CCR, ACR or Par

[Ned]

What should you be handicapped against ?

Pre Slope!

[AndyP]

Right now? Or next year?

[henno]

Right now? Or next year?

Good point. I voted CCR, but here is the breakdown:

Right now: CCR
Next year: CCR
Beyond that: Slope

ACR does not equal slope. Try and convince me otherwise (and explain why some courses are consistently two shots over ACR, while others are consistently 2 shots under).

[AndyP]

That's why I asked, henno. As I've stated before, I don't agree with the abolition of the CCR next year before slope is introduced.

[Ned]

Slope will not be in play until all courses have been rated as per the USGA system, kick off timeline at this stage is 2011!!

[henno]

Right. So CCR is being abolished because... ???

[Ned]

Right. So CCR is being abolished because... ???

Ask Golf Australia!

[PeteyD]

It is dumb. Although I am not sure it is dumberer than ACR.

[AndyP]

Right. So CCR is being abolished because... ???
We had a little bit of discussion on it before. The punters don't like it apparently.
http://www.ozgolf.net/forums/showthread.php?p=399456#post399456

[3oneday]

Happy with ACR in that case :)

[Ned]

Do any other sports/venues have or get ratings etc like ACR/CCR etc for weather, playing surface, size etc ?

Do the players or the teams that play on them have adjustments etc ?

[AndyP]

Are there any other individual sports played against a field that require a national rating system?

In most individual sports, you play off 'scratch' against similar level players.

[Daves]

I have little issue with using ACR (71) at Reddy Bay, it seems appropriate and my guess would be CCR there probably averages around the ACR over the year. I hear others complain about ACRs not having been updated for years for many courses so the ACRs are probably no longer valid, but how real is that concern?

[cutter1]

CCR

[BrisVegas]

CCR

[markTHEblake]

CCR until the courses are rerated, and as long as the muppets that run golf courses set the tees up properly.

I can still see some places pushing all the tee markers to the very back because its a championship or something.

[mike]

Doesn't CCR take into account the conditions on the day? Wind, dry, wet, hot, cold, cored greens etc and how it affects the field?
ACR and slope won't change with weather/course conditions.

Am I right?

[razaar]

Right. So CCR is being abolished because... ???
The CCR relates to Club competition and is based on the scorecard that falls at a certain percentage of the leading scores in the field. The ACR is the score a player on a scratch handicap should play a course; how this is determined is a mystery to me. If golfers who don't play competition are eligible to get a handicap in the interim before the slope system is fully introduced, then the ACR is the only way this can be achieved.

[zigwah]

I thought ccr was based on the scores for the day?

[markTHEblake]

ACR and slope won't change with weather/course conditions.

Slope has nothing to do with course rating in this context, try not to use both in the same sentence :-)

The ACR wont change with course conditions, the tees will.
Eg if the fairways are dry, move tees back, if wet move them all forward, same with the hole locations.

In other words the greenkeeper is obligated to set the course to play to its course rating (to a degree obviously)

[AndyP]

Will they get paid extra? Will they care enough?

[Courty]

Do any other sports/venues have or get ratings etc like ACR/CCR etc for weather, playing surface, size etc ?

Interesting question, but I'll answer it with another question...

Are any other sports played on fields which can vary in length from week to week?

FWIW, I voted CCR.

[markTHEblake]

AP, They have to, because thats the fundamental basis for the course rating system. if its not adhered to then it falls apart.

The yanks seem to be able to cope with this, so why cant we.

[mike]

The ACR wont change with course conditions, the tees will.
Eg if the fairways are dry, move tees back, if wet move them all forward, same with the hole locations.
That's interesting, I didn't know that.



In other words the greenkeeper is obligated to set the course to play to its course rating (to a degree obviously)
Won't happen in Mareeba. Our tee boxes are too small to make that much difference.

[Russell]

par of the course,
so what if a few people have a good round
pro events arnt rated differently for tiger than jack nicolas just because one can hit further.

[Ned]

Are any other sports played on fields which can vary in length from week to week?

As in physically being set up differently or due to weather etc ?

[adlo]

CCR.

I refuse to believe the validity of most ACR's. How can almost every par 72 members track in Perth rates somewhere between 72 and 72.1? It is crazy. Some are so much harder than the others but they all "rate" the same. It's a load of shit.

