Breaking your HC - how often?

[Shark9]

Handicaps seem very different in UK. I play to or below my handicap in the majority of rounds. It doesn't go down as the course is seen as playing "easy". ie par is 72 but SSS is often 69 or 68.

[woodzie264]

Looking at the 10 differentials currently being used to calculate it, I shot below my HI 3 times...so 30%.

Having said that, I've been playing really well (for me) lately and imagine in time my handicap will actually come up a bit as those abnormally good rounds "fall off."

[David in FL]

For those who might not know, here's some additional reading and, although I didn't read the referenced article, where the info in the op likely was derived...

http://www.popeofslope.com

[jsgolfer]

Based on my last revision, 7 out of 20 rounds are at or lower than my handicap of 5 at my home course.

[WUTiger]

15 hours ago, Hacker James said:

Also, I don't play many nine hole rounds so my opinion on the matter really does not weigh heavily

A couple of golfers I know play 9 holes frequently, but rarely have time to play 18. The "knitting" allows them to establish and maintain a HDCP.

[Hacker James]

17 minutes ago, WUTiger said:

A couple of golfers I know play 9 holes frequently, but rarely have time to play 18. The "knitting" allows them to establish and maintain a HDCP.

again, I am in no way inferring that playing nine and combining is not justified. I am only suggesting that the possibility exists that using 18 holes might be a different outcome owing to a lot of factors, fatigue, e.t.c.   I know I am in the minority, but it is my preference. Also, the nine hole venues and tourneys are becoming more popular and for the reasons you mention. I am sort of a throw back dinosaur in that regard.  I should add, that my stating regarding it being not "Moral" was ill advised and might have been construed as judgmental. My apoligies.

Edited December 12, 2016 by Hacker James

[DaveP043]

8 hours ago, Shark9 said:

Handicaps seem very different in UK. I play to or below my handicap in the majority of rounds. It doesn't go down as the course is seen as playing "easy". ie par is 72 but SSS is often 69 or 68.

Handicaps certainly are different in the UK as compared to the US, but I think that your trend is similar to what we've been discussing.  When we in the US talk about playing to our handicap, we mean that the score less handicap is at or below the Course Rating.  Our Course Rating is analogous to your SSS (or CSS).  If you average something like net 72, and the SSS is 68 or 69, your average is about 3 or 4 strokes over the SSS, similar to what we expect here.

[Fairway_CY]

I always get frustrated by the discussion surrounding how often a golfer should or should not play to or better than their handicap.  

Like most golfers, I go through peaks and valleys in my game.  There are times when I might struggle to break 100 for a month or so... and then there are times when I can go a month without having too many struggles and I might post a handful of scores in the mid 80's.  

The handicap formula doesn't take into account the frequency of your rounds.  I've had years go where I've played 7 or less times in an entire year... and I've had years like this where I've posted 74 rounds (and counting).  The more frequently I play, the more consistent my timing gets.  This means I'm hitting more solid shots and typically scoring better.  

I began 2010 with a 23.~ USGA index.  I played often enough, but more importantly, I practiced a ton.  I finished the year with a 17.~ USGA index.  At that time, I played with a club that played net events.  I played in 17 events with the club that year.  I'd say of the 17 events I played in, I finished with a net score at or below par in about 12 of those events.  I just happened to be playing well because of the practice I was putting in.  (For the record, I didn't win a single one of those events.)

I played much less from 2011 through 2014 including a low in 2012 when I played only 5 rounds (including a 9 hole round and a scramble).  My scores climbed and so did my index.  

Now that I'm living in South Carolina where the weather is much more cooperative and I recently joined a country club that's 10 minutes from my house, I'm playing much more.  My scores are still up and down, but much less so.  I'm becoming more consistent, but... the USGA index formula is an imperfect system.  They can throw all kinds of stats and numbers at you, but at the end of the day... they're not accounting for practice... and now they're not accounting for solo rounds.  Likewise, they're not accounting for time off.  

I say you pick a number that YOU would be happy with and try to score there.  I find it to be more fun to say I want to shoot 88 on a specific day and then go out and do it (or better it)... and it keeps me in it.  If I haven't played in awhile, I might say a 94 is my target.  A USGA formula or table means nothing to me.  I don't see why so many people put so much stock in it themselves.  

Sorry for the rant.  I just always get riled up when these discussions take place. 

CY

[Shark9]

55 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

Handicaps certainly are different in the UK as compared to the US, but I think that your trend is similar to what we've been discussing.  When we in the US talk about playing to our handicap, we mean that the score less handicap is at or below the Course Rating.  Our Course Rating is analogous to your SSS (or CSS).  If you average something like net 72, and the SSS is 68 or 69, your average is about 3 or 4 strokes over the SSS, similar to what we expect here.

Thanks. I would love a worldwide system to make comparing easier. I believe courses in the UK are introducing slope rating systems.

