USGA Handicap Question

[PhillyEagle]

When do your rounds become 'outdated'? Does the handicap reset every calendar year? So if I post a couple rounds in the 70's just before January 1, 2008...does that mean those rounds won't count towards my handicap anymore after Jan 1?

[Pa Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by PhillyEagle

When do your rounds become 'outdated'? Does the handicap reset every calendar year? So if I post a couple rounds in the 70's just before January 1, 2008...does that mean those rounds won't count towards my handicap anymore after Jan 1?

Not until 20 rounds will one drop off. Whether it is 2 weeks or 2 years. It is based on the best 10 of your last 20 rounds, independent of date.

[JEFF4i]

What Jayhawk said, which, I think is rather foolish.

[Bravo]

But as Walter Conkrite used to say...."And that's the way it is........."

[JEFF4i]

Bah, compliance to idiotic rules is the entire reason that exist.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by JEFF4i

What Jayhawk said, which, I think is rather foolish.

Bah, compliance to idiotic rules is the entire reason that exist.

Foolish why? Foolish would be having to start over fresh each season... I know guys that don't play 20 rounds a year... they'd never have a legitimate handicap.

Or is there something else about the system that bothers you? Include a workable solution in your response....

[JEFF4i]

What bothers me is the un-reliability of it. Okay, here's a situation I'll be going through. Before I'm 30 I am going to need knee surgery. Now, obviously, I won't be playing at all that winter.

Supposedly I'll be golf-worthy by the next summer (will be having it around Oct-Nov) but I'm betting my swing will be off and my scores will reflect that.

Say I play in a tournament and I've only played 10 rounds since the surgery, and they are all in the mid-80s. Previous to that say I keep up what I'm doing and shoot low 70s.

I go into the tournament with little or no handicap, but shoot 15 strokes over it?

That is sooooo far from practical.

What they should do is take your most recent 10(maybe as low as 8) scores, take the 7 best from those, and then take 3 from the other 10. Why? 10 is enough rounds to have a feel for your current and recent game and the handicap will reflect that accurately. However, if you play 20 rounds in 5 years, well, it'll still reflect how your game has changed -for better or worse-, and won't effect it terribly much.

I've thought of this in depth before. A similar situation happened. I was shooting about 6 over my last year of high school. I got in a motorcycle accident that just ruined my left knee and broke my collar bone. My handicap went up 10 strokes, but, since I never had time for golf before one tournament because I was going to a doctor and doing a little physical therapy, I did shoot mid-80s in a tournament with a 4 handicap. How can you tell me that is accurate?

The big picture problem with this rule is that it is largely regressive, where it should be progressive, as in the solution I gave.

[Pa Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by JEFF4i

What they should do is take your most recent 10(maybe as low as 8) scores, take the 7 best from those, and then take 3 from the other 10. Why? 10 is enough rounds to have a feel for your current and recent game and the handicap will reflect that accurately. However, if you play 20 rounds in 5 years, well, it'll still reflect how your game has changed -for better or worse-, and won't effect it terribly much.

I would have to say that you also have to look at the other side, which may be as much if not more realistic.

Say a decent golfer want to revisit their swing and take lessons to make it to a higher level and the bottom falls out for about 10 rounds. Which is probably pretty common and I would bargain to guess many on here have been through similar circumstances. Under your scenario they would make a killing after that time. Just being the devil's advocate.

[Fourputt]

The way the system is now, it is designed to make it hard to be successful when you aren't playing your best. Even if you aren't having health issues, you have to shoot to your handicap, not just to your average, to have a chance to finish well in a tournament. The system is also designed to reward your success when your handicap is moving down, but not when it's moving up. That means that you won't be competitive when it's moving in the wrong direction, and I know from personal experience that it's hard to take. I went through some injury issues over the last 6 years, and my handicap slowly went from 11 to 18, and during that time I won exactly $0 in club tournaments. But once I was over the difficulties, those fortunes reversed and I won (and still am) more than my fair share. My handicap is down to 12.8 now, and will be lower still when the next revision comes out on Friday. I should be close to stabilizing now, and I expect my results to be more normal as well.

As you recover your game from the surgery, you should experience about the same sort of swings as I did.

