Mythbusters III
In this third and final installment of dispelling handicapping myths, I’m going after the biggest one of all.
MYTH: Playing to one’s handicap is common and expected.
Many golfers are amazed to learn they only play to their handicap around once every five rounds or so. This amazement quickly turns to downright disbelief when informed that, on average, golfers actually play two to three strokes above their handicap.
How can this be, they ask? Doesn’t a handicap pretty much represent a golfer’s average or normal play?
Of course it doesn’t. How can it when your worst 10 of your 20 most recent rounds are completely thrown out in the calculation process?
Think about it . . . we know you could not have played to your handicap in your worst 10 of 20 rounds. And even among your 10 best, at least half will normally be above your Index. This will leave you with about four scores in 20 (due, in part, to the .96 multiplier factor used in the calculations) where you played to or better than the Handicap Index you are being issued.
Despite this indisputable logic, nothing short of a score-by-score review of their current scoring record will convince some golfers of this truth.
(If you are one of the disbelievers, print-out a copy of your October scoring record. Note your current Handicap Index and count the number of differentials equal to or lower than this Index. You will probably find four, maybe five, such rounds among the 20.)
Once the reality of this situation sets in, the next question most people have is “why in the world is the system set up this way?”
Simple. A Handicap Index has always been intended to represent a golfer’s potential ability, not their actual ability. It has never been a number a golfer was expected to play to on a regular basis.
So if just playing to one’s handicap on any given day is not probable, what about those very low net scores that show up in big tournaments all too often?
The USGA has developed the following table which estimates the odds of golfers of different handicap ranges outperforming their handicap by a designated number of strokes. The numbers can be pretty grim.
Odds Table
| Handicap Index Ranges | |||||
| Net Diff | 0-5 | 6-12 | 13-21 | 22-30 | >30 |
| 0 | 5/1 | 5/1 | 6/1 | 5/1 | 5/1 |
| -1 | 10/1 | 10/1 | 10/1 | 8/1 | 7/1 |
| -2 | 23/1 | 22/1 | 21/1 | 13/1 | 10/1 |
| -3 | 57/1 | 51/1 | 43/1 | 23/1 | 15/1 |
| -4 | 151/1 | 121/1 | 87/1 | 40/1 | 22/1 |
| -5 | 379/1 | 276/1 | 174/1 | 72/1 | 35/1 |
| -6 | 790/1 | 536/1 | 323/1 | 130/1 | 60/1 |
| -7 | 2349/1 | 1200/1 | 552/1 | 229/1 | 101/1 |
| -8 | 20111/1 | 4467/1 | 1138/1 | 382/1 | 185/1 |
| -9 | 48219/1 | 27877/1 | 3577/1 | 965/1 | 359/1 |
| -10 | 125000/1 | 84300/1 | 37000/1 | 1650/1 | 874/1 |
Can you provide a link to the table referenced in the last paragraph? I’m pretty disgusted when a player posts a net 62 with a 22 handicap. The typical response is I had the game of my life. I too have had some pretty darn good games on rare occasion, but they typically run in the net 65-66 range and I am about an 18 handicap. Having a table to show the probability won’t win the argument for me, for what is posted is supposedly true, but as the club handicap chairman, I can quote from this if it happens again, and lower the persons handicap. I have never felt comfortable doing an arbitrary lowering of a persons handicap when I think they are “sand bagging”, but having some statistics to back me up would go a loooong way and make it stick!
Jerry Woomer
August 21st, 2007 at 8:15 pmJerry Woomer needs to cool his heels a little. I have posted net scores of 63 and 64 in tournaments when I was a 23 handicap. I try to post all my scores especially if they are low. I want to lower my handicap and I am proud to say for the first time my handicap is nearing the average golfer range (16.1). I am waiting to shoot a gross 79 or less for the first time. I know its coming soon and if it happens in a tournament I don’t want someone like Jerry to spoil my personal triumph by crying sandbagger. This system works pretty well. I just checked my differentrials and they fit with the article. Only 5 of my differentials are lower than my handicap. So, relax Jerry and pat that 22 handicapper on the back. You can’t win everytime and neither can Tiger.
