USGA Course Rating Calibration Q&A

Transcription

1 USGA Course Rating Calibration Q&A Note: Updated with Changes & New from 2016 Calibration Sessions GENERAL Purpose: The following Questions & Answers (Q&A) is an educational resource document for authorized golf association course raters and staff who may have attended a National Course Rating Calibration or just want to read up on some interesting questions that have been asked at calibrations that go a little beyond the book to assist course raters with accurately and consistently rating golf courses. Q: What are some recommended items that could be measured prior to arriving on the rating day? A: Generally things that don t change during the rating process or relative to a specific landing zone can be premeasured. Hole lengths, green dimensions, bunker fractions, crossing of obstacles, elevation changes, dogleg locations, Stimpmeter speed, and grass type/height are a few examples of what could be completed prior to the full rating. Q: When faced with a situation where a rating may have two possible values depending on subjectivity (i.e., 5 or 6 ), or when an adjustment doesn t quite qualify on a specific hole, but is very close to applying on multiple holes, what are the general guidelines for determining which rating value to use? A: When a rating team is struggling to decide if a green surface is relatively flat or moderately contoured, resulting in either a 5 or a 6 for this hole s Green Surface Rating value, the team could choose either value. When the team is faced with a similar decision again on another hole of this course, the opposite value from the first decision (high or low), should be chosen and the team should continue to toggle back/forth between those values. The USGA Course Rating System is based on the overall impact of obstacles, so toggling when an obstacle is not clearly in one category on multiple holes best reflects the average impact of that obstacle on a course. See Decision 3-1 in The USGA Course Rating System. Q: In some obstacles, adjustments may have an asterisk next to the letter of the adjustment (i.e., (M)*) signifying that this adjustment is shot specific. What is meant by shot specific? A: Shot specific simply means that the adjustment is evaluated at each individual landing zone (shot) versus only once as an overall hole evaluation. Shot-specific adjustments can be applied more than once during a hole (i.e., on each individual shot). For example, if significant MOUNDS (M)* are present in the tee-shot landing zone and around the green, it applies twice, thus it is cumulative to the overall R&R rating of the hole for that golfer. This is in contrast to, for example, the R&R SURROUNDED adjustment, which is only applied to the final value for that hole. Q: When evaluating multiple adjustments for an obstacle, what order do they get applied? A: When evaluating the adjustments, they are listed in the order that they should be applied. The rater should simply start with the first, and then go through the available adjustments listed for that obstacle, top to bottom, left to right, and not jump around. Sometimes raters can get to a different rating value by applying an adjustment out of order (e.g., applied a (Y)* adjustment when a minus PERCENTAGE adjustment would ve prevented usage of it).

2 Q: What is a tweener and how often should it be used? A: A tweener is a value that is not actually published in the chart for the Effective Playing Length (EPL) or obstacle being rated, but is between two values. Tweeners could be applicable when a starting row value (far left or far right of chart) is on or near the transition between two column or row values. Using Topography as an example, if the rating team encounters a landing zone that is somewhat between a minor to moderate stance/lie problem, the team is encouraged to use the value between minor to moderate as the table skips a value between columns for these two stance/lie situations. Tweeners are used by experienced raters when that inbetween value best represents the difficulty of the obstacle. See Decision 3-1 in The USGA Course Rating System. Q: A course has contacted us and indicated they have a number of holes using temporary greens; should we adjust the Ratings? A: When temporary tees and/or greens are used, the club must notify the authorized golf association. The authorized golf association will decide whether scores made under those conditions are to be accepted for handicap purposes, and whether the USGA Course Rating and Slope Rating should be modified temporarily. This is covered in The USGA Handicap System via Decision 5-1a/3 and in The USGA Course Rating System in Section 5-5a. NEW Q: Why is ball flight/trajectory not taken into consideration? A: Factoring trajectory of shots into the USGA Course Rating System is a topic of interest, as it would add sophistication to assessing Elevation and Roll. At this point in time, more data needs to be collected and analyzed in order to gain confidence in the standard trajectory of shots for our four model golfers. NEW Q: Consider lateral OB and lateral water, both the same shot length and the same lateral distance. When you get the obstacle value and convert to strokes, you find they are virtually the same. Under the rules, the OB penalty is stroke and distance but has the same impact on rating as water has. Why? A: See Form 2 in the Manual. Water is actually weighted higher than OB/ER. The rationale is that while OB/ER is more penal, players are much more likely to play away from OB/ER because of the penalty associated with it vs. water. While the impact on scoring is more penal when a player hits a shot into OB/ER, the data suggests that players tend to play away from it due to the potential penalty and, as a result, hit fewer shots into it. For water, players are more aggressive around it because it s less penal, and hit more shots into it. Water is weighted higher because, collectively, it has more of an impact on scoring.

