# Playing Conditions Calculation



## OldTomR (Apr 26, 2021)

Will the PCC be automatically calculated by WHS and the adjustment made shown accordingly
against the players record.


----------



## rosecott (Apr 26, 2021)

Yes, the PCC is shown on a column on the player's scoring record on the WHS platform.


----------



## OldMate (May 23, 2021)

Digging up a slightly old thread - does anyone know if PCC specifically takes into account weather conditions (regardless of scoring) or does it only do this by way of looking at the scores entered? We had a reasonable number of scores around or better than ‘net par’ (mainly earlier in morning) but conditions were far more difficult than usual all day and torrential rain made scoring very difficult later in the afternoon (when virtually no low scores came in). Under the old system I’d expect CSS not to have increased because enough of the field would have buffered or better but wondering if PCC looks beyond that and factors in the terrible conditions even if a few players scored well despite the conditions (the formulations I can find online re how PCC is calculated is all fairly vague). Cheers


----------



## Old Skier (May 23, 2021)

OldMate said:



			Digging up a slightly old thread - does anyone know if PCC specifically takes into account weather conditions (regardless of scoring) or does it only do this by way of looking at the scores entered? We had a reasonable number of scores around or better than ‘net par’ (mainly earlier in morning) but conditions were far more difficult than usual all day and torrential rain made scoring very difficult later in the afternoon (when virtually no low scores came in). Under the old system I’d expect CSS not to have increased because enough of the field would have buffered or better but wondering if PCC looks beyond that and factors in the terrible conditions even if a few players scored well despite the conditions (the formulations I can find online re how PCC is calculated is all fairly vague). Cheers
		
Click to expand...

It can only make a decision based on scores entered and making a decision based on that.


----------



## jim8flog (May 23, 2021)

It is possible to have 2 PCCs for one day but how this would work in practice I do not know

5.6/2 – Circumstances That May Warrant More Than One Playing
Conditions Calculation on a Single Day
Rule 5.6 recommends that only one playing conditions calculation (PCC) is
performed for the day.
However, there may be circumstances that warrant a separate PCC to be
performed for part of the day or for a certain competition. For example, when:
l There is extreme variation in weather on the day.


----------



## OldMate (May 23, 2021)

Thanks both. I also realised after I asked the question that there couldn’t be any other way as it would otherwise then just be up to someone arbitrarily deciding whether to adjust PCC based on their opinion of the weather.


----------



## mikejohnchapman (May 23, 2021)

We had our first +3 on Friday in the wind.


----------



## Deleted member 3432 (May 23, 2021)

mikejohnchapman said:



			We had our first +3 on Friday in the wind.
		
Click to expand...

Where do you see the pcc on the published results?

All we see on IG is an x where you used to see the css. Would be good to see what it actually comes up with to compare with what we used to see previously.


----------



## rulefan (May 23, 2021)

saving_par said:



			Where do you see the pcc on the published results?

All we see on IG is an x where you used to see the css. Would be good to see what it actually comes up with to compare with what we used to see previously.
		
Click to expand...

PCC shows on the WHS portal


----------



## Deleted member 3432 (May 24, 2021)

rulefan said:



			PCC shows on the WHS portal
		
Click to expand...

Found it, cheers.

Got to ask the question why it is not shown on IG comp results or EG app along side players record. Pain in the backside to have to go on WHS portal when the info should be shown on one or both of the other platforms surely...


----------



## mikejohnchapman (May 24, 2021)

Interestingly when I look at the day we had a +3 there was a ladies competition off the red tees but also a single player off the yellow tees. He was given the same PCC adjustment. I thought the PCC referred to the specific tee not all tees?


----------



## wjemather (May 24, 2021)

mikejohnchapman said:



			Interestingly when I look at the day we had a +3 there was a ladies competition off the red tees but also a single player off the yellow tees. He was given the same PCC adjustment. I thought the PCC referred to the specific tee not all tees?
		
Click to expand...

It's a single calculation for the course, taking into account all rounds from all rated tees, and is then applied to all scores from all tees.


