Course rating, slope?

[iacas]

4 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

Now we're in complete agreement.  See post # 60

That's easier when you link to the right post.

Anyway, I found it. And yeah. You're good on the handicaps for + handicaps and slope, though, now?

[DaveP043]

3 minutes ago, iacas said:

. You're good on the handicaps for + handicaps and slope, though, now?

At least I agree with you as to how I'd change the current system.  Now if only the USGA would listen to us!

[Hardspoon]

2 hours ago, Aflighter said:

Yeah im sorry for saying hardspoon was wrong.

Just don't let it happen again! (kidding, of course - )

 

[natureboy]

5 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

With enough data, and enough computational time, we might find that its better described by a different curve like a log-log or semi-log regression might show. 

IIRC, the data was there for adjusted differentials relative to CR and the slope was quantitatively defined from the scores database. Linear was probably good enough, even if not a perfect description of the relationship across all scores

The actual unadjusted average differential by HCP is likely not a straight line but more sigmoid / s-shaped. I think this because averaging a big negative differential (going really low under the CR) across best 10 of 20 rounds likely faces a hard limit. But actual score differentials above and beyond the computed HCP for high HCPs is essentially unlimited, while the ESC for your official HCP limits you to a max of 180 strokes. I'd guess the 'hard limit' for average strokes under the CR across the best 10 of 20 rounds to be somewhere in the vicinity of -10 or -11.

[natureboy]

33 minutes ago, natureboy said:

I'd guess the 'hard limit' for average strokes under the CR across the best 10 of 20 rounds to be somewhere in the vicinity of -10 or -11.

Though likely shrinking a bit as the CR drops below par to something like -5 / -6 for a CR 65 & par of 70.

[DrvFrShow]

I will say it depends. Course A: Rating 69/112. Course B: Rating 73/128. I've played both courses. I've shot upper 90s on course A not because it's hard but because where there is trouble it is on the right. Course B has a lot more trouble than Course A, but it's all on the left. I take the left side of the course out of play and typically score better on Course B.

[Rulesman]

One of the problems with rating a course is that lefties and righties, hookers and slicers, drawers and faders are not considered individually.

Some courses favoured Colin Montgomery (a right handed fader), others did him no favours. But if he had been an amateur only one rating would have applied. ie that for the model straight hitting, moderately long, scratch player. 

However, I can't envisage a rating system with 'slope' that makes a handicap adjustment for everyone's playing weaknesses or strengths.

[Buckeyebowman]

On 8/1/2016 at 3:09 PM, DaveP043 said:

Yeah, I think there are obviously going to be some players whose scoring from different tees doesn't conform to the way the rating system would predict.  If those same players continue to play forward tees, things will correct themselves before long.  If those same players move forward only occasionally, they could get an "unfair" advantage when they do.  Yet other players might score nearly the same from forward tees, depending on the relative strengths and weaknesses in their games.

I know that at our course, I end up with a 4 stroke handicap difference moving either forward or back a set of tees (combining the effect of course rating and slope).  I don't have enough data to support my impression, but I think that I'd score more than 4 strokes worse moving back, but less than 4 strokes better moving forward.

That's a point. A few months back my buddy and I played against his Sister and her girlfriends in an impromptu scramble for drinks after the round. We're both 63, soon to be 64, so we qualify to play from the "senior" tees. My buddy's Son calls BS on that, saying we hit the ball plenty long enough to still play the whites! Still, it was a lot of fun putting for all those eagles and birdies!

In most cases the senior tees were well behind the ladies, but on some holes we were right behind them. they started to bitch about it, so we decided to play the white tees on the back nine, which is the tougher nine. The course ate us up! And we lost the match and had to buy drinks.

[Rulesman]

8 hours ago, Buckeyebowman said:

That's a point. A few months back my buddy and I played against his Sister and her girlfriends in an impromptu scramble for drinks after the round. We're both 63, soon to be 64, so we qualify to play from the "senior" tees. My buddy's Son calls BS on that, saying we hit the ball plenty long enough to still play the whites! Still, it was a lot of fun putting for all those eagles and birdies!

In most cases the senior tees were well behind the ladies, but on some holes we were right behind them. they started to bitch about it, so we decided to play the white tees on the back nine, which is the tougher nine. The course ate us up! And we lost the match and had to buy drinks.

Where you playing off handicaps as per USGA specifications?

Edited August 13, 2016 by Rulesman

[iacas]

26 minutes ago, Rulesman said:

Where you playing off handicaps as per USGA specifications?

In a scramble?

[Rulesman]

oops

[Buckeyebowman]

7 hours ago, iacas said:

In a scramble?

Beat me to it!

[Rulesman]

But why not? We use handicaps in scrambles over here.

Edited August 13, 2016 by Rulesman

[Fourputt]

19 minutes ago, Rulesman said:

But why not? We use handicaps in scrambles over here.

My Men's Club uses handicaps to set up the teams for our one annual scramble, but the scores returned are just gross scores, with no further handicapping.

[Martyn W]

On 8/13/2016 at 4:55 PM, Fourputt said:

My Men's Club uses handicaps to set up the teams for our one annual scramble, but the scores returned are just gross scores, with no further handicapping.

This is what Dean Knuth (The Pope of Slope) has to say about scramble handicapping:

http://www.popeofslope.com/scramble/

 

[Fourputt]

16 minutes ago, Martyn W said:

This is what Dean Knuth (The Pope of Slope) has to say about scramble handicapping:

http://www.popeofslope.com/scramble/

 

I'm not sure about the exact process, but we use our tournament pairing software and GHIN handicaps to set up our Spring Scramble to start each season (it's a mixer for new Men's Club members and a chance to play with players who you won't normally see in our flighted stroke play events).  It's a 5 man scramble with A thru E players, and aggregate team handicaps are pretty close.  The tournaments are usually fairly competitive, and those teams which aren't competitive can usually point to one or two members (usually among the A, B, and C players) who simply didn't play up to their usual ability.  Whatever they do to level the pairings gives each team a fairly even chance at success.

[iacas]

On August 13, 2016 at 4:34 PM, Rulesman said:

But why not? We use handicaps in scrambles over here.

Scrambles aren't a recognized form of golf. That's all I'm saying.

[DaveP043]

On 8/13/2016 at 7:52 AM, Rulesman said:

Where you playing off handicaps as per USGA specifications?

As @iacas mentions, a scramble isn't played under the Rules of Golf, so the USGA doesn't have a formal handicap recommendation for it.  However, the USGA does offer an unofficial recommendation:

https://www.usga.org/HandicapFAQ/handicap_answer.asp?FAQidx=20