Interesting split for handicap scores

[Fourputt]

At least I found it interesting.  I was looking at my scoring on the GHIN site and found an unusual split in used vs. not used scores.  The 10 used in the calculation right now are all in the 80's, yet every score not being used is in the 90's, most in the 90-93 range (except for one aberration, a 101 from a tournament last year when I tried to play with a bad case of gout in my right foot - at least a half dozen costly shots were the result of trying to play through the pain).  I can't remember the last time I didn't have at least a single score either in the high 70's, or more recently in the low 90's, among the 10 used for handicap.  It's been 3 years since I didn't have a single 90's score on the used list.

Edited July 4, 2017 by Fourputt

[Hacker James]

I thought that the handicaps used are the average of the lowest 10 of most recent 20. I may not understand , but it appears that using only the scores in the 80's is cherry picking.  Am I missing something?

[Shindig]

4 minutes ago, Hacker James said:

I thought that the handicaps used are the average of the lowest 10 of most recent 20. I may not understand , but it appears that using only the scores in the 80's is cherry picking.  Am I missing something?

The 10 scores in the 80s are probably the 10 lowest differentials of the last 20.   I don't think Rick is neglecting to post his higher scores.

Fun stat:  the 10 highest differentials of the 20 most recent are sometimes called an anti-handicap.

[Hacker James]

Just now, Shindig said:

The 10 scores in the 80s are probably the 10 lowest differentials of the last 20.   I don't think Rick is neglecting to post his higher scores.

Fun stat:  the 10 highest differentials of the 20 most recent are sometimes called an anti-handicap.

Oh, I never thought that he was, only that from the description whoever calculated the GHIN scores did something different. I did not know about the anti-handicap, thanks. I really don't understand what benefit that has though (owing to my own ignorance I guess).

[Shindig]

Just now, Hacker James said:

Oh, I never thought that he was, only that from the description whoever calculated the GHIN scores did something different. I did not know about the anti-handicap, thanks. I really don't understand what benefit that has though (owing to my own ignorance I guess).

Anti-handicap is just a measure of variance.  It's generally higher than your real handicap (unless you posted 20 identical differentials).

[Hacker James]

@Shindig.  Thanks. Learned something new.

[Fourputt]

43 minutes ago, Hacker James said:

I thought that the handicaps used are the average of the lowest 10 of most recent 20. I may not understand , but it appears that using only the scores in the 80's is cherry picking.  Am I missing something?

It just happens that on this revision, my 10 lowest scores are all 80's, and only those 10 are below 90.  If I had an 11th score in the 80's, or only 9 in the 80's with one in the 70's or 90's, it wouldn't have been as statistically odd.  I've been carrying an official handicap since 1989, and I've never seen this split before.

[Hacker James]

39 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

It just happens that on this revision, my 10 lowest scores are all 80's, and only those 10 are below 90.  If I had an 11th score in the 80's, or only 9 in the 80's with one in the 70's or 90's, it wouldn't have been as statistically odd.  I've been carrying an official handicap since 1989, and I've never seen this split before.

ah, okay...I do not have an official GHIN, but do run a spreadsheet according to their calculations. I only keep the last twenty, and the older scores drop off as replaced by the new one. Sounds like you are pretty consistent as of late.

[MarvChamp]

I belong to a men's group that uses Scorekeeper software for our group. It's a USGA-compliant calculation. But in reviewing my printout for a June tournament, I felt sure the calculation (a 26.1 HI, the one I used when I registered on TST) was wrong. There were some old scores in the very high 80's and low to mid-90's that I posted before my long-time layoff due to my back problems and return to golf.

Anyway, I registered with the Texas Golf Ass'n, posted my last 20 scores on GHIN, and voila! Now my GHIN is 27.6 (EEK!) But it's only because I could post ALL scores, not just those when I golfed with my men's group.  So now I have to post my high handicap here on TST, but I have a lot of work cut out for me to reduce the HI substantially this year. -Marv

[DaveP043]

7 hours ago, Shindig said:

Anti-handicap is just a measure of variance.  It's generally higher than your real handicap (unless you posted 20 identical differentials).