August 31st, 2007 at 12:49 amSorry Ed, I’m with Jerry. If a 22 handicap comes in after a tournament with a gross 85, I’m thinking sandbagger also. I play to a 13, and an 85 in a tourney is a very good round of golf for me. A 23 shooting a 95 should be rare, an 85 close to impossible!
You say it yourself, “I TRY to post all my scores, especially if they are low” Sorry, doesn’t work that way, you must post ALL your scores. Period. Failure to do so means your handicap is worthless.
September 19th, 2007 at 1:50 pmI agree with Walt and Jerry. Ed, you are NO 23 hdcp. As an experienced handicap chairmen, we would have lowered your hdcp to a 10 to 12 at the club had you posted tournament scores of 63 and 64 in close proximity (within months). If you are close to shooting 79 you are NO 23. I am a 9 and play with many 7 to 10’s and there are only the occassional 79 or less. I played with a good friend for 15 years that had one 79 in all that time before he died. He was a steady 13 to 17 hdcp. POST ALL your scores, Ed; and; the other Ed’s out there!!!
March 7th, 2008 at 8:57 pmI want to ask these other handicappers and Jim if they have a method for determining who is sandbagging their handicap. We have two individuals who came from another club and just started with ours at the beginning of the year. They have cashed in every one of our events including a team event that they would have one big time but were not eligible since they did not have enough tournament dates. However, they still won a lot more money than the overall winners based on winning their flight, daily lowest scores and closest-to-pins as a 23 and 29 handicap. We do have a separate Tournament Handicap but again they did not have enough tournaments to establish a handicap. Any help you can offer would be appreciated.
April 9th, 2008 at 1:48 pmGary – thank you for your comment. The most telltale signs of a too-high handicap are consistent high finishes in tournaments and/or low tournament scores in relation to non-tournament scores. Consistent high finishes might be the most reliable guide since such results are impervious to bad weather, poor course conditions, team formats that prevent the posting of valid scores or mask the quality of individual performances, etc. It is difficult to argue with win after win or consistent cashing. T-scores in relation to non-T-scores are also valuable, especially if a clear pattern of scoring better in tournaments presents itself. Most clubs with use such T-scores as a guide if it ever becomes necessary to modify a golfer’s Handicap Index. Thanks again and good luck! – Jim Cowan
April 16th, 2008 at 5:01 pmThree or four years ago there was a column on cheaters. That column showed much highier odds on two or three times in a row, a golfer shoting below his handicap. Can I get a copy of that column?
May 24th, 2008 at 8:40 pmThank you
Joe Helfrich
Joe, thank you for your comment. We have never run any sort of story or column on the odds of playing below your handicap consecutive times. We have published the odds table for shooting x number of strokes under your handicap on several occasions including this particular column that you deposited your comment in. The other column with this odds table that is handy is called Guidelines for Posting Tournament Scores. It is available under the Handicap area. Thanks again – Jim Cowan.
May 28th, 2008 at 2:54 pmWhy did golf go away from a “Low Index” that showed your lowest index over the past 12 months? In my opinion this is a much more effective way to run a tournament. It prevents the index inflation for any particular event as it is unlikely that anyone will post incorrectly for an entire year. It also does not reward a player for their poor play over a month.
August 18th, 2008 at 2:56 pmRobert, thank you for your comment. The bottom line is that if a golfer is posting scores properly and a club is performing its handicapping duties properly, the current Handicap Index is the one and only number that best identifies each golfer’s “potential” ability. How I was playing a year or more ago (since my handicap twelve months ago included scores nearly a year and a half old) really doesn’t have too much relevance. We have and will be sticking to current Index whenever possible. Thanks again – Jim Cowan
August 19th, 2008 at 10:16 amJoe H,
You may be thinking of this guy, Dean Knuth (former USGA Handicap official), a.k.a. “The Pope of Slope,” who has several articles about handicapping and sandbagging.
