Hcp in Profile would make GWRX more valuable to all members

[bph7]

[quote name='russc' timestamp='1411837767' post='10195005']
[quote name='oikos1' timestamp='1411837293' post='10194955']
Open Forum! What a great concept. For those who need to feel secure in knowing what someones handicap is, start a forum that requires the posting of a handicap. This sounds like an attempt to control who posts what, by using handicaps as a "standard" of measurement and that just doesn't seem right.

Enjoy WRX for what it is...
[/quote]
Better yet to avoid possible problems of vanity handicaps and the deviation of scores in calculating one ,why not just require that members post the number of USGA championships he(she) has played in.
[/quote]

You could lie about that too...

[AndyC]

[quote name='Pert1862' timestamp='1411836488' post='10194879']
Then what are PGA guys? +12 or so??
[/quote]

Do the math. To be a +12 a player would have to have 10 scores out of the last 20 averaging 12 strokes under the course rating. Not bloody likely.

[Pigems]

^^ if they weren't playing tournament conditions all the time I bet they could.

[ABgolfer2]

[quote name='AndyC' timestamp='1411838139' post='10195041']
[quote name='Pert1862' timestamp='1411836488' post='10194879']
Then what are PGA guys? +12 or so??
[/quote]

Do the math. To be a +12 a player would have to have 10 scores out of the last 20 averaging 12 strokes under the course rating. Not bloody likely.
[/quote] Not likely to have one at all since their courses are off the charts wrt ratings.

[russc1597187869]

[quote name='bph7' timestamp='1411838097' post='10195037']
[quote name='russc' timestamp='1411837767' post='10195005']
[quote name='oikos1' timestamp='1411837293' post='10194955']
Open Forum! What a great concept. For those who need to feel secure in knowing what someones handicap is, start a forum that requires the posting of a handicap. This sounds like an attempt to control who posts what, by using handicaps as a "standard" of measurement and that just doesn't seem right.

Enjoy WRX for what it is...
[/quote]
Better yet to avoid possible problems of vanity handicaps and the deviation of scores in calculating one ,why not just require that members post the number of USGA championships he(she) has played in.
[/quote]

You could lie about that too...
[/quote]
So unless there is way of verifying either the handicap or the # of USGA championships ,then we are back to the current situation

[AndyC]

[quote name='russc' timestamp='1411837767' post='10195005']Better yet to avoid possible problems of vanity handicaps and the deviation of scores in calculating one ,why not just require that members post the number of USGA championships he(she) has played in.[/quote]

Here's a novel idea, why not just let ideas and advice stand or fall on their own merits?

[Golfbeat]

My suggestion was not about the exact and official USGA hcp but rather an indication of the current level of the player. If people do not wish to disclose this or wish to pretend they are something or someone else, that is fine obviously. Its a free world.

[Golfbeat]

I just noticed that Nacho1234 is a +8 hcp.

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='AndyC' timestamp='1411838563' post='10195075']
[quote name='russc' timestamp='1411837767' post='10195005']Better yet to avoid possible problems of vanity handicaps and the deviation of scores in calculating one ,why not just require that members post the number of USGA championships he(she) has played in.[/quote]

Here's a novel idea, why not just let ideas and advice stand or fall on their own merits?
[/quote]

Because that's the thing. Ideas are good but that doesn't mean you can apply them. I don't care if a 30 cap understands d-plane, they can't apply it, or they wouldn't be a 30 handicap.

[petter7]

To attain a handicap of +7.9 you would have to have a stroke average of 66 (10 lowest scores out of last 20) on a course with a rating of 77 and a slope rating of 150.

Think Bethpage Black or Oakmont from the tips in championship trim for reference. Would take a world class player to pull that off. Mini Tour player? IMO? Doubt it.

[Denny71]

This idea is just garbage . Who really can learn to play golf from this stuff anyway ?

[oregongolf]

^^ if they weren't playing tournament conditions all the time I bet they could.

 

They don't.

 

[Hawkeye77]

[quote name='Golfbeat' timestamp='1411769393' post='10190881']
Would it not be very helpful to know the hcp of each poster? Would the comments not become more meaningful knowing where this person is in his own golf journey? Would a comment or suggestion from a 30 hcp have the same context/meaning as from a +3 hcp? Knowing the theory is one thing, knowing the practice is quite another. Just a suggestion. I see too many posters without this info.
[/quote]

No thanks. I'll mention mine if it's pertinent to an issue, otherwise who cares what my handicap is. If you think you need to know, you can always ask or send a PM. Why is a 5 necessarily at a different point in his or her journey than a 16? That doesn't necessarily follow.

