Home Forums The World Am Bulletin Board The Dope Of Slope System Doesnt Work

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #38934

    Here is a perfect example as to why the Dope Of Slope system does not work. For it to work once you have a slope and rating it is fixed and always stays the same. So as long as the weather never changes, the holes are never moved and the markers never moved you are fine. Yeah Right.

    I played a course last week with the State Seniours and the Slope course rating was 69.2/121 The thing was that every single set of tee markers where moved forward to the next tee box making the course 600 yards shorter and thus easier for every one and should have been rated accordinly with the next tee box BUT all scores will be recorder as the longer tee box skewing the accuracy of the round recorded. Shhhesh for the four par 5s my second shot in was, wedge, 7 iron, 6 iron, 6 iron. The par 3s were no longer than 120 and I had less than 9 ards into each par 4.

    Here are the winning scores from a field of 120. You can see that 30 peaple clearly broke their handicap by 4 to 5 shots. This is why they should impliment a CCR. Calculated Course Rating which is 12.5% of the feild. so if every one goes well the course rating can move down. If it blows a gale and the conditions are tough the rating can move up. Taking the results of this event 12.5% would be the 15 best card thus the course rating or CCR for the day should have been 65 not 69

    Prize Fund Payout

    LOW OVERALL GROSS K Meador 68
    LOW OVERALL NET D Emberton 61

    GROSS – Par 72

    75+ ..J Giolitto (72) .. R McMullen (73) ..B Younger (79)
    70+ .. J Peer (73) .. D Tuttle (73) .. A Buell (74)
    65+ .. J Anthony (70) .. B Boettger (71) .. L Nicolet (71)
    60+ .. D Jongleux (70) .. S Sterrett (71) .. B Light (72)
    55+ ..G Eudaly (68) .. J Kelley (71) .. H Radley (71)

    NET – 69.2

    75+ .. J Emberton (63) .. P Fouts (65) ..R Schutz (65)
    70+ .. L Hevezi (63) .. B Fairfax (64) .. R Aikman (65)
    65+ .. J Satterfield (63) .. D Bradbury (63) .. M Shotts (64)
    60+ .. B Hatcher (63) .. D St John (64) .. D Gooden (65)
    55+ .. H Radley (64) .. G Kelley (65) ..

    So by these scores you see once they are falsely posted as a Tournament score, my index will be totally shot for another 12 months.

    You watch and see what happens. I bet any money that after this I will be a 0 handicap when I get to Myrtle Beach and will have to play off scratch. Oh well there goes my chances of being competitive in the World pairs competition

    IF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED ROUND 1 OF THE WAM WOULD THERE HAVE BEEN 15 REDUCTIONS

    Why should people be penalized for the Superindentant or the Competition Committee setting the course up wrong. There should be a provision to feed that into the BS Handicap Calculator

    #38937
    Bob Newman
    Participant

    For every 1 golfer that cares about having s legit handicap, there are 9 that do not. The pros set up the course for speed of play-tees forward, DZ’s that do not conform to the rules, shorter rough than course rated for–all so that the golfers will have fun, think they played well, beat their handicap, and come back again. And also, those that beat their handicap will not be posting that round anyway, so it will never impact their handicap. We get caught up with the same thing from the local pros in the WA. I honestly feel that the WA committee does all it can to insure PROPER course set up for WA, but do not get the support from the local pros as to yardages, set up , etc–just too many courses for the committee to inspect each day.

    #38952
    Terry Cornelius
    Participant

    Why don’t you enter your T-score as the correct slope and course rating from the set of tees that were actually played? Seems to me that would solve your dilemma.

    #38957
    Rick Kimbrell
    Participant

    One of the courses I play at regularly has a course/slope rating that is a handicap killer. Several years ago, they had 4sets of tees (back/middle/senior/forward). Most played from the Middle tees and the slope rating was 125. Then they decided to add some new tee boxes and extend the course length and in doing so added what I guess you could call a “Tournament” set of tees. The tees were Black/Blue/White/Gold/Red. They stretched out every set of tees except the forward (Red) tees. Then they rerated the course. So, what used to be the Middle or White tees received a new rating of 130. That was somewhat reasonable since the Middle/White tees were now playing to a much longer distance.
    This would have been all well and good except the guys who played there on a regular basis started complaining about how difficult the course had become and they could not carry some of the hazards, etc. etc. Plus the course gets a ton of play from non-regulars and holds a bunch of tournaments. So, they moved the white tees back up to about where they used to be with the 125 slope rating. So, now, you have a good round on that course, your differential when you score is posted is much lower. It is a handicap killer. 5 points on the slope rating can make a huge difference in your score differential.

    • This reply was modified 6 years, 10 months ago by Rick Kimbrell.
    #39169
    Scott Greenwell
    Participant

    I think this is a great point and I’d like to hear from Scott T. on this about how this is managed with the tournament courses.

    #39173
    Ken Delaney
    Participant

    Yes, Scott G., let’s hope the TC chimes in on this.

    I agree with Harry in that if markers are moved up/back significantly, there should be an adjustment to what slope/rating you are posting to. You can’t legitimately add/subtract 600 yds to a course and give it the same rating. Years ago, we played a WA tourn. round at MBN West course. Well they had us at the tips(~6800-6900 yds). At the time, I was in the 13-14 hcp range. This is a LONG way for that level of player, BUT if you look at the S/R it’s like 72ish/120ish. That means the level of difficulty isn’t there for such a yardage.

