We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Hole Handicap Input...

Titleistforlife

Titleistforlife

Active member
Joined
Mar 23, 2011
Messages
452
Reaction score
153
Location
North Dakota
Handicap
GHIN 6.3
For those with knowledge about handicapping a course: Our course was built approximately 10 years ago. A committee set up the hole by hole handicaps and after 10 years we realize they aren't correct. Some holes are way off. (eg. - our hole #3 is the #2 handicap hole on the course...with my data it is the #17 handicap hole!)

I have taken it upon myself to form a committee to reset the hole by hole handicaps. I have taken 4 years of data (random scores by hole from scorecards) and compiled new hole by hole handicaps based on those scores.

I assigned a point value for Birdies, Pars, Bogeys and others coming up with a total score for each hole. The higher the score on the hole, the higher that hole is in the handicap line up.

Here's the problem: Our #1 - #6 Handicap holes are all on the back nine using the new system. Does anyone see this as an issue? Thoughts? Help me out here. Any input is appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Are the scorecards ALL random or did you use equal amounts of good players, average players, and bad players? I always thought you needed to mix in equal amounts of all levels of golfers to help calculate the handicaps. If not, the handicaps would only be accurate for one range of players.
 
Look, you have put in 4 years of work to get this done. I can't say having the 6 toughest on the back is wrong but it seems a little weird. That would mean that the front is way easier and people's rounds would be skewed based on the new hdcp'd holes. I do believe that some courses have it wrong but usually not all the holes.
Let me ask you this, has you #1 -6 holes changed in the reshuffle. What made the new 1-6 tougher than the old? Was each set of tees played by an A-D player to give you a good mix of scores. Was each set of tees played by these different sets of golfers?
it seems pretty drastic that you new #17 used to your old #2. From the second hardest to the second easiest. Unless you have had some serious course reconstruction how did the hole loose its strength. What is the name of the course?
 
If I understand, you are saying the six hardest holes from your sampling is on the back?

The hardest hole (highest stroke average for everyone that plays it) is not necessarily the number one handicap hole. The low number handicap holes are the holes that are more difficult for a bogie golfer in comparison to a scratch golfer. The hardest hole may have a higher handicap number just because it is difficult for both scratch golfers and bogie golfers. At my home course, the hardest hole is the number 4 handicap hole. And our 6 hardest holes are on the back nine.

The USGA determines the number one handicap hole by finding a difference between what a scratch golf is expected to score and what a bogie golfer is expected to score, then the hole with the highest differential is the number one handicap hole (if it is on the front.) If it is on the back it may be the number 2 handicap hole. Because most courses actually have the holes ranked among each nine holes then alternate handicap numbers between front and back. The number one handicap hole will probably be on the front and 2 on the back, 3 on the front, 4 on the back and so on. It is not all that unusual for several of the harder holes to be on the same side.
 
Great info. so far guys. To answer some questions...When the orginal handicapping was done there was no water on the course. Now there is water on 7 holes. The state golf association has told us it is up to us.

In the sample data all levels of play were used from all 4 sets of tees. And all levels of handicaps were used.

When the course was built a committee of guys used very little data to come up with the handicaps. And there was virtually no water on the course to start with. The course is Cross Roads Golf Course in Carrington, ND. Quite simply, what made the data come up different now was the number of rounds used. (and the water)

Lefty...You shed new light on the subject that I was hoping was out there. The original committee alternated holes front to back, but my understanding is that this isn't mandatory. (they did this based on there early score findings) I am going to do a little more work using what you say the USGA does. The problem with this method is that with the scoring data only, the top 6 most difficult holes are on the back. Doing what you are saying would make the 7th most difficult hole the #1 handicap hole just because it is on the front correct?
 
Last edited:
Hoosier...SLope and Course Rating are/were done by USGA but individual handicapping of holes wasn't done by USGA, it was done by committee. Does the individual hole handicap have anything to do with GHIN? My individual GHIN handicap is figured off the course rating and slope, not off individual hole handicaps correct? How does the individual hole handicap affect course rating or slope?
 
Tadashi...How is this for skewed...(unusal for me, but true) My last 4 rounds, I am 4 over total on the front nine and 27 over on the back nine!...Averaging a 79...
 
Titleistforlife said:
Hoosier...SLope and Course Rating are/were done by USGA but individual handicapping of holes wasn't done by USGA, it was done by committee. Does the individual hole handicap have anything to do with GHIN? My individual GHIN handicap is figured off the course rating and slope, not off individual hole handicaps correct? How does the individual hole handicap affect course rating or slope?
Click to expand...

No I don't think the individual hole handicap has anything to do with GHIN. I know my home course, where I work part time, has been rated three times since it opened in 1959 and it was always done by a rating group set up by the Indiana Golf Association. They also handled the handicapping of holes. There will always be some level of disagreement among the membership on hole handicaps (everyone has an opinion), so we never wanted to be involved in this. If you can do it by committee at your course, then I would say you are doing good.

