+ Reply to Thread
Results 91 to 120 of 130
-
11-17-2011 08:41 PM #91
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Location
- aberdeen
- Posts
- 94
-
11-17-2011 10:04 PM #92
I for one would love to see a truly valid statistical analysis of actual outcomes of real matches with real players across dozens of courses and thousands of players. Looking at match play and stroke play. I can't imagine that doesn't exist somewhere. I find the one course test interesting and useful directionally, but to jvincent's point, no way is it statistically valid to apply to every other course. To our admitted point, our shorthand math here is also not complete because it doesn't reflect actual dispersion patterns or range of score (it doesn't reflect reality). But if all we have is incomplete / invalid views of the situation, I'd rather have several methods to compare - add them all up and we might just get closer to reality. In the end, I think the most practical application of the results of the exercise is to understand whether the handicap system is fair for match and/or stroke play. Not because I want to change it, but because I want to set my betting based on it!! I play with plenty of people that are simply convinced that the handicap is intended to be 100% equitable. It just isn't. I don't care that it isn't, but I certainly want to know.
-
11-18-2011 09:12 AM #93
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Location
- Gatineau
- Posts
- 12
I agree with Libbing in that I want to know what factors influence the probability of winning in various types of competition, but I think that can be done with simulated scores. It is not really any more valid to use real data to simulate matches if those scores were not recorded from actual matches. I think it would be more valid for simulating stroke play tournaments, but simulated scores based on the dispersion patterns of real scores under specific sets of conditions would be great to have.
It would be interesting to know how much hole by hole variability relative to par is influenced by these factors:
par for the hole, player handicap, match play, tournament play, familiarity with course
It would also be interesting to know how specific sets of the above conditions influence the probability of winning in different types of competitions (match play, stroke play against n competitors of handicaps x)
It has always been my general understanding that
1. lower handicaps have an advantage in match play or stroke play against a single competitor
2. that advantage gets greater as the difference in handicaps increases
3. the probability of winning a stroke play tournament decreases more for low handicaps than high handicaps as the number of competitors increases
so low handicaps should prefer match play
higher handicaps should prefer tournaments
of course I could be wrong so if anyone has any evidence to support or refute these ideas, please share
-
11-18-2011 09:22 AM #94
- Join Date
- Aug 2001
- Location
- Kanata, Ontario
- Posts
- 1,491
All I know is that more often than not the better "sandbagger" will win in match play.
-
11-18-2011 09:47 AM #95
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Location
- aberdeen
- Posts
- 94
-
11-18-2011 05:20 PM #96
-
11-18-2011 09:26 PM #97
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Location
- Gatineau
- Posts
- 12
-
11-18-2011 10:36 PM #98
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Location
- aberdeen
- Posts
- 94
-
11-22-2011 01:03 PM #99
adanac - canada
I wanna know who created this fake profile to heckle Jvincent
MJF is that you?You only get out of something what you put into it
-
11-22-2011 01:10 PM #100
Mike knows that he can't heckle me on math.
BTW, I've been busy for the last little while so I haven't been able to finish off the simultaneous stroke vs match version of the spreadsheet.Not fat anymore. Need to get better at golf now!
-
11-22-2011 03:45 PM #101
-
11-22-2011 07:07 PM #102
Right there with you mjf, engineers don't need math . . .
I've always felt that the hdcp system is a decent tool for match play (blow up holes are capped to a certain level of damage, same as match play) and should make a match reasonably close to 50-50.
I think that the "type" of player in an amateur level match play is just as important as his/her handicap.
ex. PlayerA is a streaky 10 hdcp (birdie or 2, 7 or 8 pars and a few double/triple bogeys, usually a wild long hitter with not so great course management) while PlayerB is a consistent 5 hdcp (12 pars 6 bogeys, always hits it straight and may be a little short)
The real problem with taking the data used in the study mentioned above is that the style of course will play a huge role in which of these players wins more often. Long wide opened course? Tight fairway course? I know the difference in slope is supposed to make up for the course's difficulty but it is usually only a stroke difference in a match.
The problem with the hdcp system is that it is a very limited system in measuring a golfer's ability. A long hitter will probably beat the shorter hitter on a 6700 yard wide opened course more often than not while a good putter will beat a poor putter at Augusta 9/10 because those "style" differences will be worth a few strokes at least on different courses even if their handicaps are accurate.Even I've never heard of me
-
11-22-2011 11:23 PM #103
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Location
- aberdeen
- Posts
- 94
-
01-04-2012 10:09 AM #104
- Join Date
- Apr 2011
- Location
- Orleans
- Posts
- 54
There was an article in the Golf Canada newsletter that said the main reason was to get a bigger separation in match play between high and low handicappers. It would seen that those who keep a handicap factor as a gauge of progress will be an innocent victim of the change.
