Has the ESR experiment worked?

Russman · 15-08-2014 12:34PM

Boskowski wrote: »

From a completely subjective view our system feels right to me.
Because when I know I play crap it is reflected in my (handicapped) score. A score of 27 points feels like I didn't play well at all, any worse and I'm in nightmare territory. 32 points feel like not great but not terrible. 36 feels pretty good but something was lacking for a very good round. 40 points and a chance if winning feels like I played really really well today and 42 points feels like wow today's was awesome.

This sounds about right, give or take. Although 32 always feels like I played like a w--ker

!!

SaveOurLyric · 15-08-2014 12:58PM

Russman wrote: »

This sounds about right, give or take. Although 32 always feels like I played like a w--ker !!

This 'about right' feeling score depends on your handicap category. About 30pts for a cat 4, up to about 34 for a cat1. Because of the greater consistency of the better golfer.

SaveOurLyric · 15-08-2014 01:03PM

Boskowski wrote: »

From a completely subjective view our system feels right to me.
Because when I know I play crap it is reflected in my (handicapped) score. A score of 27 points feels like I didn't play well at all, any worse and I'm in nightmare territory. 32 points feel like not great but not terrible. 36 feels pretty good but something was lacking for a very good round. 40 points and a chance if winning feels like I played really really well today and 42 points feels like wow today's was awesome.

Isn't that how it sbould be? 36 points shouldn't feel 'not great but not terrible'.

Or is it subjectively working for me cos I'm an honest golfer to myself and a lot aren't?

Maybe I'm having this arseways. Maybe it's just how I'm conditioned over time to the system.

But why I feel like the above is because it feels in line with what not handicapped golfers (pros) do. A pro shooting a 68 on a not easy course is deemed having a great day. A 66 is deemed pretty fantastic and stringing a couple of those together will almost certainly see you on the top of the leaderboard.

This is the correct interpretation of the Congu system, and how it is designed to work.
Boskowski, thanks. I was beginning to despair that there wasnt a golfer out there who had the correct expectation for their golf scores versus their handicap (and presumably anyone posting here is more interested/thinks about golf more than many playing, yet it still feels like even the keen afficionados are pretty much in the dark) .

Ciaranra · 15-08-2014 01:05PM

Saveourlyric do you have salmon for dinner every day your full of knowlege on all this

SaveOurLyric · 15-08-2014 01:10PM

Russman wrote: »

Ahh f--k it I don't know ! Rightly or wrongly, probably wrongly according to the algorithms, I tend to come down on the side that a golfer should be fairly comfortable off his handicap (within reason).

He is (as long as he knows he should only shoot an average of about 32).
You cannot really expect that you should be 'comfortable' off your handicap every individual round or anywhere near that. Your score distribution, liker everyone else is simply to wide.

A modification could be (that would make no fundamental difference, but might make people feel better), would be just to add 1 to 5 (according to category) to everyones handicap. Then you would average about 36.
Just dont get upset when you shoot 42 points and hear that you have been beaten by someone with 48 : their relative beating of you has not changed.

SaveOurLyric · 15-08-2014 01:13PM

Ciaranra wrote: »

Saveourlyric do you have salmon for dinner every day your full of knowlege on all this

Unfortunately not!

I am impressed that someone did reach the intended idea of the system without considering it too deeply from the mathematics side though.

FixdePitchmark · 15-08-2014 03:26PM

I'm not at this handicap thing long. Someone told me I'm still "naive". Lol.

started at 8 now 6.6.

Have played 18 comps. Most away (another interesting angle).
Have had 12 (.1) - 4 cuts total 2.6 in cuts. 2 in buffer.

Today I had 36 points . Played well made a balls of two holes.

But I feel, that I almost have to play out of my skin to have 36.

I think . Even to have a 32 on a bad day I have to try to the death. I Normally.
Do. Have handed in all cards except 1 (strange situation)

The point I'm getting around to. And people keep saying worry about your own prize your handicap.

I find the last thing the hardest bit. Because the majority of golfers are sort of laughing at you breaking your balls for a 29 , then saying winner 41. (Lol).

