Jump to content
IGNORED

What flaws do you think there are in the handicap system?


paininthenuts
Note: This thread is 2802 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

I think it's fair to say that everyone would agree that a handicap system is brilliant. It allows poorer inexperienced players to play against better players, and have a reasonable chance of winning. However, it dawned on me the other day that the system is flawed, and seriously needs looking at. We have competitions at my club where we have to play off of seven eighths or three quarter handicap. Apparently this is because it makes it easier for the better players. Well, if we have to play about with the handicap system, it surely can't be right in the first place. The guys I play with are all knocking shots off of peoples handicaps (not officially) because the same people keep winning friendly games. 

 

The question is, what changes would you make to the system ? 

In my bag (Motocaddy Light)

Taylormade Burner driver, Taylormade 4 wood, 3 x Ping Karsten Hybrids, 6-SW Ping Karsten irons with reg flex graphite shafts. Odyssey putter, 20 Bridgestone e6 balls, 2 water balls for the 5th hole, loads of tees, 2 golf gloves, a couple of hand warmers, cleaning towel, 5 ball markers, 2 pitch mark repairers, some aspirin, 3 hats, set of waterproofs, an umbrella, a pair of gaiters, 2 pairs of glasses. Christ, it's amazing I can pick the bloody thing up !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I personally think the system is fantastic, and I'm not sure I'd change much about it. I think the issue with the system comes more from the players gaming it than the system itself. A club that includes proper handicap review and sets up its competitions correctly shouldn't have a problem with the system being unfair.

  • Upvote 2

-- Daniel

In my bag: :callaway: Paradym :callaway: Epic Flash 3.5W (16 degrees)

:callaway: Rogue Pro 3-PW :edel: SMS Wedges - V-Grind (48, 54, 58):edel: Putter

 :aimpoint:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

47 minutes ago, paininthenuts said:

The question is, what changes would you make to the system ? 

There are several variations of a golf handicap system operating around the world.  I can only speak to the version operating in the USA.

As @DeadMan said, most of the problems arise from the players themselves.  Selective posting, failure to use ESC, and little or no knowledge of the Rules of Golf all lead to issues with the accuracy of the handicap indexes produced.

Things I would consider would be:

1. Reduce or eliminate the "Bonus for Excellence"

2. Include a factor for weather conditions (assuming such a system could easily be implemented for a small cost and no input from the individual golfer)

Brian Kuehn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I like what we have here in the U.S.A.. I can't speak for the rest of the world.

Actually, the only problem I see is how some folks use it incorrectly. Some don't bother to adjust their hndcp when playing different courses. 

In My Bag:
A whole bunch of Tour Edge golf stuff...... :beer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I think distance is a little too heavily weighted. When I play a shorter courses rated 69-70 I don't shoot 5 shots better than courses rated 74-75, more like 3 shots. It's not much but I could change my handicap a stroke either way depending on my ratio of long/short course play. 

Edit: Reading back on what I wrote I could just as well interpret it as a testament to the handicap system's accuracy. One can't expect something with so many variables to be more accurate than a stroke or two either way.

  • Upvote 2

:callaway: Big Bertha Alpha 815 DBD  :bridgestone: TD-03 Putter   
:tmade: 300 Tour 3W                 :true_linkswear: Motion Shoes
:titleist: 585H Hybrid                       
:tmade: TP MC irons                 
:ping: Glide 54             
:ping: Glide 58
:cleveland: 588 RTX 62

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The bonus for excellence doesn't make sense to me.  Why go to the effort to create such a refined handicap system and then adjust it for a bonus for excellence?

Just to make sure the better players win more frequently?  That's not what a handicap is suppose to be about.

And, it's not a very big deal as the small difference it makes doesn't come into play very much.  It's nonsensical and almost insignificant.  Just eliminate it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

6 minutes ago, SavvySwede said:

I think distance is a little too heavily weighted. When I play a shorter courses rated 69-70 I don't shoot 5 shots better than courses rated 74-75, more like 3 shots. It's not much but I could change my handicap a stroke either way depending on my ratio of long/short course play. 

Edit: Reading back on what I wrote I could just as well interpret it as a testament to the handicap system's accuracy. One can't expect something with so many variables to be more accurate than a stroke or two either way.

