Jump to content

Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at GolfWRX such as viewing all the images, interacting with members, access to all forums and eligiblility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

- - - - -

Handicap question

GHIN handicap

106 replies to this topic

#1 Roadking2003

Roadking2003

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,539 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 406342
  • Joined: 12/21/2015
  • Location:Austin
  • Handicap:8.7
GolfWRX Likes : 2224

Posted 04 December 2018 - 08:01 AM

The USGA says the purpose of a handicap is to identify a players potential ability so they can compete with players of differing abilities on an equitable basis.

Assume a course rating of 72 and slope of 135 for these examples.

Golfer A scores

80, 80, 82, 82, 84, 84, 80, 80, 82, 84, 80, 86, 86, 86, 82, 86, 80, 84, 84,86

Golfer B scores

76, 84, 82, 82, 84, 84, 78, 82, 82, 84, 82, 86, 86, 86, 86, 86, 76, 84, 84,86

Both golfers would have an index of 7.1, but clearly Golfer B has more "potential ability" as witnessed by his three scores (76, 78, 76) lower than any that Golfer A shot.  This is not an extreme example.

So if the goal is to identify a player's "potential ability", why not use only their ONE lowest score?   If a golfer shoots a 76, isn't that his "potential ability"?

Wouldn't it be accurate to say Golfer A's potential ability is 80 and Golfer B's potential ability is 76?

It looks like moving from 10 lowest to 8 lowest is a step in the right direction, but maybe it's not moving far enough.


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


1

#2 Fade

Fade

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 212785
  • Joined: 11/24/2012
  • Location:New England
GolfWRX Likes : 472

Posted 04 December 2018 - 08:08 AM

Golfer A scores

80, 80, 82, 82, 84, 84, 80, 80, 82, 84, 80, 86, 86, 86, 82, 86, 80, 84, 84,86

Golfer B scores

76, 84, 82, 82, 84, 84, 78, 82, 82, 84, 82, 86, 86, 86, 86, 86, 76, 84, 84,86

I was curious who won more often, turns out it is golfer A. : )

2

#3 Augustok

Augustok

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 56 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 435478
  • Joined: 08/05/2016
GolfWRX Likes : 13

Posted 04 December 2018 - 08:28 AM

Which handicapped tournament formats would favor Golfer A over B?  I haven’t really studied this but I think quota would be won more often by A.  If you post your scores on your GHIN app on phone then compare score graphs with a group it’s interesting to see whose graph line is relatively level and whose is erratic.

3

#4 davep043

davep043

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,124 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 489076
  • Joined: 12/20/2017
  • Location:Reston, VA, and Southern Pines, NC
  • Handicap:3.8
GolfWRX Likes : 1829

Posted 04 December 2018 - 08:34 AM

 Roadking2003, on 04 December 2018 - 08:01 AM, said:

The USGA says the purpose of a handicap is to identify a players potential ability so they can compete with players of differing abilities on an equitable basis.

Assume a course rating of 72 and slope of 135 for these examples.

Golfer A scores

80, 80, 82, 82, 84, 84, 80, 80, 82, 84, 80, 86, 86, 86, 82, 86, 80, 84, 84,86

Golfer B scores

76, 84, 82, 82, 84, 84, 78, 82, 82, 84, 82, 86, 86, 86, 86, 86, 76, 84, 84,86

Both golfers would have an index of 7.1, but clearly Golfer B has more "potential ability" as witnessed by his three scores (76, 78, 76) lower than any that Golfer A shot.  This is not an extreme example.

So if the goal is to identify a player's "potential ability", why not use only their ONE lowest score?   If a golfer shoots a 76, isn't that his "potential ability"?

Wouldn't it be accurate to say Golfer A's potential ability is 80 and Golfer B's potential ability is 76?

It looks like moving from 10 lowest to 8 lowest is a step in the right direction, but maybe it's not moving far enough.
As it stands, the USGA system favors (slightly) a lower-handicap player in a single match.  If we move towards using a smaller percentage of scores, I believe the system would favor the lower-handicap player to a greater extent.    Obviously not always, as @Fade's analysis suggests, but in general the better player's average would be closer to his "net par" score than would a poorer player, who typically has greater variance in scores. Using fewer scores would favor a more consistent player over a more erratic player, and generally speaking, higher handicaps are more erratic.  
I do agree, the system, even using 8 of 20, doesn't assess my real "potential", but identifies "pretty good for me".