Yes I've had a 41. But it was almost an outer body experience.

How on earth are we having so many 40 +

Again . I know don't worry about it. But as humans you have to go in and say 28 pts.

And do you know what . I worked hard for that 28.

I don't view a buffer as a success. I'm wrong on that. But that error has been engrained in me by golfers who have played for years in comps. (I'm confused).

Russman · 15-08-2014 04:03PM

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

I'm not at this handicap thing long. Someone told me I'm still "naive". Lol.

started at 8 now 6.6.

Have played 18 comps. Most away (another interesting angle).
Have had 12 (.1) - 4 cuts total 2.6 in cuts. 2 in buffer.

Today I had 36 points . Played well made a balls of two holes.

But I feel almost have to play out of my skin to have 36.

I think . Even to have a 32 on a bad day I have to try to the death. I Normally.
Do. Have handed in all cards except 1 (strange situation)

The point I'm getting around to. And people keep saying worry about your own prize your handicap.

I find the last thing the hardest bit. Because the majority of golfers are sort of laughing at you breaking your balls for a 29 , then saying winner 41. (Lol).

Yes I've had a 41. But it was almost an outer body experience.

How on earth are we having so many 40 +

Again . I know don't worry about it. But as humans you have to go in and say 28 pts.

And do you know what . I worked hard for that 28.

I don't view a buffer as a success. I'm wrong on that. But that error has been engrained in me by golfers who have played for years in comps. (I'm confused).

Can totally see your point.
"They" are correct, don't worry about prizes, if you did, you'd do your head in. My only goal is to get as low as I can, BUT, I don't want to do it via ESR, that's just my opinion on it.

How are we having so many 40+ scores ? As someone pointed out earlier, out of a field of 100-150, someone is bound to play very well, that's just golf IMO, it happens. Next week it could be you shooting two or three over for that 40pts.

I know where I fall down is that I couldn't give a toss whether I have 25, 28 or 32 points, they're all the same to me, an unwanted 0.1

The other thing is the course(s) you play on. We've had a long period where 37pts was winning most comps, with the odd 38 or 39. In the higher classes 34 or 35 might even win. A few weeks ago they cut back a lot of the rough (its not gone, but its a lot shorter) and there has been a few higher scores each week, usually one score of 40+ and maybe two 38s, still not crazy stuff though.
74pts won our Captains over two rounds, a few years ago that would have been unheard of, you'd need 78-80. Whether that means the system is working, the course is harder or we've no decent golfers left, who knows !
Since we changed our course and added a couple of new holes, its a lot harder, but the GUI came out to re-look at the SS and it went up by 2 shots - as a result people are getting cut much easier.

I think that's he benefit of the USA system with slope ratings etc. Over here course are basically assumed to be equal, but in reality a 5 handicapper out of club X could be a far better golfer than a 5 out of club Y.

GreeBo · 15-08-2014 04:20PM

Russman wrote: »

74pts won our Captains over two rounds, a few years ago that would have been unheard of, you'd need 78-80. Whether that means the system is working, the course is harder or we've no decent golfers left, who knows !
Since we changed our course and added a couple of new holes, its a lot harder, but the GUI came out to re-look at the SS and it went up by 2 shots - as a result people are getting cut much easier.

Our SSS is +1, I dont find that people get cut easier, but it does make it that easier to avoid a 0.1

Russman wrote: »

I think that's he benefit of the USA system with slope ratings etc. Over here course are basically assumed to be equal, but in reality a 5 handicapper out of club X could be a far better golfer than a 5 out of club Y.

The CSS is designed to take into account the difficulty of the course, on the day, by being based on the sss. Every course has a sss given by GUI, think it's wrong to say all courses are treated the same.

Russman · 15-08-2014 06:14PM

GreeBo wrote: »

Our SSS is +1, I dont find that people get cut easier, but it does make it that easier to avoid a 0.1

The CSS is designed to take into account the difficulty of the course, on the day, by being based on the sss. Every course has a sss given by GUI, think it's wrong to say all courses are treated the same.