[Hacker James]

@Fairway_CY  I hold similar sentiments especially the use of USGA handicaps. As I have often mentioned, I do not carry an official handicap, but rather have my own spread sheet that complies with USGA calculations. I have been chastised in that supposedly I am trying to re-invent the wheel in that why do I go to the trouble and that the data I compile is scant and that modern apps do a much better job. The point is, I am not interested in every jot and tittle of stats, I only need a method if recording progress and setting goals. My simple spread sheet does just that and requires very little input as the formulae make it a pretty automated system. Now with the premise of this thread, I can properly evaluate my expectations and see whether or not I am within the expected norms.  I can even set up "what if" scenarios to see what effect a progression of future rounds have on my running HC., then simply "not" save the inputted data so it reverts back to actual HC.

[uitar9]

18 hours ago, allenc said:

Taking this in another direction, the bolded leads me to believe you're interpreting the answer wrong.  The answer says nothing about how hard it it to improve, but the likelihood of shooting various scores assuming your handicap is correct and you haven't improved.

Allenc-I'm following your logic. Not a club member but have been recording all of my 9 and 18's the last two years. Managed to bring the 30 point difference in my high and low scores down by 10 strokes  over 2015. My HC has come down by approx 10 points. Both year the number of rounds under HC is much less than equal or over.

[Kalnoky]

20 hours ago, Hacker James said:

I also rarely play an executive course. Perhaps I should however, might enjoy the game more.

I love the one near my house. It doesn't help my HC though because the course is rating is very easy. 

Just off the top of my head, I broke my handicap maybe 20% of the time last summer. 

[No Mulligans]

At or below your handicap (on average), wouldn't that be simple... 25%*96%= 24% of the time

I think, if anything, playing 9 hole rounds increases my handicap (very slightly though).  It's more likely that I'll be in a groove and playing well on one day's 18 hole round, than on two separate nine hole rounds.  In addition, it takes a few holes for me to get comfortable and into the swing of things, that also makes my expectation of combined 9 hole rounds a little worse.

But, the benefits of combining two consecutive 9 hole rounds far exceeds any detriment.  Some mostly play 9 hole rounds but are still able to measure/report their handicap.

[jkelley9]

Wow. this is interesting. I assumed it was a fairly straight 50%. So I guess when I've been estimating my handicap I've been quite high. Very interesting.

[iacas]

13 hours ago, woodzie264 said:

Looking at the 10 differentials currently being used to calculate it, I shot below my HI 3 times...so 30%.

Having said that, I've been playing really well (for me) lately and imagine in time my handicap will actually come up a bit as those abnormally good rounds "fall off."

So 15% of the time, since your 10 worst scores (differentials) count too.

[paininthenuts]

On 12/12/2016 at 1:31 AM, Hacker James said:

I noticed this clip from Golf Digest which sort of explains the difficulty in substantial improvement.

• • • HANDICAPS

Q: How often should you beat your handicap?

A: Not often. In fact, you should average about three shots higher than your handicap.

For example, if you have a course handicap of 16, and the Course Rating is 71.2, you should average 90, not 87. The USGA Handicap System is based on 96 percent of the best 10 differentials (corrected for Course and Slope ratings) of your last 20 rounds. More than half of your scores should be within three strokes of three over your handicap (87 to 93 in this example). Most golfers beat their handicap (86 or better in this example) only 20 percent of the time and beat it by three strokes one out of every 20 rounds.

For a person with a course handicap of 16 to break 80 (beat his handicap by eight strokes), the odds are 1,138 to 1. To do it twice, it would take the average golfer more than 700 years. In other words, it ain't happening.

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

It sort of makes sense, except when first starting out, I can also see streaks of improvement as you reach your likely potential.

AND THIS WHERE THE HANDICAP FAILS. I accept and agree with all of the above. Even during these winter months on a wet and windy course I am hitting my handicap about 40% of the time, and getting damn close the rest of the time. In fact my last 3 rounds have been below handicap.However, if I present my card to my pro/handicap secretary with a score than less than 4 shots below my handicap she won't touch it. I play off of 20.6 and regularly play with golfers playing off of 18, and with exception to one of them my gross score is invariably lower. 

The handicap is ones best way of gauging improvement, but unfortunately the system is failing

[woodzie264]

9 hours ago, iacas said:

So 15% of the time, since your 10 worst scores (differentials) count too.

Good point. That's helpful to put it into perspective like that so that I don't have unreasonable expectations.

[sjduffers]

The answer quoted in the OP is misleading: it talks about a number given a course rating and then shows at the end an example of a 16 course handicap shooting 80 (or 8 below "handicap"): with 72 + 16 = 88, and 80 being 8 less than 88.

While Net score is Gross score - Course Handicap, it is quite different from the differential which incorporates the course rating. For courses that are "easy", i.e. having a lower course rating of 2 or 3 strokes (or more) below par, it can create confusion as to what "Beat your handicap" mean.

A lot of people think that "Beating your handicap" means a Net score of par or below, including the last part quoted in the OP. I have done this (net score of par of below) 40 times out of 105 this year, but that does not mean my index is out of whack from where it should be, because the majority of these rounds have a course rating about 1.5 to 2 strokes lower than par. The differential was lower or equal to my index only 18 times out of those 105 times. QED.

Edited December 14, 2016 by sjduffers