4

#5 Roadking2003

Roadking2003

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,539 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 406342
  • Joined: 12/21/2015
  • Location:Austin
  • Handicap:8.7
GolfWRX Likes : 2224

Posted 04 December 2018 - 08:53 AM

My point isn't who would win.  It's that if you ask somebody about their potential to do something they have been doing, their best effort is the most accurate way of estimating their potential.

If you asked about Mickey Mantle's potential for hitting home runs in 1963, it would be 54, not his average of his ten best.

If you asked about Usain Bolt's potential for the 100 meter in 2010, it would be 9.58 seconds.


5

#6 bladehunter

bladehunter

    I have a great profile! Especially from the side !

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,500 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 291449
  • Joined: 01/12/2014
  • Location:south carolina
  • Handicap:NONE
GolfWRX Likes : 18992

Posted 04 December 2018 - 09:08 AM

Yea. I agree with the op...  My handicap has never reflected my potential.   But Iím relatively new to the game.  So I think maybe in time it will.  But I have more than 4 - 9 hole scores this summer in the low 30s. And one 29.  But low 18 this year is 69.  With an average as of today of 75.8.  And a handicap of 2.4.  ( itís up since two months ago ). Low round last year was 65 T round.  Never got to a plus.  Why ?  Iím still able to throw up on myself and shoot 85. ( driver penalty shots and putter ).  Truth.  Hasnít happened in last 3 months. But havenít kept them  all below 75 either. One of these days Iíll string 2 -9s together and be called a bagger I guess. Lol. But thatís when it will start to reflect my potential.  Until then it really doesnít.  

And I donít think it reflects plenty of 6-14 guys out there either.  If you can shoot in the 70s any given day  you should be less than an 8.  Period.  I donít care how many 85s you shoot.

Edited by bladehunter, 04 December 2018 - 09:09 AM.

Nike TW Oven Vapor Speed Aldila Synergy 70TX
TM 17 M1 Tour 14.5*  Graphite Design ADDI 8X
TM M3 Tour  19* Fuji Pro white 95X
Titliest 681 proto 3-pw Modus 130X
Vokey Tour raw 54 60 M Modus 130S
GSS 009 1.5  Beached Tungsten weights
Bidgestone RXS

6

#7 Roadking2003

Roadking2003

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,539 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 406342
  • Joined: 12/21/2015
  • Location:Austin
  • Handicap:8.7
GolfWRX Likes : 2224

Posted 04 December 2018 - 09:23 AM

 bladehunter, on 04 December 2018 - 09:08 AM, said:

Yea. I agree with the op...  My handicap has never reflected my potential.   But I'm relatively new to the game.  So I think maybe in time it will.  But I have more than 4 - 9 hole scores this summer in the low 30s. And one 29.  But low 18 this year is 69.  With an average as of today of 75.8.  And a handicap of 2.4.  ( it's up since two months ago ). Low round last year was 65 T round.  Never got to a plus.  Why ?  I'm still able to throw up on myself and shoot 85. ( driver penalty shots and putter ).  Truth.  Hasn't happened in last 3 months. But haven't kept them  all below 75 either. One of these days I'll string 2 -9s together and be called a bagger I guess. Lol. But that's when it will start to reflect my potential.  Until then it really doesn't.  

And I don't think it reflects plenty of 6-14 guys out there either.  If you can shoot in the 70s any given day  you should be less than an 8.  Period.  I don't care how many 85s you shoot.

Exactly!  The other alternative is for the USGA to remove the words "potential ability" from the purpose of a handicap.  Maybe replace it with "potential average ability".

7

#8 HitEmTrue

HitEmTrue

    @HitEmTrue1

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,771 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 93756
  • Joined: 09/04/2009
  • Location:North Texas
GolfWRX Likes : 1637

Posted 04 December 2018 - 09:30 AM

 Roadking2003, on 04 December 2018 - 08:53 AM, said:

My point isn't who would win.  It's that if you ask somebody about their potential to do something they have been doing, their best effort is the most accurate way of estimating their potential.

It is to measure potential so people can compete. Not measure potential so folks can brag (or feel miserable).