3 THE SCRATCH & BOGEY GOLFER Q: I ve observed many scratch and bogey golfers that exceed the distances used for shot length in the USGA Course Rating System. Does the System need to be updated to account for these increases in distance? A: The USGA continuously collects and analyzes shot data at USGA Championships, state/regional events, and casual play at local courses throughout the country. Recent data supports the current values used for both the scratch golfer and bogey golfers. Remember that the distances used in the System are averages, not maximums. The System also assumes straight shots, which in effect neutralize the advantage of longer shots that are somewhat offline. There are definitely players who do not fit the distance models, but they usually have other parts of their game (i.e., short game) that balance it out. The key to the USGA Course Rating System is to predict scoring for players of certain handicap levels and not focus on the distances they hit the ball to achieve those scores. Q: Do bogey golfers lay up by choice, or is course management specific to the scratch golfer? A: Lay up by choice can apply to a scratch or a bogey golfer. A significant obstacle or combination of obstacles near the normal landing zone may prompt either golfer to hit less than a full shot. A fairway landing zone that is less than 15 [13] yards wide but without severe obstacles may also be a reason for a lay up by choice. A lay up by choice resulting from a course management decision would apply primarily to the scratch golfer. In order to qualify, the normal landing zone must present an unpleasant situation (e.g., downhill stance/lie to an elevated green). NEW Q: Please explain how underbrush affects tree ratings. The two paragraphs in Decision 12-8a/1 seem contradicting. A: The two paragraphs in the decision aren t meant to be contradictory. The language is intended to help raters avoid double dipping, which occurs when a full rating is given to both Trees and Extreme Rough present in the same area. Generally, a player can only be affected by one of those at a time (in trees or extreme rough). If the underbrush meets the definition of extreme rough, and that s what the golfer is likely to encounter first (not trees), then rate extreme rough as the primary obstacle and assign a downgraded or existing (1) obstacle value for Trees. If the ball is likely to be found and can be played, the underbrush may force the scratch golfer to hit a different type of shot in order to recover from trees. This condition limits shot options and usually makes recovery more difficult. Generally, when a player tries to recover from underbrush and trees, a higher-lofted club will be needed to extricate the ball out of the underbrush. The higher-lofted club typically decreases the recovery options available (e.g., a punch shot under the trees) and further reduces the ability to gain appreciable distance toward the hole. This relates to many factors required for consideration when rating trees such as: length of shot required to reach the next landing zone or the green; conditions under the trees that impact the lie of the ball; and conditions along the line of play from the trees.

