A different kind of skins format. Ideas?

[larrybud]

[quote name='Stuart G.' timestamp='1426840291' post='11178299']
Thanks. Although if you really want to extract accurate probabilities of what might happen in a net skins, the net scores would have been much more effective. Gross scores might give us an insight to what happens with just the 0 and 18 handicaps but doesn't accurately reflect what goes on with all the cappers between (or above). It would be curious to see what those numbers might show but I suspect you used the gross scores because you didn't have the net scores?
[/quote]

It would take a bit more doing to come up with the net scores, but if I have time this weekend I can do it. But I have so many scores of scratch and bogey golfer I think you can extrapolate it. Obviously any propabilities are just that, and analyzing 40 guys of varying handicaps with net scores is beyond my pay grade!

[larrybud]

[quote name='TheCityGame' timestamp='1426854774' post='11178741']
Or, short 5's that are high handicap holes where you have to give a stroke because scratch golfers birdie them so much. 470 yard par 5's e.g. These would skew towards low cappers since their chances of net eagles are high but it's still a tough birdie for a bogey golfer.
[/quote]

Except eagles even by scratch golfers, are far and few between.

[Stuart_G]

[quote name='larrybud' timestamp='1427336176' post='11217433']
[quote name='Stuart G.' timestamp='1426840291' post='11178299']
Thanks. Although if you really want to extract accurate probabilities of what might happen in a net skins, the net scores would have been much more effective. Gross scores might give us an insight to what happens with just the 0 and 18 handicaps but doesn't accurately reflect what goes on with all the cappers between (or above). It would be curious to see what those numbers might show but I suspect you used the gross scores because you didn't have the net scores?
[/quote]

It would take a bit more doing to come up with the net scores, but if I have time this weekend I can do it. But I have so many scores of scratch and bogey golfer I think you can extrapolate it. Obviously any propabilities are just that, and analyzing 40 guys of varying handicaps with net scores is beyond my pay grade!
[/quote]

In that case, I wouldn't take the time unless you yourself are really interested in the results. It's just a case of mild curiosity from my perspective. Though I appreciate the offer. It's just my nature to avoid making assumptions until all the data is in.

[HackerD]

Net skins outcomes has a lot to do with how many players are in the group. Take 39 18-handicappers and 1 scratch. Odds are at least one of the 39's will par every single hole, thus nullifying any bird the scratch may have. The scratch will never win a skin.

 

However, take 3 18-handicappers and 1 scratch. The odds are much better that the scratch will clean up.

 

If the 100% handicap system was completely "fair" in regards to net skins, the odds shouldn't change based on the number of players in the game.

 

As far as different games, think of weighting the skins based on the result. Our group plays "1-2-3" $1 for par skins, 2/birdie, 3/eagle. And we play $2 to closest to the pin.

 

Of course odds for the scratch player are better with 3 opponents than with 39. Not obvious why handicap has anything to do with that.

[bladehunter]

I run a 12 event season for our group and also keep the stats on skins and par 3's won. We play net skins with the lowest being the baseline and getting 0 strokes and others getting the differential. Last year the lowest index player (5 index) averaged 2.8 skins per round while the highest index player averaged 2.1. The overall average was 1.7 skins per round.

 

And in a wacky twist, the highest index player had the 2nd most closest to the pins on average. Hmmm.

 

Exactly our findings when playing in groups with legitimate handicaps. The lowest handicap, playing off scratch, still has the best of it in terms of skill because he's a better player.

 

It's also exactly in line with the USGA's findings.

 

People that don't want to play net skins are low caps that want to get paid. That's it. They already have an advantage over worse players, and they want to stretch that advantage further.

 

The reason why legitimate high handicappers are high handicappers (or mid cappers, or whatever) is because they don't hit enough good shots to be a low handicapper, or scratch, or better.

 

If everyone's handicap is on the level, they can play straight up net skins and the advantage will still be a little in favor of the better players. The only reason you wouldn't play net skins is because low cappers get butt hurt when they get a birdie and some 20-capper gets 2 shots and beats them with a net eagle.