[sms316]

ACR

The CCR is a farce at this point in time because of drought conditions around the country. Old coots who hit the ball nowhere are able to reach greens which they never have before, whereas personally, I don't find course with doglegs any easier at all.

Just take a look at some of the scores being returned and what demographic is generally having them.

[razaar]

The following is a formula for determining the Standard Scratch rating on distance in Great Britain (or it used to be). According to the USGA a Scratch player is expected to play all courses at par or better, therefore distance is a real factor for these players as accuracy decreases with distance.

Formula: total yardage x .0044 + 42.3 = SS (or ACR)

Pacific GC. Blue 6878 x .0044 + 42.3 = 72.6
White 6576 x .0044 + 42.3 = 71.2

When the slope system comes into being in Australia every score card will display two ratings for each set of permanent markers - a course rating (scratch rating or ACR) and a slope rating.

Example for Pacific GC
White 71.2 130
Blue 72.6 139

[WBennett]

CCR.

Leeton GC has a par of 72. CCR is normally 68 or 69. ACR is 70. You never win a ball unless you shoot 39 or 40 points.

CCR is a better reflection of how you played against the days prevailing conditions.

[3oneday]

But surely that is a reflection of the number of burglars on the course ?

[BrisVegas]

The following is a formuls for determining the Standard Scratch rating on distance. Scratch players are expected to play all courses at par or better, therefore distance is a real factor for these players as accuracy decreases with distance.

Formula: total yardage x .0044 + 42.3 = SS (or ACR)

Pacific GC. Blue 6878 x .0044 + 42.3 = 72.6
White 6576 x .0044 + 42.3 = 71.2

I assume you're talking in yards ray?

Brookwater is 6505m. ACR if metres is 70.92. ACR if yards is 73.78.

That's all very interesting but it doesn't take into account elevation change, green size, tightness of fairways, playability of rough etc... CCR gives a better reflection of how players manage a course on a given day.

[razaar]

Yep in yards Dion. Brooky would have a 73.8 ACR based on the formula. The formula is only to determine the average score a scratch player should play the course. Apparantly the formula stood up to tournament play in various conditions over all sorts of tracks. I think it was inspired by guesswork.:wink:

[Veefore]

I voted CCR because at the moment it is the closest thing we have to a rating of the way a course actually plays. Par is the least relevant. Any system that can rank a 440m dogleg, water and bunker lined hole the same as a 220m straight, wide, bunkerless hole is simplistic at best and misleading. It may have been relevant back in the 1600's when the courses were fairly basic but not today.

[razaar]

I voted CCR because at the moment it is the closest thing we have to a rating of the way a course actually plays. Par is the least relevant. Any system that can rank a 440m dogleg, water and bunker lined hole the same as a 220m straight, wide, bunkerless hole is simplistic at best and misleading. It may have been relevant back in the 1600's when the courses were fairly basic but not today.
Not catching what you are saying Vee. What has the CCR or the ACR got to do with rating holes on the SS?

[markTHEblake]

That's all very interesting but it doesn't take into account elevation change, green size, tightness of fairways, playability of rough etc

the current system, ACR does take most of that into account. The starting point is the measurement in distances, which would be obvious. Then a lot of points are added on and taken off for various things. like green sizes, hazards, narrow fairways and almost everything you can think of.

except i think, elevation, but that is included in the USGA rating system. I am not sure if there is any other major difference.

[AndyP]

Not catching what you are saying Vee. What has the CCR or the ACR got to do with rating holes on the SS?What does the SS have to do with the thread topic?

[Clevision]

Personally I don't like the way CCR is currently calculated, I don't think I should be handicapped on other peoples performance.

I remember when I was a junior the CCR was calculated on the conditions of the day, before any rounds were finished, I think ACR come into it somehow too, can't really remember.

[pom]

I have always thought that the fact that the CCR is tied to the ACR is the main problem. Iy you use the CCR to handicap by, the CCR is decided by the players on the day giving a fairly accurate idea of how the course played on that day. Tying it to the ACR nullifies that idea to a certain extent. I play on a course where the CCR is nearly always 2 shots lower than the ACR. If players think the h/Capping system stinks now. Wait until they have been H/Capped off the course ACR for 12 months. I believe the whingeing will become much louder!! I rather think this is a knee jerk reaction by GA to all the whineing about the present system. Somehow I do not think they have found the correct solution by rushing through a Half ass system!!

[markTHEblake]

What does the SS have to do with the thread topic?

