Jump to content
IGNORED

World Handicap System Now Out (2020)


iacas

Recommended Posts

I like the idea of a worldwide HC system even though I'm not likely to ever partake in a situation where it might be useful.

I really like the idea of the rating being changed based on the scoring of the day.

Christian

:tmade::titleist:  :leupold:  :aimpoint: :gamegolf:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I like this change, but I'm uncertain about how the daily rating will be calculated. It's a great idea (since tournaments usually play under tougher conditions than the rating would lead you to believe), but I'm not sure on how they plan to implement it at courses that don't have a dedicated daily player base. Even with courses that have a dedicated daily player base I'm not certain you can truly account for the variance that a golfer will score on any given day, regardless of course conditions.

Best I could see happening effectively would be a "competition ration" and a "normal rating" where they rate the course set up for competitions and for daily play, then use the appropriate handicap based on the course setup for the day. Maybe something could even be as complex as a sliding scale based on the stimp of the greens that day and a rating of the pin location difficulties (rate each pin location on each hole, then total the ratings for each hole for the day to get a grand total and the rating adjustment). I just see it as a difficult problem to solve there.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I do not read anything about the handicap system in continental Europe (EGA), does that mean they are not included in the plans?

Besides this, I think it is good to have an universal handicap system, it make it easier to compare your score if you play abroad. However, would be nice to have some more money to try that:-P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

4 hours ago, Pretzel said:

I like this change, but I'm uncertain about how the daily rating will be calculated. It's a great idea (since tournaments usually play under tougher conditions than the rating would lead you to believe), but I'm not sure on how they plan to implement it at courses that don't have a dedicated daily player base. Even with courses that have a dedicated daily player base I'm not certain you can truly account for the variance that a golfer will score on any given day, regardless of course conditions.

Best I could see happening effectively would be a "competition ration" and a "normal rating" where they rate the course set up for competitions and for daily play, then use the appropriate handicap based on the course setup for the day. Maybe something could even be as complex as a sliding scale based on the stimp of the greens that day and a rating of the pin location difficulties (rate each pin location on each hole, then total the ratings for each hole for the day to get a grand total and the rating adjustment). I just see it as a difficult problem to solve there.

I was thinking on similar lines. I'd think there's a randomness in scores to some degree, particularly in small sample sizes. The current system just gives an overall baseline. I realize I'm one of those guys who always brings up problems with a new plan, but then I get onboard with progress and try to make it work. With technology and stats, I suppose we will be able to instantly rate courses, in effect, based on knowledge of how people typically play to how they played that day, and the deviations work themselves out.

One other thing is that we'd no longer be able to know for certain after a round how it impacts our handicap. Like during an election, we'd have to wait until all the returns are in. That could take days, right? If other really good scores come in from similar players on the same tees, then your handicap would then get negatively impacted because the course rating for that day gets easier, however slightly. Could you achieve your 9.9 handicap one day, and then more scores get posted, bump you back to 10.0?

Also, now vanity handicappers will no longer impact just their own handicaps- they'll make everyone else's handicaps worse if they post lower scores than they really shot. Think of the angry threads on golf forums worldwide. 

My Swing


Driver: :ping: G30, Irons: :tmade: Burner 2.0, Putter: :cleveland:, Balls: :snell:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I wonder what will happen when only a few scores are posted on a course for the day.  I.e. the sample size is small enough that any kind of extrapolation would be invalid.

Edit: Oops, Pretzel made the same point above.

Edited by No Mulligans
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
12 hours ago, RickK said:

WOW, that was in 2012.  Seems they have been thinking about this for quite a long time with no action scheduled till 2018. 

It doesn't strike was something you can just start doing right away. Look at Australia - they're a smaller (relatively) place and it's taken them years and years to get courses rated. I imagine that even if this does take place in 2018, there will still be courses in the UK alone that take a few years to get fully on board.

12 hours ago, David in FL said:

Interesting.  I'm not 100% sure that the daily rating doesn't add some unnecessary complexity.  

It's not too complex for a computer.

10 hours ago, RFKFREAK said:

I like the idea of a worldwide HC system even though I'm not likely to ever partake in a situation where it might be useful.