 

Instead of saying, "nice hole", they whine that the handicap system is skewed toward worse players which is dead wrong. In that example, where the 20-cap makes a par on the 1 or 2 handicap, it may be one of the few times that year he does it.

 

In a group with legit caps, you can play net skins every time out. Vanity caps have no bearing on it as they are ego-centric idiots and are costing themselves money. That's their choice.

 

But to skew the skins format more in the favor of the low caps seems inequitable.

 

and people who do want to play net skins are high caps that have a good shortgame.... they negotiate the handicap..then at last moment say "oh yea and ill play from the senior tees"..... poof... wins skins pot... surprise surprise...

 

 

only truly fair way to do it is get a group that will play straight up and let the higher caps play forward tees and lower caps back tees... we have a regular 12-16 man skins game that is plus handicap to 15 cap... i am a 2 currently and i havent won the pot in a while... get my buy in back sometimes but thats about it... the 7-10 handicap guys win far more often from the front tees.. but once upon a time when full handicaps were used i rarely won a single skin... when you make a birdie , math says that cances are one of the guys getting a stoke there will make a real par and cancel you out.... you arent playing against one given stroke.. youre playing against 5-6 strokes..

 

same is true in handicapped match play... im pencil whipped before the match starts when a guy is getting 7-10 shots... speaking from experience over several years not theories from the usga

[bladehunter]

I run a 12 event season for our group and also keep the stats on skins and par 3's won. We play net skins with the lowest being the baseline and getting 0 strokes and others getting the differential. Last year the lowest index player (5 index) averaged 2.8 skins per round while the highest index player averaged 2.1. The overall average was 1.7 skins per round.

 

And in a wacky twist, the highest index player had the 2nd most closest to the pins on average. Hmmm.

 

Exactly our findings when playing in groups with legitimate handicaps. The lowest handicap, playing off scratch, still has the best of it in terms of skill because he's a better player.

 

It's also exactly in line with the USGA's findings.

 

People that don't want to play net skins are low caps that want to get paid. That's it. They already have an advantage over worse players, and they want to stretch that advantage further.

 

The reason why legitimate high handicappers are high handicappers (or mid cappers, or whatever) is because they don't hit enough good shots to be a low handicapper, or scratch, or better.

 

If everyone's handicap is on the level, they can play straight up net skins and the advantage will still be a little in favor of the better players. The only reason you wouldn't play net skins is because low cappers get butt hurt when they get a birdie and some 20-capper gets 2 shots and beats them with a net eagle.

 

Instead of saying, "nice hole", they whine that the handicap system is skewed toward worse players which is dead wrong. In that example, where the 20-cap makes a par on the 1 or 2 handicap, it may be one of the few times that year he does it.

 

In a group with legit caps, you can play net skins every time out. Vanity caps have no bearing on it as they are ego-centric idiots and are costing themselves money. That's their choice.

 

But to skew the skins format more in the favor of the low caps seems inequitable.

 

 

whew..... that couldnt be farther from reality....

 

and who on earth would play in a skins game where someone is getting 2 pops a hole?

[dpb5031]

I play with a group at my club of about 30 guys, though most days there are 8-12 players, sometimes on the weekend up to 24. Our regular game is a $40 throw-in, $20 going toward Stableford system where we track our own point quotas, $20 toward scats.

 

Most of our guys are in the 2-12 HC range, but we also have some 18/19 caps, and some scratch to plus players. We have been keeping data for over 15 years and have tried multiple formats. Our data clearly indicates that, no surprise, the low HC players clean up on scats. It's so lopsided at the end of the year it's ridiculous. There are some exceptions, like a long hitting/explosive 14 HC who makes several birdies per round but has a bunch of blow-up holes. The steady-Eddie short hitting types are typically disadvantaged, even if they are low cap good players. Same for good ball strikers but poor putters. Anyway, I digress...