8

#9 Sawgrass

Sawgrass

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,952 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 83736
  • Joined: 05/24/2009
  • Location:Stamford, Connecticut
GolfWRX Likes : 6287

Posted 04 December 2018 - 09:52 AM

 Roadking2003, on 04 December 2018 - 08:01 AM, said:



So if the goal is to identify a player's "potential ability", why not use only their ONE lowest score?   If a golfer shoots a 76, isn't that his "potential ability"?

Wouldn't it be accurate to say Golfer A's potential ability is 80 and Golfer B's potential ability is 76?


Why do you assume that a player's true potential is his lowest score?  Why wouldn't "potential" be lower still?  

All of which seems to me that you have more of a quarrel with the  USGA's word choice than the results the formula supplies.  I agree that the formula does not produce a literal potential, that something more along the lines of "typical potential" would be more accurate.

9

#10 davep043

davep043

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,124 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 489076
  • Joined: 12/20/2017
  • Location:Reston, VA, and Southern Pines, NC
  • Handicap:3.8
GolfWRX Likes : 1829

Posted 04 December 2018 - 10:04 AM

 HitEmTrue, on 04 December 2018 - 09:30 AM, said:

 Roadking2003, on 04 December 2018 - 08:53 AM, said:

My point isn't who would win.  It's that if you ask somebody about their potential to do something they have been doing, their best effort is the most accurate way of estimating their potential.

It is to measure potential so people can compete. Not measure potential so folks can brag (or feel miserable).
I said in an earlier post, I agree that "potential" would be best indicated by a smaller number of the better scores.  The ultimate indication of potential would be to use the single best score over the past year, or even two years.  On the other hand, the USGA decided to use the term "potential" to differentiate their calculation from a simple average, and throwing out even half of the worst scores moves the handicap index toward a measure of true potential.  Decreasing the number from 10 to 8 scores of the last 20 moves it slightly closer to what I would call true potential.
Whatever number of scores is chosen, and the time period of scores to be considered,  is essentially an arbitrary decision.  To select one set of values over another will result in more or less of an advantage to different types of players, better v. worse, consistent v. erratic.


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


10

#11 DavePelz4

DavePelz4

    Legend

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 23,365 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 69051
  • Joined: 11/10/2008
  • Location:A golf course in the Chicago area.
GolfWRX Likes : 24616

Posted 04 December 2018 - 10:09 AM

The lowest score theory has some errors.  If someone plays a 18 hole par 3 course and shoots 54, is that their "potential?'

If someone shoots 75 from the tips at Bethpage Black, is that their potential?

Course rating, slope and ultimately differential have to be factors that ultimately go into the underlying "potential."

11

#12 Superbrit

Superbrit

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 354 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 505108
  • Joined: 06/19/2018
  • Location:UK
  • Handicap:8.7
GolfWRX Likes : 302

Posted 04 December 2018 - 10:20 AM

 Roadking2003, on 04 December 2018 - 08:01 AM, said:

The USGA says the purpose of a handicap is to identify a players potential ability so they can compete with players of differing abilities on an equitable basis.

Assume a course rating of 72 and slope of 135 for these examples.

Golfer A scores

80, 80, 82, 82, 84, 84, 80, 80, 82, 84, 80, 86, 86, 86, 82, 86, 80, 84, 84,86

Golfer B scores

76, 84, 82, 82, 84, 84, 78, 82, 82, 84, 82, 86, 86, 86, 86, 86, 76, 84, 84,86

Both golfers would have an index of 7.1, but clearly Golfer B has more "potential ability" as witnessed by his three scores (76, 78, 76) lower than any that Golfer A shot.  This is not an extreme example.

So if the goal is to identify a player's "potential ability", why not use only their ONE lowest score?   If a golfer shoots a 76, isn't that his "potential ability"?

Wouldn't it be accurate to say Golfer A's potential ability is 80 and Golfer B's potential ability is 76?

It looks like moving from 10 lowest to 8 lowest is a step in the right direction, but maybe it's not moving far enough.

This is where Congu is very different

Golfer A would have started off at 8 (providing he never scored over a double) and after the rest of the scores probably be off 9

Golfer B would have started off at 4 (providing he never scored over a double) and after the rest of the scores be off 5.1, roughly.