    If Harry enters his score himself, then HE could just enter it as playing the “forward” tees if the “whites” were on the usual “gold” boxes (or whatever). The USGA doesn’t care where you play from, as long as it’s entered accordingly. Now if the TC entered for him, then he has a gripe.

    As for playing to a certain “colored” tee, people should pay attention to a yardage or slope/rating that they are comfortable with. That way if you go to a course that has a higher slope/rating from it’s “middle/white” tees, all you have to do is move up to the next box and enjoy your round!! There’s no shame in playing the next one up if where you’re at is eating you up.

    Like the great Mr. Palmer said “PLay it forward” and “While we’re young”!!

    #39178
    Dale McMath
    Participant

    Rick is correct. The new rating on the course he is referencing is just plain wrong. Several of us have been ignoring where the white tees are set up and have been playing from the yardage markers so that we do post based upon the correct yardage. Still the course(s) are mis-rated.

    I’m not sure what could be done to adjust the course rating on the fly based upon changing tee marker locations. I think the main objective should be to set up the MB courses as close to the stated hole yardage as possible. That would solve the problem with regard to posting scores on wrongly rated tees.

    #39181

    A key factor of course rating is based on yardage. So changing established tee yardages can be extremely detrimental to any net tournament. That’s why we explain to the courses (to the point of exhaustion) to never stray from your course scorecard yardage. Even if it’s too short/long a course for the player, which we still want to avoid, the course rating is accurate if you play from the scorecard yardage.

    Once in a while we see what Harry referenced.. a bunch of players beating the course rating for the day. But we’ve established a contingency on the off chance it does, provided it was due to improper course setup and not pin placements, LCP, etc.. which are not a component of the course rating system.

    #39182
    Scott Porter
    Participant

    I can understand and relate to Harry’s and several others comments on having and keeping a accurate handicap. All of us whether we want to admit it or not come to the WA hoping to win so we want our handicap as close as possible to our actual playing ability, at least at that time. I play in a lot of local handicapped events so like Harry I am vigilant about monitoring it, but not to the point of not posting great rounds to keep my handicap high. Calculating handicaps has a lot of moving parts and variables to the exercise but true golfers apply their individual integrity to insuring that their represented handicap is as accurate as they can make it. The WA TC has a arduous task of trying to insure that all of the courses comply with their recommendations and event mandates but insuring that 60 courses are set up correctly everyday is a impossible task without an army of people. The one suggestion I could see that may help with establishing a correct and competitive handicap would be using each persons present index as of 8/15 and average with the 12 month low index for the tournament index. It still gives opportunities for sandbaggers but the WA deals with those people already. Isn’t it amazing how much people have to say when you start talking about handicaps.

    #39230
    Bob Newman
    Participant

    Scott, I firmly believe that you stay on the courses to set up us up the correct yardages for our flights and indexes but the last several years we will get 2 the correct yardages and 2 that are around 5600/5700 yards. They end up putting us on the tees that they want us to play to get around as quick as possible, just like leaving the DZ’s on incorrect side of hazards. this is just my opinion- I have stated on the BB several times, that I think the local pros do not help the WA committee like they should. It is just a money maker for them. These shorter course can mess up the indexs if we post according to the yardages we play. Although nothing could have made me get close to mine as my play has not been stellar. LOL. I do try to keep them straight on the DZ’s but they could honestly care less what I complain about. Simply tell me it is not a USGA event (The World Tour last year). I am actually looking forward to this year and I truly hope I get 4 courses as the yardages we should be playing. If any one get the World Tour this year, let me know and I will give you a tip on how to play the Par 5, with island green. I can guarantee you will be on the fringe laying 3 (if they use the DZ)

    #39231
    Jon Craig
    Participant

    I play in the 60-69 age group (12/13 handicap for all the courses) We had the opposite problem last year. Barefoot Norman was set up way longer than the tees we were suppose to play. I hit a lot of 3 woods into par 4’s. It was the same for everyone so I am not complaining about fairness, just complaining about not getting what I expected. I’m kinda anal so I had printed all the cards. So when I got to my starting par 3 that was suppose to be 155 and it was 187, it was a shock. And the shocks kept coming. Oh well on with the games

    #39340
    Glenn Foster
    Participant

    Guys, Glenn Foster here. I’m a 20+ yr. participant and I also believe there is wiggle room in this system. As we all know, if you’ve played here a lot, you get multiple course over the years multiple times. I can think of 10 courses I played in the first 15 yrs. every year or 2. I don’t know if it was a combo of age bracket & handicap… but I did. I am also blessed/cursed with remembering these courses set-ups when I see the tee boxes again. I can say this helps tremendously when being correct in where to miss! Committee has those course assignments somewhere. ( Hell I have my old scoresheets from 1995- 2017 except a few days.)
    Courses do change some, but its’ like playing a home course when you get Rivers Edge 5 times & Wicked Stick 6 times, Burning Ridge 5 times…! Just a thought.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Call Us at 1-800-833-8798

HTML Snippets Powered By : XYZScripts.com