4 EPL/OBSTACLES Q: If a rating team does not have an altimeter to measure altitude, how should elevation changes be determined? A: The rating team can use various tools to help determine changes in elevation such as topographical maps from the course, a sight level, nearby trees/flagstick/parallel holes/buildings, etc. Google Earth can be useful as well, but be aware that the images are not always up to date and elevation changes are not always accurate (especially if artificial like an elevated tee or green). The rating team should use their best judgment using these tools and balance that info with what is observed on the rating. Q: When applying adjustments that would cancel each other out such as -1 INCONSISTENT and the +1 UNPLEASANT, do you still apply the code, or do you simply not list them? A: Check with your association but the USGA recommends as a best practice to include any adjustments that are applicable to the final obstacle value, regardless of whether another adjustment would negate the original adjustment. The information may also provide useful information if the Ratings are audited or questioned. Q: When evaluating the CARRY (C)* adjustment ( or +1 option), what s the key distinction when applying it for the scratch or bogey golfer? A: When a bunker(s) must be carried to reach a green, the scratch value is adjusted upward only if the Green Target value is 5 or greater and the bunkers being carried must closely border the green. For the bogey golfer, there is an upward adjustment for any Green Target value and bunkers only need to be along the line of play. Bunkers must be carried when they protect more than half of the green. When a bunker(s) must be carried to reach a fairway landing zone, the bunker(s) must be significant and must be near the start of the landing zone the scratch golfer for bogey, it s just anywhere along the line of play. A significant bunker is a judgement call, but allows a rater to disregard small bunkers that only affect a small portion of the line of play or sandy areas just in front of the tee that do not pose a significant problem for the bogey golfer. Q: When evaluating the EXTREME adjustment, how do you determine whether to use the +1 or +2 adjustment? A: When applying the adjustment, typically the +1 is used when the EXTREME condition is present but minimally impactful and the +2 is used when the EXTREME condition is largely present and may be significantly impactful. For example, in most situations, if there is one punitive bunker near a landing zone, a +1 would be applicable. If there are multiple punitive bunkers near the landing zone, or the extreme condition exists in multiple landing zones, it would warrant a +2. If there are compounding factors, such as extreme rough that interferes with the swing, sharp banks (sod, railroad ties, etc.), or unusual features (e.g., trees in bunkers) that make the shot more difficult and out of the ordinary, then the rating team can go with a +2 vs. +1. In these situations, it is helpful to have experienced raters so they know how to distinguish these difficult situations and make the appropriate adjustments when necessary.

5 Q: When there are numerous fairway bunkers of average to significant difficulty, a course such as Kiawah Island (SC), Whistling Straits (WI), etc., should the rating team add a +1 on every hole? A: If the course has many holes that don t quite qualify for the EXTREME adjustment, but at the same time giving no special adjustment seems to undervalue the impact of these bunkers, the rating team should not be concerned with an all-or-nothing approach. It would be sensible for the rating team to apply the adjustment on every other hole. The principle to remember is that ratings are based on nine-hole totals, and often a single hole may not qualify for an adjustment, but having multiple holes that almost qualify for the adjustment may warrant it to be used on alternating holes. This would best represent the average obstacle difficulty a player will be dealing with when playing the course. As noted see Decision 3-1. Q: On a par-3 hole where the bogey golfer cannot reach the green in one shot, when does a greenside bunker qualify as a fairway bunker (i.e., it would not get the -1 (N) adjustment)? A: When greenside bunkers extend far enough back from the front of the green that they are now near (within 20 yards of) the bogey golfer s landing zone, the rating team should not apply the -1 (N) adjustment. In this situation, the greenside bunkers also qualify as fairway bunkers. The same principle applies on a par 4 or 5 hole where there are no traditional fairway bunkers. If either the scratch or bogey golfer has a landing zone just short of the green and there are greenside bunkers near that landing zone, the rating team should not apply the -1 (N) adjustment. Q: When applying the SURROUNDED adjustment for the Water Hazards obstacle factor, is there anything to take into consideration other than simply the measured distance? A: Yes, when applying this adjustment, the rating team should review the third and fourth bullets under Factors to consider when making adjustments on page 28 of the Guide for items that may influence the effective distance, making it more or less likely for the ball to end up in the water. For example, if the water hazard is 12 yards from the edge of the green (11 to 20 yd. column), and surrounds ¼ to ½ of the green, but the grass from the edge of green to the water hazard is closely mown and sloped towards the hazard, the rating team may want to move to the 5 to 10 yd. column and give a +1. Conversely, if a water hazard is 9 yards from the edge of a green with bunkers between the green and the water hazard, the rating team may want to move the opposite direction and not add the +1 since it is likely some shots will be stopped by the bunker. Q: How close to obstacles does something such as a cart path, fence, slope, etc. need to be before the obstacle is given the +1 BOUNCE adjustment? A: This is a judgment call on behalf of the rating team whether to apply the adjustment. The team can simply make the call if the conditions decrease/increase the likelihood of a ball bouncing into/ away from an obstacle. Typically this adjustment is given when the object is close to the break point between columns on a table. For example, if there is a water hazard that is 32 yards (low 30s) from the center of a landing zone, and there is a cart path close to the water hazard that increases the likelihood of a ball going into the water hazard, the BOUNCE adjustment could be added since the next column in the table is yards, and the rating team believes the ball would likely travel a few more additional yards to effectively make it into the next column instead of the actual column.