To answer your original question, our course has five of the top nine handicap holes on the back nine.
 
Last edited:
Can anyone tell me for certain how this should be done? Lefty are you sure what you are saying for individual hole handicaps applies? The more I think about the methodology you speak of, the more confused I get. I can see how you MIGHT be able to come up with #1 handicap using this method, but what about the 14 holes where there is a one stroke differential?

Also, does anyone know if you have to alternate handicap holes front to back? I know many courses do, but does it have to be that way?
 
Ok...In my limited research here's what I've learned so far:

*USGA and the Local Golf Association usually don't get involved in the individual handicapping of holes. This is normally done by a course committee.

*The emphasis for handicapping a hole should be the differential between what a scratch golfer would score on a hole and what a bogey golfer would score on a hole. (Lefty appears to be spot on here)

*Nobody can tell me if committee should/or has to alternate those holes front to back.

If I can find the answer to #3, I am going to start the committee process, even if it takes a call to the USGA to re-handicap our holes.
 
I've always found it weird how one nine has odd numbered handicaps and the other has the even numbered handicaped holes.
 
MarcW said:
I've always found it weird how one nine has odd numbered handicaps and the other has the even numbered handicaped holes.
Click to expand...

The USGA suggests (but does not require) that you allocate the first stroke to a hole on the front nine and the second stroke to a hole on the back nine. Go back and forth until you have done all 18 holes. It’s done this way to equalize the number of shots a player gets on each nine.
 
Great information guys. Another call has confirmed the above. The USGA SUGGESTS but does not require the standard allocation. Thank you Hoosier for your input here. The two links you provided are exactly what I was looking for. I think I have enough information to go to the board and set up a committee.
 
Titleistforlife said:
Great information guys. Another call has confirmed the above. The USGA SUGGESTS but does not require the standard allocation. Thank you Hoosier for your input here. The two links you provided are exactly what I was looking for. I think I have enough information to go to the board and set up a committee.
Click to expand...

Nice! I know it has been a long time since ours was last done. I also know the members all have opinions about what hole should be what. It is just one of those things in golf where not everyone will agree, but you just do the best you can.
 
For those that care, the USGA has come up with some new methodology regarding a formula called "Stroke Hole Allocation By Need" whereby you take two groups of golfers, one with low handicaps (say under 5), and one with high handicaps (say over 20) and use the average differntial in score, hole by hole to determine your hole handicaps. I am going to use this method for some of the data. This has been very interesting research to say the least.

I found out last night that the membership is all over the board on which holes they think should be the lower handicap holes and which holes are the higher handicap holes. The process will be interesting to say the least.
 
Titleistforlife said:
Great info. so far guys. To answer some questions...When the orginal handicapping was done there was no water on the course. Now there is water on 7 holes. The state golf association has told us it is up to us.

In the sample data all levels of play were used from all 4 sets of tees. And all levels of handicaps were used.

When the course was built a committee of guys used very little data to come up with the handicaps. And there was virtually no water on the course to start with. The course is Cross Roads Golf Course in Carrington, ND. Quite simply, what made the data come up different now was the number of rounds used. (and the water)

Lefty...You shed new light on the subject that I was hoping was out there. The original committee alternated holes front to back, but my understanding is that this isn't mandatory. (they did this based on there early score findings) I am going to do a little more work using what you say the USGA does. The problem with this method is that with the scoring data only, the top 6 most difficult holes are on the back. Doing what you are saying would make the 7th most difficult hole the #1 handicap hole just because it is on the front correct?
Click to expand...

Assignment of handicap number to the individual holes is for the purpose of allocating strokes in match play so if you make all your first 6 handicap holes all on the back side it could give a distinct advantage to the guy with higher handicap in a match. If there is a difference of six or more strokes between two guy's handicaps then the high handicapper is getting 6 strokes on the back before getting a stroke on front. I am guessing that is the reason that strokes are allocated alternately between front and back to insure that strokes are allocated on both front and back side as evenly as possible. I can't think of any other reason to have a handicap number for a hole??? I guess if I were on a committee making this decision, I would be strongly in favor of having the handicap holes evenly divided between front and back, in your case probably would have the odd holes on back and evens on front though.

Thanks for posting what you are doing it is really interesting. Good luck with that committee and don't worry, whatever you do, someone will be pleased and someone will be mad. If by chance you do please everyone, please share your secret with us. :D
 
Titleistforlife said:
For those that care, the USGA has come up with some new methodology regarding a formula called "Stroke Hole Allocation By Need" whereby you take two groups of golfers, one with low handicaps (say under 5), and one with high handicaps (say over 20) and use the average differntial in score, hole by hole to determine your hole handicaps. I am going to use this method for some of the data. This has been very interesting research to say the least.


I found out last night that the membership is all over the board on which holes they think should be the lower handicap holes and which holes are the higher handicap holes. The process will be interesting to say the least.
Click to expand...

