Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

New Worldwide Handicap System

Options
1…1819212324…65

Comments

  • Options
    #602
    OS_Head
    Closed Accounts Posts: 125 ✭✭OS_Head


    Russman wrote: »
    I could see it getting very messy if different tees were allowed in the same competitions though.
    Wouldn't it then be possible for two guys, say both off 16 but different exacts, depending on the slope, to get different playing handicaps for the same set of tees ?
    I've just plugged the numbers in and someone off 16.0 plays off 16 on both our sets of tees, whereas someone off 16.1 plays off 17 from our back tees. There's not a lot of difference so it might make sense for the 16.1 guy to choose the back tees to get that extra shot in the same competition. I'm sure it would work the other way too. Just sounds a bit counter intuitive to what we've been used to to be honest.

    What's the club? I just plugged 16 handicap for Elmgreen and the front mens tees came back with a revised handicap of 14 while the mens back tee returned a 17 handicap. I checked a couple others, Portmarnock hotel came back 18 and 23 for mens front and back and St Margarets was 17 front and 20 back. For each tee I also put in 16.1 and was unable to get any change in the handicap over 16.


  • Options
    #603
    Rikand
    Registered Users Posts: 20,341 ✭✭✭✭Rikand


    hurleronditch wrote: »
    It would actually be very interesting. There might be exploitable gaps in the slope indexes, but in reality it’s going to be minimal.

    A few risk items would be a fella forgetting what tee he’s off if you have a 4 ball all playing a different tee, especially on a par 3 where you might just blindly load up on the same tee box after the fella in front of you.

    Maybe to start clubs could start by mandating that for medals, majors and stroke events the senior scratch lads play the blacks, the juniors play blues, intermediates the whites and the minors the yellows. Once fellas get the hang of the etiquette of teeing off, it would likely speed things up massively as the 28 handicappers aren’t trying to play stroke play off the tips with the greens quick and the rough up.

    The uptake from the minors might be good, but the senior and junior scratch lads would be leaving in their droves. No way to be able to compete against the shots AND the shorter course


  • Options
    #604
    hurleronditch
    Registered Users Posts: 656 ✭✭✭hurleronditch


    Rikand wrote: »
    The uptake from the minors might be good, but the senior and junior scratch lads would be leaving in their droves. No way to be able to compete against the shots AND the shorter course

    You’d be surprised though, the slopes if done correctly should even this out. I’m off 9, if I’m playing the whites and getting 9 strokes, and an aul lad off 27 is getting 20 yards a hold off me to play the yellows, but I’m only giving him 15 or 16 shots instead of 18, that feels reasonably fair, no?

    It’s so dependent on course and conditions it’s impossible to know until you actually start running comps I would admit. If after a few weeks the net prizes are showing a tendency towards one group or another you either need to amend your slopes or revert to single tee structures


  • Options
    #605
    Russman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,853 ✭✭✭Russman


    OS_Head wrote: »
    What's the club? I just plugged 16 handicap for Elmgreen and the front mens tees came back with a revised handicap of 14 while the mens back tee returned a 17 handicap. I checked a couple others, Portmarnock hotel came back 18 and 23 for mens front and back and St Margarets was 17 front and 20 back. For each tee I also put in 16.1 and was unable to get any change in the handicap over 16.

    I did it for Slade Valley, slope of 120 off the whites and 123 off the blues.


  • Options
    #606
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,161 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    Russman wrote: »
    I did it for Slade Valley, slope of 120 off the whites and 123 off the blues.
    That's not a huge difference to be fair. You might find some holes are almost sharing tee boxes and others have a significant difference.

    As an aside, have just confirmed that the data on the USGA website are correct. Slope and course ratings are exactly as issued to clubs by the GUI.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #607
    OS_Head
    Closed Accounts Posts: 125 ✭✭OS_Head


    Russman wrote: »
    I did it for Slade Valley, slope of 120 off the whites and 123 off the blues.

    Thanks for that. I input the numbers for 16 handicap and they came back as 16 for front tees and 18 for the back. I got the same results for 16.1. No difference.