If you mean a tournament, sure, but you use it every time you play golf if you keep and maintain a handicap. And now you can directly compare your handicap to everyone else's in the world.

10 hours ago, Pretzel said:

I like this change, but I'm uncertain about how the daily rating will be calculated. It's a great idea (since tournaments usually play under tougher conditions than the rating would lead you to believe), but I'm not sure on how they plan to implement it at courses that don't have a dedicated daily player base. Even with courses that have a dedicated daily player base I'm not certain you can truly account for the variance that a golfer will score on any given day, regardless of course conditions.

I imagine that if the minimum number of participants is not reached, the number stays as measured by the golf association… though that number might not have to be that high. Perhaps as few as 20 to 30 rounds could shift the number?

I'm sure, particularly given historical data to use as a model, the USGA (etc.) can derive formulas that account for the usual scattering of scores. And days where everyone just happens to shoot their high score will be balanced by days when everyone just happens to shoot their low score, regardless of the course conditions.

I think you can account for it. Plus, it's not like the course rating is going to change five strokes. I think this adjusts in smaller increments unless warranted (i.e. a hell day tournament drives everyone's scores up by five+, etc.).

10 hours ago, Pretzel said:

Best I could see happening effectively would be a "competition ration" and a "normal rating" where they rate the course set up for competitions and for daily play, then use the appropriate handicap based on the course setup for the day. Maybe something could even be as complex as a sliding scale based on the stimp of the greens that day and a rating of the pin location difficulties (rate each pin location on each hole, then total the ratings for each hole for the day to get a grand total and the rating adjustment). I just see it as a difficult problem to solve there.

I disagree that's best. There are days when the course plays to a 71.4 and days when it's more like a 71.1.

Given that paragraph I have to wonder if you're not thinking like you usually do in these kinds of areas, or if I'm not being clear.

I made up what I'll call an extreme case. I "set" the course rating and slope at 71.6 and 124 for the blue day, and the green day (heh heh) is a tougher day - call it a tournament, high winds, whatever. I plotted 21 scores from 0 to 20 handicappers (right on the dot) that happens to work out to a slope of 124.

56547e4b24339_ScreenShot2015-11-24at10.1

This is kind of what you'd expect to see on a normal day. (Really, since about half of the dots are below the line, this graph shows about 50% of the rounds beating the handicap, but honestly I don't know how to plot 42 points and tell Numbers to ignore the higher of the two at each handicap index so that the trend line isn't shoved up higher too.)

The green day, you can see, follows a similarly sloped trend line, but the course rating shakes out to about 2.5 strokes more difficult.

When you overlap the two graphs:

56547f4ee8c4a_ScreenShot2015-11-24at10.1

So, with even 21 scores, I think you can start to see how they'll begin to assess rounds.

I kept slope the same in both graphs (close to the same anyway), and maybe the USGA already knows that slope narrows or broadens at one end or the other.

It would not be difficult to write an algorithm that:

  • Plots the day's scores related to the player's up-to-the-minute handicap index.
  • Throws out any scores which are too far away from the established line (slope).

Every time a score is entered for that day, the day's rating is adjusted slightly. If four scores are returned, I don't know that it would move very much at all even if everyone shot eight strokes higher than usual… but if 100 scores are returned and everyone shot six strokes higher, on average, it might move four or five strokes that day.

6 hours ago, DutchGolf said:

I do not read anything about the handicap system in continental Europe (EGA), does that mean they are not included in the plans?

I think it's going to be worldwide. I don't know what system EGA uses, or Korea, or Japan… but AFAIK this is literally a worldwide system, as in all golf associations are on board.

5 hours ago, RandallT said:

I was thinking on similar lines. I'd think there's a randomness in scores to some degree, particularly in small sample sizes. The current system just gives an overall baseline. I realize I'm one of those guys who always brings up problems with a new plan, but then I get onboard with progress and try to make it work. With technology and stats, I suppose we will be able to instantly rate courses, in effect, based on knowledge of how people typically play to how they played that day, and the deviations work themselves out.

I think it will be fine, and I think you can account for "small sample sizes" by simply not moving the number very much.

Heck, if you define the number of "valid scores" (VS) (i.e. scores close enough to the new line to count, which should rule out people that had a horrible day PLUS bad weather or vice versa) you could always just do a weighted average, something like:

Daily Course Rating = (Standard Course Rating * (100-VS)/100) + (Calculated Course Rating * VS/100).