This is the main site:
http://www.popeofslope.com/index.html
And this is the direct link to a table of odds:
http://www.popeofslope.com/sandbagging/odds.html
A lot of other interesting stuff throughout the site…
October 10th, 2008 at 2:10 pmSandbaggers go buy a trophy instead of stealing them – just played in a club tournie and sure enough Mr 18 hcap turns up and shoots a 61 on a par 71 course. -10 on his hcap!!!!
Please fix the automated 20game system to drop these guys hcaps imediately take away the personal “sandbagging” statements and slaash their hcap.
June 8th, 2009 at 7:36 pmFirst I need to qualify something I said earlier about trying to post all my scores. The scores I sometimes did not post were those embarrassing 100 plus scores which would raise not lower my handicap. I haven’t done that in a few years though. Now to you cry babies. Don’t play if you can’t congratulate people when they have a great round. Everyone does it now and then. One night in league, playing alternate shot, my partner and I scored even par for the nine holes. I was so proud. Then some jerk says, “That’s why I’m not going to sign up for league again.” Good riddance!! People like him spoil the game for everyone. I just played in a tourney where a 33 handicapper shot a net 64. I wish I knew him so I could have patted him on the back and wished him luck in the second round. Odds are just numbers and they don’t mean things won’t happen. What were the odds that Tom Watson would be in the lead or tied for the lead all four rounds of the British Open?
August 10th, 2009 at 1:54 amEd, thank you for your comment. What if the 33-handicapper followed up his 64 with another 64 the next day in the tournament? Then did it again in the next big tournament? Then the next? That is the point of the table. Such rounds are supposed to be recorded once every several years. What if they are commonplace for a golfer everytime there is a big tournament? The Handicap System gives everybody one free pass per year. That is, every golfer is granted one low T-score per year without blinking an eye. It is when there are at least two in a given year that the scoring record is reviewed with greater scrutiny. And it is when they become the rule, not the exception, that a golfer is abusing the System. Thanks again – Jim Cowan
August 11th, 2009 at 8:34 amJim, the 33 handicapper followed it up with exactly 64 the next day and came in second to a 24 handicapper who fired a net 124. I congratulate both of them. I would have done it personally but it was a 5 hour day on the course and they weren’t in yet. I had to leave. The tournament was broken up into flights; championship (no handicap), first flight (8-14), and second flight (15 and up). The winner of the first flight had a net of 126. Neither of the first or the second flight scores would have been fair to pit against the championship flight which was won with a score of 143. But that is my point. Golfers are all over the place with there scores over a year. Sometimes everything lines up for the high handicapper and he plays like he knows what he is doing and then as quickly as his game came it goes. It happens with professionals too that’s why even Tiger Woods fails to make the cut sometimes and other times nobody can touch him. And believe it or not it usually happens one way or the other when the most is on the line. I have no doubt that there are some people out there that cheat the system, but as is the nature of golf they can’t do it all the time. So to Jerry Woomer, Colin Campbell and the rest I say quit spoiling peoples major golf moments because you can’t stand to loose. Play your best, enjoy the game, gve the winners their due and you will feel better about it all. And as to your question Jim, if they do it once, twice, or five times in a row they have just defied the odds and their handicaps will drop because those scores will be recorded.
August 13th, 2009 at 1:53 amSorry Jim,
One last note. I just looked at your odds table and it actually helps to make my point. As you go down and across the table it shows that the higher your handicap the better your odds are to outperform your handicap.