  • Options
    #608
    Russman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,853 ✭✭✭Russman


    prawnsambo wrote: »
    That's not a huge difference to be fair. You might find some holes are almost sharing tee boxes and others have a significant difference.

    As an aside, have just confirmed that the data on the USGA website are correct. Slope and course ratings are exactly as issued to clubs by the GUI.

    Absolutely. That why I think it’s a bit odd that someone could choose a set of tees to play off and get a shot more than their buddy who plays off the same handicap but maybe 0.1 lower in exact terms.
    I suppose it’s just a new way of thinking that we’ll have to get used to.


  • Options
    #609
    Russman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,853 ✭✭✭Russman


    OS_Head wrote: »
    Thanks for that. I input the numbers for 16 handicap and they came back as 16 for front tees and 18 for the back. I got the same results for 16.1. No difference.

    I did it this way:

    Handicap Index = 16.1
    Course Handicap (blue tees) = 16.1 x 123/113 = 17.525, rounded to 18
    Playing Handicap (95%) = 18 x 0.95 = 17.1, rounded to 17.

    Course Handicap (white tees) = 16.1 x 120/113 = 17.097, rounded to 17
    Playing Handicap (95%) = 17 x 0.95 = 16.15, rounded to 16.

    Handicap Index = 16.0
    Course Handicap (blue tees) = 16.0 x 123/113 = 17.416, rounded to 17
    Playing Handicap (95%) = 17 x 0.95 = 16.15, rounded to 16.

    Course Handicap (white tees) = 16.0 x 120/113 = 16.991, rounded to 17
    Playing Handicap (95%) = 17 x 0.95 = 16.15, rounded to 16.

    Perhaps I'm wrong with the roundings but that's the way I took it when reading the info the other day, that the index is rounded to the nearest tenth and the Course & Playing handicaps are rounded to whole numbers.


  • Options
    #610
    OS_Head
    Closed Accounts Posts: 125 ✭✭OS_Head


    Russman wrote: »
    I did it this way:
    ....
    Perhaps I'm wrong with the roundings but that's the way I took it when reading the info the other day, that the index is rounded to the nearest tenth and the Course & Playing handicaps are rounded to whole numbers.

    I just used the calculator here. https://www.calculator.net/golf-handicap-calculator.html

    Your numbers look correct. Might be something funny going one with the calculator.


  • Options
    #611
    OS_Head
    Closed Accounts Posts: 125 ✭✭OS_Head


    Here is a usga org calculator.... https://www.usga.org/course-handicap-calculator.html


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #612
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,161 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    Russman wrote: »
    I did it this way:

    Handicap Index = 16.1
    Course Handicap (blue tees) = 16.1 x 123/113 = 17.525, rounded to 18
    Playing Handicap (95%) = 18 x 0.95 = 17.1, rounded to 17.

    Course Handicap (white tees) = 16.1 x 120/113 = 17.097, rounded to 17
    Playing Handicap (95%) = 17 x 0.95 = 16.15, rounded to 16.

    Handicap Index = 16.0
    Course Handicap (blue tees) = 16.0 x 123/113 = 17.416, rounded to 17
    Playing Handicap (95%) = 17 x 0.95 = 16.15, rounded to 16.

    Course Handicap (white tees) = 16.0 x 120/113 = 16.991, rounded to 17
    Playing Handicap (95%) = 17 x 0.95 = 16.15, rounded to 16.

    Perhaps I'm wrong with the roundings but that's the way I took it when reading the info the other day, that the index is rounded to the nearest tenth and the Course & Playing handicaps are rounded to whole numbers.
    Where are you getting the 95% from? I know there was talk in the early stages of an adjustment of this type, but afaik, this has been dropped.


  • Options
    #613
    Russman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,853 ✭✭✭Russman


    prawnsambo wrote: »
    Where are you getting the 95% from? I know there was talk in the early stages of an adjustment of this type, but afaik, this has been dropped.