 

Remember, the USGA HC system was not created to apply to a scats game with a group and they do not have a recommendation for this scenario. We have tried several iterations of net scats over the years. As I said, we track the distribution of pay-outs to include total # of scats won, scats won per round played, total money won, money won per round, overall ROI, and several other metrics. In a nutshell, here are our findings:

• Gross - As stated above clearly favors the better players (quite obvious)
  
• 100% Net - Clearly favors the higher HC players. This is especially true when we have had one (or even a few) high caps playing with a bunch of lows & mids.
  
• 50% Net (or any other percentage) - Works OK to bring the higher caps into on the tougher holes but most of our guys did not like it. Here's an example as to why: A 4 HC player makes a great birdie on the #6 HC hole (so he's not getting a shot). It's a tough hole location and a very difficult birdie, but not too tough of a par for most of our field, so he ends up getting halved by 2 or 3 other players with caps higher than 12 (50% gives anyone higher than 12 a shoot on the #6 rated hole).
  
• Half Shots (100% of a player's handicap on the card as they fall, but distributed as half shots...so 50% but in a different way): This by far produced the fairest distribution of winners across entire handicap range (E.g. a 12 hc gets 12 half shots as they fall on the card) (3.5 beats a 4, but not a natural birdie 3)
  

so...

 

out of everything we've tried, half shots works the best and our data supports it. Exceptional birdies are still rewarded unless halved by another exceptional birdie, yet the higher caps have multiple opportunities to win a scat by making a pars netted down by half a shot.

 

Now, that said, even though the half shot format works best, we continue to do gross scats only. I have been a vocal advocate for the half shot system becasue it makes the most sense, but most of our guys do not want to be bothered. They feel that calling the cards is a tad more difficult/confusing (but it's not really once you get used to it). Seems crazy to me and I'm not sure why our higher handicap players don't make more of a stink about it, but so it goes.

 

And for disclaimer I am one of the lowest handicap players in the group and typically win more scats per round and more total money than any other player when we wrap up our year-end stats.

[Augster]

I run a 12 event season for our group and also keep the stats on skins and par 3's won. We play net skins with the lowest being the baseline and getting 0 strokes and others getting the differential. Last year the lowest index player (5 index) averaged 2.8 skins per round while the highest index player averaged 2.1. The overall average was 1.7 skins per round.

 

And in a wacky twist, the highest index player had the 2nd most closest to the pins on average. Hmmm.

 

Exactly our findings when playing in groups with legitimate handicaps. The lowest handicap, playing off scratch, still has the best of it in terms of skill because he's a better player.

 

It's also exactly in line with the USGA's findings.

 

People that don't want to play net skins are low caps that want to get paid. That's it. They already have an advantage over worse players, and they want to stretch that advantage further.

 

The reason why legitimate high handicappers are high handicappers (or mid cappers, or whatever) is because they don't hit enough good shots to be a low handicapper, or scratch, or better.

 

If everyone's handicap is on the level, they can play straight up net skins and the advantage will still be a little in favor of the better players. The only reason you wouldn't play net skins is because low cappers get butt hurt when they get a birdie and some 20-capper gets 2 shots and beats them with a net eagle.

 

Instead of saying, "nice hole", they whine that the handicap system is skewed toward worse players which is dead wrong. In that example, where the 20-cap makes a par on the 1 or 2 handicap, it may be one of the few times that year he does it.

 

In a group with legit caps, you can play net skins every time out. Vanity caps have no bearing on it as they are ego-centric idiots and are costing themselves money. That's their choice.

 

But to skew the skins format more in the favor of the low caps seems inequitable.

 

 

whew..... that couldnt be farther from reality....

 

and who on earth would play in a skins game where someone is getting 2 pops a hole?

 

This post is a resurrection from 2 years ago. Two years later, everything I said still rings true and is supported by two more years of data.

 

Guys that get two shots on holes, 19 caps and above, rarely do anything with those two shots. They get those shots on hard holes where they typically suck.

 

Where the higher caps get an advantage is on the par 3’s that are the 17 and 18 handicaps. At our course, these holes are both 125 yards or less from the whites. They make a lot of net birdies. Almost a guarantee. And a lot of net 1’s.

