TST Fall NW PA/NE OH (Erie, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit, etc.) Outing - August 13, 14

[iacas]

We've found another player… thanks @Rob Thompson.

1. @iacas Both (NC)
2. @Jeremie Boop Both (17.3)
3. @mcanadiens Both (21.4)
4. @saevel25 Both (4.2)
5. @vasaribm Both (14.3)
6. @Slice of Life Both (19.1)
7. @GolfLug Both (11.6)
8. @georgep Both (8.1)
9. @Hardspoon Both (24.3)
10. @macdaddy18 Both (4.4)
11. @Buckeyebowman Sunday (12.5)
12. @Divot Master Both (10.6)
13. @dave s Sunday (16.8)
14. @dave s Dennis Sunday (19.6)
15. @voodoo Sunday (8.2)
16. @cupslam Both (+3.7)
17. open

And yeah, he's a +3.7. We'll figure out how to do the 80% thing with him. Since strokes are added to his score, maybe we add 20% more or something. 3.7 *1.2 = 4.44.

[Buckeyebowman]

Thanks Hardspoon.

8 hours ago, Slice of Life said:

Rain expected every day through Monday...awesome...

Yeah, same here for the last two days. Guess how much rain we got? Nada! It's so widely scattered, it's really hit or miss. I'll bring my magic umbrella. Anytime I bring it on the course, it never rains! Well, except for that one time. But I figure an umbrella is allowed at least one mistake. It poured at the course, but basically nowhere else. We sat tight, rode it out, and finished the round.

19 minutes ago, iacas said:

We've found another player… thanks @Rob Thompson.

1. @iacas Both (NC)
2. @Jeremie Boop Both (17.3)
3. @mcanadiens Both (21.4)
4. @saevel25 Both (4.2)
5. @vasaribm Both (14.3)
6. @Slice of Life Both (19.1)
7. @GolfLug Both (11.6)
8. @georgep Both (8.1)
9. @Hardspoon Both (24.3)
10. @macdaddy18 Both (4.4)
11. @Buckeyebowman Sunday (12.5)
12. @Divot Master Both (10.6)
13. @dave s Sunday (16.8)
14. @dave s Dennis Sunday (19.6)
15. @voodoo Sunday (8.2)
16. @cupslam Both (+3.7)
17. open

And yeah, he's a +3.7. We'll figure out how to do the 80% thing with him. Since strokes are added to his score, maybe we add 20% more or something. 3.7 *1.2 = 4.44.

It will be interesting to see him swing the sticks. Maybe you can talk him into giving a clinic.

I also think, since he's a + HI, you should multiply by 1.25.

[Hardspoon]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

And yeah, he's a +3.7. We'll figure out how to do the 80% thing with him. Since strokes are added to his score, maybe we add 20% more or something. 3.7 *1.2 = 4.44.

Huh.  Shouldn't it still just be 80% (so, as if he's a +2.96)?  The idea with the 80% is to make it more likely that the better players win (instead of a high handicapper having a bad day)...why should that stop at 0.0 and flip around?

I'm genuinely just curious/interested...if this isn't the right thread for this, nevermind.

[iacas]

33 minutes ago, Hardspoon said:

Huh.  Shouldn't it still just be 80% (so, as if he's a +2.96)?  The idea with the 80% is to make it more likely that the better players win (instead of a high handicapper having a bad day)...why should that stop at 0.0 and flip around?

If he was a +40, and we had to add 40 strokes to his score to make it fair (i.e. he would shoot 32, +40, = 72), you think we should instead add only 32 so he shoots a net 64? Or should we add 48 strokes so he shoots a net 80?

What's the more likely net score of a 20 handicapper who gets only 16 strokes taken off? 64 or 80?

I'm not worried about "making it more likely that the better players win." That's why we're doing 80%. Plus it's Stableford. The better player STILL has an advantage because birdies and eagles are worth proportionally more points.

[Jeremie Boop]

All discussion of how to "make it fair" with his index aside, I'm pretty stoked to just be able to see this guy play!

[Hardspoon]

This is now clearly , so I'll at least spoiler it.

Spoiler

 

28 minutes ago, iacas said:

If he was a +40, and we had to add 40 strokes to his score to make it fair (i.e. he would shoot 32, +40, = 72), you think we should instead add only 32 so he shoots a net 64? Or should we add 48 strokes so he shoots a net 80?

What's the more likely net score of a 20 handicapper who gets only 16 strokes taken off? 64 or 80?

I'm not worried about "making it more likely that the better players win." That's why we're doing 80%. Plus it's Stableford. The better player STILL has an advantage because birdies and eagles are worth proportionally more points.

Maybe I'm being dumb, but I kind of think you give that +40 guy the 32 strokes only.  It just seems weird to have an "inflection point" at 0.0 where the percentages change.  Expanding on your first example:

Scenario 1, full handicaps:

• 20 index, 100% = shoots gross 92, net 72
• 10 index, 100% = shoots gross 82, net 72
• 0 index, 100% = shoots gross 72, net 72
• +10 index, 100% = shoots gross 62, net 72

In this "perfect world", full handicaps equalize things.  OK, cool.

---

Scenario 2, 80% for everybody:

• 20 index, 80% = 92, net 76
• 10 index, 80% = 82, net 74
• 0 index, 80% = 72, net 72
• +10 index, 80% = 62, net 70

OK, the 80% thing makes it so that better players win if they shoot their "expected" score.  Cool.

