Handicap manipulation?

mike12

AGC wrote: »

Not if he is doing it only a few times a year with .1's in between - Which this guy doesn't even seem to be doing.

In fairness if people saw some of my front 9 back 9 combinations this year they would be asking questions!!

He can only go up 10 .1s from his lowest handicap so he can do it once if the Esr gets him.
U know this happens but I'm a bit dubious.
I'm off 12 I've been under par for the first 6 holes this year and ended up with 33 points.
I've won 2 captains prizes in my previous club I was coming down in handicap at the time.

I'm the type of golfer that can have a couple of super rounds a year but collect .1s at an alarming rate.
I can't chip so my super rounds are the days I miss where I can putt or hit a lot of greens.

Dtoffee

Seve OB wrote: »

http://www.congu.com/faqs/old_site/9%20Hole%20Scores.pdf

so to shoot 24 is effectively a score of 42, because they just add a neutral 18 points for the unplayed 9. so based on css of 36 that's a cut of 1.2 for our "bandit"

In actual fact, I would think it might be easier then to get cut in a 9 hole comp as many of us can play very well for 9 holes, but have a poor 9 then to balance it out.

Does that still apply when theres winter rules with placing, forward tees etc etc ??

Because the non qualifying competitions are the ones where the big scores tend to arrive ... its open season when the computer is off :rolleyes:

The Rape of Lucretia

Russman wrote: »

Handicap has never been IMO properly explained by the governing bodies as a players potential (if that's in fact what it is, I think myself its still a little grey, albeit I haven't looked up the definition in a while)

'Potential' is a reasonable way to think of it. More specifically, what it does is attempt to equalise the probability of any given level golfer, shooting their statistically likely best score. So that in theory everyone starts out with an equal chance of winning.

That happens to be about 6 better than CSS and should only happen about once every 100 rounds (this assumes a 'correct' steady state handicap, and not a newbie, someone deciding to get lessons, practice, and drive to improve when previously they didnt).

Roughly, being 4 or more better than CSS should be achievable about 1 in 25 rounds. Only about 30% of your rounds should be CSS or better. i.e. a currect hc will have most golfers not hit 'their handicap' two out of three rounds. (this varies a bit according to level - lower handicap golfers are more consistent).

Which shows you how any golfers steadily on the CSS score, one below it, or a few ahead of it, are clearly keeping a few strokes in reserve. Particularly higher handicappers. They simply couldnt do it unless they were keeping a few shots in their back pocket that turns what should have been 32 points into 35. And yet they will feel they were playing badly - they were, relatively - its just not reflected in their score.

(btw, people moan about winners being in the 43, 44 points level and how they can never do it. In fact it is generally what the winning score can quite likely be. And, should feel out of reach for most golfers - because it is so rare. Play a reasonable 20-30 singles qualifying comps per year, and to not shoot such a score in several years is in fact to be expected.)

Senna

Russman wrote: »

I don't think they all know they are doing it. Lots of older golfers have grown up with the simple notion that a 10 handicap should pretty much always be close to 10 over par, give or take. Its a fairly logical conclusion to come to.
Handicap has never been IMO properly explained by the governing bodies as a players potential (if that's in fact what it is, I think myself its still a little grey, albeit I haven't looked up the definition in a while)

I really don't think there is an explanation needed. If you don't manipulate your returning scores, as the vast majority of golfers don't, then it is what it is, sometime you play to it, some times you don't.
If you believe that is not the way handicaps work and you need to manipulate your scores to keep to a certain handicap, then I don't belive any golfer does this due to a lack of understanding of the handicap system. More likely they understand the system completely, don't agree with it and so take matters into their own hands.

spoke2cun

I think it shows a bad example to the younger players at the club. I also think that the HC secretary should take a firmer stance against it. I was hoping that someone here would have come across a similar situation at their club and were able to tell us what they did about it.

The Rape of Lucretia

Senna wrote: »

I really don't think there is an explanation needed. If you don't manipulate your returning scores, as the vast majority of golfers don't, then it is what it is, sometime you play to it, some times you don't.
If you believe that is not the way handicaps work and you need to manipulate your scores to keep to a certain handicap, then I don't belive any golfer does this due to a lack of understanding of the handicap system. More likely they understand the system completely, don't agree with it and so take matters into their own hands.

I do think there are people out there who think they should be pretty much on the CSS. Lets call it the 36 point attitude. If you are averaging that, they hitting 40+ will happen now and again (not on demand, mind), and so they will feel that is reasonable - to win a few competitions a year. They would feel that 32 points is a bad day becuase they couldnt push to 36 let alone beyond), even though averaging about 32 is exactly what they should do. And the feeling that shooting 43 is beyond them should be there. The mistaken golfer, on the buffer zone of 32-33 points feeling he cant play to his handicap may feel quite justified, rather than mercenary and dishonest about it, not caring too much about the last few holes, and ensure he gets a .1 back rather than play on regardless and be in the buffer zone.

(btw, you can look at this from another angle and it stacks up also : a typical mens comp field can have 100+ golfers. So in such a field, you should have a 1 in 100+ chance of winning (and so likely only do it every 3-5 years for most golfers). In a small club with maybe 40 competitors, yes, you will win more often, but be able to do so at times with only 38 points instead of the 43).

The Rape of Lucretia

spoke2cun wrote: »

I believe every golfer's prize or target should be to lower your HC. But it seems that some would prefer vouchers as prizes.

To each his own though, no ?

The Rape of Lucretia

spoke2cun wrote: »

I believe every golfer's prize or target should be to lower your HC.