----------



## rulefan (May 24, 2021)

mikejohnchapman said:



			Interestingly when I look at the day we had a +3 there was a ladies competition off the red tees but also a single player off the yellow tees. He was given the same PCC adjustment. I thought the PCC referred to the specific tee not all tees?
		
Click to expand...

The word 'Playing' gives a clue. The conditions are encountered by everyone playing, regardless of tees.


----------



## Wildboy370 (Aug 9, 2021)

On this thread does anyone actually know how this is calculated, what formula do they use ? Myself and our club handicap chairperson have asked England Golf and got a reply saying it’s done automatically by the system. Not once have they told us what and how the system does it. I ask as for three weeks at our club due to weather etc out of a playing field of 110 we have had less than 10 make Par or Better and we have not had any PCC. So does PCC think less than 10% of a field breaking par is acceptable or have we a club where 90% of the handicaps are wrong. Since the start of the WHS we have had two days when a PCC has been applied, which frankly is ridiculous. So anyone know what formula is used and in what basis ?..


----------



## wjemather (Aug 9, 2021)

Wildboy370 said:



			On this thread does anyone actually know how this is calculated, what formula do they use ? Myself and our club handicap chairperson have asked England Golf and got a reply saying it’s done automatically by the system. Not once have they told us what and how the system does it. I ask as for three weeks at our club due to weather etc out of a playing field of 110 we have had less than 10 make Par or Better and we have not had any PCC. So does PCC think less than 10% of a field breaking par is acceptable or have we a club where 90% of the handicaps are wrong. Since the start of the WHS we have had two days when a PCC has been applied, which frankly is ridiculous. So anyone know what formula is used and in what basis ?..
		
Click to expand...

The formulas themselves have not been published. However, the rules do provide a brief overview of PCC. Essentially it is based on a comparison of the number of players returning scores within, better or worse than their expected range on a given day.

This range is taken from a standard deviation of expected scores, which is calculated individually for every handicap index and from every tee. Naturally the range will be wider for higher indexes and narrower for lower indexes.

In addition, it should be remembered that handicap calculations are based around the Course Rating (and Slope), not Par.


----------



## Wildboy370 (Aug 9, 2021)

wjemather said:



			The formulas themselves have not been published. However, the rules do provide a brief overview of PCC. Essentially it is based on a comparison of the number of players returning scores within, better or worse than their expected range on a given day.

This range is taken from a standard deviation of expected scores, which is calculated individually for every handicap index and from every tee. Naturally the range will be wider for higher indexes and narrower for lower indexes.

In addition, it should be remembered that handicap calculations are based around the Course Rating (and Slope), not Par.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply, and there in lies the problem, with WHS they have gone to great length to tell us how everything is calculated except the PCC. And what is returning score within the expected range, what range ? Our course rating is 72.2 with a slope of 135. But this week it was blowing a Gale and raining heavy most of day which had to be a factor in such poor scoring, so why no PCC, just seem wrong.


----------



## Deleted member 3432 (Aug 9, 2021)

wjemather said:



			The formulas themselves have not been published. However, the rules do provide a brief overview of PCC. Essentially it is based on a comparison of the number of players returning scores within, better or worse than their expected range on a given day.

This range is taken from a standard deviation of expected scores, which is calculated individually for every handicap index and from every tee. Naturally the range will be wider for higher indexes and narrower for lower indexes.

In addition, it should be remembered that handicap calculations are based around the Course Rating (and Slope), not Par.
		
Click to expand...

As I see it the PCC is 0 approx 95 of the time.

Under Congu the CSS was almost nearly always moving upwards and often considerably.

So either the PCC calculation is very different to that of the old CSS or players have suddenly got better  (or have got more shots to play with) which seems to be the case looking at the scores at our place this year.


----------



## wjemather (Aug 9, 2021)

saving_par said:



			As I see it the PCC is 0 approx 95 of the time.

Under Congu the CSS was almost nearly always moving upwards and often considerably.

