Home course rating easy rant

[Rodent]

I thought the DSR was going to be really good but the formula consistently delivers a DSR under the scr rating. Conditions have to get really bad before the DSR goes above the scr rating. DSR can be as low as 3 under the scr rating or as high as 4 over. If the DSR calculation formula were accurate, you'd expect a reasonable spread. At my club, the DSR averages 2 under the scr rating and I've never seen it rate more than 2 over the scr rating, even in foul weather.

[Hatchman]

How many courses/clubs have seen a larger % than normal of their A graders go out this year? On the flip side have the B & C graders reduced by more? If it does happen this way the DSR has done it's job to even the playing field. The true level out would take more than one season thou.

What I've seen at my home track is the amount of run on the fairways was the biggest factor in the DSR swings from over scratch to 2-3 under scratch.
The B & C graders didn't feature too much in the week ball winners lists on 37-35pts during our wet winter.
As soon as the fairways dried out they started dominating the list with 39-36pts and the DSR dropped.
The A grade scores were still grouped around the same #pts so the run added nothing in making it easier for them but the DSR suggests it is.

[Rodent]

How many courses/clubs have seen a larger % than normal of their A graders go out this year? On the flip side have the B & C graders reduced by more? If it does happen this way the DSR has done it's job to even the playing field. The true level out would take more than one season thou.

What I've seen at my home track is the amount of run on the fairways was the biggest factor in the DSR swings from over scratch to 2-3 under scratch.
The B & C graders didn't feature too much in the week ball winners lists on 37-35pts during our wet winter.
As soon as the fairways dried out they started dominating the list with 39-36pts and the DSR dropped.
The A grade scores were still grouped around the same #pts so the run added nothing in making it easier for them but the DSR suggests it is.

I've seen similar things. When the greens are really slow and bumpy, the C graders excel and the A graders struggle. When the greens are really fast and true, the C graders struggle and the A graders do much better.
It shows that the "conditions" have a different impact on players of different skill levels. I play at a club where A graders are a small minority and C graders dominate the field. I think the Scr rating is too low to begin with and the lop sided DSR just makes it impossible. My best gross score at my home club is a played to that is 3 over my handicap! In my quest to lower my handicap, I've had to avoid playing at home.

[Buzz]

Checking the Pro comp results at my local for yesterday ... DSR was 69. Bloody C graders ... oh wait, the best score of the day was 46 points ... in A grade ...

[Matt 3 Jab]

What hc? A grade midweek can run to 18

[Buzz]

10. I know the guy, long time club A grader who has played off 7-10 for as long as I've known him. Must have had a career round.

[Matt 3 Jab]

10. I know the guy, long time club A grader who has played off 7-10 for as long as I've known him. Must have had a career round.

So was it the smaller field that brought the DSR down or his score plus others from other grades?

[Matt 3 Jab]

Just had a quick look through our results at kooindah.

It's rated 68 (4 under ACR) or 67 (5 under ACR) each and every comp.

What's the point anymore! A grade is also 0-18 which is useless for any of the low markers

[gumby]

Just had a quick look through our results at kooindah.

It's rated 68 (4 under ACR) or 67 (5 under ACR) each and every comp.

What's the point anymore! A grade is also 0-18 which is useless for any of the low markers

so dumb, DSR should never rate below its ACR in my opinion. how does a par 72 become a par 69 on that day? are the 480+ metre par 5's now becoming par 4's to compensate for the course being "easy"

[Rodent]

Just had a quick look through our results at kooindah.

It's rated 68 (4 under ACR) or 67 (5 under ACR) each and every comp.

What's the point anymore! A grade is also 0-18 which is useless for any of the low markers

Rules only allow the DSR to be 3 under the ACR. The ACR from the black tees at Kooindah Waters is 72 however the ACR from the Gold tees at Kooindah Waters is 70, therefore the DSR can't fall below 69 from the blacks or 67 from the golds.
Either you are playing the gold tees or someone at KW has stuffed up.

[dunteachin]

Nahh didn't play, wife had the baby last week so no golf

Congrats on the bub - PGA or LPGA?

[Tank33]

Something I found strange described as below. Would someone know how they happen?

Par 71
Scratch rating 71
Slope rating 134
DSR 69

Now I list some results of different golfers in the same competition

1.
Stableford score 40
Played off 12
Played to 8.4
Difference between 'real played to' and 'adjusted played to': +0.4

2.
Stableford score 36
Played off 11
Played to 9.3
Difference between 'real played to' and 'adjusted played to': -1.7

3.
Stableford score 34
Played off 11
Played to 11.0
Difference between 'real played to' and 'adjusted played to': -2.0

4.
Stableford score 28
Played off 11
Played to 16.0
Difference between 'real played to' and 'adjusted played to': -3.0

They say 'Played to value' is calculated as follows:

Calculate a ‘Played To’ value for each score (this is the value that is listed in the ‘Played To’ column on www.golflink.com.au).
‘Played To’ values are calculated as follows:
A = Course Par plus Daily Handicap minus (Stableford Points Total minus 36)
B = A minus Daily Scratch Rating
C = B multiplied by Neutral Slope Rating (ie 113)
D = C divided by Slope Rating
D (rounded to one decimal place) = ‘Played To’

If I calculate each person's played to value according to this formula, it shows inconsistencies

Case 1

A = 71+12-(40-36) = 79
B = 79 - 69 = 10
C = 10 x 113 = 1130
D = 1130 / 134 = 8.4

Case 2

A = 71+11-(36-36) = 82
B = 82 - 69 = 13
C = 13 x 113 = 1469
D = 1469 / 134 = 11.0

Case 3

A = 71+11-(34-36) = 84
B = 84 - 69 = 15
C = 15 x 113 = 1695
D 1695 / 134 = 12.6

Case 4

A = 71+11-(28-36) = 90
B = 90 - 69 = 21
C = 21 x 113 = 2373
D = 2373 / 134 = 17.7

Why is there differences between what I calculated according to their rules and what is shown as played to value on the golflink site?
What am I missing?

