Comments on: Mythbusters III http://www.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/ Northern California Golf Association Sat, 22 Nov 2008 04:59:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Jim Cowan http://www.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-1043 Jim Cowan Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:16:12 +0000 http://thebacknine.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-1043 Robert, 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 Robert, 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

]]> By: Robert Day http://www.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-1042 Robert Day Mon, 18 Aug 2008 21:56:00 +0000 http://thebacknine.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-1042 Why 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. Why 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.

]]> By: Jim Cowan http://www.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-849 Jim Cowan Wed, 28 May 2008 21:54:07 +0000 http://thebacknine.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-849 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. 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.

]]> By: Joe Helfrich http://www.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-843 Joe Helfrich Sun, 25 May 2008 03:40:15 +0000 http://thebacknine.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-843 Three 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? Thank you Joe Helfrich Three 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?
Thank you
Joe Helfrich

]]> By: Jim Cowan http://www.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-744 Jim Cowan Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:01:39 +0000 http://thebacknine.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-744 Gary - 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 Gary - 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

]]> By: Gary A Krohn http://www.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-733 Gary A Krohn Wed, 09 Apr 2008 20:48:17 +0000 http://thebacknine.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-733 I 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. I 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.

]]> By: Jim Thurman http://www.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-659 Jim Thurman Sat, 08 Mar 2008 03:57:53 +0000 http://thebacknine.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-659 I 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!!! I 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!!!

]]> By: Walt Bouchard http://www.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-131 Walt Bouchard Wed, 19 Sep 2007 20:50:03 +0000 http://thebacknine.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-131 Sorry 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. Sorry 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.

]]> By: Ed Brenneman http://www.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-109 Ed Brenneman Fri, 31 Aug 2007 07:49:42 +0000 http://thebacknine.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-109 Jerry 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. Jerry 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.

]]> By: Jerry Woomer http://www.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-97 Jerry Woomer Wed, 22 Aug 2007 03:15:19 +0000 http://thebacknine.ncga.org/2006/10/03/mythbusters-iii/#comment-97 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 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

]]>