So if you had 50 valid scores, and SCR of 71.6 and a CCR of 74.2, the DCR would be halfway between the two: 72.9. After all, you had 100 scores showing the course played to a 74.2 that day. I don't know that adjusting it to 72.9 is all that bad. Maybe it's not enough.

5 hours ago, RandallT said:

One other thing is that we'd no longer be able to know for certain after a round how it impacts our handicap. Like during an election, we'd have to wait until all the returns are in. That could take days, right? If other really good scores come in from similar players on the same tees, then your handicap would then get negatively impacted because the course rating for that day gets easier, however slightly. Could you achieve your 9.9 handicap one day, and then more scores get posted, bump you back to 10.0?

Yes, I assume so. Unless there's a mandate to enter scores in on the day they're entered, or within 1 day or something, you might end up waiting a week before you can surely say what your score is.

But then again, maybe this is worrying about very little. No, if you play in the morning, you won't have a great idea, but if 95% of the scores are posted at the end of the round, you can be pretty certain how your score that day will affect your handicap before you go to bed that night.

5 hours ago, RandallT said:

Also, now vanity handicappers will no longer impact just their own handicaps- they'll make everyone else's handicaps worse if they post lower scores than they really shot. Think of the angry threads on golf forums worldwide. 

I don't know about that, because they've already established their vanity handicap. So if a 6.8 index shoots an 81 on a tough day while everyone else shoots higher as well, his score goes up a similar amount. Really, yeah, the guy shot 87 or whatever, but whether he gets to a vanity handicap by not counting strokes or not counting the three balls he hit OB, he's likely to keep score the same as he always has, and thus, continue to shoot the same scores as he always has.

And in a tournament when people count his actual scores and he shoots 88, his differential is likely to be thrown out as being an aberration so even then it won't artificially change the differentials of others that day.

P.S. I don't think vanity handicapping is a very big issue, and on top of that, I think most vanity handicaps are simply from people not following the Rules and counting all penalties, etc.

31 minutes ago, No Mulligans said:

I wonder what will happen when only a few scores are posted on a course for the day.  I.e. the sample size is small enough that any kind of extrapolation would be invalid.

I imagine they'll just say "too few to be valid… use the established course rating that day." If that happens to be in the "bad" 10 of 20 for all eleven players that day, so be it.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instructor Development, 5 Simple Keys®/Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins • Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 • "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 • Penn-State Behrend Head Coach • • • • • • • • • • :aimpoint: :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | 5SK.com | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I see the "SSS" adjustment being made more often at private clubs.  There are some courses where I play that my guess is that fewer than 5% of the players maintain a handicap.  Most private courses that I have seen, enroll every member in the handicap system.  That would tend to greatly increase the number of scores returned on any given day.

Has anyone had significant experience with "SSS" adjustments?  How much could a course rating be adjusted?  What is typical?  If a course rated as 72.0 had a day where everyone was 5 shots higher than one might predict for a random "normal" day, would the rating rise to 72.5, 73.0 or possibly 77.0?

Brian Kuehn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

6 hours ago, RandallT said:

I was thinking on similar lines. I'd think there's a randomness in scores to some degree, particularly in small sample sizes. The current system just gives an overall baseline. I realize I'm one of those guys who always brings up problems with a new plan, but then I get onboard with progress and try to make it work. With technology and stats, I suppose we will be able to instantly rate courses, in effect, based on knowledge of how people typically play to how they played that day, and the deviations work themselves out.

One other thing is that we'd no longer be able to know for certain after a round how it impacts our handicap. Like during an election, we'd have to wait until all the returns are in. That could take days, right? If other really good scores come in from similar players on the same tees, then your handicap would then get negatively impacted because the course rating for that day gets easier, however slightly. Could you achieve your 9.9 handicap one day, and then more scores get posted, bump you back to 10.0?

Also, now vanity handicappers will no longer impact just their own handicaps- they'll make everyone else's handicaps worse if they post lower scores than they really shot. Think of the angry threads on golf forums worldwide. 

