Handicap Index and *** Optishot Tour

[CatMan]

Hey Guys,

Eventually we will be moving towards a Handicap process, this will keep the field close but also encourage players to practice and improve there score..
What I have in mind is a Weighted Handicap: Handicap weighted against the Gross.

Works something like this Player A is a Scratch golfer, Player B is a 20 Handicap, it we use a Weight of 75% handicap and 25% Gross Player B would have a handicap of 15 coming into Tournament.. Player A would stay same because he is Scratch..

This process will always give the edge to the better golfer, and will encourage golfers to improve there score instead of just settling.

The Weights can vary from week to week until we find a weight that is fair for all and keep it tight..

Please let me know your thoughts

Thanks
CatMan

[mikerochipshot]

also what it means is they played to that 20% of the time 0f -1 or -2 or even -3 not to the -8 that is once in 350 years or twice in 700.

[mikerochipshot]

one last thing the "average golfer plays 21 rounds a year so those of us obsessed with the game will play many more than that and reach those scores more often...oh and 1 more last thing ...we need more players/flights...LOL

[JohnMeyer]

Looking at my rounds so far and the net scores for the last 8 rounds (only rounds available that we auto auto calculate rounds)

-1, +2, +8, +8, +3, +2, -3, E,

As per article

>50% should between +3 and +6
20% Max should be -1 or -2
5% Max should be -3 or less
-8 should be near impossible

My stats

>+6 = 25%
+3 to +6 = 12.5%
E to +2 =37.5%
-1 to -2= 12.5%
-3 or less = 12.5%

Obviously will be better once have 20 rounds that were auto calculated but not a million miles off it has to be said, 62.5% of my rounds within the area around my cap, -2 to +6 and only the 1 round so far at -3 or less

Not one to not admit I was wrong, it looks like there is something to be said by trusting those in the know, ie Hoganwoods and co and their excellent website, plus the fine people of the USGA

Good job I enjoy making Excel spreadsheets otherwise all this would've been a real waste of my time

[psgolfer]

Also a real handicap needs to be adjusted before entering. For example if you are a 9 HC or lower, you can only record a max of 2 over for any hole. So if you were shooting even par up to the last 2 holes and you took a quad on each of the last two holes, you still can only enter a score of 4 over or lets say a 76 instead of the actual 80 you scored on your card. How many actually do this is a whole other reason for the sandbagging comments.

If you are a higher than a 9 HC it changes to that you can take a max 7 on any hole, so big differences once you hit below that 9 HC mark.

That's one thing I forgot to mention too, is that my scores are "adjusted", true scores would of been higher. Based on my current cap, I max out a double bogey. Where if you are 10 plus then you can take 7's across the board and 20 plus can take 8's.

But that being said, if the handicap system were to be adjusted as John's mentioned, then the only difference is we would all go up 3 strokes, it won't change the spread between us, it will just alter the number we play to but not the spread.

[mikerochipshot]

Looking at my rounds so far and the net scores for the last 8 rounds (only rounds available that we auto auto calculate rounds)

-1, +2, +8, +8, +3, +2, -3, E,

As per article

>50% should between +3 and +6
20% Max should be -1 or -2
5% Max should be -3 or less
-8 should be near impossible

My stats

>+6 = 25%
+3 to +6 = 12.5%
E to +2 =37.5%
-1 to -2= 12.5%
-3 or less = 12.5%

Obviously will be better once have 20 rounds that were auto calculated but not a million miles off it has to be said, 62.5% of my rounds within the area around my cap, -2 to +6 and only the 1 round so far at -3 or less

Not one to not admit I was wrong, it looks like there is something to be said by trusting those in the know, ie Hoganwoods and co and their excellent website, plus the fine people of the USGA

Good job I enjoy making Excel spreadsheets otherwise all this would've been a real waste of my time

also if my math is right your averaging a +2 to your handicap very close to the +3 stated in the article.

[mikerochipshot]

does any one know if the system we use automatically adjust the scores for the +2 or 7max.. 8max above 20?

[JohnMeyer]

-ESC is now used on all league golf holes. I wont go into too much detail but basically all 9 handicaps or lower can not make more than a double bogey, for handicap purposes ONLY. All rounds that are in our system have been computed and a new total score with ESC included has been calculated. This helps remove blow up holes which are not reflective of ones ability, which is the purpose of the handicap.

If you have anymore questions, feel free to ask. We are always looking to try and change things for the better.

