[Tim Pitner]

Other (with the little ones, I'm down to about a dozen times a year)

Hdcp index is 8.9 (thanks a lot, Fossil F***ing Trace)

[Tony Petersen]

Hucks In no was I implying "artificial" scoring... The USGA handicap system is based on potential, not actual ability. Therein lies the 96% of the 10 low score differentials. Truth be told, the rating/slope system really needs an overhaul, as it doesn't travel well. That result is lower handicaps that don't reflect ability nor potential. Example: Golden Valley G & CC back in beautiful MN; Or Bear Path CC in MN... Both have ratings from the tips that are waaaaay toooo high for the course. Then, come to Outlaw at Desert Mountain in AZ... With ratings that are waaaay toooo low for the course. The result for me was a 2.8 while back in MN, while currently a 6.0 back in AZ... That's all I was saying

[Craig Van Egmond]

Tom,

        I'm sure that Shivas meant 2.6, just missed that period thingie in the middle.

        Seldom golfer, about a 16

[Tom Huckaby]

Tony:

Just because a few courses seem to come out wrong as you see things does NOT mean the entire system needs an overhaul.

Good lord let's hope neither Goodale nor Lavallee nor Arble sees this... they've argued with me and TE Paul and a few others about this topic for YEARS.  Best to leave it alone - we'll never come to any agreement.  But I am a course rater for these purposes and a rather ardent supporter of our USGA handicap system.  So unless you want a rather large fight, well... I'll just leave it at your experiences with our handicap system have not been the best.  

Craig - I thought of that re shivas, but then remembered that he said awhile ago that he hasn't had a posted handicap in years.  So no, my bet is on wiseass.  

[Doug Ralston]

I don't have a handicap, as all know, I have a total disability.  

avid golfer

had 2 birdies on the back nine at Gibson Bay thursday. Since I would surely be -25 to -30, that is really something special.

Doug

[Richard Choi]

Man, these numbers are pretty low, let me bring it up closer to the prediction

Avid Golfer, 12.6

[John Mayhugh]

Hucks In no was I implying "artificial" scoring... The USGA handicap system is based on potential, not actual ability. Therein lies the 96% of the 10 low score differentials. Truth be told, the rating/slope system really needs an overhaul, as it doesn't travel well. That result is lower handicaps that don't reflect ability nor potential. Example: Golden Valley G & CC back in beautiful MN; Or Bear Path CC in MN... Both have ratings from the tips that are waaaaay toooo high for the course. Then, come to Outlaw at Desert Mountain in AZ... With ratings that are waaaay toooo low for the course. The result for me was a 2.8 while back in MN, while currently a 6.0 back in AZ... That's all I was saying

I'm a 7.6 avid golfer.
Tony is 100% correct that handicap index doesn't necessarily travel that well, though.  Most of the courses that I play are pretty forgiving off the tee.  My 7.6 would be closer to 16 if I played somewhere like Victoria National regularly.

[Jason Connor]

Avid golfer, though I haven't played as much as I'd like the last few years.

13.2 right now, an all-time low though my playing time is down.

[Matt MacIver]

Golfer, wish I had the time to be avid.  13.3 index.  

[Tom Huckaby]

John - you do know that the entire system is set up so that handicaps "travel" correctly, right?  You know about what slope is and how it is used, right?

Your 7.6 gives you probably a 7 or 8 handicap at your normal courses and gives you a 9 or 10 at VN, because VN's slope is higher.  It's rating is higher too.

I'm gonna assume you know all that and like Tony, are just frustrated with your own personal situation.

Because please believe me, the system works.

TH

[Brian Noser]

My ego cap is currently at 1.8,   and it will not go up becasue of 6 rounds in a row that I played well in this year. They are killing me!! I really think I should be anywhere between a 2 and a 10..

Oh avid golfer...

[Tom Huckaby]

shivas:  can you set us up as partners against two patsies, er I mean opponents, who will give you 27?  I'll bring lots of money.

