Handicap and CSS

Given the recent forum posts on the golf handicap system and honesty for golf handicap calculations was very interesting to read the following forum post -

discussing calculation of Club Competition CSS and affect on high and low handicappers

http://onetannedhand.blogspot.com/2009/08/anniversary-golf-sunday-driver-bargains.html

Anyone have any views on this ?

Interesting, Darren, but only confirms what we know already, the CSS system is unfair to the lower handicap players, as is full handicap, as is 2 shots a hole for some players. Why we are suckering up to the players who make no effort to improve, I do not know.

Agreed but unless I am misunderstanding the CSS calculation if max handicap of 24 or 18 was applied wouldn't this make the issue for the lower handicappers more ?

Should the whole CSS system not be applied to a category only ? thus having several CSSs.  Guess all gets far to complicated.

A little unfair with your sweeping statement about "players who make no effort to improve" John.  Just because someone holds a high handicap does not mean that they want it to be so.  This time last year I was off 27 but would've much preferred to hold my current handicap and was trying to get there.  Even now, I am working to get it down, as I suspect most golfers are. 

I agree with the comments about CSS being loaded agianst the better golfers and this being unjust, but I do think that apart from a few exceptions most golfers would like to, and do try to, improve.  Those that don't are usually better than their handicap suggests and tend to walk away with the prizes when they "have a good round"

I have always thought that Cat 4 (21-28) players are not included in the calculation of CSS. This along with the fact that CSS can only go a single shot below SSS seems OK for low Hcp's.

But it does not work out that way.

Your Hcp is worked out using SSS and does not take into account the conditions it was achieved in. Then in your first Comp the CSS does. Bad weather will up the CSS.

You will get complaints from Cat1 (0-5) players because they want to play in many Open Comps where Hcp's mean they get in or don't. An example is say a National where you must have a Hcp of TWO, you are 2.4 so are in. You play in a Medal at your Club (a par72 SSS70) and in awful conditions shoot a creditable 74. During the day the weather changed and the CSS was 69. You win the 1st Division but get 0.1 back making you 2.5 and miss your entry into the National. CONCLUSION:- Don't enter the Comp.

This is happening at Clubs all over. Low Hcp's don't play in a lot of Comps, not because they can't match a Nett 62 or 45pts but because they could play WELL and get 0.1 back.

TheLyth

Why is it unfair, Chris? They will know who they are, and if the cap fits, they will wear it.

Why should the lower handicap have to contend with the players whose handicap is high through the fact of having a couple of mares on a hole each time they play.

I include myself in this as I tend to play fourtenn holes very well and four very poorly, but the system decrees that the rubbish holes are lumped with the good holes for handicap, when in actual fact, they shouldn't be.

Take yourself, with your inbuilt power. You make a fair number of pars by hitting greens in regulation, so, in my opinion you should not be allowed to throw into the mix the disasters you sometimes have.

Personally I would like to see a handicap system which is based on the number of pars made in a round and then only allowing bogeys for the other holes to work out a sensible handicap.

David L (TheLyth) - thanks for the reply most interesting and answers a few questions in my head.

Shame we have such an inbalanced system.

John,

Re-read your post and I apologise for misreading it.  I thought that you were saying that all high handicappers are that way because they do not wish to improve and it was that I took umbridge with.  After re-reading I realise that is not what you were saying. 

I'm not sure I agree with the handicap being based on number of pars, but I think gross double rather than net being the maximum when calculating is not unrealistic.  Take my round with Paul on Sunday.  I had an awful round, going out in 57 with a solitary par and taking 25 shots for the first four holes on the back.  Then it clicked (when I was 5 down with 5 to play) and I finished with par, par, par, par, bogey (with a lip out on the par putt).  I finsihed with 102 but it should've been much worse.  On your suggestion above, this would put me at playing off 13 from that round!

On the basis of that round, Chris, 13 was your capability and it is that capability which should be the basis of any handicap system, in my humble opinion.

Handicaps are given to offer one a fair chance of competing with players of better ability, not provided so that it becomes easier to beat the better player. I would suggest that 40 points seems to be a regular occurrence these days, sometimes even greater, but the low handicap golfer has no chance  of improving his score by those same amounts as the higher handicaps can.

It is amazing how a tight handicap tends to focus the mind more.

Darren,

The idea behind the system is OK but it is making it work that is the problem.

Over the years thing have changed. From every score taken against SSS, whatever the conditions, through the committee working out a 'SSS of the Day' to the present CSS.

It all stems from the fact that on any Comp Day about 11hrs of Golf is played and the conditions change, sometimes to the extent of causing a 10 shot swing. There is a need to try and get a fair reflection of the effect of the changing conditions and the latest is CSS.

It only takes a quarter of the field to better SSS+2 on a day to take CSS to SSS-1.

TheLyth

John P,

The idea od having your Hcp based on Pars is OK, but has a few flaws. A course with 12 par 4's ranging from 280 to 350yds would be treated the same as a course with 12 par 4's ranging from 350 - 450yds. How do you work with this and also what about Birdies and Eagles?

TheLyth

I was having a mare and couldn't swing for toffee.  I was stuffing balls into areas (and lakes) I hadn't been in for months, all on the same round.  Then we crossed the road to come back and I hit every fairway and every green in regulation and put my first putt to within 18".  The exception was the 18th which I left myself a very long first putt after hitting the green and the break we both expected failed to happen.  I had an 8 footer for par and lipped out. 

