Handicaps (the good, the bad, the ugly)

General Discussion
#1

I write this post to catalogue a few of my observations about how golf is handicapped. I want to begin by saying that the handicap system, in some ways, is attempting to solve an inherently unsolvable problem:

  • golf is played on different courses
  • golf is played from different tees on those courses
  • golf is played by people with a wide range of skill and athletic ability
  • golfers with different strengths and weaknesses within those sets of skills can be affected by courses and conditions differently
  • golfers play a variety of formats with different incentives (stroke, match play, bingo bango bongo, etc)

So, all in all, the handicap system attempts to create a method of distributing strokes amongst golfers of different abilities to allow them to compete. Pretty tough job, and I’d say its almost impossible to do it equitably amongst all golfers and all formats. It reminds me of one of my favorite phrases, “There are no solutions, only tradeoffs” <---- this represents a resource constrained view of the world, which happens to be how I think. Lastly and maybe the greatest challenge of all is that handicapping isan honor system that relies on golfers self reporting (they must be honest and understand the rules…something that runs counter to human nature in many cases).

So, here are few things that would give you a handicap that “travels well” without really breaking any of the rules:

  • above average ball striker that plays extremely aggressively (maybe matchplay format that rewards birdies :slight_smile:)
  • good ball striker playing a course with lots of OB who plays aggressively and takes full stroke and distance penalty when going OB or losing golf ball
  • Someone who “holes every putt” but does not approach a 3 ft putt in a casual round with the same amount of focus as a tournament round. Ie, they have an inflated miss rate in casual rounds because they don’t actually putt it, they just walk up and tap it, etc.
  • Someone who plays the ball down, ALWAYS, no winter rules, no special fall “leaf” rules, etc
  • doesn’t enter 9 hole scores or know that handicap system allows you to replace a hole where you took a mulligan with an adjusted score
  • doesn’t enter best scores (this is just cheating)

Here are things that contribute to a vanity handicap:

  • Playing casual rules
  • giving putts
  • improving lies
  • not playing OB / lost ball as two stroke penalty
  • “breakfast ball” rules
  • plays course with almost no penalty off the tee
  • really bad rounds quickly turn into “practice rounds” that are not entered
  • enters lots of 9 hole rounds

So there are some observations. I don’t really have suggestions for “fixing” anything. This mainly contributes to why I don’t really get fired up or try to “win” net stroke events. Additionally, I don’t really care what your handicap is… we will negotiate strokes on the first tee and since I play match play you just aren’t going to get 100% of the spread if we are playing for more than $10 Nassau and I don’t know your game.

On this last note, I would say that 75-80% of my golf is social, for small wagers where I am mainly competing with myself. The rest is matches with a few people I know well, who based on experience together, know the appropriate strokes to give. Additionally, in the spirit of gamesmanship, I always will give an additional stroke or two on the back 9 to someone if I am whipping them on the front.

Just some musings… chime in if you feel motivated

#2

Just a couple of comments. The first bits in bold actually ARE breaking the rules. Another comment, I’m not sure that playing (and entering) a bunch of 9-hole scores necessarily results in a vanity handicap. You might shoot a low 9-hole score, but who knows whether your next 9-hole score a few days later will be a continuation of that good play, or whether a fresh start will produce a return to the “norm”, a regression to the mean.
But overall, I agree with your comments concerning the difficulties in designing and implementing the handicap system, it really is an impossible task. As to the “honor system”, that could be improved by adopting measures that are common in other parts of the world. The adoption of some type of pre-registration requirement for posting scores, along with a formal attestation requirement would go a long way towards decreasing the opportunities to intentionally manipulate the system. But these run contrary to the USGA attitude that every round must be posted, and posting is done by each player without anyone else attesting the accuracy of the score.

1 Like
#3

They are breaking the rules… but it is not intentional sand bagging for the most part imo, just ignorance. Could have been more precise with my language :slight_smile:

I’d be interested to see data on the 9 hole round piece. My sense is that it’s much easier to play 9 holes because of the shorter duration. Mental focus and fatigue make it tougher to play a great 18 holes. This is my speculation, no data to back it up. Also I think I heard the pope of slope say this in an article. Not sure though.

What do you think of the Augusta National handicap system? I could see doing something like that for my friends in a league assuming we all play the same course, tees and rules. It seems like it may make more sense for match play and a small group??

#4

I think of my own 18-hole rounds, how often do I follow a good 9 with a bad 9. But I also sometimes rebound from a poor first 9 with a good second 9. If you’re playing just 9, and start out poorly, you don’t have much chance to get things under control before its all over. I’m guessing just as you are, but I don’t think its a slam-dunk that combined 9-hole scores will be consistently lower than 18-hole scores.

I’m not familiar with the Augusta National system, but a quick google search leads me to a system that bases your handicap for today solely on your single most recent round. I suppose that might serve to equalize winnings, because it rewards a single good score with a really low handicap, vice versa. You talk about using it for a small league playing the same course and tees, and I don’t see any problem using the WHS for that. You might choose to have a “league handicap” which counts only league scores, but is calculated similarly to the WHS handicap.

#5

I would extend the look back to maybe 5 rounds or do best 3/5 but I think it’s interesting that the system only cares about your ability to make par or birdie.

Almost like an extreme ESC that makes no sense for stroke play but is relevant for match play.

I may mark down scores and compare some sort of modified Augusta National system vs WHS

#6

I almost always score better on the back 9 and that’s even though I warm up plenty before a round. To me, it’s because I need time to adjust to playing on the course. Sure I get a little tired by the time I’ve walked hole # 16 but for all I know that helps me play with relaxed focus.

1 Like