|
Abstract:
|
Golf handicapping is meant to “level the playing field” and allow players of different abilities to compete nearly equally in tournaments. Each golfer has a handicap based on a fairly elaborate formula that uses the ten best adjusted scores in the most recent twenty rounds. In competition, the handicap is subtracted from a golfer’s gross score to determine the net score. The lowest net scores are the winning scores. From a statistical viewpoint, is the handicapping system fair and performing as expected? One analysis approach is to compare gross and net scores versus handicaps. Gross scores are expected to increase with handicaps, but net scores should be reasonably consistent and comparable across handicaps. For this talk, we employ regression analysis to investigate the relationships of gross and net scores to handicaps for several difference tournaments run at a private country club. In the process, we uncover several interesting scoring differences for tournaments among men, women, and seniors. An “Aha!” moment occurs when we discover that the handicapping system for a certain tournament type can result in outcomes not indicative of a level playing field.
|
