Handicap System: GAME GOLF vs GHIN

[bm85]

Inspired by a recent post from @Lihu elsewhere about the methodology used by Game Golf.

I'm curious if perhaps Game Golf's handicap system could be considered more accurate than the one we use off the scorecards, since it has access to a vast amount of data from a variety of golfers. However, I'm not knowledgeable about either system really, and I don't want to make any assumptions.

What do you think?

 

[saevel25]

I voted GHIN. It's been around longer. It's been tweaked over the years. I think it does a great job for what it is meant to do. 

The question if Handicap is a measure of a person's playing ability? That is a hard question to answer. With GHIN you are only suppose to beat your handicap 20% of the time. In that regard, handicap is the 80th percentile of your playing ability, not the average of your playing ability.

There are a lot of situations where using a higher percentile is good. In traffic we use the 85th percentile speed when doing speed studies and for other traffic related applications. 

I am sure Game Golf could be better if people took tagging more seriously, and editing their rounds more seriously. Also if they spend a few years tweaking the system. 

 

[SavvySwede]

I voted Game Golf. I rarely see tees set to the proper yardages for their ratings, Game Golf takes out that variable.

[Dave2512]

Same both are affected by GIGO. The only time I consider another golfer's handicap is when we are competing.

[SavvySwede]

46 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

Same both are affected by GIGO. The only time I consider another golfer's handicap is when we are competing.

I think GG users are much less likely to post their funds incorrectly.

[David in FL]

For the majority of us who do not use Game Golf, could someone please explain how GG calculates a "handicap" and how it differs from an actual USGA handicap?

Thanks.

[RandallT]

Interesting topic.

@David in FL  here is Game Golf's site on handicap calculation (in red I think is the most significant, if you want the cliff notes version):

Quote

How is the GAME GOLF handicap calculated?

We have a vast data set for users who have played a large number of rounds and can be identified as scratch players (average normalized score of 70-75).  So we are using this as a benchmark baseline to estimate a player's handicap.
From Game Golf scratch players (which act as the benchmark group), we first discover how these players score (average number of strokes) on holes of a certain yardage* (yardage is from first tee shot to the pin location).  

Then we aggregate all the scores from the holes played from all of these players and bucket them into 5-meter intervals using holes 60 meters and up to 600 meters.  Meters are converted into yards when needed.  
To calculate a handicap, we then apply the same principles to a player of interest and getting their average number of strokes played for each of those hole distance buckets.  

We then collect the difference between that player and GAME GOLF's Scratch players, and then find the collective average.

Quote

What's the difference between the USGA's handicap and GAME GOLF's?  

 

Besides being similar in terms of a stroke-count representation of how well a golfer performs with respect to typical scratch golfers, the main difference is that GG Handicap doesn’t use the course/slope ratings against a players score.  

 

GG Handicap uses the actual yardage played for each hole from their tagged tee positions to the middle of the green, with dog-legs factored into the equation according to the design of the hole.

As for which is more indicative of your ability, that's an interesting question. No doubt we are all familiar with our current handicap system, so we mostly know what our handicap indicates and why.

GG's handicap now comes along, and we will see how it stacks up. By using yardages of holes (and not factoring in course difficulty), it'll probably still be ballpark with the current system. Some players might be higher, some lower and we will figure out why that might be on a case-by-case basis.

USGA was calibrated (as @saevel25 said) to be a score you end up beating 20ish percent of the time. Time will tell how Game Golf's index appears to be calibrated.

For mine, it seems quite low for the scores I've entered. My index is 15ish after just 3 rounds, and my best score is 87. My only two other scores were far worse than bogey golf, so anecdotally, I'd say GHIN/USGA handicap seems more realistic. I know what I'd get with that calculation since it's simple math. Game Golf seems a bit more opaque at the moment.

 

[iacas]

1 hour ago, bm85 said:

I'm curious if perhaps Game Golf's handicap system could be considered more accurate than the one we use off the scorecards, since it has access to a vast amount of data from a variety of golfers. However, I'm not knowledgeable about either system really, and I don't want to make any assumptions.

Look, I like my GAME GOLF as much as anyone but it bases handicap on nothing but yardage IIRC. There's no consideration for slope at all.

GHIN is more accurate.

[David in FL]

1 hour ago, RandallT said:

Interesting topic.

@David in FL  here is Game Golf's site on handicap calculation (in red I think is the most significant, if you want the cliff notes version):

As for which is more indicative of your ability, that's an interesting question. No doubt we are all familiar with our current handicap system, so we mostly know what our handicap indicates and why.

GG's handicap now comes along, and we will see how it stacks up. By using yardages of holes (and not factoring in course difficulty), it'll probably still be ballpark with the current system. Some players might be higher, some lower and we will figure out why that might be on a case-by-case basis.

USGA was calibrated (as @saevel25 said) to be a score you end up beating 20ish percent of the time. Time will tell how Game Golf's index appears to be calibrated.

For mine, it seems quite low for the scores I've entered. My index is 15ish after just 3 rounds, and my best score is 87. My only two other scores were far worse than bogey golf, so anecdotally, I'd say GHIN/USGA handicap seems more realistic. I know what I'd get with that calculation since it's simple math. Game Golf seems a bit more opaque at the moment.

 

 

Thank you.  

 

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Look, I like my GAME GOLF as much as anyone but it bases handicap on nothing but yardage IIRC. There's no consideration for slope at all.

GHIN is more accurate.

 

From the perspective of someone admittedly unfamiliar with GG, I can't help but agree with this.  Relative course difficulty is more than simple yardage.

[bm85]

3 minutes ago, David in FL said:

 

Thank you.  

 

 

From the perspective of someone admittedly unfamiliar with GG, I can't help but agree with this.  Relative course difficulty is more than simple yardage.

Yeah. Par from 200 in a cattle field isn't quite the same as par from 200 at Whistling Straits. 

Just seems with all that data you could potentially estimate a courses difficulty far more accurately than GHIN does, with dynamic updates considering weather conditions, tee/pin locations, and the list goes on.

[boogielicious]

I voted GHIN. I have used Game Golf (have the Arrcos system). Those systems are good for analyzing your play. But GHIN is your true handicap to use against other golfers.

[DaveP043]

If you're talking about comparing your own ability to the ability of a large number of other players, I think you'd have to look at the system with the most members.  I'm guessing that there are substantially more players with USGA handicaps than there are Game Golf users.  Ghin isn't a system by itself, it's a computational service for USGA handicaps, so that has the be the standard for comparison.  Add to that the use of Slope to help evaluate non-distance difficulty, and I'd say that's the gold standard.