[JakaB]

This is very much about architecture considering the goofy rating system Huch now loves penalizes the courses and members of designs that do not have out of bounds.  They rate courses more difficult based on out of bounds locations when in most cases they are just lot lines for houses and not design elements at all.  Lost balls are very painful but I think anybody would prefer the chance to find their ball and have options from that location to stupid ugly white stakes with houses or roads behind them.   I would never sacrifice a tree for more ob stakes...even if they were designed by a women doctor.

[THuckaby2]

WHEW!

OK, that's a lot to digest.  Lots of questions, yes.  And damn I wish I new how to italicize, use different colors, etc. - I can only do plain text in here!

First, sorry for the persnickety response.  I truly didn't mean to SHOUT... but teasing is good.  My bad!

But Dan, I was thinking about this off-line, as at least part of this is an issue near and dear to my heart given all the trouble I had to go to to become a course rater.  Honestly, you make a LOT of great points above and I'm not gonna waste any more of Ran's space here to battle them again, as you have me convinced on most of it anyway!

Just let me clarify re the thing closest to me, course rating.  What do you miss sitting home at the computer?  The list is too long for my limited energy to put here.  Basically, yes, you can come pretty close to a decent rating based on distance alone.  But let's compare two courses I know that you are familiar with.

(each listing is re back tees)
1. Spyglass Hill, gold tees:  6480 yards, 73.6, 144 slope

2. San Jose Muni, blue tees:  6639 yards, 71.2, 118 slope.

Using your pure yardage system, San Jose Muni should be about 2 strokes HARDER, no?  So why is it two strokes easier?  Because real humans went and took a look at each course, rated each using very objective standards, and that's how they came out.  Then the system adds in a very valuable factor - slope - which basically assists in levelling the very obvious fact that the player producing an index at SJ Muni is going to have a very hard time reproducing that at Spyglass.  Are you gonna tell me any of this is wrong?

Dan, course ratings are indeed very valuable, as is the slope system.  The rest of all this, well I'm gonna continue to disagree on some of it (the UK system ain't PERFECT, that's for sure), but a lot of what you say I do indeed agree with and you have swayed me.  In any case, what the hell, it's a big beautiful golf world.  I'm just happy we DO have teams of people who take the time to do this for us.  I am indeed PROUD to be one of them.

TH

ps to JakaB - if a course marks ob, we can't ignore it generally.  I agree it's stupid though - and in the rating process, there is a facility for this - we rate UNDER THE RULES OF GOLF.  If there's an "illegal" ob - ie a pole or something, not a line between two points, for example - than it doesn't count.

[Bob_Huntley]

Dan King:

I would pay a King's ransom, or at least seven shillings and sixpence, to learn how to put quotes in boxes and to use color in answer to a questions.

Bob

[THuckaby2]

You and me both, Bob!  

The only thing I know how to do is get a quote from a previous post in a box - you just hit "reply with quote" rather than "reply" and the system does it for you.  Beyond that, oh yes I am clueless!

TH

[Jim_Kennedy]

Tom and Bob,
goto the help section and you will find a series of codes to do the things you want. Insert your own text,etc., between these codes and presto!

[Jim_Kennedy]

Tom and Bob,
goto the help section and you will find a series of codes to do the things you want. Insert your own text,etc., between these codes and presto!

[THuckaby2]

Well, hush my mouth.  I'm obviously one of those stereotypical husbands who would rather die than ask for directions.  I didn't even realize there was a help key.


Thanks, Jim

TH

[Dan Kelly]

Please, guys! Have mercy on an aging man's eyes!

Color is great -- but that godawful neon green is just ... godawful! Bordering on unreadable!

[THuckaby2]

Which is why I used a quite dignified blue.  Uh oh, I've found a new toy...

TH

[Dan King]

UBBC is somewhat like html, just without as many options. Sort of a poor man's html.  There is a page that explains how it is used.  You can either go to the Help button above, which will launch another window in frames and from there click on "Make text bold, italic, underlined, etc..."
Or you can just Click here for page on UBBC help

It's a bit tough to demonstrate UBBC code here since if I put in the tags it will convert them.  If this page doesn't help enough I can tell you more
Click here to send me email.
Try things out, you can use the preview button before submitting to make sure you used the tags correctly.

Not a lot of use for shillings and sixpences, but if we get this figured out I'll settle for a beer.

More about the original topic later.

There was a crooked man,	and he walked a crooked mile,
He found a crooked sixpense	against a crooked stile;
He bought a crooked cat	which caught a crooked mouse,
And they all lived together	in a little crooked house.

[THuckaby2]

Dan - I shall gladly buy you a beer next time I see ya, you being the starving student and all... but as you see, Jim Kennedy beat you to the real commission.