So either the PCC calculation is very different to that of the old CSS or players have suddenly got better  (or have got more shots to play with) which seems to be the case looking at the scores at our place this year.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, PCC is a completely different calculation. With CSS, players were expected to score close(r) to their handicap far more often than actually happens [edit] and it was often skewed massively by the performance of a relatively small number of cat 1 golfers.


----------



## Wildboy370 (Aug 9, 2021)

The calculation, if there is one, is badly out of kilter with what’s actually  happening then. If it thinks less than 10% of players play to the playing handicap all it’s doing is loading the system with grossly inaccurate figures and inevitably these become part of your best 8 at some point with wildly fluctuating HI. Mine has gone between 10.1 and 11.4 in a month due to poor rounds coming in some if not all due to poor weather affecting how I played and my better scores which were not weather affected dropping out.


----------



## rosecott (Aug 9, 2021)

saving_par said:



			As I see it the PCC is 0 approx 95 of the time.

Under Congu the CSS was almost nearly always moving upwards and often considerably.

So either the PCC calculation is very different to that of the old CSS or players have suddenly got better  (or have got more shots to play with) which seems to be the case looking at the scores at our place this year.
		
Click to expand...

What data do you have to support your contention that CSS was always moving upward?

If that was the case, then your SSS was not a true reflection and should perhaps have been higher.


----------



## wjemather (Aug 9, 2021)

Wildboy370 said:



			The calculation, if there is one, is badly out of kilter with what’s actually  happening then. If it thinks less than 10% of players play to the playing handicap all it’s doing is loading the system with grossly inaccurate figures and inevitably these become part of your best 8 at some point with wildly fluctuating HI. Mine has gone between 10.1 and 11.4 in a month due to poor rounds coming in some if not all due to poor weather affecting how I played and my better scores which were not weather affected dropping out.
		
Click to expand...

Analysing very crudely, due to the nature of handicap calculations and scoring patterns, most players will only have 2 or 3 scores at or better than handicap in their most recent 20 (I have 2), or 10-15%.

Note also, that the calculations are based on Course Handicap, not Playing Handicap, so if you are taking your analysis from competition results, the scores will need to be adjusted.


----------



## Deleted member 3432 (Aug 10, 2021)

rosecott said:



			What data do you have to support your contention that CSS was always moving upward?

If that was the case, then your SSS was not a true reflection and should perhaps have been higher.
		
Click to expand...

Comp results every week would be as much data as was required to see the CSS going up.

Personally I think the SSS was fair, the CSS covered the conditions of the day, usually fairly windy as Silloth is well known for. 

This is where the PCC falls down in my view. I couldn't believe it was 0 on Sunday, there was a strong wind and scores were considerable worse than they have been recently when conditions have been pretty benign for the course.

I played as well as I have all season to get round in 75 and certainly expected a better score differential with some help from PCC. My mate who played less than 10 miles away at Southerness described conditions as brutal..


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 10, 2021)

saving_par said:



			...
I played as well as I have all season to get round in 75 and certainly expected a better score differential with some help from PCC. My mate who played less than 10 miles away at Southerness described conditions as brutal..
		
Click to expand...

So it's quite possibly 'your fault' that PCC was zero!
Neither PCC, nor did CSS, consider 'how well' folk played. It simply compares score differentials on the day to statistical expectation. I suspect the PCC calculation is somewhat 'tighter' than the CSS one, so you should probably expect fewer (and probably smaller) adjustments under WHS than the previous method.


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 10, 2021)

saving_par said:



			Comp results every week would be as much data as was required to see the CSS going up.

Personally I think the SSS was fair, the CSS covered the conditions of the day, usually fairly windy as Silloth is well known for.

This is where the PCC falls down in my view. I couldn't believe it was 0 on Sunday, there was a strong wind and scores were considerable worse than they have been recently when conditions have been pretty benign for the course.

I played as well as I have all season to get round in 75 and certainly expected a better score differential with some help from PCC. My mate who played less than 10 miles away at Southerness described conditions as brutal..
		
Click to expand...