---

Scenario 3, 80% for everybody, but 120% for the + index guys:

• 20 index, 80% = 92, net 76
• 10 index, 80% = 82, net 74
• 0 index, 80% = 72, net 72
• +10 index, 120% = 62, net 74

This seems weird.  In every other case, the better player wins if they shoot the same relative to their index.  But just because someone is a +, they actually lose.

---

 

Anyway, that's all I was thinking...seems like you're arbitrarily penalizing someone for being a +3.0 against a 0.0, while you are "bonusing" a 0.0 against a 3.0.  Again, you've done this a hell of a lot more than me, so I'm sure your way works better.

Also - point taken on the Stableford thing.

 

 

[iacas]

12 minutes ago, Hardspoon said:

• 20 index, 80% = 92, net 76
• 10 index, 80% = 82, net 74
• 0 index, 80% = 72, net 72
• +10 index, 120% = 62, net 74

We don't have any 0 indexes playing, so… the chart above looks pretty fair to me, no?

[Hardspoon]

6 minutes ago, iacas said:

We don't have any 0 indexes playing, so… the chart above looks pretty fair to me, no?

Hey, you're the one who brought up the +40 index! 

What about:

• 20 index, 80% = 92, net 76
• 10 index, 80% = 82, net 74
• 8 index, 80% = 80, net 73.6
• 4 index, 80% = 76, net 72.8 (winner)
• +4 index, 120% = 68, net 74

That doesn't seem fair.  Everyone shoots their index...you win if you're better, until you get to 0.0, then you lose if you're better.

(Did I screw up that math?  I'm tired...)

[iacas]

7 hours ago, Hardspoon said:

Hey, you're the one who brought up the +40 index! 

What about:

• 20 index, 80% = 92, net 76
• 10 index, 80% = 82, net 74
• 8 index, 80% = 80, net 73.6
• 4 index, 80% = 76, net 72.8 (winner)
• +4 index, 120% = 68, net 74

That doesn't seem fair.  Everyone shoots their index...you win if you're better, until you get to 0.0, then you lose if you're better.

(Did I screw up that math?  I'm tired...)

Looks fair to me, yep. You're still not including Stableford and the odds of gaining no points on certain holes or net eagles, etc. 80% in my experience gives players a pretty fair shake at all levels.

We've used 80% forever.

[jsgolfer]

I'll be in Lorain, OH this weekend with my wife visiting her father.  Wish I could get down there and play one day. 

[Hardspoon]

When is everybody planning on showing up on Saturday?

Depending on the weather, I was thinking I'd get there in the early afternoon (maybe 3 or 4) and hang out on the range and practice for a bit.

[mcanadiens]

3 minutes ago, Hardspoon said:

When is everybody planning on showing up on Saturday?

Depending on the weather, I was thinking I'd get there in the early afternoon (maybe 3 or 4) and hang out on the range and practice for a bit.

They say that 3 p.m. is the check in time at the hotel, so I'll probably look to get to the course around 4.

[Jeremie Boop]

28 minutes ago, Hardspoon said:

When is everybody planning on showing up on Saturday?

Depending on the weather, I was thinking I'd get there in the early afternoon (maybe 3 or 4) and hang out on the range and practice for a bit.

I'll have to be careful how much time I spend on the range, I seem to screw myself up if I spend more than an hour or so hitting balls. However, I'm sure there will be enough people there that I will probably spend more time talking to people than swinging a club. I'll probably end up getting there around 4 myself.

[GolfLug]

13 hours ago, Hardspoon said:

Hey, you're the one who brought up the +40 index! 

What about:

• 20 index, 80% = 92, net 76
• 10 index, 80% = 82, net 74
• 8 index, 80% = 80, net 73.6
• 4 index, 80% = 76, net 72.8 (winner)
• +4 index, 120% = 68, net 74

That doesn't seem fair.  Everyone shoots their index...you win if you're better, until you get to 0.0, then you lose if you're better.

(Did I screw up that math?  I'm tired...)

STOOOOOOP!! You trying to get us pummelled?? LOL! No, thank you.. I will take EVERY SINGLE SHOT I am afforded..

5 hours ago, iacas said:

Looks fair to me, yep. You're still not including Stableford and the odds of gaining no points on certain holes or net eagles, etc. 80% in my experience gives players a pretty fair shake at all levels.

We've used 80% forever.

Si Senor.. The fella is a + coz he makes birdies. Worth LOTS of points. Can he be my partner??

1 hour ago, Hardspoon said:

When is everybody planning on showing up on Saturday?

Depending on the weather, I was thinking I'd get there in the early afternoon (maybe 3 or 4) and hang out on the range and practice for a bit.

Prolly 4:30 - 5. But usually  limit range-time 20-30 mins. Any more than that is usually counterproductive for me (before a round, that is). 

 

[mcanadiens]

"Counterproductive range time". Common guys. Let's not go into that one-club challenge looking for blood. I can barely play with my full bag.

 

[Jeremie Boop]

5 minutes ago, mcanadiens said:

"Counterproductive range time". Common guys. Let's not go into that one-club challenge looking for blood. I can barely play with my full bag.

 

Hey, this is serious business! It's the only thing I've done well in

 

[Hardspoon]

7 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

Hey, this is serious business! It's the only thing I've done well in

Haha - I think our team used approximately one of my shots last year over 9 holes.

[DaveP043]

10 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

Hey, this is serious business! It's the only thing I've done well in

Hey, you scored a round of golf with two college co-eds, that ain't nothing!  And came away from it without feeling too embarrassed about your play, if I read your post right, even though they're pretty good players.