    It’s on page 21 of this

    https://www.golfnet.ie/Documents/WHS%20Player%20Presentation.pdf


  • Options
    #614
    OS_Head
    Closed Accounts Posts: 125 ✭✭OS_Head


    Russman wrote: »
    It’s on page 21 of this

    https://www.golfnet.ie/Documents/WHS%20Player%20Presentation.pdf

    I found this https://www.golfdigest.com/story/voices-the-flaw-in-the-new-world-handicap-system-dean-knuth


    Course Handicap = Handicap Index x (Slope Rating/113) + (Course Rating - par)

    For Sladevalley blue tees.
    16 x (123/113) + 70.4 - 70 equals 17.81 rounded up to 18
    16 x (120/113) + 69.4 - 70 equals 16.39 rounded down to 16

    Similarly
    16.1 x (123/113) + 70.4 - 70 equals 17.92 rounded up to 18
    16.1 x (120/113) + 69.4 - 70 equals 16.49 rounded up to 16

    Note the the rounding off of the last one. If you hit 16.2 you gain an extra shot.


  • Options
    #615
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,161 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    Russman wrote: »
    It’s on page 21 of this

    https://www.golfnet.ie/Documents/WHS%20Player%20Presentation.pdf
    Thanks. So they didn't drop it after all. From a player's perspective, at least only the course handicap has to go on the card. I can see some confusion there though as strokes received could well be different.


  • Options
    #616
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,161 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    OS_Head wrote: »
    I found this https://www.golfdigest.com/story/voices-the-flaw-in-the-new-world-handicap-system-dean-knuth


    Course Handicap = Handicap Index x (Slope Rating/113) + (Course Rating - par)

    For Sladevalley blue tees.
    16 x (123/113) + 70.4 - 70 equals 17.81 rounded up to 18
    16 x (120/113) + 69.4 - 70 equals 16.39 rounded down to 16

    Similarly
    16.1 x (123/113) + 70.4 - 70 equals 17.92 rounded up to 18
    16.1 x (120/113) + 69.4 - 70 equals 16.49 rounded up to 16

    Note the the rounding off of the last one. If you hit 16.2 you gain an extra shot.
    The course rating - par adjustment is definitely gone.


  • Options
    #617
    GreeBo
    Registered Users Posts: 27,073 ✭✭✭✭GreeBo


    OS_Head wrote: »
    Well I guess the proof will be in the pudding. It will be unfortunate if this new system becomes lob sided for any particular group. It's been in use already in Australia, the US and many other countries. I haven't heard or looked for that matter of any big problems yet. I just hope that changing from CONGU is not a special basket case.

    Ah its not the system (either of them!) thats causing the problem its allowing different tees in the same comp.
    So you have yet another handicap to worry about.


  • Options
    #618
    OS_Head
    Closed Accounts Posts: 125 ✭✭OS_Head


    prawnsambo wrote: »
    The course rating - par adjustment is definitely gone.

    Yep, just read now, the UK and Ireland opted out of that.


  • Options
    #619
    OS_Head
    Closed Accounts Posts: 125 ✭✭OS_Head


    Russman wrote: »
    I did it this way:

    Perhaps I'm wrong with the roundings but that's the way I took it when reading the info the other day, that the index is rounded to the nearest tenth and the Course & Playing handicaps are rounded to whole numbers.

    So I think you are correct, It's just a matter of if the Course Handicap gets rounded or not. Apparently there will be lookup tables available in the club house so my guess it's probably rounded.


  • Options
    #620
    Redriddick
    Registered Users Posts: 1,099 ✭✭✭Redriddick


    Where are ye getting the slope etc for courses?


  • Options
    #621
    A Shaved Duck?
    Registered Users Posts: 1,686 ✭✭✭A Shaved Duck?