So far in the 30 plus comps I've played so far this year, not one has any adjustment for pcc. I'll have to ask my couple of mates who are Dornoch members what there's have been like as pretty much every comp there used to have a css higher than the Sss and quite often was RO


----------



## wjemather (Aug 10, 2021)

saving_par said:



			Comp results every week would be as much data as was required to see the CSS going up.

Personally I think the SSS was fair, the CSS covered the conditions of the day, *usually fairly windy* as Silloth is well known for.

This is where the PCC falls down in my view. I couldn't believe it was 0 on Sunday, there was a strong wind and scores were considerable worse than they have been recently when conditions have been pretty benign for the course.

I played as well as I have all season to get round in 75 and certainly expected a better score differential with some help from PCC. My mate who played less than 10 miles away at Southerness described conditions as brutal..
		
Click to expand...

"Usually fairly windy" is (or should be) accounted for in the Course Rating (and Slope).

Unlike CSS, PCC will not change solely on the basis of a small number of low handicappers playing badly. In addition, the range of expected scores with PCC is significantly wider than the old SSS+buffer margin that basically expected players to be far more consistent than they are, so PCC will be non-zero much less frequently than CSS was.


----------



## wjemather (Aug 10, 2021)

patricks148 said:



			So far in the 30 plus comps I've played so far this year, not one has any adjustment for pcc. I'll have to ask my couple of mates who are Dornoch members what there's have been like as pretty much every comp there used to have a css higher than the Sss and quite often was RO
		
Click to expand...

If CSS was going up in almost every competition, especially in normal conditions, the SSS was very clearly wrong (or everyone's handicaps were too low).


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 10, 2021)

wjemather said:



			If CSS was going up in almost every competition, especially in normal conditions, the SSS was very clearly wrong (or everyone's handicaps were too low).
		
Click to expand...

It's a tough golf course and normal conditions is not something understand🤣


----------



## Deleted member 3432 (Aug 10, 2021)

wjemather said:



			If CSS was going up in almost every competition, especially in normal conditions, the SSS was very clearly wrong (or everyone's handicaps were too low).
		
Click to expand...

The last bit in brackets is interesting.

Patricks148 is in the same boat as me with a CH a couple of shots lower under WHS than it was previously.

I'm not a 3 handicapper and never will be,  yet all of a sudden I am 🤔


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 10, 2021)

saving_par said:



			The last bit in brackets is interesting.

Patricks148 is in the same boat as me with a CH a couple of shots lower under WHS than it was previously.

I'm not a 3 handicapper and never will be,  yet all of a sudden I am 🤔
		
Click to expand...

I dare not enter a comp at the moment, just in case I shoot a good score and end up off 2🤣🤣


----------



## Deleted member 3432 (Aug 10, 2021)

patricks148 said:



			I dare not enter a comp at the moment, just in case I shoot a good score and end up off 2🤣🤣
		
Click to expand...

Problem is you could end up off 2 without playing in a comp these days 

Don't hole out just in case your mates have entered you for a general play score 🤣


----------



## wjemather (Aug 10, 2021)

saving_par said:



			The last bit in brackets is interesting.

Patricks148 is in the same boat as me with a CH a couple of shots lower under WHS than it was previously.

I'm not a 3 handicapper and never will be,  yet all of a sudden I am 🤔
		
Click to expand...

From what you have said, there may be legacy CSS translations being applied to pre-November 2020 scores that are artificially reducing your handicap indexes. However if your most recent 20 scores are all valid and played since November 2020, then your handicaps will be correct, and you are just better than you thought.


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 10, 2021)

wjemather said:



			From what you have said, there may be legacy CSS translations being applied to pre-November 2020 scores that are artificially reducing your handicap indexes. However if your most recent 20 scores are all valid and played since November 2020, then your handicaps will be correct, and you are just better than you thought.
		
Click to expand...

I've had some good scores this year and pretty much have replaced all my 20 scores. But the difference is under the old system, I've been off 5/4 the last 8 years. With only 0.1 cuts and equally as many 0.1 increase and buffers I would have zero chancebof getting to my current index of 2.7. I wasn't a 3 handicap before and I'm still not, just the bad rounds don't count any longer.