I've mentioned a few times before about how "easy" my league course is at 66.4/110. However, my scores on that course are no different than when I play any other course that's rated much more difficult comparatively. For example, my other most frequently played course is 70.2/121. I mostly shoot in the low/mid 90's at both courses, but because the league course rating is so low it skews my overall handicap because my expected scores are 5 shots different. The main reason I don't shoot any better is there are a lot more places to lose a ball at the "easier" course than the "harder" course, so errant shots aren't as penalized. The shorter course also isn't maintained as well, having rock hard greens which are extremely difficult to hold even on good approach shots and fairways which have grass that's almost as long as the rough, etc. The league course is over 500 yards shorter though, so it's rated much lower. This is partially why I don't always agree that playing forward is going to make a course play easier. Depending on the player, length isn't necessarily an issue, direction is. In answer to the OP, I don't really think there is anything that needs changed. I just think that some courses ratings may not be reflective of it's actual difficulty depending on the person playing and/or the condition the course is in..

KICK THE FLIP!!

In the bag:
:srixon: Z355

:callaway: XR16 3 Wood
:tmade: Aeroburner 19* 3 hybrid
:ping: I e1 irons 4-PW
:vokey: SM5 50, 60
:wilsonstaff: Harmonized Sole Grind 56 and Windy City Putter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

34 minutes ago, bkuehn1952 said:

There are several variations of a golf handicap system operating around the world.  I can only speak to the version operating in the USA.

As @DeadMan said, most of the problems arise from the players themselves.  Selective posting, failure to use ESC, and little or no knowledge of the Rules of Golf all lead to issues with the accuracy of the handicap indexes produced.

Things I would consider would be:

1. Reduce or eliminate the "Bonus for Excellence"

2. Include a factor for weather conditions (assuming such a system could easily be implemented for a small cost and no input from the individual golfer)

Whats the bonus for excellence?

And I agree with #2 and think that its a brilliant idea that they are considering doing that.  I remember from the "handicap changes" thread that that topic came up and they were talking about adopting some sort of daily handicap factor at each course to help normalize everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

44 minutes ago, SavvySwede said:

I think distance is a little too heavily weighted. When I play a shorter courses rated 69-70 I don't shoot 5 shots better than courses rated 74-75, more like 3 shots. It's not much but I could change my handicap a stroke either way depending on my ratio of long/short course play. 

Edit: Reading back on what I wrote I could just as well interpret it as a testament to the handicap system's accuracy. One can't expect something with so many variables to be more accurate than a stroke or two either way.

Probably more a rating quirk. We get killed in CO because of effective playing length due to altitude. I have to play at near 7000 for a tee rating at par. I don't get around as much as I used to but I didn't and don't play better or worse going from 6500 to 7000.

I don't sweat funny weather days because it all evens out. That windy day that runs the strokes up is offset by the perfect day when I play at my best.

Dave :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
14 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Whats the bonus for excellence?

And I agree with #2 and think that its a brilliant idea that they are considering doing that.  I remember from the "handicap changes" thread that that topic came up and they were talking about adopting some sort of daily handicap factor at each course to help normalize everything.

The bonus for excellence is the factor the USGA system uses to reduce the raw average of your best 10 differentials, which is 0.96.  Its pretty inconsequential, amounting basically to one stroke for every 25 handicap index strokes.

The "course rating for the day", or whatever it might eventually get called, might be similar to the Competition Scratch Score (CSS) used in England.  I just read a bit of their procedure, and my head started to spin around :w00t: like Linda Blair's in The Exorcist, so I stopped :surrender:.  Essentially, they take all of today's scores by players with proper handicaps, and do some kind of statistical hocus pocus to backfigure what the course rating for today should have been in order to produce a "normal" distribution of scores.  It seems like a kind of self-perpetuating deal that would make changes to handicaps pretty slow.

As far as the USGA Handicap System, I think it works reasonably well if managed and enforced properly.  Of course some players will semi-consistently shoot lower net scores on a course that is (pick one or more) longer, shorter, harder, easier, has more water, has more trees, etc.  as compared to his normal course.  That's simply a problem with the application of a statistical system based on a huge population to each individual within the population.  