Maybe so in theory, but are you seriously suggesting that 5 handicappers (or whatever handicap) are all much the same, no matter what course they play out of ? Most SS scores are within a shot or two of par, I can think of plenty of courses that are more than a few shots harder than others.

SaveOurLyric · 15-08-2014 06:16PM

Russman wrote: »

I think that's he benefit of the USA system with slope ratings etc. Over here course are basically assumed to be equal, but in reality a 5 handicapper out of club X could be a far better golfer than a 5 out of club Y.

Thats not the case. SSS makes that adjustment. And further enhances it by CSS since Congu handicaps are (predominantly) determined by competition rounds. Which can be argues is more thorough than the US system since it is more accurately assessing your necessary handicap correction relative to how a bunch of other golfer played the same course setup in the same conditions.

For instance, as easy as they come, Leopardstown is par 67 but SSS is -2 = 65. Royal County Down is par 71 but SSS +4 = 75. Thats a 6 shot difference on course 'difficulty' alone.

SSS is not just plucked out of the air either. But is a very systematised course asessment, shot by shot for each hole, which evaluates according to the difficulties presented by each shot: hazards from the tee; is there punishment left and right, or is there a bailout area, if the hazard itself sparse trees making a half or one shot chip-out recover likely or is it an OB inflicting an effective 2 shot penalty; etc, etc.

GreeBo · 15-08-2014 06:37PM

Russman wrote: »

Maybe so in theory, but are you seriously suggesting that 5 handicappers (or whatever handicap) are all much the same, no matter what course they play out of ? Most SS scores are within a shot or two of par, I can think of plenty of courses that are more than a few shots harder than others.

All 5 handicappers are different, do you have any examples of a 5 handicap golfer who I'd a joint member and always scores much better or worse than one club or another?

Handicap isn't about individual rounds, it's about many, many rounds. So yes, I am suggesting that a correctly handicapped 5 is the same across multiple courses, and CONGU agrees!

SaveOurLyric · 15-08-2014 06:38PM

This discussion prompted me to pull out again after some years, a book, 'The Science of Golf' by John Wesson. Interesting to check out his chapter on handicaps if you have it.
His both theoretical, and some experimental data, is very much in agreement with the Congu assessment of the system (and as I have tried to explain in various posts above).
A few points struck me :
- He concludes that a scratch golfer averages about 1 shot worse than his handicap. A 22 handicapper will average 6 score worse than his 22 (no data but its clear this difference will be even greater for a 28 hc).

- He compares the US and Congu systems. The same phenomenon occurs in each system: though even more so for the American : the scratch American will be 0 shots away from his hc, the 28hc American averaging 8 shots away from his hc. American hc are that bit lower.

- Despite the popular moan of low men ("we never stand a chance, high hc men always win), both systems confer a slight advantage to low handicapper. They have a greater chance of winning a hc comp than high men. Whats more, this is explicitly and deliberately built in to the US system (title a 'Bonus for Excellence' factor of 0.96). In the Congu, it happens as a by-product of the graded .1,.2,.3,.4 reduction categories.

- He calculates the chances of playing to your handicap in a given round as a sliding graph from 1 in 2 for scratch players, up to 1 in 13 for 28hcs.

- The book was written before the ESR and he does examine how quickly an 'incorrect' hc corrects itself. If your hc is 3 shots too high, it takes approx 20 rounds for it to correct itself. (No mention of the annual review system). So for me, if the ESR accelerates this correction, it has to be a good thing.

Russman · 15-08-2014 06:42PM

GreeBo wrote: »

, and CONGU agrees!

And CONGU are never wrong.....:D

SaveOurLyric · 15-08-2014 06:44PM

GreeBo wrote: »

So yes, I am suggesting that a correctly handicapped 5 is the same across multiple courses, and CONGU agrees!

You are correct here.
Only my guess this time rather than any analysis, but, suspect that if you were to really study a 'lab sample' of 5 handicappers under neutral conditions, you would find variations between them. And some part of that would be due to their home courses. But that would be a minor part. The bigger factor causing a wider spread in their true performace than should be found, would be due to ..... those manipulating their handicaps (both low for vanity, and high to 'be competitive') and those who play honestly and dont.