USGA is probably already tracking daily variances from the official rating and I expect they have an idea of how scores vary. They will only be adjusting a mean anyway so it shouldn't shift by much right? I expect this is to catch really big swings in course conditions like extra long rough and faster greens leading up to a tournament, or 20+ mph winds rather than just pin positions. Also, conditions vary hourly, let alone daily. Why not do time of day while they're at it to capture morning / afternoon conditions difference?

I had the same concern as you in the second paragraph, particularly if the daily rating is not made publicly available.

Edited by natureboy

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
21 minutes ago, natureboy said:

Why not do time of day while they're at it to capture morning / afternoon conditions difference?

Because that's just getting silly.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instructor Development, 5 Simple Keys®/Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins • Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 • "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 • Penn-State Behrend Head Coach • • • • • • • • • • :aimpoint: :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | 5SK.com | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

24 minutes ago, natureboy said:

USGA is probably already tracking daily variances from the official rating and I expect they have an idea of how scores vary. They will only be adjusting a mean anyway so it shouldn't shift by much right? I expect this is to catch really big swings in course conditions like extra long rough and faster greens leading up to a tournament, or 20+ mph winds rather than just pin positions. Also, conditions vary hourly, let alone daily. Why not do time of day while they're at it to capture morning / afternoon conditions difference?

I had the same concern as you in the second paragraph, particularly if the daily rating is not made publicly available.

Yah the more I think about this whole change, I like it. Like you and Erik said above, I'll bet they've factored all that in, and it'll work.

Plus, it's all an improvement over what we do today when every day is considered the same, despite weather and pin/tee placements.

And, more math based on more data is good! 

From then on, I'll consider only playing on days where the morning is pristine conditions and I know the course will be crowded after me when the gail force winds come rolling in. :beer:. Or is that a new form of vanity cap?

1 hour ago, iacas said:

I don't know about that, because they've already established their vanity handicap. So if a 6.8 index shoots an 81 on a tough day while everyone else shoots higher as well, his score goes up a similar amount. Really, yeah, the guy shot 87 or whatever, but whether he gets to a vanity handicap by not counting strokes or not counting the three balls he hit OB, he's likely to keep score the same as he always has, and thus, continue to shoot the same scores as he always has.

Yes, I think this is already baked in to some degree. Probably a minor effect anyway, you're right. 

  • Upvote 1

My Swing


Driver: :ping: G30, Irons: :tmade: Burner 2.0, Putter: :cleveland:, Balls: :snell:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

7 minutes ago, RandallT said:

From then on, I'll consider only playing on days where the morning is pristine conditions and I know the course will be crowded after me when the gail force winds come rolling in. :beer:. Or is that a new form of vanity cap?

Already ahead of the curve. :beer:

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites


14 hours ago, David in FL said:

Interesting.  I'm not 100% sure that the daily rating doesn't add some unnecessary complexity.  

Regardless though, I'm a huge fan of a unified system, as long as the overall execution is simple to drive as many participants as possible.

The daily rating is my main concern as well.  The big question is WHO does the daily rating and HOW standardized is it.  How involved is it?  How long does it take to determine the correct adjustment?

And an even bigger question is: how can they get compliance when we hear so many stories here about courses that really do not give a damn about doing things the right way (mis-marking, invalid local rules, non-enforcement of (their own) pace of play standards, etc.).  What makes them think courses will be more compliant in THIS area than they have historically been in these other areas?  Are the governing bodies going to audit courses to make sure they are determining their adjustments properly?

OTOH, I guess this kind of daily rating is already part of one of the systems (SSS?) so maybe they have already worked out those problems.  It will be interesting to see how it works out in detail, because the details is where the devil resides.

  • Upvote 1

But then again, what the hell do I know?

Rich - in name only

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

20 minutes ago, turtleback said:

OTOH, I guess this kind of daily rating is already part of one of the systems (SSS?) so maybe they have already worked out those problems.  It will be interesting to see how it works out in detail, because the details is where the devil resides.

I think this is also similar in concept to how the PGA does adjusted scoring to account for different courses played or how Broadie adjusts strokes gained by the field average to account for better / worse scoring per course and playing conditions differences.