----------



## wjemather (Aug 10, 2021)

patricks148 said:



			I've had some good scores this year and pretty much have replaced all my 20 scores. But the difference is under the old system, I've been off 5/4 the last 8 years. With only 0.1 cuts and equally as many 0.1 increase and buffers I would have zero chancebof getting to my current index of 2.7. I wasn't a 3 handicap before and I'm still not, just the bad rounds don't count any longer.
		
Click to expand...

The old handicapping system was supposed to reflect your potential but for lower handicaps (cat 1) it simply didn't work that way because, without a consistent run of good scoring and/or playing in lots of comps where CSS always went up, e.g. scratch opens, you were perpetually anchored by your earlier higher handicap. With WHS, which is an "average best" system, that anchor has gone and your handicap is now much better reflection of your current scoring.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Aug 10, 2021)

wjemather said:



			Analysing very crudely, due to the nature of handicap calculations and scoring patterns, most players will only have 2 or 3 scores at or better than handicap in their most recent 20 (I have 2), or 10-15%.

Note also, that the calculations are based on Course Handicap, not Playing Handicap, so if you are taking your analysis from competition results, the scores will need to be adjusted.
		
Click to expand...

Under CONGU yes, not under WHS. By it's nature it's an averaging vehicle, so you should be 4/5 out of 20 constantly. I have 5 of my 8 below my current HCI.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Aug 10, 2021)

patricks148 said:



			So far in the 30 plus comps I've played so far this year, not one has any adjustment for pcc. I'll have to ask my couple of mates who are Dornoch members what there's have been like as pretty much every comp there used to have a css higher than the Sss and quite often was RO
		
Click to expand...

Also have 30 scores in, two of the Opens I've played in have had an adjustment, and none in club competitions. SG say the new system is more conservative than the old system. They can say that again, so conservative to be Gavin Williamson in its effectiveness.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Aug 10, 2021)

saving_par said:



			Don't hole out just in case your mates have entered you for a general play score 🤣
		
Click to expand...

that's not a thing


----------



## patricks148 (Aug 10, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			that's not a thing
		
Click to expand...

That was a joke


----------



## wjemather (Aug 10, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			Under CONGU yes, not under WHS. By it's nature it's an averaging vehicle, so you should be 4/5 out of 20 constantly. I have 5 of my 8 below my current HCI.
		
Click to expand...

You have to bear in mind that a player's scoring pattern is very asymmetrical around their average best. Most players will have a couple of really good scores that bring that average down below the differentials of almost all of their other counting scores; some have one score so good, it's the only one below their average.


----------



## Foxholer (Aug 10, 2021)

saving_par said:



			As I see it the PCC is 0 approx 95 of the time.

Under Congu the CSS was almost nearly always moving upwards and often considerably.

*So either the PCC calculation is very different to that of the old CSS...*

Click to expand...

This!


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Aug 10, 2021)

wjemather said:



			Most players will have a couple of really good scores that bring the average down below the differentials of their other counting scores.
		
Click to expand...

Something I'd never given a thought to till now.  Just had a flick through about 15 of our most regular players, only one other had 5 below their HCI like me, a number of 4, but three seems to be the go to number. No twos or sixes.

I'd say that's very interesting, but it probably isnt


----------



## Wildboy370 (Aug 11, 2021)

With it clearly obvious no one knows how or why, I emailed the authorities at England golf as surely they know what formula is used and when. They did after all give us massive amounts of information leasing up to WHS being thrust upon us.
see the reply I got, make staggering reading.

The PCC is a closed calculation within WHS - Its done via a calculator provided to us by the USGA/R&A. 

We have no detail to share currently and have raised concerns with the USGA/R&A.


----------



## rulefan (Aug 12, 2021)

Wildboy370 said:



			With it clearly obvious no one knows how or why, I emailed the authorities at England golf as surely they know what formula is used and when. They did after all give us massive amounts of information leasing up to WHS being thrust upon us.
see the reply I got, make staggering reading.