But this can depend on weather conditions when they made these scores
Taylormade M3 440 9.5*
Taylormade M3 3 wood 15*
Adams Proto DHY 21*
Taylormade P7704 & 5 iron
Taylormade P730 6 - PW
Titleist SM7 RAW Black 50/56/60
Taylormade TP Mullen

12

#13 Shilgy

Shilgy

    Legend

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,495 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 235237
  • Joined: 03/07/2013
  • Location:Phoenix
  • Handicap:3.1
GolfWRX Likes : 7093

Posted 04 December 2018 - 10:26 AM

 Fade, on 04 December 2018 - 08:08 AM, said:

Golfer A scores

80, 80, 82, 82, 84, 84, 80, 80, 82, 84, 80, 86, 86, 86, 82, 86, 80, 84, 84,86

Golfer B scores

76, 84, 82, 82, 84, 84, 78, 82, 82, 84, 82, 86, 86, 86, 86, 86, 76, 84, 84,86

I was curious who won more often, turns out it is golfer A. : )
I would take A for a partner. He is a lot more likely to help any given day than is B
TM M3 440 10* Graphite Design AD IZ 6x
TM M1 3w 14*  Graphite Design BB7s
TM M2  5w 18* Fujikura Atmos TS Blue 8S or Srixon U65 18° Atmos Red 7s
Adams A12 UST Silver S 21°
Srixon Z765 5-AW Nippon Pro Modus3 125S
Titleist Vokey 54*F  58*S
Toulon Garage Rochester flow neck H5/ Toulon Rochester stock

To paraphrase Dr Seuss: Don't cry because the round of golf is over-smile because it happened .  :)

13

#14 davep043

davep043

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,124 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 489076
  • Joined: 12/20/2017
  • Location:Reston, VA, and Southern Pines, NC
  • Handicap:3.8
GolfWRX Likes : 1829

Posted 04 December 2018 - 10:31 AM

 Superbrit, on 04 December 2018 - 10:20 AM, said:

 Roadking2003, on 04 December 2018 - 08:01 AM, said:

The USGA says the purpose of a handicap is to identify a players potential ability so they can compete with players of differing abilities on an equitable basis.

Assume a course rating of 72 and slope of 135 for these examples.

Golfer A scores

80, 80, 82, 82, 84, 84, 80, 80, 82, 84, 80, 86, 86, 86, 82, 86, 80, 84, 84,86

Golfer B scores

76, 84, 82, 82, 84, 84, 78, 82, 82, 84, 82, 86, 86, 86, 86, 86, 76, 84, 84,86

Both golfers would have an index of 7.1, but clearly Golfer B has more "potential ability" as witnessed by his three scores (76, 78, 76) lower than any that Golfer A shot.  This is not an extreme example.

So if the goal is to identify a player's "potential ability", why not use only their ONE lowest score?   If a golfer shoots a 76, isn't that his "potential ability"?

Wouldn't it be accurate to say Golfer A's potential ability is 80 and Golfer B's potential ability is 76?

It looks like moving from 10 lowest to 8 lowest is a step in the right direction, but maybe it's not moving far enough.

This is where Congu is very different

Golfer A would have started off at 8 (providing he never scored over a double) and after the rest of the scores probably be off 9

Golfer B would have started off at 4 (providing he never scored over a double) and after the rest of the scores be off 5.1, roughly.

But this can depend on weather conditions when they made these scores
Thanks for doing the math on this.  So we have two golfers, fairly evenly matched.  Looking only at stroke play, and the order in which the scores were written, Player A wins 4, loses 3, and ties 13 times, that's pretty close.  In the USGA system, they have identical handicaps.  Under CONGU, Player A has a handicap about 4 strokes higher than B, even though he wins slightly more when they play even.  Under @Roadking's idea, using the lowest score (80 v. 76) Player A would still get 4 strokes from B, even though A has a slight edge over B playing straight up.  Is this consistent with a goal of allowing even competition?

14

#15 HatsForBats

HatsForBats

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,380 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 433112
  • Joined: 07/18/2016
  • Location:Philly Burbs
  • Handicap:7
GolfWRX Likes : 674

Posted 04 December 2018 - 10:42 AM

I think Player A is clearly the better player and there is an increased chance he may be a sandbagger. Player B happened to shoot 2 rounds in the last 20 that he at best has about a 2% of shooting any given round (assuming a 7.1 index). More than likely their index is normally higher than 7.1 and they went on a hot streak. Their index is likely going back to 8.5'ish range where they normally are.