I feel like most are up front about their handicaps on here, but there have been some surprising revelations. If you want to post it, great, that's part of the fun.

I've learned a ton from reading back and forth among pros and amateurs of a variety of levels (thanks Monte, in particular, but there are plenty of others). I don't find myself looking at the little window for a certain handicap to further validate someone's argument.

[pingfool]

[quote name='AndyC' timestamp='1411838563' post='10195075']
[quote name='russc' timestamp='1411837767' post='10195005']Better yet to avoid possible problems of vanity handicaps and the deviation of scores in calculating one ,why not just require that members post the number of USGA championships he(she) has played in.[/quote]

Here's a novel idea, why not just let ideas and advice stand or fall on their own merits?
[/quote]

that concept has seemed to suffice so far...

I don't care what monte's index is - when he types - I listen

and there are a couple of notable d-bag's here with low indexes that have repeatedly proven to be be FOS

[petter7]

^^ if they weren't playing tournament conditions all the time I bet they could.

 

They don't.

 

 

Nice find oregongolf. That's a world class player at his home club and those are some really low numbers for a +7.2 cap.

[PutterKilledTheDream]

This thread is hilarious. I know several current and former tour players that couldn't tell what or how they actually swing the club let alone give good instructional advice. Index alone doesn't indicate validity otherwise the PGA cert process would be structured completely different. Any 7 hc who can post 76/78 from 6000 yards in a formal setting is good enough by their standards. Why not just indicate whether or not you get paid as a teaching pro vs being an amateur?

[bruinsPATSirish]

Did anyone mention there is a spot to the left

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

With your handicap if you choose to include it?

[AndyC]

[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1411840276' post='10195201']Because that's the thing. Ideas are good but that doesn't mean you can apply them. I don't care if a 30 cap understands d-plane, they can't apply it, or they wouldn't be a 30 handicap.[/quote]

So I guess all of the golf research done by scientists should just be thrown out unless they can go out and make themselves scratch golfers.

[iteachgolf]

Yet many courses have that rating with lower slopes which would require a smaller differential. TPC Craig Ranch for example where one of my players would have been a +9.6 differential with tournament rounds of 73-64-67-66. Course is rated 77.3/144. Or another who shot 67-71-64-64 at first stage at St John's Golf and Country Club (74.7/132) and leading up to first stage had 7 consecutive rounds of 64 or better including a 59 on courses rated at 74 or higher. Both are/were above +9 over that stretch. Both have never played an event on the PGA Tour and one has never played an event on the Web.com tour. Have another who has averaged 67 in the best half of his rounds over the last 2 years on the NGA/Hooters Tour. Not over a small period of time, over 2 years. And these are in tournament play. Casual rounds he shoots 62 regularly. As in very often. And has never played in a web.com or PGA tour event.

There are more than a handful of legitimate +6 to +9 guys playing mini tour golf.

The Bubba example is skewed because it's a course with a fairly low course rating but a high slope. If he played at Orange County National every day his handicap would be considerably lower. The up tee there is rated 73.7/132. The back tee is 76/139. The higher rating with the much lower slope would yield a much lower handicap

[MonteScheinblum]

[quote name='PutterKilledTheDream' timestamp='1411842461' post='10195403']
why not just indicate whether or not you get paid as a teaching pro vs being an amateur?
[/quote]

That doesn't work either. Lots of people out there getting paid to give lessons that see shutter effect and tell the person t hold the lag. They see a pull hook and say OTT and swing more right...and lots of ams here that give great advice.

[PutterKilledTheDream]

[quote name='MonteScheinblum' timestamp='1411842856' post='10195443']
[quote name='PutterKilledTheDream' timestamp='1411842461' post='10195403']
why not just indicate whether or not you get paid as a teaching pro vs being an amateur?
[/quote]

That doesn't work either. Lots of people out there getting paid to give lessons that see shutter effect and tell the person t hold the lag. They see a pull hook and say OTT and swing more right...and lots of ams here that give great advice.
[/quote]
Not many that post here though. I agree, but the general consensus seems to be a being a tour player with a +8 makes you 'better' at giving swing advice,can't say I agree with that.