On that round, I don't think I should be awarded anything like an 18, let alone a 13.  That round is proof that what John said on another thread is correct; handicaps should be calculated across an 18 hole performance (as opposed to 9) because that is how many holes the game is played over. 

I agree that the current system seems to give the higher handicappers the advantage against the lower handicappers, and this is why the low guys favour 3/4 as it levels the playing field somewhat.  But I ask why should there have to be a 3/4 calculation?  Why can't official handicaps just be issued in line with this?  For example, someone's handicap based on current methods would give them a handicap of 20, so their offical playing handicap is 15.  It removes all the needs for "should we play off full or 3/4", reduces the opportunity for banditry and gives players something to strive for.  You also know that if ou have played to your handicap you have done well and will be rewared with a cut. 

As regards 40pt rounds, yes they do seem to be becoming more and more common.  Golfshake events last year were most commonly won with around 38pts, which is acceptable, but when someone can come in with 40+ off 3/4, not only are people going to question the player's integrity but they are not going to play in subsequent comps. 

Another thing about CSS is that you stand on the 1st Tee of the Comp, not knowing what the CSS will be, so low Hcp's don't have a known Target, which most like.

Standing on the 1st Tee of a Par72, SSS72 course, a Scratch Player doesn't know if he can drop a shot or not.

One thing I would like to see is The Buffer Zone being +2 in all Cats, so bringing it in line with the workings of CSS.

TheLyth

Chris,

I think it has been touched on before but I'll try and explain.

In the past your Hcp was worked out on the TOTAL number of shots you took (no rounding down to Nett+2) and was to a maximum of 24. A Player with a 24hcp would usually have one or two bad holes so the system allowed for this by having Match-Play with the 34 Hcp difference. This also meant that if a Scratch Golfer played a 24hcp only ONE shot would be given on a single hole. Then the max Hcp was upped to 28 and the new Hcp system was introduced where the worst score on any hole could be Nett+2 so the powers that be decided that Full Hcp in Match-Play was fairer and also trying to work out 78th for stableford was difficult without a calculator.

Some people don't like the move away from 34 thinking it is putting more of an advantage on the higher Hcp, it is. But it's the new system of using Nett+2 rather than the change from 34 to Full that causes debates. In a Match-Play situation an 8 loses the hole to a 4, the same way a 5 does and either way it is the loss of ONE hole.

TheLyth

Lyth, how do I see it, that is indeed a queston.

Of course your analogy asks the question about the differences between the par fours on one course from another and no matter what course I played for my handicap it would be expected that I would get a lower handicap at the course where the par fours are, in the main, shorter.

The SSS is supposed to take of this difference, but it does not, for the simple reason that if I go to a harder course my handicap is not increased to take count of the extra difficulty I will find.

It seems that the only criteria for handicap is that the higher handicaps are not accurate enough to hit greens in regulation fiogures. Chris puts that claim to bed, well and truly. What abpout someone like me who just cannot reach these par fours in regulation figures, does the par go up, of course it doesn't.

We have just seen the 16th hole where Tiger hit that stunning 8 iron for his third. That hole measures 667 yards. Now please tell me how can that length of hole be a par five for the likes of me. three of the four par fives on my course are unreachable i three shots for me, so what is the par, after all a par is meant to be the number of shots required by a player to reach the green.

The system does not cater for every type of player, only for the one who can belt it a long way off the tee.

John,

We will have to have a game at Donnington Valley.  Not an overly long course, and I would venture that there are only two holes that would be out of reach for you in regulation (the long par 4 6th and the long par 5 15th).  The rest are all reachable with a fairway wood and mid-iron for me, although I have driven straight through the green of the par 4 10th.  It rewards accuracy and getting close to the pin is important as the greens are pigs.  I reckon you'd score well around there.

Don't fall into the trap of taking the Pro Tours as an example. A pro shoots 58 or 88 it doesn't effect his Hcp because he doesn't have one. They are playing Par 4's up to 500yds now.

Also with regard to par 5's, I thought the way they worked it was 250yd Tee-shot and 200yd each one after that so 651yds would go to a 6. Now take a Par 4 at 500yds and thats 275 Tee-shot and 225 after, this equates to 726yds for a 6.

TheLyth

Par 4's sixty years ago were anything up to 474 yards so another 26 yards for all technology is no big deal.

Golf today is all about length and modern golf course design is built around this factor, with the only built in difficulty factor being usually a large lake.

If you take Hazeltine National GC where we can watch the USPGA Championship this week.

The 12th is 518yds Par 4 followed by a 248yd Par 3. The whole course is stretched out to 7674yds which would make it SSS 77.

TheLyth

The last hole at Richmond Park public course is a par 3 of 247 yards, so nothing new in that. The Pros do not play to SSS so it is irrelevant.

518 yards for the modern pro is a drive and mid iron, I used to hit those for two when I could play the game fifty years ago.If you played that SSS 77 course, Martin, theoretically you should get the extra shots based on your own SSS, but in reality if you were o play there you would still be playing off 20, and therin lies the rub.

We have to cut the Pro game out of the equation, it is totally different in every respect and I feel we are justified in condemning CONGU for the mess they have made of the amateur game.

Not sure what effect it would have on a UK Hcp, but Hazeltine is 76.3 'Rating' with a 'Slope'of 147.

TheLyth