This is where I first read about Anti-Handicap.  Handicap guru Dean Knuth suggests that it might be a factor to consider in picking a partner tor a better-ball competition.  Take the difference between handicap and anti-handicap.  A good pairing would be a player with a low difference (i.e. a very consistent player) with a player with a high difference (more erratic).  

http://www.popeofslope.com/guidelines/anti.html

[Missouri Swede]

18 minutes ago, MarvChamp said:

But it's only because I could post ALL scores, not just those when I golfed with my men's group.

But you're not posting rounds when you play solo are you?  (You have to have somebody with you--anybody--to post a score for handicap.)

[Shindig]

7 minutes ago, Missouri Swede said:

But you're not posting rounds when you play solo are you?  (You have to have somebody with you--anybody--to post a score for handicap.)

I must have missed this rule.  Why?  

It doesn't have to be someone I know, does it?  Just someone that was there, like if I sign up as a single and get paired with one or more people.

9 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

This is where I first read about Anti-Handicap.  Handicap guru Dean Knuth suggests that it might be a factor to consider in picking a partner tor a better-ball competition.  Take the difference between handicap and anti-handicap.  A good pairing would be a player with a low difference (i.e. a very consistent player) with a player with a high difference (more erratic).  

http://www.popeofslope.com/guidelines/anti.html

I think I read that site many years ago -- it seems familiar.  Thank you for the link, I'll give it some more reading soon.

[DaveP043]

3 minutes ago, Shindig said:

I must have missed this rule.  Why?  

It doesn't have to be someone I know, does it?  Just someone that was there, like if I sign up as a single and get paired with one or more people.

This rule was changed for the 2016 season.  My best guess, this change was a first step towards unifying handicap systems worldwide, and took the USGA system a little closer to the system used in Europe and elsewhere.  It can be anyone you play with, or even someone who just walks along with you.  You can read a whole lot of discussions of the changes here:

 

[Shindig]

Just now, DaveP043 said:

This rule was changed for the 2016 season.  My best guess, this change was a first step towards unifying handicap systems worldwide, and took the USGA system a little closer to the system used in Europe and elsewhere.  It can be anyone you play with, or even someone who just walks along with you.  You can read a whole lot of discussions of the changes here:

 

Thanks.  I did miss that.  Shoot.  

[MarvChamp]

18 minutes ago, Missouri Swede said:

But you're not posting rounds when you play solo are you?  (You have to have somebody with you--anybody--to post a score for handicap.)

No, no. Primarily because I always play with a golf buddy. -Marv

[shortstop20]

I have read about anti-handicap before but never paid much attention to it. I guess I'm quite consistent because my anti-handicap is less than 5 strokes different.

I do shoot around my average alot so it makes sense.

Edited July 10, 2017 by shortstop20

[Golfingdad]

On 7/4/2017 at 9:04 AM, Shindig said:

Anti-handicap is just a measure of variance.  It's generally higher than your real handicap (unless you posted 20 identical differentials).

 

On 7/4/2017 at 4:47 PM, DaveP043 said:

This is where I first read about Anti-Handicap.  Handicap guru Dean Knuth suggests that it might be a factor to consider in picking a partner tor a better-ball competition.  Take the difference between handicap and anti-handicap.  A good pairing would be a player with a low difference (i.e. a very consistent player) with a player with a high difference (more erratic).  

http://www.popeofslope.com/guidelines/anti.html

Speaking of this, I just calculated mine last week for the first time in awhile and I've become quite consistent.  It's certainly not all good, because part of what's brought my variance down is that my handicap has gone up, but there have been no wildly awful scores in there for awhile now.  My cap is 5.5 and my anti-cap is 8.5.

Heck, even if you just take the difference between my lowest and highest SINGLE differential right now, it's only 6.5.

[No Mulligans]

My current handicap goal is to have my 20 most recent differentials below 20... 20 below 20

I had 8 in a row until this morning, I shot to a 20.3 differential. Starting over, again.

My anti-handicap is 5 strokes higher than my handicap.  My lowest vs. highest differential difference is 13.2.

Edited July 10, 2017 by No Mulligans