Poll: Is this guy a sandbagger?

[Dave2512]

Yeah something doesn't add up. My guess is he plays more than he posts and that he is a sandbagger.

[Golfingdad]

He is now signed up to play in the September event, which is the other "big money" two day event.

I'm now really interested in finding out how this turns out.

[RayG]

Conditions in tournament play can knock off a stroke or two. Especially in putting.

[RH31]

Yes. The numbers don't lie. Tournament play usually raises scores for most players, not the other way around.

[BuckeyeNut]

I am a bit reluctant to post this (because this is an actual member of our men's club and you never know who reads internet forums anonymously), but some of the differentials were striking to me. Here are the last 20 rounds, which I have sorted between Tournament and "other"

Tournament differentials

- 3.6, 4.8, 6.5, 2.4, 3.8, (-1.8), 6.2, (-3.0). Average = 2.8

"Other" differentials

- 4.1, 7.5, 8.4, 8.8, 7.5, 8.8, 8.6, 4.8, 6.9, 7.3, 9.2, 8.8. Average = 7.6

A 4.8 stroke gap in differential is a HUGE red flag and this guy is an obvious sandbagger.   I am sure he is one of those guys that insists ............"I concentrate better during tourney play" or something to that effect.  LOL

That guy is a HUGE BAGGER!!!!!!!   At my old club, the pro would manually adjust his index based on the above results.  The offender would cry and moan, but at least he wasn't tarred and feathered too!  When taking into account this guy carries a low single digit HC, 4.8 is a big number!!  The guy is clearly padding his HC.

For those who couldn't see the obvious, what more could you possibly need?   A confession?   LOL

[David in FL]

Agree..... Huge sandbagger!

[flintcreek6412]

I tend toward sandbagger but there are things that can explain it.   I thought a guy at one of our events was a sandbagger.   He came in with an index of about 6.   He shot par to 2 over for the entire event.   Guys obviously began to question it.   I then got curious and dug into his posted scores.   He practices on really hard courses from the tips.....75/145 type courses.   Even when accounting for the course difficulty his 82 is about a 5-6 differential.   Pretty easy for a good golfer to shoot 82 if he's driver long iron to hybrid on most holes and hybrid on par 3s.

Then you show up for nearly any event playing the middle tees that play 6400yrd at about 71/130 and he's driver 9i to most holes.   A simple change from links style where it's stroke/distance for an errant shot in tall grass to a nice parkland easy rough course can gain 6-8 strokes alone.   I've seen it happen and I don't consider it sandbagging if you practice on hard courses to make tournament courses for the non-tour golfer seem easy.

That's why the practice 50-60yrd archery shots so the 20yrd shot in the field seems really easy.

[David in FL]

I tend toward sandbagger but there are things that can explain it.   I thought a guy at one of our events was a sandbagger.   He came in with an index of about 6.   He shot par to 2 over for the entire event.   Guys obviously began to question it.   I then got curious and dug into his posted scores.   He practices on really hard courses from the tips.....75/145 type courses.   Even when accounting for the course difficulty his 82 is about a 5-6 differential.   Pretty easy for a good golfer to shoot 82 if he's driver long iron to hybrid on most holes and hybrid on par 3s.   Then you show up for nearly any event playing the middle tees that play 6400yrd at about 71/130 and he's driver 9i to most holes.   A simple change from links style where it's stroke/distance for an errant shot in tall grass to a nice parkland easy rough course can gain 6-8 strokes alone.   I've seen it happen and I don't consider it sandbagging if you practice on hard courses to make tournament courses for the non-tour golfer seem easy.

That could account for lower scores .....but not the significant drop in differential . In order to drop 3 strokes in differential your 82 shooter referenced above would have average more than 8 strokes better on the easier course. Once in awhile? Sure. Consistently.......and only in tournaments? No way in hell. Generally someone with a lower hcp from playing harder, higher rated courses will struggle to maintain that same hcp when playing lower rated courses. One of the easier ways to lower a hcp for a decent player is to play harder courses, or to back up a set of tees..... This guy is the exact opposite. He's a Bagger. Plain and simple.

[Aguirre]

Definite sandbagger.

[turtleback]

I won't presume to label him either way.

I will note, however, based on the differentials we were given (assuming the T 3.6 is really a -3.6 as in the OP) and the passing comment that he is a mid 3 index, the mandatory adjustment in section 10-3 of the handicapping manual would lead to an adjustment of about 1.9 for this guy.  The average of his 2 lowest T differentials is -3.3 which is 6.3 strokes better than a presumed index of 3.  And at that level, with 8 T scores in the book, the table in section of 10-3 of the USGA Handicapping manual says his index should be reduced by 1.9.

This is not an optional thing, it is mandatory and the computation is black and white.  So it should be reflected right in his GHIN record, I would think.

http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Handicap-System-Manual/Rule-10/

[Golfingdad]

I won't presume to label him either way.

I will note, however, based on the differentials we were given (assuming the T 3.6 is really a -3.6 as in the OP) and the passing comment that he is a mid 3 index, the mandatory adjustment in section 10-3 of the handicapping manual would lead to an adjustment of about 1.9 for this guy.  The average of his 2 lowest T differentials is -3.3 which is 6.3 strokes better than a presumed index of 3.  And at that level, with 8 T scores in the book, the table in section of 10-3 of the USGA Handicapping manual says his index should be reduced by 1.9.

