Handicap scoring

[discgman]

Included in my handicapp system, we have a max for biggest handicapp at +6 for the better players due to our local course being fairly easy. In general, handicapp leagues are for those players who are new to the sport or want to get that tournament feel for the first time. So, if there are people out there who are looking at making a living off the payouts, we spread the payout to 40 percent to discourage that. We are not in it for the money, but the experience and weekly gathering of old and new friends. We get a few complaints on the payouts and how others are "gaming" the system. But I feel if you dont like it, dont play it. We still get an average of 40 to 50 people a week, on a 9 hole course. And its also all year long due to some lights in the park and great cali weather.

 

[TrustYourRubber]

So keep up if you can understand my views and ideas...

On my local course I have seen -13 all the way up to +24 in league play. On our course we have 2 tee boxes that would be considered a par 4 by DGA course par guidline standards.

Say the guy who hits -13 has a 1 to 1 ratio starting them at +13 for the round
All the way to -4 x -1 = 4 so this player has a +4 handicap
-3 x -.9 = 2.7 so this player still has a +3 handicap
shoots +3 x -.9 = -2.7 HC -3
+4 x -.7 = -2.8 HC -3
+7 x -.7 = -4.9 HC -5
+8 x -.65 = -5.2 HC -5
+9 x -.65 = -5.85 HC -6
+10 x -.6 = -6 HC -6
+13 x -.6 = -7.8 HC -8
+24 x -.6 = -14.4 HC -14

If everyone shoots their average that average +3 on up will shoot a zero
+4 player ends with 1 over
+5 avg. = 1 over
+6 = 2
+7 = 2
+8 = 3
+9 = 3
+10 = 4
+11 = 4
+12 = 5
+13 = 5
+24 = 10

This would be good to use as a formula for any course. I think anyway, what are your thoughts?

To me this seems like a really good way to bring newer players into the fold without dealing with the issues that arise with a simpler handicap system. I will propose this to my league mates.

Also, I was watching the video blog for Steven Dodge today, and he had offered something on the subject of a handicap system.

He was posting in response to the question, "What is par?"

I will post again tomorrow with some of the details of his presentation. It's very interesting to see his "wheels" turning, and it's also relevant to this discussion. I will post it here, so that everyone who tried to help me with this question may gain another insight to the par/handicap system, which is what we're dealing with in this thread. Thanks again! Disc on! Hope to see some of you on the course in the future!

 

[3j0hn]

So keep up if you can understand my views and ideas...

I don't really follow what you're trying to do. I can't tell what the formula is for determining someone's handicap from their average.

From what I can see, it looks like the guy with the 24 ends up with a +10 if he shoots his average while the guy with a -4 average ends up even par if he shoots his average. Assuming most people's averages are mostly stable (except for newer, rapidly improving players) the +24 guy on his very best day will not place higher than the -4 guy having a really bad day, which defeats a lot of the point of handicapping.

But maybe I misunderstand.

 

[Grungedude42]

Pick a number well below what you'd expect players to shoot. Say, for the sake of argument, 45. My first two weeks of league, players would just receive their raw score. On their third round, I would take their average round. Subtract 45, and then multiply by 0.6. The result would be subtracted from their score for that round. In the rare event someone shot lower than my base number, they use their raw score, and were not penalized.

 

[Stover]

I started a singles handicap league two years ago to try it out. It did not work very well. We evened everyones average with a handicap. So when my average was -2 on the course I started +2. When others average was +6 they started with a -6.

The problem this lead two was it hurts the people that are more consistent. It is much easier for someone with a +6 average to shoot better then there average then it is someone with a -2. While I would still take this if it was 1v1. The problem was there was like 8+ people each week getting 8+ strokes on me. While being more consistent would allow me to beat most of them, there was no chance of beating them all. One or two of them would always shoot way better then there average.

The idea I had to solve this by creating a league that ran like my bowling league. The league would run for a designated time. Say 20 weeks. All weeks paid for up front. It would be a handicap league but each week you would just play against one person, then against each person in the league, and with placements rounds and stuff. If someone couldn't play a week they would just get there average +2. At the end the payout would simply come down to who had the best record.

I really liked this idea for a league, however, no one in my area was interested.

 

[3j0hn]

The problem this lead two was it hurts the people that are more consistent. It is much easier for someone with a +6 average to shoot better then there average then it is someone with a -2.

It is definitely the case the a Handicap system benefits people who play inconsistently over people who are more consistent.