-
01-04-2012 11:49 AM #105
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Posts
- 4,163
-
01-04-2012 12:56 PM #106
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
- Location
- Ottawa
- Posts
- 196
So does this mean that all score tracking software that does handicapping need to be updated starting this year.
For example I use Gstat Pro (I think they advertise on this site).
I assume they need to update their software to reflect this. Is that accurate?
-
01-04-2012 02:39 PM #107
In GStat all you`d need to do is select USGA Handicapping as thay are now the same as I understand it. But yes they need to do an update for hole by hole entry since the esc has changed.
I`ll email Scot and give him a heads up.Life dinnae come wit gimmies so yuv got nae chance o' gitt'n any from me.
-
01-04-2012 03:03 PM #108
- Join Date
- Jan 2012
- Location
- Redondo Beach
- Posts
- 1
In GStat there is a way to unlock the program options to modify the ESC table. If you go into the Program Options dialog, then click on the Handicap tab, double click on the word "Method" in the frame title "Hdcp Method Selection" in the upper left hand corner of the tab. This will toggle the lock off (or on if it was already unlocked). To determine that it is unlocked, you will see the "USGA" method in the Hdcp Method Selection options. Also the fields for the min and max will be unlocked and you will be able to edit them.
If you click on the ESC tab you can edit this (but for the USGA method it is correct).
If you want to switch the USGA method, which uses the updated ESC method, close out the Program Options dialog by clicking OK.
Open the Player Window, select the Player you want to change, and then change th Handicap Computation Method for This Player to the USGA method. Then click the Update Player Information button on the second button bar. This will re-compute the player's handicap for all scores using the new handicap method.
If you want to change all players at once in your database, close any open windows and selelct Utilities | Change All Players Hdcp Methods. A dialog will appear and select the desired method from this list by entering in the corresponding number (e.g. 1 for USGA).
If you have any problems or questions regarding GStat Pro, please contact me at scot@maga1.com
Thanks,
Scot
-
01-04-2012 05:15 PM #109
- Join Date
- Apr 2011
- Location
- Orleans
- Posts
- 54
I will clarify the "victim" aspect in that if the one doesn't partake in or care about the fairness of match play, one still has to follow the revised system. Thus the probably rise in one's handicap factor may not necessarily mean that one's play has declined, but just that the reoccurring bad hole has more influence than it did last year.
-
01-05-2012 08:43 AM #110
I always thought that in order to decrease your handicap, you had to play better golf. But then, that's just me.
There definitely is bias in any handicap system, and I expect that the new one will adversely affect me: some of my worst holes to par are par 3s. With a handicap hovering around 20 (19.6, but likely to increase due to the par3s), my maximum scores on par 5s may fluctuate between 7 and 8, causing some volatility in scoring. But then, it has taken me 3 years to get my last 8 rounds in, so any difference will be very slowly realized unless I can find some more free time on my hands.
-
01-06-2012 01:22 PM #111
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Posts
- 4,163
Since one only uses 50% of one's games, the impact of the revised ESC system for those who handicaps are above 10, will be less than some perceive it will be. If the changes are to correct the current flaw where the lower handicap player wins more than his share of matches against higher handicap players, then those 10 and up should be pleased. What do you mean by if one doesn't ....care about the fairness of match play?It will now be fairer in the upcoming season.
A bigger problem, IMO, centres around where strokes are given during a match. Many cubs still handicap their holes based on their overall degree of difficulty and my post #62 describes this problem. If the hole handicapping was done correctly, then match play results should be fairer.
Using one's handicap factor as a measure of improvement will not disappear in 2012. If the best 10 of your last 20 games are based on the new ESC, then progress or regression will be quite apparent.
-
01-08-2012 02:00 PM #112
For the National Capital Golf Tour, we looked at the effect that the changing ESC calculation makes to the handicaps of the existing Tour members. Now there is some margin of error here as we play Stableford and people ar X'ng out on holes that they are blowing up on, however it should be pretty close.
Of the 48 players in the system, the following results were found:
- The old Tour handicap factor average was 15.3, the new average 14.8, a drop of approximately 0.5
- The biggest drop was 3.6
- The largest gain was 1.9
It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.