 

  • Upvote 1

Dave

:callaway: Rogue SubZero Driver

:titleist: 915F 15 Fairway, 816 H1 19 Hybrid, AP2 4 iron to PW, Vokey 52, 56, and 60 wedges, ProV1 balls 
:ping: G5i putter, B60 version
 :ping:Hoofer Bag, complete with Newport Cup logo
:footjoy::true_linkswear:, and Ashworth shoes

the only thing wrong with this car is the nut behind the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
2 hours ago, paininthenuts said:

Apparently this is because it makes it easier for the better players. Well, if we have to play about with the handicap system, it surely can't be right in the first place. The guys I play with are all knocking shots off of peoples handicaps (not officially) because the same people keep winning friendly games.  

It's more about how handicaps are best designed for match play. 20 scratch players lose to 20 18 handicappers more than 50%. The higher handicappers have more variability in their scores.

1 hour ago, bkuehn1952 said:

1. Reduce or eliminate the "Bonus for Excellence"

2. Include a factor for weather conditions (assuming such a system could easily be implemented for a small cost and no input from the individual golfer)

1. Why? It's 4% and helps account for holes where a bad golfer makes an 8 or something.

2. It all evens out. And… this is coming. ;-)

1 hour ago, SavvySwede said:

I think distance is a little too heavily weighted. When I play a shorter courses rated 69-70 I don't shoot 5 shots better than courses rated 74-75, more like 3 shots. It's not much but I could change my handicap a stroke either way depending on my ratio of long/short course play.

I don't think it is. Distance has a huge impact on scoring. The numbers consistently bear that out.

  • Upvote 1

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction 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 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 hours ago, paininthenuts said:

I think it's fair to say that everyone would agree that a handicap system is brilliant. It allows poorer inexperienced players to play against better players, and have a reasonable chance of winning. However, it dawned on me the other day that the system is flawed, and seriously needs looking at. We have competitions at my club where we have to play off of seven eighths or three quarter handicap. Apparently this is because it makes it easier for the better players. Well, if we have to play about with the handicap system, it surely can't be right in the first place. The guys I play with are all knocking shots off of peoples handicaps (not officially) because the same people keep winning friendly games. 

 

The question is, what changes would you make to the system ? 

No changes. It's fair as it is, and the 3/4 handicap is fair as well. It makes complete sense. Higher handicaps have a lot more strokes to play around with.

EDIT: Just read Erik's response.

1 hour ago, bkuehn1952 said:

There are several variations of a golf handicap system operating around the world.  I can only speak to the version operating in the USA.

As @DeadMan said, most of the problems arise from the players themselves.  Selective posting, failure to use ESC, and little or no knowledge of the Rules of Golf all lead to issues with the accuracy of the handicap indexes produced.

Things I would consider would be:

1. Reduce or eliminate the "Bonus for Excellence"

2. Include a factor for weather conditions (assuming such a system could easily be implemented for a small cost and no input from the individual golfer)

I noticed that Game Golf seems to include weather conditions in the reports when conditions are less than optimal.

New Bitmap Image.png

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I feel like distance should make more of a difference. The difference in rating at my home course between the blues and the whites is 71.5 to 70.1. Yet I shoot way better scores when all of my approach shots are 30 yards or so closer to the green on each hole when I play the whites.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I haven't really "embraced" the handicap system but, from my outsider's perspective . .it's too complicated.  It's too difficult to establish and maintain (have to belong to a club or some kind of hc service).  People can easily cheat it with selective posting or by not knowing/following the rules, etc.   I think there is an unspoken understanding that there is cheating going on at nearly all handicap tournaments . .even if the prize is just a sleeve of balls, lol. 

Plus I can't rationalize the reason for it, in the first place.  Let's create a way so bad golfers can beat good golfers.  Hmm.  That's odd to me.  The rare times I play for money it's never very much money and I always offer to play "straight up" even if I'm totally going to lose.  If the other guy happens to know my game and wants to give me some strokes . . ok.