6 Q: When evaluating the (Y) & (2) adjustments, should they still be applied when the value of the obstacle is already at the max in the table? A: Provided that the adjustments are applicable on that hole, they should always be applied, even if you are using the max rating table value. Keep in mind, the maximum value for an obstacle is 10 (including adjustments). When entering the data to the online USGA Course Ratings Application, it will not allow anything higher than 10 to be entered, even if the table value plus adjustments is higher than 10 (see page 5 of the Guide and information in the General section of this document). Q: Does hooking, slicing, etc. come into play when determining tree recovery? How is the recovery for the bogey golfer assessed? A: While the USGA Course Rating System is based on golfers hitting straight shots (see Note on page 3 of the Guide), the System does assume with tree recovery the scratch golfer s ability to control trajectory as well as work the ball left or right to avoid trouble. It may be beneficial to stage a demonstration of a scratch golfer and his/her ability to recover from trees to gain an appreciation for how well scratch can recover and avoid tree trouble. It is difficult to predict a bogey golfer s ability with consistency in playing the wide variety of recovery shots that trees can present. Evaluating recovery based on a scratch golfer s ability enables rating teams to be more consistent in the rating process. The final rating values for Trees are subject to a weighting factor for both the Trees obstacle and the overall obstacle stroke value. Since the multipliers are much higher for the bogey golfer, the impact of the Trees rating is higher for the bogey golfer even if the rating value for Trees is the same as the scratch golfer. Q: What are the determining factors on a green surface that distinguish between being relatively flat, moderately contoured, or highly contoured? A: One way is to look for few (flat) vs. many (moderate) vs. numerous (highly) knolls and swales. This can be done by simply looking at the green surface, putting, or tossing a few balls around the green to see the impact of any knolls/swales/breaks, and by playing the course. Changing from one of these categories to the other on just a few greens would result in a relatively insignificant effect on the Ratings. See Section 15 of The USGA Course Rating System (manual). Q: When a golfer has to carry two obstacles on a single shot (e.g., water followed by Extreme Rough) how should the rating team handle these situations? A: On the crossing situation, ultimately the rater is crossing Extreme Rough so the full value for the Extreme Rough crossing should be assigned and the water crossing ignored on this shot. See Decision 12-7/3 of The USGA Course Rating System. Q: On a green with considerable depth, if a golfer can reach the front of the green with his/her approach shot; do we use a Transition Zone or the long shot length for determining the Green Target value? A: The long shot length should not exclusively be used for Green Target unless the golfer can reach the center of the green with his/her approach shot. The Transition Zone row would be appropriate if a golfer can reach the front portion of a deep green.

7 NEW Q: In the new rating procedure for Trees, how are adjustments utilized in connection with the Trees Rating Table? Sharing any other insights to this new rating procedure would also be appreciated. A: The adjustments available for Trees are to be taken into account independently from the table value for Trees. For example, it would be best to think of any trees being utilized for an adjustment as uprooted and not there when determining the value from the Trees Rating Table. Any adjustments would then be added to the table value for a final Trees rating. An example of this is a two-shot hole for both golfers where the team determines recovery problems as minor to moderate, which is a table value of 3. In addition, there is a +2 Squeeze/chute adjustment on the tee shot. The final Trees ratings would be 5, 5 (3 from the table, and +2 for the Squeeze) for this hole. A team would be overrating if they were including the trees forming the chute to the overall difficulty of the hole and then applying the Squeeze adjustment to the table value. It would be a form of double dipping, as using moderate or moderate to significant recovery and then applying the adjustment on top of that would be factoring in the same trees twice. The purpose behind having the adjustments independent of the table value is to maintain accuracy and consistency in overall Trees ratings and to distinguish them from the holes that don t have the squeeze or obstruct. As for other insights with the new Trees procedure, when evaluating the Obstruct adjustment consideration needs to be given to the golfer s length and trajectory of shot. For example, a possible obstructing tree is near the front of the green; however it may only obstruct based on the length/trajectory of bogey golfer s shot so the adjustment may only apply to the bogey golfer. Scratch may have an approach shot that can easily clear the tree, e.g., tree is only about 25 ft. tall, and approach is with a short iron or wedge, whereas the bogey golfer s approach shot is with a long iron where the tree is likely to cause an obstruction. In other words, even though the tree appears to obstruct when viewed from the tee, the approach shot of the golfer and the club likely used can help determine if the adjustment is necessary. NEW Q: If greenside bunkers are mostly at the back of the green, why aren t they rated less difficult than bunkers at the front of greens where they are more likely to come into play? A: If bunkers are located only behind the green, they may be downgraded per the Obstacles Behind the Green procedure (see page 9 of the Guide). Obstacles behind the green are generally less important than those of a similar nature to the side or in the front of the green. On long shots, the ball will most likely land short of the target and roll, bringing obstacles in front of the green more into play than those behind the green. Again, bunkers would need to be only behind the green, not mostly, for the rating team to consider downgrading the final rating value and this would only apply to adjustments and not the fraction of the green closely bordered by bunkers. Bunkers generally creep around the sides of the green and are in other locations around the green, so this procedure wouldn t often be applied to bunkers.