[MonteScheinblum]

[quote name='PutterKilledTheDream' timestamp='1411843228' post='10195469']
[quote name='MonteScheinblum' timestamp='1411842856' post='10195443']
[quote name='PutterKilledTheDream' timestamp='1411842461' post='10195403']
why not just indicate whether or not you get paid as a teaching pro vs being an amateur?
[/quote]

That doesn't work either. Lots of people out there getting paid to give lessons that see shutter effect and tell the person t hold the lag. They see a pull hook and say OTT and swing more right...and lots of ams here that give great advice.
[/quote]
Not many that post here though. I agree, but the general consensus seems to be a being a tour player with a +8 makes you 'better' at giving swing advice,can't say I agree with that.
[/quote]

As you said, tour players are notorious for giving bad advice and have a jaded view of what they actually do.

[Hawkeye77]

[quote name='MonteScheinblum' timestamp='1411842856' post='10195443']
[quote name='PutterKilledTheDream' timestamp='1411842461' post='10195403']
why not just indicate whether or not you get paid as a teaching pro vs being an amateur?
[/quote]

That doesn't work either. Lots of people out there getting paid to give lessons that see shutter effect and tell the person t hold the lag. They see a pull hook and say OTT and swing more right...and lots of ams here that give great advice.
[/quote]

I've gotten that exact advice from a well respected PGA instructor. Got some of the best advice ever in a short time from Monte in March (unfortunately knee injury/surgery cut off the progress I felt I was making this summer, so hopefully I'll be welcome back in Irvive come March next year!). Gotten some really good insights from ams on here.

[PutterKilledTheDream]

There's better advice from ams here than you get from range pros out there, believe me. People should just be aware that it's free advice and this isn't an instructional forum run by instructors. It's players of all levels seeking out and giving advice, mixed in with some instructors. Everything is free around here and it's up to the members to decipher what advice is solid, what doesn't apply, and what is bad.

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='petter7' timestamp='1411840940' post='10195263']
To attain a handicap of +7.9 you would have to have a stroke average of 66 (10 lowest scores out of last 20) on a course with a rating of 77 and a slope rating of 150.

Think Bethpage Black or Oakmont from the tips in championship trim for reference. Would take a world class player to pull that off. Mini Tour player? IMO? Doubt it.
[/quote]

You don't understand that there is little actual skill difference between successful mini tour players and PGA tour players. Have you ever even seen the scores that win on mini tours? It's like 64 4 rounds in a row. You have to go stupid low. Stroke average doesn't equal 10 lowest scores out of 20 so..... Not to mention I don't think you understand the difference between tournament golf and casual golf, even when completely played by the rules. Not to mention the fact that you don't understand the whole .9 thing either. It seems like you don't have an understanding of a) competitive golf b) the handicap system, so I have no idea why you're trying to make proclamations about either.

[oregongolf]

Yet many courses have that rating with lower slopes which would require a smaller differential. TPC Craig Ranch for example where one of my players would have been a +9.6 differential with tournament rounds of 73-64-67-66. Course is rated 77.3/144. Or another who shot 67-71-64-64 at first stage at St John's Golf and Country Club (74.7/132) and leading up to first stage had 7 consecutive rounds of 64 or better including a 59 on courses rated at 74 or higher. Both are/were above +9 over that stretch. Both have never played an event on the PGA Tour and one has never played an event on the Web.com tour. Have another who has averaged 67 in the best half of his rounds over the last 2 years on the NGA/Hooters Tour. Not over a small period of time, over 2 years. And these are in tournament play. Casual rounds he shoots 62 regularly. As in very often. And has never played in a web.com or PGA tour event.

 

There are more than a handful of legitimate +6 to +9 guys playing mini tour golf.

 

The Bubba example is skewed because it's a course with a fairly low course rating but a high slope. If he played at Orange County National every day his handicap would be considerably lower. The up tee there is rated 73.7/132. The back tee is 76/139. The higher rating with the much lower slope would yield a much lower handicap

 

 

I would believe there are lots of +6 handicaps playing mini tour golf. I don't anyone who is a legit +9 over time that isn't playing on a very large stage.

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='AndyC' timestamp='1411842706' post='10195425']
[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1411840276' post='10195201']Because that's the thing. Ideas are good but that doesn't mean you can apply them. I don't care if a 30 cap understands d-plane, they can't apply it, or they wouldn't be a 30 handicap.[/quote]

So I guess all of the golf research done by scientists should just be thrown out unless they can go out and make themselves scratch golfers.
[/quote]

Knowing something doesn't mean you can apply it. Again for the 10th time. Why do you think MDs treat patients and PhDs do research? Explain that one to me. A PhD 99/100 times knows 10x more about various basic science principles than physicians, yet they aren't the ones on the front line helping people.