I'd rather just play off scratch and lose all the time. 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Moderator
9 minutes ago, Rainmaker said:

I haven't really "embraced" the handicap system but, from my outsider's perspective . .it's too complicated.  It's too difficult to establish and maintain (have to belong to a club or some kind of hc service).  People can easily cheat it with selective posting or by not knowing/following the rules, etc.   I think there is an unspoken understanding that there is cheating going on at nearly all handicap tournaments . .even if the prize is just a sleeve of balls, lol. 

Plus I can't rationalize the reason for it, in the first place.  Let's create a way so bad golfers can beat good golfers.  Hmm.  That's odd to me.  The rare times I play for money it's never very much money and I always offer to play "straight up" even if I'm totally going to lose.  If the other guy happens to know my game and wants to give me some strokes . . ok.

I'd rather just play off scratch and lose all the time. 

I think you'll find that where there's an active Handicap Committee, there's relatively little sandbagging, although there's always a bit of friendly banter aimed at the winner.  The problem is that the people who are supposed to enforce the rules isn't "them", its US.  An employee of a golf club can, and should, be on the committee, but its really run and chaired by members.  Too often, very few members care enough to do the work required to make the system work correctly.  They get what they deserve, in my opinion.

And the system isn't intended to allow a poorer player to beat a better one, but to allow them to compete against each other fairly.  My wife has beaten me once straight up, in 20 years of playing together, but with our handicaps, we almost always play a tight match when we play, and that makes it more fun.

Dave

:callaway: Rogue SubZero Driver

:titleist: 915F 15 Fairway, 816 H1 19 Hybrid, AP2 4 iron to PW, Vokey 52, 56, and 60 wedges, ProV1 balls 
:ping: G5i putter, B60 version
 :ping:Hoofer Bag, complete with Newport Cup logo
:footjoy::true_linkswear:, and Ashworth shoes

the only thing wrong with this car is the nut behind the wheel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

23 minutes ago, Rainmaker said:

I haven't really "embraced" the handicap system but, from my outsider's perspective . .it's too complicated.  It's too difficult to establish and maintain (have to belong to a club or some kind of hc service).  People can easily cheat it with selective posting or by not knowing/following the rules, etc.   I think there is an unspoken understanding that there is cheating going on at nearly all handicap tournaments . .even if the prize is just a sleeve of balls, lol. 

Plus I can't rationalize the reason for it, in the first place.  Let's create a way so bad golfers can beat good golfers.  Hmm.  That's odd to me.  The rare times I play for money it's never very much money and I always offer to play "straight up" even if I'm totally going to lose.  If the other guy happens to know my game and wants to give me some strokes . . ok.

I'd rather just play off scratch and lose all the time. 

This is more or less what I thought three years ago.

The handicap system is designed to make betting more equitable. This way more experienced golfers can be pushed to their limits as with new golfers. They can both enjoy a hard earned victory against each other.

You can play straight up, just against people of your own skill level. For instance, skins is mostly played without handicaps against other people with similar handicaps.

:ping:  :tmade:  :callaway:   :gamegolf:  :titleist:

TM White Smoke Big Fontana; Pro-V1
TM Rac 60 TT WS, MD2 56
Ping i20 irons U-4, CFS300
Callaway XR16 9 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S
Callaway XR16 3W 15 degree Fujikura Speeder 565 S, X2Hot Pro 20 degrees S

"I'm hitting the woods just great, but I'm having a terrible time getting out of them." ~Harry Toscano

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, iacas said:

1. Why? It's 4% and helps account for holes where a bad golfer makes an 8 or something.

ESC accounts for the high scoring holes. The 4% is just an adjustment to weight the system in favor of the better player.  Why does the system need to be weighted in favor of anyone?  When the USGA talks about the handicap system they always tout how it makes it possible for players of different abilities to compete against each other. The USGA never mentions it is a system weighted in favor of better players versus less skilled.

And for those that dismiss it as "only 4%" or an insignificant number, then we agree.  Since it is insignificant and only 4%, get rid of it.

 

Brian Kuehn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

The bonus for excellence is the factor the USGA system uses to reduce the raw average of your best 10 differentials, which is 0.96.  Its pretty inconsequential, amounting basically to one stroke for every 25 handicap index strokes.