Maybe because each golfer is thinking in terms of their own game and not of the membership at large. Most people think that the number one handicap hole is the "hardest" hole with little or no thought into what the actual purpose of the handicap number is.

It is simply just a ranking of where strokes should be given in match play.
 
Lefty78 said:
Assignment of handicap number to the individual holes is for the purpose of allocating strokes in match play so if you make all your first 6 handicap holes all on the back side it could give a distinct advantage to the guy with higher handicap in a match. If there is a difference of six or more strokes between two guy's handicaps then the high handicapper is getting 6 strokes on the back before getting a stroke on front. I am guessing that is the reason that strokes are allocated alternately between front and back to insure that strokes are allocated on both front and back side as evenly as possible. I can't think of any other reason to have a handicap number for a hole??? I guess if I were on a committee making this decision, I would be strongly in favor of having the handicap holes evenly divided between front and back, in your case probably would have the odd holes on back and evens on front though.

Thanks for posting what you are doing it is really interesting. Good luck with that committee and don't worry, whatever you do, someone will be pleased and someone will be mad. If by chance you do please everyone, please share your secret with us. :D
Click to expand...

I would have thought the opposite - having say holes 12-17 as the numbers 1-6 handicap holes would give an advantage to the lower handicapper.

In a matchplay scenario there is no way you'd want all the lower handicap holes on one side due to the reasons already suggested.

From memory there is no stipulation in the rules saying the hardest hole should be stroke index 1, only that there be an even spread on each nine. Most courses I've played do however have them almost in order if difficulty but with also having the even spread which may sometimes require that say the 2nd hardest hole be rated the 3rd to keep the spread.

Interesting topic and I look forward to following it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Xt1ncT-NZ said:
I would have thought the opposite - having say holes 12-17 as the numbers 1-6 handicap holes would give an advantage to the lower handicapper.

In a matchplay scenario there is no way you'd want all the lower handicap holes on one side due to the reasons already suggested.

From memory there is no stipulation in the rules saying the hardest hole should be stroke index 1, only that there be an even spread on each nine. Most courses I've played do however have them almost in order if difficulty but with also having the even spread which may sometimes require that say the 2nd hardest hole be rated the 3rd to keep the spread.

Interesting topic and I look forward to following it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

My thinking is the low handicapper would have to build a huge lead on the front because of giving six strokes on the back. You could be right, I suppose a lot depends on circumstances of the match. Either way would seem to be a good argument for balancing the handicap strokes front and back.
 
UPDATE: Got the board approval to form a committee to re-handicap the holes! My plan is to present all of my data to the committee, make my recommedation and let the committee make the final decision. Right now, I am leaning towards recommending rotating the holes BACK to FRONT. I have my theroy on the order of the holes, but we will see what the committee thinks. With all of the legwork basically done, hopefully, we will be able to accomplish this in one meeting.
 
Titleistforlife said:
UPDATE: Got the board approval to form a committee to re-handicap the holes! My plan is to present all of my data to the committee, make my recommedation and let the committee make the final decision. Right now, I am leaning towards recommending rotating the holes BACK to FRONT. I have my theroy on the order of the holes, but we will see what the committee thinks. With all of the legwork basically done, hopefully, we will be able to accomplish this in one meeting.
Click to expand...

I like your thinking, good luck with it.
 
While not mandatory, having the hole handicaps alternate between back and front nines makes Match Play, where you may not finnish all 18, a bit more fair.. Say there is a 6 stroke difference between competitors handicaps but all the hard holes are on the back. The weaker player may not get to use any of his strokes before the match is over.

My home course has separate slope and ratings for the front and back nines and also has different hole handicaps for stroke and match play. Not sure why, but it does.
 
UPDATE2: My committee is formed and I am one meeting away from a final decision. PROBLEM: I took USGA's advice and did a sample "Stroke Allowcation By Hole". Took two groups of golfers. Group A was 0-5 handicappers and Group B was 15 and above. Using 300 scores (150 in each group) the stroke differential by hole shows the Par 5's as the lowest 4 handicap holes and the 4 par 3's as the high handicap holes. The stroke differential method seemed to work good on the Par 4 holes. Eg - Our #3 hole is a short par 5 with a little dogleg before the hole. Very little trouble. I consider this one of the easiest holes on the course and through scoring average is the second easiest hole on the course. Using the "Stroke Allowcation By Hole" method it becomes the #1 Handicap Hole!

I think the problem with our data is that a majority of our "Group B" players are older (65+) and are short hitters, making for a high stroke differential on long holes. Vice Versa on the Par 3's. Our #17 is probably the second toughest hole on the course...A 190 yard par 3 with water down the right side and thick rough down the left side and a long narrow green, but with stroke differential it comes in at #16!

The committee is going to have some tough decisions to make based on the data, especially when it comes to the Par 5's and the Par 3's. I will post a final update after our committee meeting in the next couple of weeks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top