SS is an older acronym for ACR: Standard Scratch

[markTHEblake]

If players think the h/Capping system stinks now. Wait until they have been H/Capped off the course ACR for 12 months.

There is no comparison to make as the old handicapping system is gone when that starts.


Somehow I do not think they have found the correct solution by rushing through a Half ass system!!

Good point, but I think they have already addressed the reasons why its a gradual phasing in process rather than wait for all the courses to be rated and then hit us with it.

One of them will be that to hit the ground running, we already need the 20 scores in the system, and we do not have that yet.

[AndyP]

SS is an older acronym for ACR: Standard Scratch
But that's now how our ACRs are calculated, are they?

[razaar]

A more accurate ACR will result when the courses have been rated under the USGA rating system. The USGA ratings include both ACR (scratch) and Slope (bogey) ratings. The ACR in the interim is one that will not be permanent.

[pom]

[quote=markTHEblake;403501]There is no comparison to make as the old handicapping system is gone when that starts.



Good point, but I think they have already addressed the reasons why its a gradual phasing in process rather than wait for all the courses to be rated and then hit us with it.

One of them will be that to hit the ground running, we already need the 20 scores in the system, and we do not have that yet.[/quote
THe way I see it. How would you like to be playing somewhere like Port Fairy where it can be calm one day & blowing 40 knots another. These 2 days will be H/Capped on the same base figure ie,ACR. There would at least be some variation if the CCR was used. I am prepared to wait & see how the Slope system goes when it is Introduced. I just think that H/Capping on the course ACRs. Some of which are obviously the Biggest part of the Problem anyway. Is Ludicrous.

[razaar]

[quote=markTHEblake;403501]There is no comparison to make as the old handicapping system is gone when that starts.



Good point, but I think they have already addressed the reasons why its a gradual phasing in process rather than wait for all the courses to be rated and then hit us with it.

One of them will be that to hit the ground running, we already need the 20 scores in the system, and we do not have that yet.[/quote
THe way I see it. How would you like to be playing somewhere like Port Fairy where it can be calm one day & blowing 40 knots another. These 2 days will be H/Capped on the same base figure ie,ACR. There would at least be some variation if the CCR was used. I am prepared to wait & see how the Slope system goes when it is Introduced. I just think that H/Capping on the course ACRs. Some of which are obviously the Biggest part of the Problem anyway. Is Ludicrous.
Why ludicrous? The new USGA ratings will be fixed; they won't change with the weather. Can't see a problem with being handicapped on the ACR which is the average score a scratch player would play the course, averaging our 10 best scores of 20. Under the CCR we are handicapped on a score card/s that finish in the top 1/5 of the field every time we play comp. It's a no brainer which will result in a truer personal handicap that reflects our progress on the course.

[AndyP]

That's true only if you play the same course all of the time. With next years system, if I was looking to reduce my handicap I would stay well clear of courses like Brookwater.

[razaar]

That's true only if you play the same course all of the time. With next years system, if I was looking to reduce my handicap I would stay well clear of courses like Brookwater.
Sounds like handicap ego, Andy. Courses like Brooky are the equalizer for the advances in equipment and balls. Most of us need to be humbled on the course to motivate us to work on our game.

[Ned]

Par is the only thing that is consistent.

ACR is subject to personal interpretation.

When I did my training some years ago for doing ratings under the ACR system, its was noted then that there was some major inconstancies with the information used to calculate difficulty factor.

In then doing a number of ratings with different teams, it also was shown this was the case, although it wasn't happening for any other reason then how people perceived the factors.

CCR, it is limited as its linked to the ACR and regardless of how difficult your course maybe on factors, if its a short course then you will have a low ACR, which in turn then limit's the effect of the CCR as in on any given hard days play, the CCR will only be two more then your maximum distance of the course.

The only Club in Queensland with consideration for weather conditions is Cooktown.

The CCR calculation could be better utilised if it was calculated for grades and players handicapped accordingly.

With no disrespect to any graded player, an A Grader for a number of reasons will consistently play a course differently to a C Grader.

However, C Graders in the field have a far greater impact on the CCR under the present system.

So for me, at the end of the day, I am playing the par of the course and thats what I should be handicapped on, for that is what my handicap was originally calculated on.

[Sydney Hacker]

Sounds like handicap ego, Andy. Courses like Brooky are the equalizer for the advances in equipment and balls. Most of us need to be humbled on the course to motivate us to work on our game.