This is not an optional thing, it is mandatory and the computation is black and white.  So it should be reflected right in his GHIN record, I would think.

http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Handicap-System-Manual/Rule-10/

Actually, I don't think the 3.6 is a -3.6 ... pretty sure that is just him using a hyphen to start each list.

This brings up a question though:  Since everything is done by computers now, and the USGA guidelines for re-rating are not optional, why do they leave it up to handicapping committees to make these adjustments?  Why doesn't it happen automatically with the software once the scores are entered?

[dfreuter415]

Sandbagging is not an abnormal occurrence, especially when that person plays handicapped events.

On the other hand, I know several golfers at our local club that are accused of sandbagging, when in actuality, they have a much truer handicap because they putt everything out, and do not take "gimmies." When golfers count those 3 and 4 foot putts as a "gimmie" they artificially lower their handicap. Dave Pelz has recorded that pros on the PGA tour make only 83% of their three foot putts, so you can see where this might be true.

However, I have been with golfers who will win a match on the 14th green, and then shoot double bogie, double bogie, bogie, double bogie on the last 4 holes.

[thegolfcourses]

When I used to play competitive tournament golf, I was astounded at all the reverse sandbaggers.  It was more important to them to sport a low handicap than to record actual scores they shot during casual rounds.  I was constantly winning my flights just because I recorded honestly all my rounds.  No way some of those guys were a 5 or a 6 or a 7.

[Lihu]

Sandbagging is not an abnormal occurrence, especially when that person plays handicapped events.

On the other hand, I know several golfers at our local club that are accused of sandbagging, when in actuality, they have a much truer handicap because they putt everything out, and do not take "gimmies." When golfers count those 3 and 4 foot putts as a "gimmie" they artificially lower their handicap. Dave Pelz has recorded that pros on the PGA tour make only 83% of their three foot putts, so you can see where this might be true.

However, I have been with golfers who will win a match on the 14th green, and then shoot double bogie, double bogie, bogie, double bogie on the last 4 holes.

When I used to play competitive tournament golf, I was astounded at all the reverse sandbaggers.  It was more important to them to sport a low handicap than to record actual scores they shot during casual rounds.  I was constantly winning my flights just because I recorded honestly all my rounds.  No way some of those guys were a 5 or a 6 or a 7.

Are you saying that "most" people post handicaps with gimmes and kick-em-out-of-divots?

I hope it's not "most"?

I found that single digit handicaps tend to be very accurate and have good knowledge of the rules. Usually, because they have been playing many years.

[thegolfcourses]

Are you saying that "most" people post handicaps with gimmes and kick-em-out-of-divots?

I hope it's not "most"?

I found that single digit handicaps tend to be very accurate and have good knowledge of the rules. Usually, because they have been playing many years.

Not saying most, but there were a lot.  But my suspicion is that, in  addition to what you mentioned, they just would conveniently fail to report their rounds in the 90's while being diligent about getting their 76 into the database, for ego reasons.

[Fourputt]

I am a bit reluctant to post this (because this is an actual member of our men's club and you never know who reads internet forums anonymously), but some of the differentials were striking to me. Here are the last 20 rounds, which I have sorted between Tournament and "other"

Tournament differentials

- 3.6, 4.8, 6.5, 2.4, 3.8, (-1.8), 6.2, (-3.0). Average = 2.8

"Other" differentials

- 4.1, 7.5, 8.4, 8.8, 7.5, 8.8, 8.6, 4.8, 6.9, 7.3, 9.2, 8.8. Average = 7.6

No way that I consider this to be the act of a sandbagger.  The way I see it, all of his tournament scores, and the 2 lowest of his "other" scores are going to be what determines his handicap - the rest are irrelevant.  A sandbagger returns enough scores to wipe his good rounds off the list between tournaments so that only his casual scores are in effect for handicapped competitions.  A player who takes 18 months to record 20 scores can't possibly be sandbagging.  Either that or he's the stupidest sandbagger ever.

[Lihu]

Not saying most, but there were a lot.  But my suspicion is that, in  addition to what you mentioned, they just would conveniently fail to report their rounds in the 90's while being diligent about getting their 76 into the database, for ego reasons.

The other possibility is that they could be more afraid of being called a sand bagger during a tournament. You get kicked out of clubs for this.

There should be a GHIN link to the starter desk that automatically starts your round, and to complete it you need to enter a score at the end of the round and logs the round time.

BTW, what's wrong with getting scores in the 90s.

No way that I consider this to be the act of a sandbagger.  The way I see it, all of his tournament scores, and the 2 lowest of his "other" scores are going to be what determines his handicap - the rest are irrelevant.  A sandbagger returns enough scores to wipe his good rounds off the list between tournaments so that only his casual scores are in effect for handicapped competitions.  A player who takes 18 months to record 20 scores can't possibly be sandbagging.  Either that or he's the stupidest sandbagger ever.

I might go with this one. Just like so many people think that Cella Choi was cheating by moving a 1 foot putt to 10.5" or 13.5" or something like that, this fellow must be sand bagging.

Seriously though, I thought you need to post every single round when you get a GHIN number. What's the point of having an official GHIN number if you don't post every score?

[iacas]

The other possibility is that they could be more afraid of being called a sand bagger during a tournament. You get kicked out of clubs for this.

There should be a GHIN link to the starter desk that automatically starts your round, and to complete it you need to enter a score at the end of the round and logs the round time.

So you can't ever play a practice round?

Sandbagging isn't the problem these kinds of threads make it out to be, or we'd have a hundred of these threads or more per year.