15

#16 Deceptively Short

Deceptively Short

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 328 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 200633
  • Joined: 08/29/2012
  • Location:Bristol, England
GolfWRX Likes : 137

Posted 04 December 2018 - 10:44 AM

 davep043, on 04 December 2018 - 10:31 AM, said:

 Superbrit, on 04 December 2018 - 10:20 AM, said:

 Roadking2003, on 04 December 2018 - 08:01 AM, said:

The USGA says the purpose of a handicap is to identify a players potential ability so they can compete with players of differing abilities on an equitable basis.

Assume a course rating of 72 and slope of 135 for these examples.

Golfer A scores

80, 80, 82, 82, 84, 84, 80, 80, 82, 84, 80, 86, 86, 86, 82, 86, 80, 84, 84,86

Golfer B scores

76, 84, 82, 82, 84, 84, 78, 82, 82, 84, 82, 86, 86, 86, 86, 86, 76, 84, 84,86

Both golfers would have an index of 7.1, but clearly Golfer B has more "potential ability" as witnessed by his three scores (76, 78, 76) lower than any that Golfer A shot.  This is not an extreme example.

So if the goal is to identify a player's "potential ability", why not use only their ONE lowest score?   If a golfer shoots a 76, isn't that his "potential ability"?

Wouldn't it be accurate to say Golfer A's potential ability is 80 and Golfer B's potential ability is 76?

It looks like moving from 10 lowest to 8 lowest is a step in the right direction, but maybe it's not moving far enough.

This is where Congu is very different

Golfer A would have started off at 8 (providing he never scored over a double) and after the rest of the scores probably be off 9

Golfer B would have started off at 4 (providing he never scored over a double) and after the rest of the scores be off 5.1, roughly.

But this can depend on weather conditions when they made these scores
Thanks for doing the math on this.  So we have two golfers, fairly evenly matched.  Looking only at stroke play, and the order in which the scores were written, Player A wins 4, loses 3, and ties 13 times, that's pretty close.  In the USGA system, they have identical handicaps.  Under CONGU, Player A has a handicap about 4 strokes higher than B, even though he wins slightly more when they play even.  Under @Roadking's idea, using the lowest score (80 v. 76) Player A would still get 4 strokes from B, even though A has a slight edge over B playing straight up.  Is this consistent with a goal of allowing even competition?

That would be right if they are playing Medal matchplay, a format that is almost never used over here at least. In matchplay obviously without hole by hole scores we cannot know the result.
Off the same handicaps player A will probably never win any event with more than a handful of players, similarly in a team event I think I would prefer to have two Bs rather than two As in order to give our team a chance of wining, but then again not sure how these scores are achieved hole by hole so this is just a guess .



16

#17 _Red_

_Red_

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 514036
  • Joined: 10/09/2018
  • Location:Aberdeen
  • Handicap:4
GolfWRX Likes : 15

Posted 04 December 2018 - 10:45 AM

 Superbrit, on 04 December 2018 - 10:20 AM, said:

 Roadking2003, on 04 December 2018 - 08:01 AM, said:

The USGA says the purpose of a handicap is to identify a players potential ability so they can compete with players of differing abilities on an equitable basis.

Assume a course rating of 72 and slope of 135 for these examples.

Golfer A scores

80, 80, 82, 82, 84, 84, 80, 80, 82, 84, 80, 86, 86, 86, 82, 86, 80, 84, 84,86

Golfer B scores

76, 84, 82, 82, 84, 84, 78, 82, 82, 84, 82, 86, 86, 86, 86, 86, 76, 84, 84,86

Both golfers would have an index of 7.1, but clearly Golfer B has more "potential ability" as witnessed by his three scores (76, 78, 76) lower than any that Golfer A shot.  This is not an extreme example.

So if the goal is to identify a player's "potential ability", why not use only their ONE lowest score?   If a golfer shoots a 76, isn't that his "potential ability"?

Wouldn't it be accurate to say Golfer A's potential ability is 80 and Golfer B's potential ability is 76?

It looks like moving from 10 lowest to 8 lowest is a step in the right direction, but maybe it's not moving far enough.