Colby
-
01-08-2012 07:39 PM #113
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Posts
- 4,163
If golfers were to use the new ESC system and apply it to the last 20 games played in 2011 or earlier, the individual differentials will either remain the same or go up. In selecting the low 10 of the last 20 differentials, how is it possible for one player, the one whose factor came down 3.6, to drop a total of roughly 30 differential strokes?
-
01-09-2012 11:21 AM #114
Because he only has 3 entries in the system as we only use tour events for our handicapping due to issues getting people to put their non-tour events into the system. There's pros and cons either way, however this seems to work the best and has appeared to eliminate the sandbagging for the most part.
I did mention that there is a good chance for a margin of error due to the scoring method that we use which allows a person to X-out when they blow up on a hole (the modified Stableford we use gives 1 point for a bogie, so marking a triple or higher doesn't matter, and if you pick up, it helps with pace of play). When we mark the scores in GStat, we always gave a player a quad (or higher depending on handicap) for X-out holes (so when their handicap is applied on certain holes for the automated Stableford scoring, they don't receive points on the holes they X-out on), which may have unintentionally skewed the handicap factors under the new system.
In any respect, the lack of rounds tracked for the single golfer, and the resulting skew of the handicap average (if that one is removed, the average change is -0.45, which again is not significantly different than the -0.5 before). We know that with the change in the ESC calculation, we are going to have to review how X-outs are recorded in the system, trying to balance the pace of play with te ability to use handicaps to ensure fairness of play.It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.
Colby
-
01-19-2012 10:36 AM #115
I think the new system is a fair one. As a 5hcp, this system doesnt change much for me, and if the stats are correct, it should level the playing field between high and low handicaps in matchplay competitions. Although, I don't necessary believe the statement that low hcp'rs are a like more than 50% favoured.
I too do not by the argument that it makes it easier to understand. It seems the same to me.
-
07-16-2012 06:05 PM #116
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
- Location
- around here
- Posts
- 2,111
I'm reviving this thread because I finally reached 20 rounds for this season, and from the beginning of the season I have been tracking my scores on both the old system and the new system.
Under the old system, my handicap factor is 14.9 - pretty much where it usually is at this time of year.
Under the new system, my handicap factor is 15.7 - almost a full stroke more.
I actually thought the difference might be greater, but the rounds where I ended up counting triple bogeys or more in my handicap score tended to be ones that were not used for handicap calculations. Nevertheless, I think a 0.8 stroke difference is significant.
-
07-16-2012 09:06 PM #117
My index has gone up this year, reletively speaking. given my play I'd expect to have a lower cap. Although even my good rounds seem to have their share of triples this year, go figure.
I don't think it's possible for someone's cap to go down due to the new system. I'm not sure what those posts are about, but you have to take at least a double now, where as before, it was double max. At least for golfers in the usual mid cap range.
-
07-16-2012 11:15 PM #118
- Join Date
- Nov 2011
- Location
- aberdeen
- Posts
- 94
-
08-21-2012 10:42 AM #119
I have (by accident) kept track of my handicap using the new system (on the club's computer) and the old system on Skycaddie's clubsg. I can't seem to figure out how to apply the new ESC to the skycaddie.
The new ESC really balooned my cap up at the beginning of this season, but as I slowly got some of the rust off, its interesting that right now, I'm 11.5 on the "old" system (max double) and 11.8 on the new system (max 7) So even though I thought I'd see a huge difference, I'm actually the same course handicap on the course I play the most (13)Andrew
-
08-21-2012 08:57 PM #120
I've actually lowered my handicap down to 9.5. The new system makes me think more when I get into a bad situation and try to save those 6's and not turn them into 7's. being in the bubble range right now depending on the the course and the slope I can either be max double or be max 7.
Although recently I haven't been playing much this month or last, I plan to start playing more soon! Hopefully to get it down a little lower.Proud member of the 2012 OG vs TGN Ryder Cup winning team
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
Handicapping
By little brit in forum General Golf TalkReplies: 2Last Post: 07-05-2008, 02:18 PM -
Handicapping system
By FuriouS in forum General Golf TalkReplies: 2Last Post: 05-04-2008, 10:16 AM -
Handicapping ?
By big mac in forum General Golf TalkReplies: 3Last Post: 08-15-2007, 01:10 PM -
Handicapping
By SIMMER in forum Rules Of GolfReplies: 24Last Post: 08-02-2006, 01:11 PM -
Handicapping System?
By carnagenames in forum General Golf TalkReplies: 3Last Post: 04-21-2006, 12:43 PM