As far as the article, one interesting bit was the emphasis on the not every round need be scored for HCP idea. One reason I haven't registered for an official handicap is I don't want to have to enter a score every time I step on a course. I want to go out sometimes and 'mess about' playing practice rounds with more than one ball (if course is empty) to explore and get more comfortable hitting certain shots. Or if I'm in a rush, to just ignore keeping score altogether and get some on-course strokes in. It would be nice to have an official handicap while still being able to do that without having to estimate most likely score (for which the rules thread even seems to have some disagreement as to the correct method).

Edited by natureboy

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Why don't I have much confidence in the system? Computers? They have to be maintained. The local information regarding conditions has to be entered daily. Bear in mind that customer service in this country sucks. I had my land line disconnected back on September 2 because all I was getting was telemarketers. Did you know my ISP still hasn't gotten my bill right? Three months. This month they threatened to cut off my internet service because I haven't paid my phone bill. I don't have a home phone. I have Verizon for my phone. Idiots! They apologized again for the third time and told me that they'd correct it and that I only owed $$ instead of $$$, and that it would take four days for the correction to show up. That was November 3. I checked Friday and it's still not corrected. I know this is OT but you get the point. Systems rely on people to maintain them. 

Will daily changing handicaps be any different on GHIN? In the United States? And enforcement? On public goat tracks? Are you kidding me?

It won't change vanity capping or sandbagging.

However, what I see as a big improvement is the uniformity between organizations. This isn't for us hackers. This is for the young amateurs who compete on a national and international level. There needs to be uniformity in the systems around the globe so that a 3 HC from Germany can come to the US and compete in the US Amateur and vice versa.

@natureboy You can do that now. You can go out on the course and mess around. No USGA official is looking over your shoulder. I've played 18 holes without a scorecard and just made notes. Who cares? Need bunker practice? Hit 3 or 4 balls out of the bunker next time you're in one if you're not being rushed. My pro told me to do that when I'm playing solo. Most driving ranges don't have practice bunkers or pitching areas unless you belong to a country club.

@RandallT You need to move to the SF Bay Area then. You'll have your calm pristine mornings and in the afternoons those 35 mph winds with the fog can come rolling in unannounced.

Edited by DrvFrShow

Julia

:callaway:  :cobra:    :seemore:  :bushnell:  :clicgear:  :adidas:  :footjoy:

Spoiler

Driver: Callaway Big Bertha w/ Fubuki Z50 R 44.5"
FW: Cobra BiO CELL 14.5 degree; 
Hybrids: Cobra BiO CELL 22.5 degree Project X R-flex
Irons: Cobra BiO CELL 5 - GW Project X R-Flex
Wedges: Cobra BiO CELL SW, Fly-Z LW, 64* Callaway PM Grind.
Putter: 48" Odyssey Dart

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 minutes ago, DrvFrShow said:

 

@RandallT You need to move to the SF Bay Area then. You'll have your calm pristine mornings and in the afternoons those 35 mph winds with the fog can come rolling in unannounced.

That's how it is with my course.  5 MPH in the morning, and 20 MPH in the afternoon.   Of course, holes on top of the hill, 20 MPH forecast means 30 MPH in reality.   I can lose 5 strokes easily on such windy day.   Bring on the new system, yeah!

RiCK

(Play it again, Sam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • iacas changed the title to World Handicap System Now Out (2020)
  • iacas featured and pinned this topic
  • iacas unfeatured this topic
  • iacas unpinned this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Support TST Affiliates

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct links for Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package. Save 10% on Mevo with coupon code "IACAS" as well.
  • Posts