Ed
August 13th, 2009 at 10:09 amEd, we are going to have to agree to disagree . . . big time! The Handicap System would expect a golfer to play to his handicap in tournaments at the same ratio (1 out of 5) as all other rounds. Not knowing the handicaps of the golfers or the ratings of the tees played, we are still talking about rounds that might be four to five strokes under their handicap. Depending on how much golf they play, these are still “once every couple or few years” types of performances. To do it once is fine. To do it twice in a row is a stretch. To do it five times in a row is a farce. And though their handicap may come down for a time, the impact of these scores will likely go away with the posting of 20 more rounds of golf. It’s like trying to roll six or seven straight “snake eyes” with dice. The only way to do it is with loaded dice. Thanks, but again, we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Jim Cowan
August 17th, 2009 at 2:27 pmI fail to understand the golfers who say that they shoot better in tournaments “because so much more is on the line.” The majority of golfers crumble under the pressure of the big moment, push a drive OB, fat or thin an iron, or leave an important putt short. You see it every week on the PGA Tour and every week at your home course.
I’m all for congratulating the winning golfer, but when an 18 handicapper consistently shoots to an 11 during tournaments, it’s time to lower that golfer’s handicap and rest assured I will not be offering that golfer his full complement of strokes in any friendly side game.
August 25th, 2009 at 11:38 amJim, the chances of rolling snake eyes is 1 in 36. Any gambler will tell you that each time you pick up the dice you have a 1 in 36 chance of rolling snake eyes no matter how many times you have rolled it already. One reason so many people lose money in the casinos is the mistaken belief that the odds turn in their favor for something to happen the more it does not happen. In May Patricia Demauro rolled the dice in an Atlantic City casino 154 times in a row before she rolled a seven. The probability of that happening is 1 in 1.56 trillion but it happened. Even with that high a probability against it happening it does not mean it could not happen a week later, a day, or by the next roller.
Nick, your comments opened my eyes to a couple flaws in the handicap system. I am one of those players that do not crumble under the pressure in a golf match. After the first tee shot the nerves are gone and my game flows depending on whether my eye is on and I am on a hot streak or I am off and missing every other shot. The other players be damned. Let them choke. That leaves the door open for me even if I am having a bad day. Now here is the problem. The rules of golf say I must record my scores each time I play but when I play with my friends its for fun. That is not to say that I do not try to play my best and that I do not get frustrated when I make a series of poor shots. I just do not have the same intensity. So do I just arbitrarily take 5 or 10 or 15 or more strokes off my game when I record my scores and become a scratch golfer or a 10 handicap when I am no where near that good? How do I know the proper number of strokes to take off my scores when I record them so people like you will not call me a sandbagger when they choke? Something else you might think about. Your handicap index changes once a month not every score you record. In that month a golfer might find his game and even though he is recording all his scores his handicap is not going down until the end of the month. I am in that situation right now. At the beginning of September I will be a 15 or a 16 for the first time (yippee!! I will be among the slightly better than average golfers). I hope I can continue this trend and get down to a 12 by the time we have our senior mens championships in October so I can compete with the higher caliber players. You will enjoy your successes and the competition more if you quit looking for cheaters and give everyone their due.
August 29th, 2009 at 3:07 amEd, you just contridicted your own point. You so boldly point out that rolling snake eyes has an associated probability of 1 in 36. And that no matter how many times the dice are thrown, there always is a 1 in 36 chance of hitting it. Then you go on and explain about the lady in Atlantic City who rolled 154 times without hitting a 7, a 1 in 1.56 trillion chance. Yet, according to your snake eyes logic, it shouldn’t be a big deal because each roll has a 1 in 6 chance of hitting a 7 regardless of what was rolled before. The 1 in 1.56 trillion odds are EXACTLY WHAT JIM COWAN WAS TRYING TO POINT OUT ABOUT THE 33 HANDICAPPER SHOOTING 64 ON CONSECUTIVE DAYS! The odds of shooting 10 under in two straight days (tourneys) would be roughly 1 in 764,000 according to the chart in the article. On three straight days (tourneys) in would be 1 in 668 million! According to quantum mechanics I have a slim chance of walking right through a solid wall, but when have you heard that happening (magician’s exempt)? So I would call that 33 handicapper a cheater and not feel the least bit bothered by it.
December 15th, 2009 at 12:14 pm