This is where Congu is very different

Golfer A would have started off at 8 (providing he never scored over a double) and after the rest of the scores probably be off 9

Golfer B would have started off at 4 (providing he never scored over a double) and after the rest of the scores be off 5.1, roughly.

But this can depend on weather conditions when they made these scores

How did you calculate the CONGU handicap?
TaylorMade M1 3-wood 15* (set to 17*)
Callaway X-forged UT 18*
Titleist 818H1 21*
Ping S55 4-PW
Titleist SM7 50*
Mizuno MPT5 54*
Titleist SM7 58*
Odyssey White Hot #6

17

#18 davep043

davep043

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,124 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 489076
  • Joined: 12/20/2017
  • Location:Reston, VA, and Southern Pines, NC
  • Handicap:3.8
GolfWRX Likes : 1829

Posted 04 December 2018 - 10:54 AM

 Deceptively Short, on 04 December 2018 - 10:44 AM, said:

 davep043, on 04 December 2018 - 10:31 AM, said:

Thanks for doing the math on this.  So we have two golfers, fairly evenly matched.  Looking only at stroke play, and the order in which the scores were written, Player A wins 4, loses 3, and ties 13 times, that's pretty close.  In the USGA system, they have identical handicaps.  Under CONGU, Player A has a handicap about 4 strokes higher than B, even though he wins slightly more when they play even.  Under @Roadking's idea, using the lowest score (80 v. 76) Player A would still get 4 strokes from B, even though A has a slight edge over B playing straight up.  Is this consistent with a goal of allowing even competition?

That would be right if they are playing Medal matchplay, a format that is almost never used over here at least. In matchplay obviously without hole by hole scores we cannot know the result.
Off the same handicaps player A will probably never win any event with more than a handful of players, similarly in a team event I think I would prefer to have two Bs rather than two As in order to give our team a chance of wining, but then again not sure how these scores are achieved hole by hole so this is just a guess .
I agree with the underlined bit, but if we only have total scores, there's only one way we can compare them.

I remember reading this article on Dean Knuth's webpage about partners.
http://www.popeofslo...es/picking.html
He suggests that in fourball match play, you should look for a partner with a handicap significantly different from yours, who is also a different "type" of player (i.e. an erratic player should pair with a steady player).

18

#19 davep043

davep043

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,124 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 489076
  • Joined: 12/20/2017
  • Location:Reston, VA, and Southern Pines, NC
  • Handicap:3.8
GolfWRX Likes : 1829

Posted 04 December 2018 - 10:59 AM

 _Red_, on 04 December 2018 - 10:45 AM, said:


How did you calculate the CONGU handicap?
Others may be able to explain better, but in essence your "exact handicap" is increased or decreased by a set amount, based on your new score.  It can only go up by 0.1 at a time, but can decrease a much larger margin based on a single low score.  You can read about it here:
http://www.congu.co....ONGU-Manual.pdf
on page 48, or in Appendix E on page 76

19

#20 _Red_

_Red_

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 514036
  • Joined: 10/09/2018
  • Location:Aberdeen
  • Handicap:4
GolfWRX Likes : 15

Posted 04 December 2018 - 11:10 AM

 davep043, on 04 December 2018 - 10:59 AM, said:

 _Red_, on 04 December 2018 - 10:45 AM, said:

How did you calculate the CONGU handicap?
Others may be able to explain better, but in essence your "exact handicap" is increased or decreased by a set amount, based on your new score.  It can only go up by 0.1 at a time, but can decrease a much larger margin based on a single low score.  You can read about it here:
http://www.congu.co....ONGU-Manual.pdf
on page 48, or in Appendix E on page 76

I know how CONGU works - I've had my handicap calculated off it for years.

My query was with the suggestion Player B's handicap would have started off at 4.

I'd have thought it would have started at 7.

That would be on the basis on the first three scores (76, 84, 82) being submitted for the calculation.  The worst score would be thrown out, so it'd be the average of the 76 and the 82 that would be used. So that would be 79 on a 72 rated course giving a 7 handicap.