==============

I'm sorry, that's just a different language !!

 

6 minutes ago, bkuehn1952 said:

ESC accounts for the high scoring holes. The 4% is just an adjustment to weight the system in favor of the better player.  Why does the system need to be weighted in favor of anyone?  When the USGA talks about the handicap system they always tout how it makes it possible for players of different abilities to compete against each other. The USGA never mentions it is a system weighted in favor of better players versus less skilled.

And for those that dismiss it as "only 4%" or an insignificant number, then we agree.  Since it is insignificant and only 4%, get rid of it.

==================================

And that's my point. If a handicap system is meant to be correct, why should anyone play around with it ?

6 minutes ago, bkuehn1952 said:

 

 

In my bag (Motocaddy Light)

Taylormade Burner driver, Taylormade 4 wood, 3 x Ping Karsten Hybrids, 6-SW Ping Karsten irons with reg flex graphite shafts. Odyssey putter, 20 Bridgestone e6 balls, 2 water balls for the 5th hole, loads of tees, 2 golf gloves, a couple of hand warmers, cleaning towel, 5 ball markers, 2 pitch mark repairers, some aspirin, 3 hats, set of waterproofs, an umbrella, a pair of gaiters, 2 pairs of glasses. Christ, it's amazing I can pick the bloody thing up !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Note: This thread is 2802 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Makes sense.  Like I said, I wouldn't have been upset at their original offer either, and based on the fine print it seems like they've held up their end of the deal.  
    • If you've only had to adjust retroactively one time in 8 years and have around 5 people each year without handicaps, that's like 40-50 people total so it sounds like you're doing a pretty good job. I think your questions give enough to go off of. This might be a good way to get new people to actually post a few scores during the 6 weeks leading into the first event. Something like "New members will be eligible for tournament money once they have at least 3 posted rounds in GHIN" or something like that. If they can get 3 rounds in prior to their first event, then they're eligible. If not, they'll soon become eligible after an event or two assuming they play a little bit outside of events.
    • This is a loooooong winded narrative so if you don't like long stories, move on. 😉 Our senior club typically gets about 25 new members each year. We lose about 25 members each year for various reasons (moved to FL/AZ, disabled, dead, too expensive). Of the new members, usually 20 have an active GHIN handicap. About 5 each year do not have a GHIN handicap. When they join our club, we give each member a state association membership that includes GHIN handicapping services. We play a series of handicapped tournaments over the summer. When we sign up a new member who does not have a GHIN handicap, we attempt to give them an estimated index until they have sufficient scores posted to have an actual GHIN index.  Our first event typically is around May 15 so, in theory, a new member has about 6 weeks to post a few scores. Posting season in the Mitten starts April 1. Inevitably, several of the unhandicapped individuals seem  to either not play until the first tournament or can't figure out how to enter scores (hey, they are seniors). That situation then leads to my contacting the new member and asking a series of questions: a. Did you ever have a GHIN handicap? If yes, which State and do you recall what it was? b. Do you have an alternate handicap through a non-GHIN handicap service or a league? c. What do you think your average score was last year (for 9 or 18) d. What was your best score last year? Where did you play and which tee was used? e. What do you consider a very good score for yourself? Based on their responses I attempt to give them an index that makes them competitive in the first couple events BUT does not allow them to win their flight in the first couple events. We don't want the new members to finish last and at the same time, we don't want someone with a "20" playing handicap to win the third flight with a net 57. In the event some new member did shoot a net 57, we also advise everyone that we can and will adjust handicaps retroactively when it is clear to us that a member's handicap does not accurately reflect their potential. We don't like to adjust things retroactively and in the 8 years I have chaired the Handicap Committee, we have only done it once. So here are the questions to the mob: Any ideas how to do this better? Any questions one might ask an unhandicapped individual to better estimate their index/handicap? Would it be reasonable to have a new player play once (or more?) without being eligible to place in the money?
    • Wordle 1,013 4/6 ⬜🟨⬜🟨🟨 ⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Awesome! I got that a while back with my start word! Wordle 1,013 4/6 ⬜⬜🟨⬜🟨 ⬜🟨⬜🟩⬜ ⬜⬜🟩🟩🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • 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...