Gambling is illegal at Bushwood

[xcott]

9 minutes ago, mchepp said:

No, the OP stated they spin off the low guy. So he gets no strokes. 

they remove the strokes from the high handicappers, so tomatoe potato, right?

 

If I'm a 18 and play a 5, there's a few holes where we're playing straight up. I would say that those 5 holes the lower handicap player has a distinct advantage. Some of those middle handicap holes where I get a stroke, maybe I get a bit of an advantage, but overall it should even out. 

[tdiii]

It's interesting how there's not a high handicapper who asserts the low handicapper has the disadvantage, nor a low handicapper who asserts that the high handicapper is at a disadvantage. 

[StevenR84]

14 minutes ago, tdiii said:

It's interesting how there's not a high handicapper who asserts the low handicapper has the disadvantage, nor a low handicapper who asserts that the high handicapper is at a disadvantage. 

I'm a higher handicap and on certain holes I know I play well, I know I have the advantage. I'm also aware that long run I expect the better player to beat me. Most of the lower guys we (league partner and I) wind up playing, we wind up usually only separated by 1, 2 strokes max at the end of 9.

[tdiii]

17 minutes ago, StevenR84 said:

I'm a higher handicap and on certain holes I know I play well, I know I have the advantage. I'm also aware that long run I expect the better player to beat me. Most of the lower guys we (league partner and I) wind up playing, we wind up usually only separated by 1, 2 strokes max at the end of 9.

But the handicap system is supposed to equalize things so people can compete fairly over time.  Right?  Or is it meant to reward the better player over time? 

[StevenR84]

1 minute ago, tdiii said:

But the handicap system is supposed to equalize things so people can compete fairly over time.  Right?  Or is it meant to reward the better player over time? 

It looks like it is clearly meant to favor the better player over time. If i stay at a 23 and play pretty accurately to it, long run I will lose to a low handicapper based on the system. And I think it's fair. This game is tough, I see no fault with rewarding better players who have put in the time and effort to hone their skills, just makes me want it more.

[No Mulligans]

27 minutes ago, tdiii said:

But the handicap system is supposed to equalize things so people can compete fairly over time.  Right?  Or is it meant to reward the better player over time? 

The .96 bonus for excellence should give a slight edge to the better handicap player for stroke play.

[Fourputt]

1 hour ago, tdiii said:

It's interesting how there's not a high handicapper who asserts the low handicapper has the disadvantage, nor a low handicapper who asserts that the high handicapper is at a disadvantage. 

Not true.  I've stated it both ways, and it mostly depends on the situation and whether or not the competition was set up following recommended procedures.  Since the handicap system was created by the USGA, the only thing that makes sense is that you set up the competition using their guidelines.  They know and understand the unavoidable shortcomings in the system, and they recommend procedures to follow depending on the type of competition that do the best job of overcoming those shortcomings.  

When those procedures are followed, nobody is at a significant disadvantage.  When they are not followed, then there can be problems of varying severity, again depending on the specific situation.

33 minutes ago, tdiii said:

But the handicap system is supposed to equalize things so people can compete fairly over time.  Right?  Or is it meant to reward the better player over time? 

It's intended to make all players in a competition competitive.  That .96 multiplier just helps to counteract the low end variability of the high handicapper.  It's just a leveler, not an advantage to either player.

[No Mulligans]

Any low handicappers want to write down their last 20 differentials and their current HI?  Looking for someone in the single digits but not a "+" HI.  I'll line them up with mine and write the results as if we played together from earliest to oldest differentials.  Curious to see the results on who wins.  Too small a sample size but it would be fun to look at.  I'm thinking I'd lose a bit more than I'd win against a low handicapper but it really depends on how they line up.  But if you did a bunch of iterations randomizing the order of rounds, I'd certainly lose more than I'd win.  I believe it is not a level playing field.

The thing is with high handicappers the variance is higher which results in fewer rounds under the HI.  Note that I only had 3 rounds under my HI.  Also, my HI gets knocked down by .96 which equals .7 strokes, the .96 has little or no impact on a low HI.

Anyways, here are mine from most current to oldest, this works out to a 16.7 HI:

25.8, 30.4, 20.3, 20.3, 22.1, 20.2, 12.3, 33.9, 18, 21.4, 8.9, 16.6, 22.6, 25, 22.6, 27.2, 18.7, 18, 24.9, 22.6.

[Lihu]

7 minutes ago, No Mulligans said:

25.8, 30.4, 20.3, 20.3, 22.1, 20.2, 12.3, 33.9, 18, 21.4, 8.9, 16.6, 22.6, 25, 22.6, 27.2, 18.7, 18, 24.9, 22.6.

I'm only a mid handicap, but here are the differentials from my last 20:

9.8, 10.2, 11.0, 13.1, 17.9, 9.2, 12.7, 11.1, 12.4, 13.6, 15.8, 10.9, 13.9, 10.2, 7.4, 11.6, 8.2, 15.0, 12.7, 10.7

[No Mulligans]

Thank Lihu...