I Look forward to your further thoughts re this subject - I continue to learn a lot from you!

TH

[Dan Kelly]

Speaking of a King's ransom:

I can't think of a single King -- other than Dan, of course -- for whose safe return I'd be willing to pay, oh, say, more than three or four shillings!

Nor any Queen, either!  

[Dan King]

That's what I get for trying to be thorough, losing out on nearly a bob.

For I don't care too much for money
For money can't buy me love.
 --John Lennon

[THuckaby2]

BB King?

Elvis (the King)?

I'd give a good ransom for either of those!

TH

[THuckaby2]

Dan King, your good intentions earned you a beer in any case, to be paid at Barona.  Damn I already owe Bernhardt... looks like it's gonna be a lot of buying straight from the start for me.  Better not lose any more bets!

TH

[Richard_Goodale]

Dan "The" King

Stop showing off!  You are making me dizzy.

[Gib_Papazian]

Ohmygawd,

Now that the Treehouse has discovered such techno-wizardry, we are doomed to descend into the same cyberspace Hell as all those teenage chat rooms.

Personally, I even consider these smiley faces a bit over the top, but allow myself this indulgence even though it seems childish.

The temptation is enormous to jazz up my pedantic drivel with cutsie tricks, but I think in the  long run it best to remain Amish.  

[THuckaby2]

Of course you're right, oh wise one.  'Tis dangerous indeed to give fools like me too many toys.  I'm sure I'll get over this very quickly.[/i]

TH

[Bob_Huntley]

Tom:

Banish the green, it's hard to read.

[THuckaby2]

Very correct, oh wisest one.  I am having too much fun with this whole color thing, that's all!

TH

[Gib_Papazian]

All this playing with colors reminds me of a wonderful Hogan story a friend related to me:

Several months after selling the Hogan Golf Company to foreign interests, the following exchange occurred between The Hawk and a local golf writer:

Writer: "Mr. Hogan, do you mind if I ask you a question?"

Hogan: (scowling) "Go right ahead young man."

Writer: (quickly) "Now that the Hogan Golf Company has decided to make colored golf balls, do you plan to play one?"

Silence.

Hogan: (sneering though his teeth) "Golf balls are white."

End of interview.

Text is black. not green, not blue, not chartreuse.  Black.  

[JohnV]

Warning, the following post is long and all in black.

Just to get us back somewhere near the original topic.

I decided to do a little comparison among 81 of the top courses in Northern California/Reno area courses thanks to the NCGA Blue Book.

If you were to base your rating strictly on yardage as Dan has said they did at Golfweb you would say the hardest courses in the area are:

Montreux
Edgewood Tahoe
Ruby Hill
Arrowcreek - Challenge
Fall River Valley
Sierra Nevada Golf Ranch
Arrowcreek - Legend
Genoa Lakes
Diablo Grande Ranch
Pheasant Run

Seven of these are in the Sierras and the yardage is unrealistic.  Since I don't feel like looking up the altitude and the number of par 4/5 holes I won't adjust for this.

If we look at the top 11 (tie for 10th) based on Course Rating we get:
Ruby Hill
Arrowcreek - Challenge
Edgewood Tahoe
Bayonet
Montreux
Diablo Grande Ranch
Coyote Creek Tournament
San Juan Oaks
Sierra Nevada Golf Ranch
Half Moon Bay Old
Sierra Nevada Golf Ranch

If we look based on Slope  (difference between CR and BR) we get:
Mayacama
Spyglass
Diablo Grande Legends
The Dragon
Twelve Bridges
Spanish Bay
The Preserve
Wente Vineyards
Montreux
San Juan Oaks

Interestingly Pheasant Run which is in the top 10 for yardage is last in Slope of these 81 courses.

Now if we calculate the Bogey Rating (what a bogey golfer would average in his 10 best of 20 rounds) we get similar results:
Arrowcreek - Challenge - 103.2
Spyglass - 102.8
Montreux
San Juan Oaks
Ruby Hill
Twelve Bridges
Mayacama
Spanish Bay
Diablo Grande Legends
Coyote Creek Tournament - 101.7

I went back and calculated the Scratch Obstacle Rating and Bogey Obstacle Rating.  In order to get these I had to use the yardage rather than the true effective playing length, so it is biased against the courses at altitude and for courses that play long (Spyglass/Pasatiempo).