TaylorMade M1 3-wood 15* (set to 17*)
Callaway X-forged UT 18*
Titleist 818H1 21*
Ping S55 4-PW
Titleist SM7 50*
Mizuno MPT5 54*
Titleist SM7 58*
Odyssey White Hot #6

Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


Wanna get rid of this ugly yellow box? And remove other annoying "stuff" in between posts? Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

20

#21 Deceptively Short

Deceptively Short

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 328 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 200633
  • Joined: 08/29/2012
  • Location:Bristol, England
GolfWRX Likes : 137

Posted 04 December 2018 - 11:23 AM

I believe the initial CONGU handicap is based on your best card not an average.

21

#22 bladehunter

bladehunter

    I have a great profile! Especially from the side !

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,500 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 291449
  • Joined: 01/12/2014
  • Location:south carolina
  • Handicap:NONE
GolfWRX Likes : 18992

Posted 04 December 2018 - 11:24 AM

 HatsForBats, on 04 December 2018 - 10:42 AM, said:

I think Player A is clearly the better player and there is an increased chance he may be a sandbagger. Player B happened to shoot 2 rounds in the last 20 that he at best has about a 2% of shooting any given round (assuming a 7.1 index). More than likely their index is normally higher than 7.1 and they went on a hot streak. Their index is likely going back to 8.5'ish range where they normally are.

lol. Say it ainít so !  

Brother.  You hit the nail on the head.
Nike TW Oven Vapor Speed Aldila Synergy 70TX
TM 17 M1 Tour 14.5*  Graphite Design ADDI 8X
TM M3 Tour  19* Fuji Pro white 95X
Titliest 681 proto 3-pw Modus 130X
Vokey Tour raw 54 60 M Modus 130S
GSS 009 1.5  Beached Tungsten weights
Bidgestone RXS

22

#23 _Red_

_Red_

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 28 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 514036
  • Joined: 10/09/2018
  • Location:Aberdeen
  • Handicap:4
GolfWRX Likes : 15

Posted 04 December 2018 - 11:30 AM

 Deceptively Short, on 04 December 2018 - 11:23 AM, said:

I believe the initial CONGU handicap is based on your best card not an average.

You may be correct - it's that long since I was involved in an initial handicap allocation.

I had it in my head best two of three were used.
TaylorMade M1 3-wood 15* (set to 17*)
Callaway X-forged UT 18*
Titleist 818H1 21*
Ping S55 4-PW
Titleist SM7 50*
Mizuno MPT5 54*
Titleist SM7 58*
Odyssey White Hot #6

23

#24 davep043

davep043

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,124 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 489076
  • Joined: 12/20/2017
  • Location:Reston, VA, and Southern Pines, NC
  • Handicap:3.8
GolfWRX Likes : 1829

Posted 04 December 2018 - 12:50 PM

 _Red_, on 04 December 2018 - 11:30 AM, said:

 Deceptively Short, on 04 December 2018 - 11:23 AM, said:

I believe the initial CONGU handicap is based on your best card not an average.

You may be correct - it's that long since I was involved in an initial handicap allocation.

I had it in my head best two of three were used.
It does appear to be the single lowest 18-hole score of the first 54 holes posted (any combination of 9 or 18 hole scores)

Quote

Initial Handicap = (LAGD + (LAGD*0.13))/ 1.237 truncated to provide a whole number.
where LAGD is Lowest Adjusted Gross Differential

24

#25 Fade

Fade

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 212785
  • Joined: 11/24/2012
  • Location:New England
GolfWRX Likes : 472

Posted 04 December 2018 - 01:34 PM

 Roadking2003, on 04 December 2018 - 08:01 AM, said:

The USGA says the purpose of a handicap is to identify a players potential ability so they can compete with players of differing abilities on an equitable basis.

The way I read the above premise doesn't seem to represent the USGA very well. You are putting too much emphasis on what the handicap number means or doesn't mean, IMO. I like their wording better.

The purpose of the USGA Handicap System is to make the game of golf more enjoyable by enabling players of differing abilities to compete on an equitable basis.
http://www.usga.org/...tml#!rule-14367

The handicap numbers used to accomplish that are primarily a means to that end.


25

#26 Roadking2003

Roadking2003

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,539 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 406342
  • Joined: 12/21/2015
  • Location:Austin
  • Handicap:8.7
GolfWRX Likes : 2224

Posted 04 December 2018 - 03:48 PM

 Sawgrass, on 04 December 2018 - 09:52 AM, said:

 Roadking2003, on 04 December 2018 - 08:01 AM, said:

So if the goal is to identify a player's "potential ability", why not use only their ONE lowest score?   If a golfer shoots a 76, isn't that his "potential ability"?