I doubt that there has ever been a system that has made everyone happy all the time, or ever will be, but I still think that the GHIN system is adequate until something better comes along.

[JEFF4i]

But then how can they say that your handicap accurately reflects your swing? It doesn't, unless it is current.

Even worse, it might reflect a time past.

[MGP]

Actually I think your handicap is supposed to reflect what you are capable of, playing at your best rather than how you are playing at any given time.

Over time, if your game does get worse then your handicap will follow it but it will take a while to catch up.

Personally I think it's beter to err in this direction than the other way. Sandbagging would become a lot easier with fewer rounds included in your index calculation...

[JEFF4i]

Sandbagging is existant anyway.

That is one of the largest arguments right now, is that it prevents sandbagging. How? People still do it plenty. So why not adapt the rules to those who are honest?

And "capable of playing" is largely subjective. As I said, capability is also relative to current situation.

[Pa Jayhawk]

Originally Posted by JEFF4i

Sandbagging is existant anyway.

That is one of the largest arguments right now, is that it prevents sandbagging. How? People still do it plenty. So why not adapt the rules to those who are honest?

And "capable of playing" is largely subjective. As I said, capability is also relative to current situation.

I guess my question would be, would you rather play against someones ability or immediate status. In the example of one making changes to their swing, they are making a choice to better their game even though it may have an initial impact to their game, not their average ability. Where under your scenario they could in fact play in a tournament with their old swing and actually take immediate benefit from doing so.

In that case I am not sure I could even consider them a sandbagger, as they simply used what they were entitled to.

It is true you are going to have sandbaggers either way, but I could easily see this unintentionally making sandbaggers out of people where that was not their intent.

In the same sense many people, myself definitely included, go through an occasional funk for maybe 3-4 round. There have been occasion where I shot well into the 100's for 2-3 rounds when I tried to tweek something, or for no reason at all, then moved back to my scoring ability and even in the 80's the next few round. If you lessen the criteria, those 100's would reflect on my handicap, when I am in fact capable of much more.

I would rather be forced to play up to what I am capable of in order to win, as opposed to simply taking advantage of a few bad rounds.

[ezra76]

I've started entering every round regarless of how bad it is and every stroke, like I'm supposed to. Still has me at a 9.1. I shot a 95 on a barely under 7000yd. track yesterday and had to use ESC for 2 holes. Mine should not be that low the way I'm swinging and putting lately. It's a challenge to get back to it though. I can usually chalk up 1 tee shot and putting to 7 or 8 strokes. I even tried hitting 3w more, hooked the piss out of it on the 10th hole. Set up dead draw with driver there on out, swung 105% and made some pars to finish.

[Bignose]

There is actually a fairly simple solution, at least in reporting handicaps that would take into account recent changes, and that is to include a standard deviation when reporting the handicap. That is, you would read your index as 15.6 +- 4.3 where the 4.3 is the deviation about the average index. If you are consistently playing to your index, the deviation would be small, 1 or 2, but if you are bouncing around a lot, the deviation would be high, 5 or 6 or maybe even 7 or 8. The deviation could reflect a recent injury or swing change much faster than just the index itself, because the index may change much until a lot of rounds are entered, but the deviation will change. Just one suggestion to address the good points brought up by this thread.

Edit. I forgot to add the best part about using a deviation calculation: the time between rounds can be factored directly in. That is, the player who only reports 20 rounds a year will always have a higher deviation than the player who reports twice a week. I used to play on a chess server several years ago, and that was how they reported their ratings -- a rating and a deviation and the deviation was both a factor of the variability of play and the times between games. I.e. the players who played 30 games a day always had lower deviations than the players who only played once a week or so.

Finally, applying a deviation calculation can help with Jeff's point. Because, if the deviation is high (either due to variability of play or time between rounds) the index itself can change more quickly. For example, using the cases in this thread, someone is out for several months after a surgery, during which time the deviation slowly increases (as more time pases). Well, when they do finally get some rounds in, the index changes quickly because the deviation is large. Once they get a lot of rounds in, the deviation will be smaller to reflect that, or in other words, the index will be more honed in to reflect the current skill of that player.