We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Hole Handicap - What does it actually mean

I finished compiling the data and sent the new hole handicaps to the scorecard company and we'll have them in in a week or two. We also have a new printing of our course yardage book coming up and they will also be changing the actual hole signs since the handicaps are listed on them.
 
Smallville said:
I finished compiling the data and sent the new hole handicaps to the scorecard company and we'll have them in in a week or two. We also have a new printing of our course yardage book coming up and they will also be changing the actual hole signs since the handicaps are listed on them.
Click to expand...
Wow. good work.
 
blugold said:
Wow. good work.
Click to expand...

Thanks Joe. The old handicaps were from before the remodel of 2012 of over half the course.

As far as I know they could have been from when it was still Victory Hills, which is before the FIRST remodel, in 1994.
 
Great stuff, Smalls!
 
Interesting read.
 
Our new scorecards came in. The new handicaps are the top one and the old are on the bottom. Six holes stayed the same, three on each nine. Fives holes changed by 1 on their respective sides, two changed by 2, three changed by 3.

After that, the old #1 hole dropped 5 spots on the front nine and the new #1 handicap hole on the front was #8 on that nine before the change.



51f29b3f798a998eefa1b6ae2dfd35d2.jpg
 
I just explained to the cart kids how the "easy" hole #10 is now the #6 handicap hole on the course (Dub's Dread in KCK). Either they thought I was full of it or they thought I am the smartest person in the world, hahaha.
 
So I like the objective. But if the objective is to give help on the holes with the greatest differential between higher handicap and better players, why would you constrain yourself to use odd numbered handicap numbers on the front nine and even numbers on the back? Wouldn't you just want to rank them 1-18 based solely on the differential? As is often the case with the USGA, they contradict themselves.

Another example of this is what the USGA actually uses as an example for doing this.

"A method for allocating your handicap strokes is to collect 200 hole-by-hole scorecards from two different groups of golfers. Group A consists of golfers with a Course Handicap™ of 0-8 for men or 0-14 for women...Group B consists of middle-to-high Course Handicap golfers, ranging 15-20 strokes higher than group A (20-28 for men and 26-40 for women)."

The actual gap for women is NOT " ranging 15-20 strokes higher". The handicap range for women ranges 26 at the low end and 12 at the high end creating a range that is outside the recommendation at both ends.
 
Last edited:
Understanding how this works (or is supposed to work) helps explain a lot of hole handicaps. It also causes you to question others. Here's an example of both on one hole.

We've got a par 3 locally that is 200 yards from the back tees over water. It's a 170-yard carry to get it over the water. The white tees are 180 yards with a 150-160 yard carry to clear the water. The women's tee is off to the side 124 yards with none of it over water. So for the women, it makes perfect sense that this would be the 18 handicap hole.

But for the men, it's listed as the 14 handicap hole and that seems crazy. The low handicap players you almost never see put it in the water. Most put it on the green and the 'miss' from these players is safely just off the green with an easy chance for an up and down. The mid to high handicap players almost always play from the whites. This hole scares the dickens out of these players, so all the water balls come out. But there is no way their egos are going to let them go to the women's tees. Lots of balls go in the water or OB as they try to bail out to the right over by the women's tees. Lots of big numbers get posted by these players.

There are two other tee shots over water on this course with a similar carry (150 yards). Both of those have a pretty low handicap rating, which makes sense. They also would appear to be less risky than this par 3. The others are on elevated tees and par 4s, so you have a driver in hand and presumably a greater margin for error.

I'll be asking the GM of that course if they've assessed the hole handicaps anytime recently and if so what methodology they used.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top