    • It is a disbarrable offense for a lawyer to lie in a court pleading, so I'm going with what the lawyer said in the suit, not what the LIV PR flack says. Just playing common sense here, but LIV not being able to provide competition for their players is one of the silliest claims yet.  If they want competition, play the tour.  If they're just interested in money play LIV. The PGA pays what it pays based on how much they actually generate, which has absolutely nothing to do with what other sports pay, that generate what they generate.  LIV pays based on how much money the Saudis want to sportswash and has nothing to do with how much LIV generates.  But how strange that a non-competitive league would set itself up against the ultra-competitive PGATour. I had asked about your profession, in a prior message, because I was looking to see if my surmise that it had nothing to do with law or economics was correct.
    • Hang in there, brother. I've been there. We all have. Driver is great at the range, but sucky on the course.  A couple of things. It will come. Keep up your range work and it will transfer. Just know that it will ... eventually. Be patient. Stick to the plan.  Maybe try to hit the driver a little extra in warming up before the round? When doing so, try to find a swing thought that works "that day".  You can always try visualizing the range when on the tee-box. Imagine you are on the range. Really "see" the range. That can also get you thru.  If none of that works, one thing that sometimes works for me is to image the golf ball sitting on the tee is a nail, and nail is just started to be hammered into a baseboard. I'm trying to hammer that nail into a baseboard. But the only hammer I was given is 46" long. Forget all the mechanics and just try hitting the nail on the head.  Lastly, sometimes it only takes one round of hitting it well and suddenly everything kind of "clicks" into place. Sometimes it only takes one shot.   
    • I thought Minnie driver was great in GoldenEye!  Oh wait, that's not what you meant.   
    • Okay so, I have a few rounds in now and I'm starting to like this thing.  The last time I played I didn't have to do any editing after the round. It was only 9 holes, but I actually tagged everything exactly right and even got the pin placements right. 😄 I only had to go back and change 2 shots to positional shots.  I have 7 rounds in there now, so the data is starting to get interesting. The first thing I've learned (okay, confirmed, because I already knew it) my wedge play is not very good. I was surprised to find that I'm getting up and down only about 20% of the time with my 54 or 60 degree wedge in my hands. Interestingly, when I putt from off the green, I'm getting up and down 73% of the time. (That's with 15 attempts, so that's interesting to me.)  The second thing I learned is I am super-inconsistent off the tee with the driver. Take a look:  There is almost 100 yards difference between my longest drive and my average drive. Which tells me that for every really good drive I hit, there's at least on real stinker.... probably more than one. Some of those have hit trees, but some of them (too many) have been straight up shanks, hosel rockets, tops, flubs, thins, toes, heels, and/or skanks. If I can eliminate the totally sh!tty ones, I think my average would come up closer to my performance average. I'm not good enough at math to calculate my standard deviation, but I bet it's huge.  I did find that I'm just about as likely to miss left of the fairway as I am to miss right of the fairway.  I plan to start to work my practice around the areas that need improvement.  Of course, I'm going to continue to work on my swing in general, as it can still get better. But consistency off the tee and wedge play will have to get a little more attention going forward. 
    • Yay, was able to get to the range today!  Half of the bucket (20 balls or so), worked on top of the swing work. Taking club back to A3.5, pausing, then while looking at the ball extending the right elbow without turning, then extending the elbow while turning a bit. After like 4-5 reps, I would paus it at A3.5, and try to extend my right elbow as I hit the ball like 100 yards or so.  Quarter of the bucket, worked on some lower body movement from A4 to A6. Just trying to stay down a bit more as my arms get more around me (right elbow extending). Taking the club to A3.5, pausing, shift pressure under left foot as I bring the hands/arms down by extending right elbow. When I was looking at my left knee, from A4 to A6, as I bring my arms down, my left knee rotates back overtop my left foot, and my knees stay flexed at A6. From A6, I would make a small pump and hit shots like 60 yards or so by bringing my right side through. This got me back to getting my right side through better.  Quarter of a bucket making swings were I focus on manipulating the club path and face a bit. I would think, "lets hit a straight draw/hook". I would try to see what feel would make it do that. If I didn't hit it how I wanted on one shot, I would try to make some slow practice swings through impact to get a better feel and try to see if those feels worked for the next shot. Turns out, I am halfway decent at making the correct change on the next shot. Example, when trying to hit a straight draw/hook I hit a low pull cut. I figured as I closed the face down, I brought the club path left. So, I did a few slow swings from A6 to A7, closing the face but also swinging out. On the next shot I hit a straight hook. After hitting a leftward shot, I would flip to trying to hit a big cut. Also, I really focused on making the same turn through the ball. I really had to focus on manipulating the club with my hands and arms.  To curve left, more of a left hand forward revving feel. It feels like I start revving the left hand over from like A5 through impact.  To curve right, more of right palm staying up more longer. It feels like I am delaying the crap out of the club turning over.   
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. JoeInPI
      JoeInPI
      (49 years old)
    2. meenman
      meenman
      (53 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...