When my old league was trying to decide on a new handicapping system we though the better players would also be the more consistent players. However, when we took two years worth of scores and subjected them to statistical analysis, there was only a very weak correlation between average score and consistency (average deviation). [caveat this was for one course and one set of players]

I can think of several solutions to this, but they all involve things like calculating z-scores and thus would be harder to explain to the average player. On the other-hand a fairly large number of players I have met in handicap leagues happily accept the handicap system as a black box without worrying too much about the details.

 

[3j0hn]

To add, this is why I don't like using a 0.6 multiplier for example (or an accelerating multiplier like hedfan1). Because it basically assumes that the player with higher averages are also less consistent.

For simplicity, I've always advocated using centered moving average over 5 or 6 rounds. That is, take the last six rounds, drop the highest and lowest scores, and compute the average of the rest: that (minus par) is your handicap. This is more fair to consistent players who still average high scores.

 

[TrustYourRubber]

I don't really follow what you're trying to do. I can't tell what the formula is for determining someone's handicap from their average.

From what I can see, it looks like the guy with the 24 ends up with a +10 if he shoots his average while the guy with a -4 average ends up even par if he shoots his average. Assuming most people's averages are mostly stable (except for newer, rapidly improving players) the +24 guy on his very best day will not place higher than the -4 guy having a really bad day, which defeats a lot of the point of handicapping.

But maybe I misunderstand.

No, basically you have to account for the fact that the -4 player is far more consistent and thus less likely to improve throughout the course of the year. The +24 guy is a beginner at the beginning of the year, and by the end of the year he could be anywhere from +10 to +3 (in one year's time, that is).

That in, and of itself, is reason enough to not give him all his strokes. He's going to improve, or he's going to pad the bottom. (Better players don't like to be dogged, because they've spent years playing and practicing, and they especially don't like finishing behind a beginner, because they improved three strokes on a round that's +21. That's outrageous.)

 

[FriedInTheDesert]

Without a handicap system, average players never win and get discouraged (they stop donating). With a handicap system, the best players know they can't win.

One solution could be to play doubles pairing the 1 seed with the last seed etc. Another way to look at it is to pair up A players with D players, B with C. In a blind draw nobody wants the D player but with the above format, the best player knows he/she will be paired up with the worst player.

Regarding any handicap system, some players know they will never win and unfortunately evolve into a sandbagger (turn to the dark side). The better players stop showing up unless there is a gross division. That's why most men's leagues have a gross and net division paying out equally.

I personally don't like the blind draw doubles format. It involves too much luck but I think it's great for casual leagues for social purposes.

 

[3j0hn]

No, basically you have to account for the fact that the -4 player is far more consistent and thus less likely to improve throughout the course of the year.

I don't think this is actually true. As I mentioned in one of my earlier posts, statistical analysis of scores from my old handicap league didn't show ANY correlation between average score and consistency. This isn't an easy fact to observe, you really have to look at whole seasons of data.

The +24 guy is a beginner at the beginning of the year, and by the end of the year he could be anywhere from +10 to +3 (in one year's time, that is).

That +24 player may be a beginner and super inconsistent. But they may be a super consistent player but may be a 62 year old with a bad leg, or a 40 year old woman, or a 12 year old girl, or just a not very athletic guy who's been playing for 3+ years, loves the sport, but has plateaued.

If you don't have any of these people in your league and you only have some Advanced/Pro players and some rapidly improving beginners, then "fair" handicapping is going to be very hard, and you should just play Pro/Am doubles.

(Better players don't like to be dogged, because they've spent years playing and practicing, and they especially don't like finishing behind a beginner, because they improved three strokes on a round that's +21. That's outrageous.)

Everyone plays hot and cold to some degree. Handicap play rewards you when you are hot. It is not "outrageous" if a Novice player who shoots their best score all year "beats" an Open player who played their worst round in weeks. If that bothers someone then they are a big baby who shouldn't play handicap leagues.

 

[3j0hn]

One solution could be to play doubles pairing the 1 seed with the last seed etc. Another way to look at it is to pair up A players with D players, B with C. In a blind draw nobody wants the D player but with the above format, the best player knows he/she will be paired up with the worst player.

The problem here, is figuring out the seeding. Unless you are playing combined score doubles (no fun), your league won't be generating clear data about the individual skill level of each player. If you run singles half the time (handicapped or not) then you could do that to seed doubles the other half of the time - as long as the same people show up for doubles and singles days.

 

[Steve West]

Hold an auction for partners.

 

[3j0hn]

Hold an auction for partners.

Nice! Now figure out a fast (10 minute) and easy way to run an auction. This should be a thing.