Yes all sorted as part of the system for under 9. Not sure about higher caps

[psgolfer]

Yes all sorted as part of the system for under 9. Not sure about higher caps

If Hoganwoods has said that they are adjusting according to ESC, then yes, anyone who is getting 10-19 strokes will be adjusted to 7's across the board and for 20-29 they are adjusted to 8's across the board. 9 and under can post max double bogey, but for the overall tournament, if you take more than a double, that's your tournament score, it just gets adjusted for handicap purposes.

[Willymakit]

I know I'm banging my head against the wall and waisting my time typing this out but I just want to point out a couple things about how this handicapp is not working and needs to be addressed so the low handicappers can compete with the high handicapp guys. I keep hearing things will even out. Well there NOT.

Here's my stats from the past 4 tournaments. First tournament. 12 place and 28 strokes from first. 2). T5 and 11 strokes out. 3). 6 place and 16 strokes out. 4). 6 place and 16 strokes out. 5). 12 place and 34 strokes out. And at the moment. Not taking anything away from knbgolfer. Great shooting. But after 2 rounds I now have to shoot 52 under in 36 holes Does anybody see there's a problem with this. And I keep hearing it's getting better. It's getting worse. So I think maybe there need to be Capps put in place so that us can compete in the handicapp division. But something needs to be done so all scores can be close and at the moment there not.

[psgolfer]

Jason, your not banging your head. What's happening moving forward is Q School to get sufficient rounds to develop an accurate handicap.

This weeks tournament, it's expected for people to go low, this is a very easy golf course, I'd be shocked if your not 9 under at least in all three rounds. That being said, with your handicap, no you won't win this tournament, but KNB will be probably at a -6 for the next tournament. Trust me, I'd have to shoot career rounds to even be in the mix. Same with last week, I thought my scores were good, but good only for second. Slice dropped from a 10 to a 0.

So ya for now, it's still a growing pain, but I feel that it will get better. And hey, go shoot some crappy scores and juice your cap back up. I didn't say that........

[JohnMeyer]

Psgolfer has indeed hit the nail on the head, its not the system, its the lack of accurate data available to it.

Peoples scores are dropping far quicker than they would in real life, and the system simply cant keep up

As said above, Slice went from a 10 to a 0 in 1 week, now in real life thats like going from a 28 to an 18 in a week, its just not gonna happen. Slice says its to do with his grip change, but im sure this wouldn't have the same effect on his scores in real life, and also Id be amazed if he was a 28 real life handicap, which in my opinion is what a 10 on Optishot is

It is however not his fault at all, its just the system allocated him the 10 based on his performance in his previous 6 rounds. Even with Catmans input there was no way to know that his score would improve so dramatically

The same can be said for KNB this week. Prior to this event he had a PB of 75, hes now shot a 65 and a 64. Now on his cap this is totally feasible as it is an easy course and again as PSgolfer says this does not make his cap wrong. the system accounts for this in its low rating. Handicap par is in effect a 70. However if we are saying that a -9 is an "average low score" for this event, you could argue the rating should've been lower still, maybe even 67 as it now may well reduce KNB too low.

The solution is Q school as, I believe Jason, you have been saying for some time. I have spoken with Hoganwoods and there are plans to make this an automatic feature within the website in the medium term (he is hoping for autumn for the start for the Pro tee new season) Until this is done Catman has rightly introduced the Q school dummy tournaments, so can get a proper reflection of peoples ability prior to them coming into competitions, to hopefully avoid these scenarios.

There is still an issue though as you rightly say, as when you get down to a level such as yourself and Catman, it becomes a near physical impossibilty for you to shoot the same net scores as others on the higher indexes

Eg
Average players will be playing off around the 0 H/C index. So its possible that when playing well they will be able to score -9 rounds. With a player playing of of -9, it is very very much harder for you to shoot -18 than it is for them to shoot -9. However when players do have sufficient data so their caps are correct and more reflective of their current ability I am pretty sure we will see scores far more tightly grouped

On the basis of this

"You should average about three shots higher than your handicap. For example, a player with a Course Handicap of 16 on a course with a USGA Course Rating of 71.2 should average about 90, not 87. The USGA Handicap System is based on 96 percent of the best 10 differentials (corrected for Course and Slope Rating) of his last 20 rounds. More than half of your scores should be within three strokes of three over your handicap (87 to 93 in our example). Most golfers will beat their handicap (87 or better in our example) 20 per cent of the time and beat it by three strokes one out of every 20 rounds. For this player to break 80 (beat his handicap by eight), the odds are 1,138 to 1 that his handicap is correct. Do that twice and it would take the average golfer to play over 700 years of golf to accomplish it "fairly". In other words, odds far beyond reasonableness."