Thats not really the handicap system though. In fact, pushing to lower your handicap is a temporary bucking of the system, which is based on a steady state skill level for everyone.
So people making a step drive to improve their handicaps, playing more, etc, are bucking the system in theory. All perfectly legitimately though. And note, there is no such thing as a free lunch - its a two way street - strivers who get cut and then taper off their efforts, visits to the range, general focus on the game, encounter the same think in reverse. As their game regresses, the become even less likely than the steady state golfer to compete or win. To the win every 5 years 'correct' handicap golfer you made add on another 3 years or so if comeones game regresses by a few shots. Leaving the previously keen golfer with the sinking feeling that the game is now impossible, he cannot compete, and a lack of enjoyment in the game. But that is only payback time for the period previously when he was on the way down, and had a greater chance than the steady state golfer, of winning.

Russman

Senna wrote: »

I really don't think there is an explanation needed. If you don't manipulate your returning scores, as the vast majority of golfers don't, then it is what it is, sometime you play to it, some times you don't.
If you believe that is not the way handicaps work and you need to manipulate your scores to keep to a certain handicap, then I don't belive any golfer does this due to a lack of understanding of the handicap system. More likely they understand the system completely, don't agree with it and so take matters into their own hands.

I agree with most of that, but I really don't think there are many people who take matters into their own hands because they don't like the system. What I mean is that, for example, I'm playing with a lot of the same guys say for 20 or 30 years since I was a junior and, almost to a man, they'll tell you that broadly speaking you should be in or around your handicap most of the time. Now, whether they actually think this through or believe this is even possible, I doubt it myself, I think its simply a thought process that equates 10 handicap with 10 over par. I think most people have that link between handicap and number of shots over par somewhere in their mind, and if/when they start golf, nothing is done to explain that's not actually what handicap is.

In reality I don't think anyone's scores would bear this out, its just a wrong perception, idea, theory, call it what you will, that they've always had. They certainly don't go out of their way to make it so in their own cases. I'd bet even the guy who thinks he able to play to his handicap most of the time, and is convinced he actually does, would be surprised at what he averages if he took the time to analyse a number of rounds.

Russman

spoke2cun wrote: »

I think it shows a bad example to the younger players at the club. I also think that the HC secretary should take a firmer stance against it. I was hoping that someone here would have come across a similar situation at their club and were able to tell us what they did about it.

The problem is that its very subjective and open to abuse, personal vendettas, settling of scores etc. If someone is not doing the scores or not winning the prizes then it could easily be argued that they're not in fact a bandit. You need some form of evidence (ie team event wins, 4/ball wins, 9 hole wins etc) and if you have that then the annual review should do the business. Otherwise you're in the realm of "....sure Joe hit the 15th green in two the other day into the wind with a 5 iron, how the f--k is he still off 14 ?...."


Plus there's the other elephant in the room of clubs "preparing" their inter-club teams for the following year or three. Some of the handicap limited competitions require a team of out and out bandits to be anywhere close to competitive. Its not right, but it is what it is. It'd be all to easy for a guy heading for a cut in a meaningless end of season singles that might take him below the limit for a team he really wants to play in, to drop a few shots to make sure it doesn't happen. You often even hear of team managers warning or asking guys not to go below x handicap for the year because they're earmarked to be a partner for Joe in next year's xyz shield.

Rikand

Dtoffee wrote: »

I am convinced the only way to deal with guys like this is to have a league table of wins in all competitions (inc 9H/teams/4ball etc etc) posted up for everyone to see ..... its amazing how these guys dont like being under the spotlight :rolleyes: and its also true that most members would be surprised at how many prizes can be collected by one member throughout a golf year.

Contrary to this I'm aware of a similar ploy at a club I know. It's amazing how quick the players that they thought were manipulating in one way, changed their tactic and manipulated the game in the other direction.

Spotlight is immaterial. All that matters is the prizes

nuac

About 30 years ago I recall discussion re those handicap bandts.

Idea was to have a very low monetary limit on prizes
Haven't been a member recently/
Sorry to hear it is still going on
i

Senna

Russman wrote: »

I think its simply a thought process that equates 10 handicap with 10 over par. I think most people have that link between handicap and number of shots over par somewhere in their mind

Agreed, but that's completely normal, shooting 36 points and your happy, standing on the 10th tee and working out that you need 21 points this 9 for 36 points, again completely normal.
I don't know anyone who shoots 32 points and say "well that's normal".
I think most players either want to lower their handicap or be able to constantly shoot it. But it's a moving target, if your playing well enough to shoot your handicap a few rounds in a row, chances are it's going to drop and now you have a new target. Sometimes the target isnt realistic and it's again it's trying just to hit it regularly.

The Rape of Lucretia

Senna wrote: »

I don't know anyone who shoots 32 points and say "well that's normal".

You will overhear it, or something like it in a locker room every weekend :

Player 1 : "So 2, how did you do today?"

Player 2 : "Pretty good. Quite chuffed. 30 points. Which, being off 23, and given todays CSS was 35, has me one shot better than my score distribution profile mean. A one round sample is unsound as a statistical indicator of the level of my game improving. But nonetheless, it is consistent with my mean scores this year, and actually improves it by about 0.12 shots, so, being an optimist and all, I can go home dreaming that I might win a competition within the next four years, rather just in the next 5 years I might previously have calculated as most likely."

We've all heard it, countless times.

Dtoffee

Rikand wrote: »

Contrary to this I'm aware of a similar ploy at a club I know. It's amazing how quick the players that they thought were manipulating in one way, changed their tactic and manipulated the game in the other direction.

Spotlight is immaterial. All that matters is the prizes

Are you saying the club showed a regularly updated list of prize winners, but those prize winners changed their tactic and manipulated the game in another way ? Sorry I am lost in this one ..... if they were cleaning up and their names were top of the prize winners, how did they manage to manipulate the system and keep winning without it being noticed? I've probably got the wrong end of the stick, what happened?