Here are the results:  

The 1st image is the actuals.  The 2nd image, I changed the outlier 8.9 that I had to a 15 for a hypothetical.  In both cases I lose 12 times and win 8.  Lihu would have ended up with some of my money.

 

[Fourputt]

Hasn't this slipped off track a bit?  The original post was more about skins (I don't count the "Dot game" because that would be impossible to handicap), so it can't be resolved by matching differentials, only by matching hole by hole scores.  Most of my comments have been directed toward skins or match play (which is what skins is for handicap purposes).  

I'm not even sure what you are comparing with that chart above.  Were your handicap indices the same through that entire period?

[Lihu]

10 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

Hasn't this slipped off track a bit?  The original post was more about skins (I don't count the "Dot game" because that would be impossible to handicap), so it can't be resolved by matching differentials, only by matching hole by hole scores.  Most of my comments have been directed toward skins or match play (which is what skins is for handicap purposes).  

I'm not even sure what you are comparing with that chart above.  Were your handicap indices the same through that entire period?

IDK for sure, but he's looking at the statistics that seem to indicate that a better player has a better chance of winning. Albeit, in this case only a slightly better player.

In a skins game, I don't think our handicaps are different enough to see a dramatic number of wins for the "better" player.

It's more dramatic if a scratch player plays either me or Frank.

[xcott]

Typically though in my experience it's the low handicappers who get their panties in a wad about it not being fair because they feel that they should win more because they are better at golf. 

 

I was in a handicapped skins game but the low handicappers would not allow you to take more than an 18 handicap and they required that you par the following hole after a skin to justify your skin. Unsurprisingly the low handicappers cashed out every week. 

They once let a guy take a 25 handicap, but he won some skins and they immediately changed their tune.

[Lihu]

24 minutes ago, xcott said:

Typically though in my experience it's the low handicappers who get their panties in a wad about it not being fair because they feel that they should win more because they are better at golf. 

 

I was in a handicapped skins game but the low handicappers would not allow you to take more than an 18 handicap and they required that you par the following hole after a skin to justify your skin. Unsurprisingly the low handicappers cashed out every week. 

They once let a guy take a 25 handicap, but he won some skins and they immediately changed their tune.

 

A scratch player would probably give you your full 27 strokes, and might even still win most of the holes.

@saevel25 already addressed why this is the case with low handicaps (but not scratch) earlier, bad math at first, but that was corrected. . .

[No Mulligans]

53 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

 

I'm not even sure what you are comparing with that chart above.  Were your handicap indices the same through that entire period?

Most likely no.  Though mine, coincidentally, stayed the same for the last two revisions and I played about 10 rounds.  Regardless, this is close enough as those HI are based on those rounds and therefore would be the kind of scores that would be representative for the respective HI's.

This is not directed at Fourputt but just some observations.  Note that in one case I beat Lihu by 16 strokes and in another case he beat me by 16 strokes.  After a round were I won by 16 most would think I was a sandbagger, after a round were I lost by 16 most would think I was a vanity capper.  One should be careful before jumping to conclusions.  And, if a low handicapper lost by 16 it would be understandable if he questioned the handicap system and thought it favored the higher handicapper.  He'd be wrong though.

I still feel that the handicapping system favors the lower HI in stroke play as I explained earlier.  This is on topic as that has been repeatable discussed in this thread.

 

[mchepp]

1 hour ago, Fourputt said:

Hasn't this slipped off track a bit?  The original post was more about skins (I don't count the "Dot game" because that would be impossible to handicap), so it can't be resolved by matching differentials, only by matching hole by hole scores.  Most of my comments have been directed toward skins or match play (which is what skins is for handicap purposes).  

I'm not even sure what you are comparing with that chart above.  Were your handicap indices the same through that entire period?

Completely agree. In a match play event I think the handicap system works really well. Same goes for a stroke play event. Pretty even. Skins is a totally different story. 

[tdiii]

1 minute ago, mchepp said:

Completely agree. In a match play event I think the handicap system works really well. Same goes for a stroke play event. Pretty even. Skins is a totally different story. 

Isn't skins really a match play event? 

[mchepp]

18 minutes ago, tdiii said:

Isn't skins really a match play event? 

Usually you are playing skins against more than just one other person, no? Our group has 10 or so guys and everyone is in the skins game. So 9 other guys have the chance to beat me on a hole rather than me beating one guy on a hole. Also there's different variations, like carry over, or payball (where you just divide the money for the skins game by the number of skins won).

I guess I could have a skins game against someone else, one other person, but technically I could beat you 9 and 8 in match play and walk off the course, but in a skins game we'd play all 18 because every hole is worth something. 

So I guess not, in my book.