Humbled is one thing, raped by the course is another....

[3oneday]

It's only 0.1, and it should make you play better at your home course.

I agree with Raz (gee, that's been a long time coming :lol:) and sms, I'm a bit tired of seeing courses rate lower just because there is a lot of run.

[AndyP]

Sounds like handicap ego, Andy. No, it's about trying to compare like with like. I'll see a Brookwater member's 12 handicap as better than a Wolston Park member's 12 handicap every time.

[BrisVegas]

No, it's about trying to compare like with like. I'll see a Brookwater member's 12 handicap as better than a Wolston Park member's 12 handicap every time.

hmmm, how come I couldn't play to handicap at Wolston Park then? :oops:

[Veefore]

Par is the only thing that is consistent.

ACR is subject to personal interpretation.

When I did my training some years ago for doing ratings under the ACR system, its was noted then that there was some major inconstancies with the information used to calculate difficulty factor.

In then doing a number of ratings with different teams, it also was shown this was the case, although it wasn't happening for any other reason then how people perceived the factors.

CCR, it is limited as its linked to the ACR and regardless of how difficult your course maybe on factors, if its a short course then you will have a low ACR, which in turn then limit's the effect of the CCR as in on any given hard days play, the CCR will only be two more then your maximum distance of the course.

The only Club in Queensland with consideration for weather conditions is Cooktown.

The CCR calculation could be better utilised if it was calculated for grades and players handicapped accordingly.

With no disrespect to any graded player, an A Grader for a number of reasons will consistently play a course differently to a C Grader.

However, C Graders in the field have a far greater impact on the CCR under the present system.

So for me, at the end of the day, I am playing the par of the course and thats what I should be handicapped on, for that is what my handicap was originally calculated on.

Blaming the C graders for the low CCR's was a popular thing at my club until the facts were shown.

The A graders are the ones that have the most impact at my club. In any normal comp, more A graders are liable to shoot around or below their handicap than C graders are. A graders will shoot their handicap once every 4 or 5 rounds on average. C graders often have the big number under their handicap when they have a good round but the amount they shoot under the ACR has no effect on the CCR. They are also only likely to shoot their handicap or better every 7 to 10 rounds. New players coming down quickly until they find their "level" are the obvious exception.

[sms316]

How many people play in each grade at your club?

[Ned]

Blaming the C graders for the low CCR's was a popular thing at my club until the facts were shown.

The A graders are the ones that have the most impact at my club. In any normal comp, more A graders are liable to shoot around or below their handicap than C graders are. A graders will shoot their handicap once every 4 or 5 rounds on average. C graders often have the big number under their handicap when they have a good round but the amount they shoot under the ACR has no effect on the CCR. They are also only likely to shoot their handicap or better every 7 to 10 rounds. New players coming down quickly until they find their "level" are the obvious exception.

Exactly where does it state C Graders were to "blame" ?

Oh and where also does it state C Graders were solely responsible for low CCR's ?

Or that low CCR's were the problem ?



:-k

[AndyP]

Exactly where does it state C Graders were to "blame" ?Do you mean "blaming (http://www.ozgolf.net/forums/showpost.php?p=403847&postcount=48)" C graders for having a "far greater impact on the CCR under the present system?" Veefore made it up.

[3oneday]

Plus they give swing advice.

[henno]

Your swing's not flat enough.

[just]

Plus they cheat.

[sms316]

Do you mean "blaming (http://www.ozgolf.net/forums/showpost.php?p=403847&postcount=48)" C graders for having a "far greater impact on the CCR under the present system?" Veefore made it up.
:lol::lol::lol:

The only thing that could have made AP's post better would be if it was made by Mike.

[mike]

Please explain.

[Veefore]

Carry on, Nothing to see here:-"

[Veefore]

How many people play in each grade at your club?

I have limited access because I don't have the internet at home at the moment so working off only Saturday's comp we had:
31 A grade
42 B grade
28 C grade

in the morning and

28 A grade
42 B grade
25 C grade
in the afternoon.

I don't know if our club is representative of most other clubs.

[Ned]

The impact of C Graders works both ways, not as you implied about supposedly making the CCR lower.

Ultimately, the CCR would work far better if the CCR was calculated and players handicapped per grade.

I still come back to my preference, Par of the Course, that is the only consistent thing that ALL players are competing against in their own right and in their own ability and game!

