes it relatively easy? I've never played a course rated 72 par and with a slope that low.

[Dave2512]

Never seen a course like that. The stuff I see in the 2-3 under par range still have a slope in the 118-121 range. The only course I know of with a slope of 113 requires playing from the forward tees at 5600 yards, 65.9/113 par 71.

[Lihu]

Never seen a course like that. The stuff I see in the 2-3 under par range still have a slope in the 118-121 range. The only course I know of with a slope of 113 requires playing from the forward tees at 5600 yards, 65.9/113 par 71.

I don't know of any around here either. The slope ratings are usually much higher. There is a 107 slope rated course nearby, but I have no idea how to compare that to a 113 rated course. Maybe the obstacles that create a slope difference between a 107 and a 113 course is something that won't even affect a mid/low handicap?

[rkim291968]

There aren't too many low slope rating (/emoticons/huh.png"/> .

[Dave2512]

I meant to quote Lihu but my PC is not TST friendly today, can't get the quote or edit function to work. Was using my secretaries PC but she is back from lunch. Anyway I have no idea. But I doubt the USGA data is based on 72/113 since course like that appear to be rare, don't usually see lopsided ratings like that. Here in CO the CR's are usually low due to the altitude adjustment. At my home course I have to play from 7k yards to get a CR = Par. Many aren't even that long. To find one with a CR over par it usually plays in the 7500 yd range. That's why I brought up the relevance of CR compared to index.

[Lihu]

I meant to quote Lihu but my PC is not TST friendly today, can't get the quote or edit function to work. Was using my secretaries PC but she is back from lunch. Anyway I have no idea. But I doubt the USGA data is based on 72/113 since course like that appear to be rare, don't usually see lopsided ratings like that. Here in CO the CR's are usually low due to the altitude adjustment. At my home course I have to play from 7k yards to get a CR = Par. Many aren't even that long. To find one with a CR over par it usually plays in the 7500 yd range. That's why I brought up the relevance of CR compared to index.

The CR/slope are entered along with the score for handicap. This adjusts your score to the 72/113 course. What I'm wondering is how they normalized to the 72/113 course? I mean, where is this "standard course"? Slope is pretty irrelevant to scratch golfers, but not to the rest of us. So, how do they "measure" any course and come up with slope? CR is straightforward. You get a bunch of scratch golfer and average their scores, but not slope?

[rkim291968]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayG

[quote name="Lihu" url="/t/74194/average-handicap#post_984811"

Yes, I also think the number of people playing legitimately in the 70s is a lot lower than 2% more like <0.5%.

[/quote]

Less than 2 percent in the 70's?

Do you even play? Go to the course when it's 50 degrees and nobody's out. But in the 70's, you can't find a tee time at all! I'd say 95% percent play in the 70's... Unless of course you mean fashion wise with the Johnny Miller pants and white belts- then yes...

Okay, I stand corrected.

I saw more than 2 percent of people over 70 playing.   More like 3.6%.  Heck, the other day, I saw someone playing and he was 86 years old.   Oh, ... I see, .... never mind.

[pumaAttack]

Never seen a course like that. The stuff I see in the 2-3 under par range still have a slope in the 118-121 range. The only course I know of with a slope of 113 requires playing from the forward tees at 5600 yards, 65.9/113 par 71.

What course is that?

Park Hill Golf Club has a 67.3/113 for their Men's Tees....  Total yards are 6194

[Dave2512]

The CR/slope are entered along with the score for handicap. This adjusts your score to the 72/113 course.

What I'm wondering is how they normalized to the 72/113 course? I mean, where is this "standard course"? Slope is pretty irrelevant to scratch golfers, but not to the rest of us. So, how do they "measure" any course and come up with slope? CR is straightforward. You get a bunch of scratch golfer and average their scores, but not slope?

I didn't see that in the USGA chart/link you posted, can you point it out.

Edit: Never mind I know what you are talking about.

[Lihu]

I didn't see that in the USGA chart/link you posted, can you point it out.

You are correct, there is no reference to the 72/113 number anywhere in the link I sent. The chart was only for men's handicap statistics. I suppose I made the assumption that to obtain that handicap they used the CR/slope, and it was subsequently adjusted by the SW before calculating their index.