 

They almost never do anything on the holes where they get 2 strokes.

 

We have a guy that plays net skins with us with Parkinsons. He’s a 31 cap. He gets 2 strokes on 13 holes. Most of the time he gets blanked in net skins. Because he’s a 31.

 

Usually the guy that gets the most skins in our net skins game is the scratch or the 2 handicaps. They just hit better shots more often and make more putts because they are better players.

[rogolf]

What is the fascination with skins? We play four times a week, group scores (Stableford, or best two net etc) and don't even consider skins. Everyone is happy without skins and whining.

[dpb5031]

What is the fascination with skins? We play four times a week, group scores (Stableford, or best two net etc) and don't even consider skins. Everyone is happy without skins and whining.

 

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, our group does both...a throw-in for Stableford and scats, and we too play 4 times per week. We play gross Stableford but keep our own quotas using a rolling average of your 5 best scores out of your ten most recent and adjust quotas weekly.

 

I think guys like the scats game because it gives them something to hope for if they make a birdie or two even if they otherwise play poorly and have no shot in the Stableford.

 

And let's not kid ourselves, luck is a pretty big factor in a scats or skins game...

[bladehunter]

I run a 12 event season for our group and also keep the stats on skins and par 3's won. We play net skins with the lowest being the baseline and getting 0 strokes and others getting the differential. Last year the lowest index player (5 index) averaged 2.8 skins per round while the highest index player averaged 2.1. The overall average was 1.7 skins per round.

 

And in a wacky twist, the highest index player had the 2nd most closest to the pins on average. Hmmm.

 

Exactly our findings when playing in groups with legitimate handicaps. The lowest handicap, playing off scratch, still has the best of it in terms of skill because he's a better player.

 

It's also exactly in line with the USGA's findings.

 

People that don't want to play net skins are low caps that want to get paid. That's it. They already have an advantage over worse players, and they want to stretch that advantage further.

 

The reason why legitimate high handicappers are high handicappers (or mid cappers, or whatever) is because they don't hit enough good shots to be a low handicapper, or scratch, or better.

 

If everyone's handicap is on the level, they can play straight up net skins and the advantage will still be a little in favor of the better players. The only reason you wouldn't play net skins is because low cappers get butt hurt when they get a birdie and some 20-capper gets 2 shots and beats them with a net eagle.

 

Instead of saying, "nice hole", they whine that the handicap system is skewed toward worse players which is dead wrong. In that example, where the 20-cap makes a par on the 1 or 2 handicap, it may be one of the few times that year he does it.

 

In a group with legit caps, you can play net skins every time out. Vanity caps have no bearing on it as they are ego-centric idiots and are costing themselves money. That's their choice.

 

But to skew the skins format more in the favor of the low caps seems inequitable.

 

 

whew..... that couldnt be farther from reality....

 

and who on earth would play in a skins game where someone is getting 2 pops a hole?

 

This post is a resurrection from 2 years ago. Two years later, everything I said still rings true and is supported by two more years of data.

 

Guys that get two shots on holes, 19 caps and above, rarely do anything with those two shots. They get those shots on hard holes where they typically suck.

 

Where the higher caps get an advantage is on the par 3’s that are the 17 and 18 handicaps. At our course, these holes are both 125 yards or less from the whites. They make a lot of net birdies. Almost a guarantee. And a lot of net 1’s.

 

They almost never do anything on the holes where they get 2 strokes.

 

We have a guy that plays net skins with us with Parkinsons. He’s a 31 cap. He gets 2 strokes on 13 holes. Most of the time he gets blanked in net skins. Because he’s a 31.

 

Usually the guy that gets the most skins in our net skins game is the scratch or the 2 handicaps. They just hit better shots more often and make more putts because they are better players.

 

My takeaway from your experiences is that my clubs 15-20 cappers are sandbaggers compared to yours. Our club match play tournament has been won by a 12 or worse handicap 6 years straight. It's a two month long bracket that usually has 40 or more entries. I haven't made it out of the first round in the last 3 years. Eliminated by the same 18 cap two of those 3. He shot a real 36 on the front nine three years ago against me and closed me on 12.