Most players rounds should be between -2 and +2, Spreading this over 3 round events ideally I'd like to see the gap between 1st and last around 12 strokes, with maybe the odd exceptional performance slightly increasing it This issues happens at golf clubs all over the world, its such a difficult issue to solve, and can only be cured by having accurate caps, with requires lots of rounds to calculate.

Based on this course rating of 70 then we should see people hitting -2 for a par round if they are on the correct handicap. On the premise that most "best" rounds should be at best -2 below handicap should be seeing most people shooting around -4 for a good round. Again where is falls down is very low cap players will find it far harder to hit a net -4 than higher handicapper, as there are only so many shots that can be physically shot lower.

Again from the quote, what has happened with both Slices and KNBs scores should be impossible, no one should shoot -8 below cap, let alone twice in KNBs case. However it think this is partly due to cap, and partly due to incorrect rating of the course.

Perhaps we need to look at differing cap adjustements for negative caps

The issues is not that the system is wrong and your Handicap is wrong, its that yours is correct and some peoples caps are wrong due to the system not having enough data to give them the correct one.

The best solution we have at the moment is Q School in order to stop incorrect caps swaying tournament results.

[Willymakit]

The point I'm trying to make is. I keep hearing after 3 tournsments it should equal out. Well we are on our 5th tournament and now i have to shoot 53 under to contend after 2 rounds. So what I'm saying its getting worse and not better. I just don't know how a low handicapp can compete with high handicapp guys. It doesn't work in the real world and sure the heck won't work in the simulator world. I also keep saying that you can't treat real golf stats to simulator stats. In the past 3 tournaments the data has proven that.

And psgolfer I wouldn't try to sand bag a score. When I turn on my optishot or in real life I play to score my best.

So when next week comes I'm sure we are going to have the same situation we are having now. Some high handicapp player will shoot there best ever.

[JohnMeyer]

I guess thats where we hope that Q school will do its job and absorb the "best ever" scores as cap reflects average of "best" rounds, so by the time it get to competition we know how good their best is.

I fall into this category too, its taken 15 rounds to pretty much find my level. I dont know what other solution there is though, caps have to be set based on something, what do you suggest we do for the lower (in particular negative) cap players to make it more competitive for them?

Any change would then make it too easy for them to win and we'd be in the same situation but the other way round..

I guess this is the point of the no handicap league?

I think it is a question of time until its all good, but wont be until all players have probably at least 9/10 rounds playing at their true level. I think we can say the first 6 rounds we play are not indicative of that, as were all learning the game and adjusting settings, offsets and getting used to the system itself.

So from that i think unfortunately its not until every player in the event has got at least 12-15 rounds under their belts that we'll see a truly 100% competitive event. This however will happen in time, and the Q school will make this happen without impacting on tournaments

[HWoods]

I've never seen someone claim to be a + index and not know how a handicap system works.

You have a 2 index in your league who shot 64 / 65.... Game over.

[Willymakit]

And also that's why there should be some kind of cap. So for example will use knbgolfer has the latest score. If he's a two handicapp and he shoots 9 under like he did. The best score he should recieve should be a -2. That would get him back to even par. Everthing should be based on even par rounds. I know I'm not explaining myself that way it's in my head. Lol. But nobody should be under par when playing handicap golf. Your stats that you keep bringing up states that. So for myself I would have to shoot 7 under par to be even par for handicapp. So if I end up shooting 10 under par the best score I could get would be even par. Does that make sense. It's not how low you go it's how consistent you can shoot to your handicapp.

So say knbgolfer has a-5 handicapp for next tournament he would have to shoot 5 under or better to make par. Sorry for using you knbgolfer has an example.

So what I trying to say is. The winning score should be even par on every tournanent and anything lower would not count. That way there could be more multiple tie breakers If you shoot your handicap. Hopefully this makes sense.

[KingB84]

Golf is not like a math problem. A player may do quite well in a 2 or 3 round tourney & shoot 5 + strokes below there HC. Players are human, math is pretty much repeatable...isn't it. There are no absolutes with handicaps. That's why they are changed every 15 days.