[pinhigh27]

[quote name='iteachgolf' timestamp='1411842755' post='10195433']
Yet many courses have that rating with lower slopes which would require a smaller differential. TPC Craig Ranch for example where one of my players would have been a +9.6 differential with tournament rounds of 73-64-67-66. Course is rated 77.3/144. Or another who shot 67-71-64-64 at first stage at St John's Golf and Country Club (74.7/132) and leading up to first stage had 7 consecutive rounds of 64 or better including a 59 on courses rated at 74 or higher. Both are/were above +9 over that stretch. Both have never played an event on the PGA Tour and one has never played an event on the Web.com tour. Have another who has averaged 67 in the best half of his rounds over the last 2 years on the NGA/Hooters Tour. Not over a small period of time, over 2 years. And these are in tournament play. Casual rounds he shoots 62 regularly. As in very often. And has never played in a web.com or PGA tour event.

There are more than a handful of legitimate +6 to +9 guys playing mini tour golf.

The Bubba example is skewed because it's a course with a fairly low course rating but a high slope. If he played at Orange County National every day his handicap would be considerably lower. The up tee there is rated 73.7/132. The back tee is 76/139. The higher rating with the much lower slope would yield a much lower handicap
[/quote]

That's what insane. Shooting 73-64-67-66 on a 77.3/144 course is stupidly good to the nth level. Doing it in a tournament is like that squared.

[iteachgolf]

Yet many courses have that rating with lower slopes which would require a smaller differential. TPC Craig Ranch for example where one of my players would have been a +9.6 differential with tournament rounds of 73-64-67-66. Course is rated 77.3/144. Or another who shot 67-71-64-64 at first stage at St John's Golf and Country Club (74.7/132) and leading up to first stage had 7 consecutive rounds of 64 or better including a 59 on courses rated at 74 or higher. Both are/were above +9 over that stretch. Both have never played an event on the PGA Tour and one has never played an event on the Web.com tour. Have another who has averaged 67 in the best half of his rounds over the last 2 years on the NGA/Hooters Tour. Not over a small period of time, over 2 years. And these are in tournament play. Casual rounds he shoots 62 regularly. As in very often. And has never played in a web.com or PGA tour event.

 

There are more than a handful of legitimate +6 to +9 guys playing mini tour golf.

 

The Bubba example is skewed because it's a course with a fairly low course rating but a high slope. If he played at Orange County National every day his handicap would be considerably lower. The up tee there is rated 73.7/132. The back tee is 76/139. The higher rating with the much lower slope would yield a much lower handicap

 

 

I would believe there are lots of +6 handicaps playing mini tour golf. I don't anyone who is a legit +9 over time that isn't playing on a very large stage.

 

And those are all pga tour scores with no casual rounds and those are setup much harder than the rated conditions. Depends what you consider a very large stage. I think you guys fail to grasp how little the difference is between a guy who is top 5 on hooters tour, top 30 on asian tour or 73rd on web.com tour is from a PGA tour player. In fact one of the ones mentioned above made more cuts, more birdies per round, more top 25s and a lower scoring average while finishing 73rd on the money list as another player I was working with who finished 3rd on the money list. On paper the guy 73rd was better in almost every way. The difference? The guy who finished 3rd and is on PGA Tour had a win and 2 2nd place finishes. So while "mr 73" was more consistent and made more birdies he didn't have the few really hot weeks the other player had. That was the difference between having to go back to Q school just to get full status on the Web.com Tour and being a millionaire on the PGA Tour. And handicap wise the guy who lost his card would have been better.

[petter7]

[quote name='pinhigh27' timestamp='1411845189' post='10195631']
[quote name='petter7' timestamp='1411840940' post='10195263']
To attain a handicap of +7.9 you would have to have a stroke average of 66 (10 lowest scores out of last 20) on a course with a rating of 77 and a slope rating of 150.

Think Bethpage Black or Oakmont from the tips in championship trim for reference. Would take a world class player to pull that off. Mini Tour player? IMO? Doubt it.
[/quote]

You don't understand that there is little actual skill difference between successful mini tour players and PGA tour players. Have you ever even seen the scores that win on mini tours? It's like 64 4 rounds in a row. You have to go stupid low. Stroke average doesn't equal 10 lowest scores out of 20 so..... Not to mention I don't think you understand the difference between tournament golf and casual golf, even when completely played by the rules. Not to mention the fact that you don't understand the whole .9 thing either. It seems like you don't have an understanding of a) competitive golf b) the handicap system, so I have no idea why you're trying to make proclamations about either.
[/quote]

I'm a golf professional pinhigh27 and have been for 45 years. I have a fairly good grasp of the game. Probably right up there with you. lol