I really thought I'd done with this. But since Gilli asked:
All averages are based on the last 5 entered scores, (like in a golf handicap.)
Those with no recorded score take an average from the top three scores of their own grade. (Penalizing them slightly.)
Those with a partial recorded score take the average of the top five scores to fill in their five to qualify for a handicap. (Penalizing them, slightly less than those with no scores entered at all.)
PA = Personal Average (The standard the individual shoots to.)
A = Club Average (Clubs average across all grades ex. 400)
400 = Course Grading (Maximum possible score.)
500 = Control Integer (Since no one will ever average a perfect score, (think of it like 450240, it doesn't really mean anything on its own, but essential to calculate FT/lb's))
500 - PA x 400 = Handicap
Now; I know that the results were questionable, ("****" if you prefer.)
Take a moment to grind some figures through the equation and it works well when you know all the data. More to the point, the more data you get the better the outcome. IE the scores become closer because the club average takes into account all scores low and high.
But it does not achieve what I set out to, so I will share with you the newest thinking.
With the inclusion of AA at Castle, (which has been avoided in the past for reasons I don't understand.)
AA shoots scratch
A shoots off 2
B shoots off 5
C shoots off 10.
Now here's the interesting bit: You don't simply add your handicap on. You have to elect which shots you take again and make them. Encouraging improvement? I think so.
One of the things I tried to do with the previous system was avoid shoot off's. Now, they are encouraged, since no one disputes the results under that kind of pressure.
Down side. A bit of a nightmare to administer.
As I have your attention: Feedback please.
Last edited by Carlov; 24th March 2011 at 09:56 PM.