SaveOurLyric · 15-08-2014 06:50PM

Russman wrote: »

And CONGU are never wrong.....:D

It not so much that they agree. Its more that its what they set the system up to do in the first place. So I think its Greebo agreeing with Congu rather that vice versa !.

Mentioned by someone else. But I would agree that the biggest fault in the Congu system is its assumption of a perfect ('ly honest) world, and their failure to communicate, or device a more readily understood system. Not doing so is part of the root motivation/justification/tendency to banditry that is widespread enough to be a problem in most clubs (and assemble all those guys to play each other on interclub teams and you really have an interesting mess...;)).

GreeBo · 15-08-2014 09:27PM

Maybe congu should post all the scores every week to demonstrate the true reality.

SaveOurLyric · 15-08-2014 10:38PM

GreeBo wrote: »

Maybe congu should post all the scores every week to demonstrate the true reality.

If people opened their eyes a little to the comp results on their club notice boards I think they would see it. Have a look back through some of your clubs results on howdidido. Count the number of scores that beat CSS. Take either 2 or 3 as the average buffer zone for simplicity. And count the number in that range. Count number who didnt make either of the above.
You will see roughly ratios of 1:2:7. i.e. only roughly 1 in 10 rounds will you beat your handicap. And given that 5-10 people probably do that the same week, you will probably only win about once every 80 competitions.
From my own club, 20 counting cards in a year is quite typical. Only a handful break 40. Many pretty active golfers only put in 10-15 cards a year (also playing classics, fourballs, interclubs, matchplays, casual games, etc). So a quite typical regular golfer should only expect to win a singles comp about one every 4 years.

SaveOurLyric · 15-08-2014 10:40PM

Jerry Seinfeld wrote: »

Phelen was 17 shots better today, just missed the cut.

From todays Euro tour. 82 yesteray, 65 today. And club handicap hackers go out once or twice a week expecting to be consistent ?

galwaylad14 · 30-10-2014 05:50PM

I managed a fairly tidy 41 off 5 playing in an open competition today and I had 42 a while back off the same handicap so it's my second "exceptional" score in the last while. So I went in search of this thread in the hope I'd get an ESR of 0.5 but am I right in saying I won't be eligible to get one? I'll just about get cut to 4 for it alright but I had hoped I'd get an esr aswell to put me down close to 3 for the winter.

Before I posted I read back on a few posts actually and it's interesting to see people's views on playing to their handicap. I'd say if I play well but maybe don't hole enough putts or if I make a mistake or 2 then il have around 36. Play well and make the putts and no silly mistakes I'll have a round like today. If I play averagely and make a few mistakes I'll have maybe 32 or 33.

Dr_Colossus · 30-10-2014 06:13PM

galwaylad14 wrote: »

I managed a fairly tidy 41 off 5 playing in an open competition today and I had 42 a while back off the same handicap so it's my second "exceptional" score in the last while. So I went in search of this thread in the hope I'd get an ESR of 0.5 but am I right in saying I won't be eligible to get one? I'll just about get cut to 4 for it alright but I had hoped I'd get an esr aswell to put me down close to 3 for the winter.

Before I posted I read back on a few posts actually and it's interesting to see people's views on playing to their handicap. I'd say if I play well but maybe don't hole enough putts or if I make a mistake or 2 then il have around 36. Play well and make the putts and no silly mistakes I'll have a round like today. If I play averagely and make a few mistakes I'll have maybe 32 or 33.

Playing off 5 you're Cat1 and the ESR doesn't apply to Cat1 golfers.

Very hard to drop handicap once you're into Cat 1 but if your good rounds with a few mistakes and/or missed putts equal 36 pts you won't be long dropping some more shots.

Norfolk Enchants_ · 30-10-2014 08:37PM

Dr_Colossus wrote: »

Playing off 5 you're Cat1 and the ESR doesn't apply to Cat1 golfers.