 

But he's 73. Hits his driver 2 feet off the ground. Might carry it 150 yards . Maybe. And longest iron is a 8 iron. But he can chip and putt. What do I do whack him over the head ? Complain ? Or just be polite and take it until he can't play anymore ? I guess I've chosen the latter. And I know it's an extreme example. But you haven't lived until you've played your a** off. Shot even par or better and "lost" to a guy who couldn't hit it out of his own tracks. Is pretty comical in my opinion that guys take these wins in these situations and feel good about it.

[Shilgy]

The best format we've used in our group is 100% hc, but as 1/2 shot per handicap hole.

 

The distribution of HCs within your group matters a lot if you're playing 100% full cap in a skins game. If you have a bunch of players in the 4-8 range, and then 1 guy that's an 18, the 18 is likely to have an advantage as he will be the only one getting a stroke on a number of easy holes.

 

If you want to play a level game for everyone, Stableford works best IMO. Establish each player's quota by subtracting his HC from 36. Player who performs best relative to quota wins. (Of course sandbaggers will screw up any format you decide to use)

 

Edit to add you can do this as an individual comp, or as 2 man teams.

Your half stroke skins is the same as the OP's gross birdie beats net birdie.

 

We play the half stroke skins occasionally in a group I run but only on days where the handicaps have a relatively short spread.

[deadsolid...shank]

What is the fascination with skins? We play four times a week, group scores (Stableford, or best two net etc) and don't even consider skins. Everyone is happy without skins and whining.

 

Because a lot of people like skins. Pretty simple. If you have a really outstanding hole, you have a good chance at being rewarded.

 

I have a couple of situations where we play skins.

 

Our annual week long trip of 12 guys. Caps normally range from 2-18, with the average probably falling somewhere in low teens. I think in four years (usually the low cap in the group) I have one skin! The higher caps dominate in skins. Every year. One year on a tough par three one of the lower caps made an ace, and got halved by two net one. I've pushed for 1/2 stroke skins for a long time.

 

The other group was our regular men's day group (I've posted about this one numerous times), this was played with a $20 buy in, $10 to the team game (one low net ball per foursome) and $10 to net skins. Our group that consisted of four sub five caps got destroyed, on both sides. All the time. We finally quit playing in it as we really had no chance to cash. We tried to get the 1/2 skins in place and would have continued to play had they done so, as we would have at least had a chance to grab a skin on occasion.

 

Handicaps on both groups are fairly legitimate. If the group has any kind of numbers and are playing net skins, the low handicaps are going to get waxed! Almost every time.

[mark m]

OP: dpb gives great advice IMO. I have played in a group of 30 guys for 25 years that has a throw in game similar to his but at $20/man (not $40). We changed the game about 15 years ago and added net skins. We use 100% handicap. I would prefer the half a shot but we are stuck with full handicap. We also pay out gross skins, closet to pin on the 3's (three putt you lose it), and low net score of the day. The higher handicaps dominate the net skins. And the low guys the gross skins.

 

For our club tournaments which can have over 120 participating, we typically have a gross skin game which is optional. Sometimes the club will run it and collect the $10 or $20/man at the check-in table, but usually one of just runs it on the side and collects from the guys on the putting green before play. We often have 25-30 guys in out of a field of 100+. If it wasn't for this game, there are a few of us who would not participate in some of the club tournaments. If you are plus/scratch to below 6 or so - it is very difficult to win anything in some of the formats which are based on net scores. It's a total donation. As dpb mentioned, even the gross skins are somewhat random. I've made 6 birdies a couple of times and no skins. This summer I made 7 in one tournament round and one was good. Sometimes you get lucky when one good hole - one lone birdie - holds up. Regarding net skins in large field tournaments, it takes a net double eagle or net eagle to win. There are typically more net skins than gross skins in a large field club tournament. Anyway, 'optional' is the key and I am in favor of more payouts and more ways to win because we know from experience that it helps participation and enjoyment.

 

Good luck.