Wouldn't it be accurate to say Golfer A's potential ability is 80 and Golfer B's potential ability is 76?


Why do you assume that a player's true potential is his lowest score?  Why wouldn't "potential" be lower still?  


Yes, you could say his forecasted potential is quite a lot lower.  But basing potential on past results is probably more accurate.

26

#27 Roadking2003

Roadking2003

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,539 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 406342
  • Joined: 12/21/2015
  • Location:Austin
  • Handicap:8.7
GolfWRX Likes : 2224

Posted 04 December 2018 - 03:50 PM

 DavePelz4, on 04 December 2018 - 10:09 AM, said:

The lowest score theory has some errors.  If someone plays a 18 hole par 3 course and shoots 54, is that their "potential?'

If someone shoots 75 from the tips at Bethpage Black, is that their potential?

Course rating, slope and ultimately differential have to be factors that ultimately go into the underlying "potential."

And they are included in potential.  The 54 on a par 3 would probably produce high differential since the course rating would be quite low.

27

#28 Roadking2003

Roadking2003

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,539 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 406342
  • Joined: 12/21/2015
  • Location:Austin
  • Handicap:8.7
GolfWRX Likes : 2224

Posted 04 December 2018 - 04:05 PM

 Fade, on 04 December 2018 - 01:34 PM, said:

 Roadking2003, on 04 December 2018 - 08:01 AM, said:

The USGA says the purpose of a handicap is to identify a players potential ability so they can compete with players of differing abilities on an equitable basis.

The way I read the above premise doesn't seem to represent the USGA very well. You are putting too much emphasis on what the handicap number means or doesn't mean, IMO. I like their wording better.

The purpose of the USGA Handicap System is to make the game of golf more enjoyable by enabling players of differing abilities to compete on an equitable basis.
http://www.usga.org/...tml#!rule-14367

The handicap numbers used to accomplish that are primarily a means to that end.

I understand the goal is to allow everyone to compete on an equal basis.

USGA "A Handicap Index intends to reflect potential ability,...."

https://www.usga.org...r.asp?FAQidx=22

USGA "The USGA Handicap Index is widely recognized in America and elsewhere as a reliable measure of a player's potential ability."

http://www.usga.org/...e-23c19d10.html

28

#29 Roadking2003

Roadking2003

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,539 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 406342
  • Joined: 12/21/2015
  • Location:Austin
  • Handicap:8.7
GolfWRX Likes : 2224

Posted 04 December 2018 - 04:07 PM

 davep043, on 04 December 2018 - 10:04 AM, said:

Decreasing the number from 10 to 8 scores of the last 20 moves it slightly closer to what I would call true potential.


I agree.

29

#30 jlbos83

jlbos83

    Tour Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 528 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 73472
  • Joined: 01/22/2009
  • Location:Sahuarita, AZ
GolfWRX Likes : 266

Posted 04 December 2018 - 06:02 PM

It's tricky to find the right balance.  As a high handicapper, I believe that I am much more likely than a low handicapper of popping out a round several shots better than any of my previous twenty rounds.  That said, I am also pretty likely to shoot one a few shots off the high end.  For be, using fewer scores is going to (I think) put me a something of a disadvantage, since my actual scores are more likely to be more spread out.  I have to confess to not reading the whole thread, but I got the feeling at the start that the issue seen by the OP might not be so much the actual numbers, but the definition, or application, of the word potential.  And I could see that.  I certainly have the potential to shoot 85, maybe lower.  Now and then I get under 90, so it's certainly in there.  But if my handicap was based on that, I would be out of luck, because it's probably not happening (at least it hasn't yet!)  I know we'd like a perfect system, but what we have doesn't seem awful too me,  We use a very similar (just not official) method in our summer golf league, and on any one day we find that pretty much any team can beat any other, and vice-versa.  It's not perfect, but we have fun.  And that's what I'm looking for!

Jeff, an Arizona hacker

Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


Wanna get rid of this ugly yellow box? And remove other annoying "stuff" in between posts? Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

30




Also tagged with GHIN, handicap

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

GolfWRX Sponsors