[pom]

In all probability using any of the methods, over a period of time would even out to a similar result. But the problem , which has been identified is that the ratings on many courses are very inacurate. H/capping on these ratings therefore leaves something to be desired. At least using the CCR . The players themselves are deciding what should be handicapped , . Not some wildly inaccurate guess. Lets forget about the few players that have what seems like outragious scores. CCR is taken from the card of the player that is positioned at 12,1/2% of the field. Does anyone really believe that cutting the H/caps of the top 12,1/2 % is unfair. The trouble is , some complain about the current system because they can be cut several shots on 1 round but others complain that it is too difficult to get cut under this system.. Which complaint is correct?

[markTHEblake]

The impact of C Graders works both ways, not as you implied about supposedly making the CCR lower.

exactly, it can work both ways. A good example of this was when Emerald Lakes was undergoing renovations. Most of the time we had 3-4 temporary greens and holes, like 220m par 4's as well as long 3's relative to green size.

during this period, the C graders were winning comps with mid to high 40's, yet A grade 38 points would win the comp. I can recall winning a monthly medal with nett 1 under during that time.

The C graders flourished in these conditions but in comparison the A graders couldnt lower their scores, as you simply cant make putts on cow paddock greens.

Then when the course was completed, the winning scores were reversed. The C graders couldnt get to 40points, but A grade needed 44-45 to win. I have two scores of 45 and 46 points that didnt win the comp, one of those was only a ball in the rundown.

[Russell]

this thread has opened a whole can of worms for me,
my wife now realises that the ladies acr rating for our course is allways 72 whereas mens ccr is normally 70,she now insists i give her 2 extra shots when playing for a ticket

[Courty]

this thread has opened a whole can of worms for me,
my wife now realises that the ladies acr rating for our course is allways 72 whereas mens ccr is normally 70,she now insists i give her 2 extra shots when playing for a ticket

:lol:

[Ned]

this thread has opened a whole can of worms for me,
my wife now realises that the ladies acr rating for our course is allways 72 whereas mens ccr is normally 70,she now insists i give her 2 extra shots when playing for a ticket

:twisted:

[markTHEblake]

this thread has opened a whole can of worms for me,
my wife now realises that the ladies acr rating for our course is allways 72 whereas mens ccr is normally 70,she now insists i give her 2 extra shots when playing for a ticket

She shouldnt have to insist, that should go without saying in all cases

You sir, are therefore a scoundrel!

[Russell]

had never even considered it until she mentioned it.told her id see what anyone else thought,but that i didnt like her chances;
more fool me !:o:o

[markTHEblake]

umm. i read that again, she cant have it both ways :-)

it should be ACR to ACR, not ACR to CCR (nor Par to Par)

[Russell]

ladies acr is 72 mens acr is 71,
i dont even want to give her 1 extra shot over her handicapp
ill never win :smt022:smt022

[BrisVegas]

you'll just have to play better Russell. :wink:

[razaar]

ladies acr is 72 mens acr is 71,
i dont even want to give her 1 extra shot over her handicapp
ill never win :smt022:smt022
The ladies must play a longer course relative to the men. Women don't hit it as far as the men unless they are Laura Davies.

[Veefore]

The impact of C Graders works both ways, not as you implied about supposedly making the CCR lower.

Ultimately, the CCR would work far better if the CCR was calculated and players handicapped per grade.

I still come back to my preference, Par of the Course, that is the only consistent thing that ALL players are competing against in their own right and in their own ability and game!


I never implied that C graders make the CCR lower. I said it is mainly the A graders that do. I said that the general impression around the club was that C graders were responsible for the lower CCRs.

And I still come back to my argument that Par of the course is the most irrelevant figure that you could draw a course rating from. As I said before, any system that can rate the longest par 4 hole at Kennedy Bay with the 240m wide open par 4 16th (I think it is) at Rosehill is useless. For most players there is at least a 1-2 shot difference between those two holes and both rate as par 4's.

[sms316]

The ladies must play a longer course relative to the men. Women don't hit it as far as the men unless they are playing with Jarro.
:mrgreen:

[Ned]

3 days to close of Poll!!!!!!!!!

[mike]

What's the point of having a deadline? You gonna submit the poll results to GA?
Anyway I haven't voted yet and I need another 4 days to ponder.

[solarman]

Mike, I thought all garden gnomes were asleep by 10pm.