8 NEW Q: Should P (%) be used rather than B for bounce, i.e. fence, etc. in OB/ER and Water? A: The Bounce and Percentage adjustments are shot-specific and should be applied in order as per page 5 of the Guide. The Bounce adjustment should be applied first. If the rating team judges that the - 1 isn t enough to reflect an accurate rating, then the Percentage adjustment could be used to further reduce the rating value. We recommend utilizing the Percentage adjustment in 25% increments, similar to bunker fractions, e.g., 75% of rating value, 50%, etc. NEW Q: Please explain the Green Target Transition Zone and why we adjust up or down a point? A: A golfer is in transition when the center of the green is up to 10 yards beyond the average shot length on a one-shot hole, and up to 20 yards beyond the average aggregate shot length on a two or more shot hole. In this case, we assume the golfer will be able to reach the center of the green about half of the time. The 50/50 Green Target Transition Zone Rating Value represents the average of the long shot and short shot Green Target value, since sometimes the long approach shot will be able to reach the center of the green and other times a short approach shot will be needed to reach the center of the green. If the rating team determines that the golfer will be able to reach the center of the green significantly more than half of the time, then adding one point to the Transition Zone Green Target value is appropriate. In other words, the golfer will be hitting the longer (harder) approach shot more than half the time so the added point is needed. If the rating team determines that the golfer will be able to reach the center of the green significantly less than half the time, then deducting one point from the Transition Zone Green target value is appropriate. In other words, the golfer will be hitting the shorter (easier) approach shot more than half the time so the deducted point is needed. NEW Q: Would you review Decision 12-3/1 of the manual-measuring Greens? I don t understand measuring width and depth regardless of line of play. A: Effective Green Diameter represents a rough equivalent to the amount of surface area of the green. The line of play and the direction of approach shots to the green have no bearing on the actual size of the green. In general when evaluating Green Target, the larger a green is, the easier it is to hit and the line of play does not make a green any larger or smaller. An exception is covered in Decision 12-3/1, when the orientation of the green in relation to the line of play is such that the shape of the expected shot pattern are opposite the shape of the green. In this instance, rating teams are permitted to move one column to the right for the Effective Green Diameter, or increase the Green Target value by one point.

9 MISCELLANEOUS Q: What brand/model altimeter should I have? A: This should be left up to the authorized golf association s course rating committee or staff. The USGA doesn t endorse any brand/model. Many devices that measure elevation are based on barometric pressure, so keep in mind that these devices can have fluctuating results when weather conditions vary over short periods of time. Other altimeters are GPS based. The rating team s common sense should prevail when assigning values for elevation, and it s not a very significant factor to the overall Ratings. Remember that elevation is cumulative over 9 or 18 holes, so using other nearby holes as a reference can also help minimize errors. A rating team is better served by focusing on the things that matter more to the rating, such as verifying hole yardages, doglegs/lay ups, and Green Target rating values that carry over to R&R and Bunkers.