 

[John Mayhugh]

John - you do know that the entire system is set up so that handicaps "travel" correctly, right?  You know about what slope is and how it is used, right?

Your 7.6 gives you probably a 7 or 8 handicap at your normal courses and gives you a 9 or 10 at VN, because VN's slope is higher.  It's rating is higher too.

I'm gonna assume you know all that and like Tony, are just frustrated with your own personal situation.

Because please believe me, the system works.

TH

Even though I'm from Kentucky, I've managed to grasp how the handicap system is intended to work.  My point is that the differential in course handicap is not always large enough to reflect the difference in challenge between courses.

For example, my home course has rough that is usually no more than two inches.  I can go out and hit 6 fairways and still shoot 80 or under.  If I play a course like VN and miss the fairway by 20 yards (something I do at home), I'm probably going to lose a ball or at best end up having to hit a wedge out.  My chances of making par are not going to be very good.  Multiply this difference by 8 or more holes and you come up with a huge difference in scoring on a day with similar ball striking.  

I have a feeling that there are a lot of golfers that have a similar "personal situation."  All I'm saying is that the system doesn't always work well, but I freely admit I don't have a better answer.

[Tom Huckaby]

John:

Very well; my apologies.  Some participants here do NOT know how the system works, and LOTS outside this forum have no clue.

My experience is the system does work quite well the vast majority of the time.  Things like high rough are accounted for in the rating process.  However, what we can't account for is if they tell us rough is kept a certain way during summer time (which is what we base rating on), then you happen to play a course a few times when rough is abnormally high.  That would skew things for sure.  Same thing goes for speed of greens, abnornmal wind, etc.

I firmly believe the system works... not always, but way more than enough to make it valuable and worth keeping.

TH

[Phil McDade]

I'm pretty certain that I can break 100 on a fairly easy course if I play well.  

Is that not the truth?

Had you seen me on the 9th thru 12th holes of Ozaukee a month ago, you'd think I had a vanity number... and there's guys on this board who will vouch for it...

So that's who I heard on the back nine at Ozaukee. All those balls clanging off trees, and I thought it was just me.

Mike -- that's a golf snob position if I've ever heard one. I have never carried a handicap. I participate on the board because a) I learn a lot; and b) it's fun. Meeting some cool folks along the way makes it even more worthwhile.

I would be an 18 if I carried a handicap based on my play at the 9-hole muni five minutes from my home, where I play most often. I can usually go around it as a bogey golfer. Lately I suck.

Occasional golfer.

[Wayne_Kozun]

Avid Golfer 8.9 handicap factor.

[Trey Kemp]

Golf Industry - 2.6 index

[Bob_Huntley]

Are these handicaps posted from the practice range or the golf course?

Bob

[Mike Boehm]

Avid Golfer.  4.8 index.  

[Peter Zarlengo]

Part time golf construction/avid golfer
Hadicap Index: 5.0

[Mike Wagner]

Shivas:

I think ill-thought out is a bit off.  Handicaps are there for a reason, and the one I referred to as being the "random tournament," it makes sense to have one.  I see too many sandbaggers without handicaps play in "net" tournaments and beat good players simply because the field wasn't level.

Hey - I'm all for playing straight up, especially with a group that is 5 and under - nothing worse than giving a (4) 2 strokes that can kick my ass on any given day.

Can you give me an example of an avid golfer (30+ rounds/year) who doesn't have a handicap AND considers themselves connected to the game?

[Grant Saunders]

The average so far is 8.9 from 34 respondents. Keep them coming as the more the better. It would be nice to get around 300 as it would represent 20% of the members of this site. Will do a breakdown of the various groups at the end. Im predicting that Course staff will be the lowest handicap group averaging around 3. This should reassure golfers that the golf courses are in good hands and the staff certainly know the game.

[Andy Troeger]

Avid golfer, ~5 hcp.

Tony P,
I feel your pain regarding desert golf. I was a 1 (lowest ever) at the end of last year, then I moved to New Mexico...

[Garland Bayley]

avid 19.1

[A.G._Crockett]

Avid, 4.4 index

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()