    Apparently im moving from 15 to 18... better get a move on and actually concentrate the next few weeks


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #622
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,161 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    OS_Head wrote: »
    So I think you are correct, It's just a matter of if the Course Handicap gets rounded or not. Apparently there will be lookup tables available in the club house so my guess it's probably rounded.
    Yeah. I've seen the tables for our club and they only give the course handicap as a whole number. The table is basically the range of handicap indices that yield a particular integer course handicap (like 15.5-16.2 = 18) and after that you apply the percentage to get your strokes received for whatever format you're playing. I assume that percentage will be applied on score entry and won't be on your card.


  • Options
    #623
    OS_Head
    Closed Accounts Posts: 125 ✭✭OS_Head


    Redriddick wrote: »
    Where are ye getting the slope etc for courses?

    https://ncrdb.usga.org/


  • Options
    #624
    OS_Head
    Closed Accounts Posts: 125 ✭✭OS_Head


    prawnsambo wrote: »
    Yeah. I've seen the tables for our club and they only give the course handicap as a whole number. The table is basically the range of handicap indices that yield a particular integer course handicap (like 15.5-16.2 = 18) and after that you apply the percentage to get your strokes received for whatever format you're playing. I assume that percentage will be applied on score entry and won't be on your card.

    OK, that makes sense. I put it into a little Excel file for convenience.


  • Options
    #625
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,161 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    OS_Head wrote: »
    OK, that makes sense. I put it into a little Excel file for convenience.
    Just a couple of observations on your spreadsheet. You should round the course handicap (17) before doing the 95% playing handicap. And the result of that is actually strokes received and not course handicap. This is because the strokes received will change depending on the type of competition.


  • Options
    #626
    OS_Head
    Closed Accounts Posts: 125 ✭✭OS_Head


    prawnsambo wrote: »
    Just a couple of observations on your spreadsheet. You should round the course handicap (17) before doing the 95% playing handicap. And the result of that is actually strokes received and not course handicap. This is because the strokes received will change depending on the type of competition.

    Oh I did, In the 4th column I used the ROUND function 
    =ROUND(C6,0)*0.95
    to give the exact 16.15 then I used the ROUND function again 
    =ROUND(D6,0)
    to give the Course Handicap 16.


  • Options
    #627
    OS_Head
    Closed Accounts Posts: 125 ✭✭OS_Head


    prawnsambo wrote: »
    Just a couple of observations on your spreadsheet. You should round the course handicap (17) before doing the 95% playing handicap. And the result of that is actually strokes received and not course handicap. This is because the strokes received will change depending on the type of competition.

    OK, I just made it a little bit neater.

    Using this round to set it in one go
    =ROUND(SUM(A6*(B6/113)),0)

    And this to set your playing handicap
    =ROUND(SUM(C6,0)*0.95,0)


  • Options
    #628
    Russman
    Registered Users Posts: 5,853 ✭✭✭Russman


    In the nicest possible way, there seems to be something fundamentally wrong with a handicap system that needs spreadsheets and computer packages to work out !😊


  • Options
    #629
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,161 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    Russman wrote: »
    In the nicest possible way, there seems to be something fundamentally wrong with a handicap system that needs spreadsheets and computer packages to work out !😊
    Have you ever tried to work out CSS? :eek:


  • Options
    #630
    prawnsambo
    Registered Users Posts: 13,161 ✭✭✭✭prawnsambo


    OS_Head wrote: »
    OK, I just made it a little bit neater.

    Using this round to set it in one go
    =ROUND(SUM(A6*(B6/113)),0)

    And this to set your playing handicap
    =ROUND(SUM(C6,0)*0.95,0)
    Yeah, that looks better. Just to make a nerdy spreadsheet point, you don't need sum when doing calculations that involve a function. Or even for basic calculations except totalling arrays. Using =(A6*(B6/113),0) works just as well.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #631
    ahnoyouregrand
    Registered Users Posts: 74 ✭✭ahnoyouregrand


    Whats the story with 9 hole rounds? Maybe I did it wrong but it seems to calculate a 9 hole round of 40 as being equivalent to shooting 80 over 18 (So basically just multiplies gross X 2).... Regularly shoot 40 for a 9 hole comp but have never come close to breaking 80! Using the spreadsheet I will be cut to 12 from 18!


Advertisement