Top 10 SOR:
Spyglass
Spanish Bay
Gleneagles International
Poppy Hills
Mayacama
Coyote Creek Tournament
Monterey Peninsual Dunes
Tehama
Whitney Oaks
Olympic Lake

Top 10 BOR:
Mayacama
Spyglass
Spanish Bay
Gleneagles International
Poppy Hills
Green Hills
Pebble Beach
Twelve Bridges
The Preserve
Pasatiempo

Difference between SOR and BOR:
Mayacama - 6.6 strokes more Bogey obstacles than Scratch - nasty
Spyglass
Spanish Bay
Wente Vineyards
Green Hills
The Dragon
The Preserve
Diablo Grande Legends
Poppy Hills
Glenagles International

What all this proves I don't know, but it is fun being anal once in a while.  

Can someone tell me about Gleneagles International?  A 9-holer that plays 6390 yards for 2 laps and has a CR of 72.8 and a slope of 140.

Interesting that Pebble Beach only shows up on the Bogey Obstacle Rating.  Must be because of all that water on the right on 4-10.  We used to call that "Bogey Water" in Oregon.

Mayacama might have some carries from the back tees of over 170 yards that the Bogey Golfer can't make.  Those would pop the BOR real quick.
When that happens, it is really unplayable for a bogey golfer from that tee, but we still rate it for the person in between.

The spreadsheet with all these numbers for the 81 courses is available.  Just e-mail me.

[redanman]

Can someone tell me about Gleneagles International?  A 9-holer that plays 6390 yards for 2 laps and has a CR of 72.8 and a slope of 140.

Old information (Not played in 10 years)

It is near Candlestick Prk (3Com?) and is in a so-so neighborhood.  The basic golf course could be quite good with a little care. It is a San Francisco Course, Fog and Cypress trees.  About a Doak 3, probably unless something extraordinary has happened.

[THuckaby2]

JV - thank you very much for all this - I love having data support.  Yardage most definitely does not tell the whole story, and I'd have to guess Dan will agree with this.

David Wigler and I had an off-line discussion recently re Mayacama and it's PRETTY much as you suspect - there are indeed a few carries off the tee in the less than 170 range that count for Bogey and not at all for Scratch.  But what drives that slope up is indeed an oddity of distance (MANY par 4's in the 370 range) coupled with VERY difficult green targets.  You know how those can make the Bogey rating soar quickly....

The end result is that you have a golf course where the Scratch is challenged, but not outrageously so... but where the Bogey is absolutely killed.  Thus all the ratings are right on, I think - even though that is the highest slope we have in NCGA.

Re Gleneagles, Gib plays there a lot.  I'm kind of afraid to, though I have played there enough.  It is indeed in a bad area... fun golf course though.  Difficult most definitely.  Got to be among the best 9holers anywhere.  Just don't drive a nice car or get too attached to any belongings.

TH

[TEPaul]

Man, I'm almost sorry I looked into the back pages and found this topic again.

Dan King:

It really sounds to me that you'd like to see the Association that represents American amateur golf and golfers step back and represent a select and far fewer amount of golfers and smaller slice of golf in America.

You asked what's wrong with making American golfers play tournament golf and earn their handicaps that way. You even suggest that the USGA should not really care about the other golfers in America that don't play tournament golf! Are you really serious?

That could very well be 75% of the golfers in America, Dan? And you really don't think it a good idea that the USGA streamline its handicap structure and method to make it as efficient as possible for strictly recreational golfers to establish handicaps that can be as reliable as possible in this country? The USGA can do that by using computers and their software more efficiently and making same more efficiently usable, collecting data more efficiently, disseminating it more efficiently and comprehensively.

ESC can be a real help in reliable handicapping (and sandbag minimizing) if it acheived 100% compliance by being imbedded in the handicapping software and therefore a tool that does not have to rely on individual golfer understanding and compliance. We know under a system that requires voluntary compliance ESC compliance has barely acheived 50% after 20+ years. 100% ESC compliance requires a posting method that does not rely on gross score posting into a match play format. Gross score posting for a match play format does not work well and never will!

Peer review is a concept that works depending on how it's structured. Peer review presently resides only at the club level. It can remain there but can be mightily supplemented with the power of information dissemination by use of the Internet. I can't really see a better peer review method than anyone's scoring record on the Internet to be reviewed by anyone else.

These kinds of things can help tremendously, and help the US golfer get a more reliable handicap from the Association that presides over Amateur golf in America and also allow him to play golf the way he does play golf instead of making him earn something by playing in a way that he does not normally play.

I do not know it but would bet that the UK golfers have probably always played the way they do. I would be surprised if their handicap method has made them play the way they do! I am quite certain that the UK handicap system probably melded into the way golf was played in the UK in the first place.

Requiring only tournament play for an American golfer to get a USGA handicap will inevitably shrink the USGA's role in American golf and I can't see that's a good thing.

There are some, I realize that might want to see the USGA shrink back to controlling only a view tournaments as they did about 100 years ago and starting all over again but that can't be a good thing, in my mind.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()