[Matt 3 Jab]

Rules only allow the DSR to be 3 under the ACR. The ACR from the black tees at Kooindah Waters is 72 however the ACR from the Gold tees at Kooindah Waters is 70, therefore the DSR can't fall below 69 from the blacks or 67 from the golds.
Either you are playing the gold tees or someone at KW has stuffed up.

Yeah, seems the 'gold' are in play a lot with the scratch rating being 70. So thats ok, still rates 2 and 3 under all the time

Can someone explain this but, in the first round of the club champs, A and B grade were off the black tee's, ACR 72, with NO PERSON breaking their handicap, best scores of 2 x 73 nett, 1 x 74, 2 x 75 and then 76's, and it still rated 72???? How the hell does that work???

[Buzz]

So was it the smaller field that brought the DSR down or his score plus others from other grades?

Decent sized field and scores were good across all grades.

[Buzz]

Congrats on the bub - PGA or LPGA?

Thanks ... PGA, watch for a masters win sometime around 2040

[Scifisicko]

Can someone explain this but, in the first round of the club champs, A and B grade were off the black tee's, ACR 72, with NO PERSON breaking their handicap, best scores of 2 x 73 nett, 1 x 74, 2 x 75 and then 76's, and it still rated 72???? How the hell does that work???

We've had this happen as well. Handicapper explained it as being due to "what the computer expected this particular field to score versus what they actually scored". I just scratched my head. I don't think he understands it any more than I do. If someone out there can explain how this happens I'd love to hear it. I have zero faith in the DSR.

[3Puttpete]

We've had this happen as well. Handicapper explained it as being due to "what the computer expected this particular field to score versus what they actually scored". I just scratched my head. I don't think he understands it any more than I do. If someone out there can explain how this happens I'd love to hear it. I have zero faith in the DSR.

Your handicapper's right. You can look it up if you want to try to understand it

[Scifisicko]

Your handicapper's right. You can look it up if you want to try to understand it

Looking it up doesnt help me. Its an algorythm well beyond my capacity to evaluate. I understand that it attempts to compare what it expects the field to score, with what it actually scores and uses the differential to calculate the DSR. I dont know anyone that can comment on the validity of the maths behind the calculation, except that it seems to me it usually produces a stupid result. M3Js case being a prime example - in order to come up with the result it did it must have expected NO nett scores of par or better (unless the rating is low). Also if the DSR is consistently at or under the ACR regardless of whether the field has a good or bad day, handicaps go out, scores get better and the DSR goes ... where?

Actually that last bit is a bit absolute...restate as: it must have expected the field to play relatively poorly (not no net scores over par)

[3Puttpete]

I have zero faith in the DSR.

Looking it up doesnt help me. Its an algorythm well beyond my capacity to evaluate.

You don't know how or why it is but you're certain it's wrong.

Seems to be a fairly common reaction and makes less sense than just about anything else to do with the new system.

[Daves]

Yet it seems to work perfectly well at other courses? I have not seen a DSR at our club that I would have thought was wrong, ditto on my rounds at other courses in the area. At the moment it is at the low end for my home course, because there is lots of run, and the B & C graders are benefiting most. We are getting some exceptional scores (47 points on Wednesday), but they tend to be for only a few having a career round. A few months ago 33/34 points would get a ball, now you might be lucky with 36 points. But get a windy day, back tees and tough pins and there is at least a couple of shots more on the DSR each time. We are talking fields of 200+, perhaps smaller fields have much higher volatility?

[Scifisicko]

You don't know how or why it is but you're certain it's wrong.

Seems to be a fairly common reaction and makes less sense than just about anything else to do with the new system.

I would like to understand it. I am open to understanding it. Perhaps you can enlighten me by explaining whats happening in this real scenario...par is 70, CR 69, conditions are horndous, no one in the field plays to their HCP and the DSR for the day is calculated at 69. A week later conditions are perfect, alsmost all the same people are playing, there are several scores of nett par or better and the DSR is again 69.

[3Puttpete]

I would like to understand it. I am open to understanding it. Perhaps you can enlighten me by explaining whats happening in this real scenario...par is 70, CR 69, conditions are horndous, no one in the field plays to their HCP and the DSR for the day is calculated at 69. A week later conditions are perfect, alsmost all the same people are playing, there are several scores of nett par or better and the DSR is again 69.

I can't explain it to you because, like you, I don't understand the formula. Where we differ however is I'm not convinced it's wrong.

[Scifisicko]

hmmm, I understand we are all entitled to different views but;
1) No one I know can understand or explain it
2) GA have hardly covered themselves in glory since introducing the "upgrades" to the HCP system
3) It looks like a duck....

[3Puttpete]

hmmm, I understand we are all entitled to different views but;1) No one I know can understand or explain it2) GA have hardly covered themselves in glory since introducing the "upgrades" to the HCP system3) It looks like a duck....

Here you go mateDSR = SR + SUM{(36+Par-SR-CPA-mh-b-S)/(m'h+b')2} / {SUM(1/(m'h+b')2) + 1/CSD2}You show us where it's wrong and give us your better version so we can all rest easy.

[AndyP]

Here you go mateDSR = SR + SUM{(36+Par-SR-CPA-mh-b-S)/(m'h+b')2} / {SUM(1/(m'h+b')2) + 1/CSD2}You show us where it's wrong and give us your better version so we can all rest easy.

m'h is bullshit, and that's not the first time I've said it.