Very hard to drop handicap once you're into Cat 1 but if your good rounds with a few mistakes and/or missed putts equal 36 pts you won't be long dropping some more shots.

Not if the CSS is 38pts, you'll get the .1 back and your 36pts is pretty much the same as 0pts.

galwaylad14 · 31-10-2014 09:37AM

Norfolk Enchants_ wrote: »

Not if the CSS is 38pts, you'll get the .1 back and your 36pts is pretty much the same as 0pts.

Exactly. Although 38 isn't common but it can happen, it really is so difficult to get cut, I'm not that long in cat 1 but already I find it frustrating with the 0.1 cuts and the having to have 35 to avoid a .1. I also don't get why the esr doesn't apply, can my handicap not be too high for me like anyone else's can?

Rikand · 31-10-2014 09:51AM

I wish the ESR applied for cat 1 golfers myself. Would have made it to 3 myself a couple of years ago had it been in play

charlieIRL · 31-10-2014 11:11AM

galwaylad14 wrote: »

Exactly. Although 38 isn't common but it can happen, it really is so difficult to get cut, I'm not that long in cat 1 but already I find it frustrating with the 0.1 cuts and the having to have 35 to avoid a .1. I also don't get why the esr doesn't apply, can my handicap not be too high for me like anyone else's can?

ours is always 37!!

Tecking Fypo · 31-10-2014 11:15AM

Maybe someone can help me figure this out.

I played my local course recently and came second in the comp. 4 weeks ago i beat the CSS by 7 strokes and beat it by 4 on the last day. Without realising, this incurred an ESR reduction of one shot in addition to the cut applied by the most recent score. This was applied and notified to me by email.

However a couple of days later the ESR was removed and also it appears that the CSS for the last comp was changed retrospectively.

Would this be unusual or am I missing something here?

Course was in Cork and both were qualifying competitions.

Rikand · 31-10-2014 11:59AM

charlieIRL wrote: »

ours is always 37!!

35 still gets 0.1 back if you're a Cat 1 golfer though

Norfolk Enchants_ · 31-10-2014 07:16PM

galwaylad14 wrote: »

Exactly. Although 38 isn't common but it can happen, it really is so difficult to get cut, I'm not that long in cat 1 but already I find it frustrating with the 0.1 cuts and the having to have 35 to avoid a .1. I also don't get why the esr doesn't apply, can my handicap not be too high for me like anyone else's can?

An SSS of 38pts is way more common than you'd think, I can think of 6 courses local to me (including my home course) that have an SSS of 38pts and 2 other courses that you'd imagine would be have an SSS of 36pts or lower but they are actually 37pts, but because they are both links the CSS deviates from SSS more often the a parkland would.
It's hugely frustrating to shoot your handicap and get .1 back, but unfortunatly that's the curse of Cat 1 golfers.
Not sure why the ESR doesn't apply to Cat 1, I too was denied an ESR of a full shot in June this year because of it, just have to play better next year I guess.

charlieIRL wrote: »

ours is always 37!!

It can't be, it may seem like it's always 37pts, but in reality CSS moves +/- from SSS about 30% of the time, but perhaps because around 70% of the time CSS=SSS people automatically incorrectly assume it's the case 100% of the time.

GreeBo · 31-10-2014 08:34PM

Norfolk Enchants_ wrote: »

It's hugely frustrating to shoot your handicap and get .1 back, but unfortunatly that's the curse of Cat 1 golfers.

Only an issue because "most" other people are shooting betting than their handicap on the course.
Shooting your handicap when everyone else is consistently shooting better means you are under-performing.

Its also not just CAT1 golfers.

Norfolk Enchants_ · 31-10-2014 08:58PM

GreeBo wrote: »

Only an issue because "most" other people are shooting betting than their handicap on the course.
Shooting your handicap when everyone else is consistently shooting better means you are under-performing.

Its also not just CAT1 golfers.

If only it was that simple and yes in the example we are talking about it is only a CAT 1 problem.

Has the ESR experiment worked?

Comments