The PCC is a closed calculation within WHS - Its done via a calculator provided to us by the USGA/R&A.

We have no detail to share currently and have raised concerns with the USGA/R&A.
		
Click to expand...

What will you do with the information if you get it?
How often did you check the CSS process? Did the tables make sense?


----------



## Old Skier (Aug 12, 2021)

rulefan said:



			What will you do with the information if you get it?
How often did you check the CSS process? Did the tables make sense?
		
Click to expand...

Never a truer post. Very few of any handicap understood SSS CSS but now everyone is concerned about the dark art of PCC.


----------



## IanM (Aug 12, 2021)

Golfers questioning the WHS?  Whatever next? _ Women playing on Saturday mornings?   The Goths are at the gates of Rome!_

I guess the point is, golfers want to "understand" what is going on.  The answer "_the system is always right, so there_" is never palatable.  

I could live with the old system.. crikey its a rough day, the CSS went up a bit... that translates to PCC well enough for simple folk like me... and as said above... what will you do with the info?   Check it I suppose!!   

The point the authorities seem to not grasp, is for a new system to be trusted, you must be able to have a level of ability to check or validate.  Most players I know, want to work out what the Index will be after they've played... or at least be confident on what direction it is going in.  Otherwise it loses credibility.

As mentioned before.  A lower score/diff went on my wife's "best 8" last weekend. She went up 0.2.  No one at the club has been able to fathom out this and they've emailed WG.

At the end of the day, does that matter?  Probably not to her, but if it meant a Cat 1 failing to qualify for an event it would.  Doesn't do the credibility of the product any good either.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Aug 12, 2021)

Old Skier said:



			Never a truer post. Very few of any handicap understood SSS CSS but now everyone is concerned about the dark art of PCC.
		
Click to expand...

Not the case, there was a clear manual formula that could be used, furthermore you could have a rough guess at a glance of the scoring and predict if it was going to be an up or down day. And when a member came to me and said "how come...." I could explain it, now it's "dinna ask me mate, nobody knows"

Now we've gone through a season that was unseasonably cold, then unseasonably hot, now pissing rain, playing long, playing short, and not a single medal PCC has changed all season. Nobody knows why, nor can anyone explain it.


----------



## rulefan (Aug 12, 2021)

My impression is that the minority of areas that used CSS or an equivalent determined the the formula was too extreme (generous or harsh).
I would guess the the Golf Australia Calculated Course Rating which had been used over many years was used as a model (or even adopted in full). GA has had a reputation for possibly having the most sophisticated handicapping system in the world and other authorities have always been watching any developments there.
To the best of my knowledge GA has never published the algorithm.


----------



## IanM (Aug 12, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			Not the case, there was a clear manual formula that could be used, furthermore you could have a rough guess at a glance of the scoring and predict if it was going to be an up or down day. And when a member came to me and said "how come...." I could explain it, now it's "dinna ask me mate, nobody knows"

Now we've gone through a season that was unseasonably cold, then unseasonably hot, now pissing rain, playing long, playing short, and not a single medal PCC has changed all season. Nobody knows why, nor can anyone explain it.
		
Click to expand...

My last ten rounds.  "8" zeros and "2" twos.. on the PCC.  The last 2 was Southerndown's Open last week in 30mph plus winds and heavy rain.   5 or 6 might have done it!


----------



## jim8flog (Aug 12, 2021)

rulefan said:



			What will you do with the information if you get it?
How often did you check the CSS process? Did the tables make sense?
		
Click to expand...

 Back in the days when it was done manually from the tables I reckoned the secretary had got it wrong. I asked if I could borrow the book and did it for myself. He had but I was too polite and to friendly with him to tell him he had. It made me realise just how much work used to go in to it working from the tables.


----------



## rosecott (Aug 12, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			Back in the days when it was done manually from the tables I reckoned the secretary had got it wrong. I asked if I could borrow the book and did it for myself. He had but I was too polite and to friendly with him to tell him he had. It made me realise just how much work used to go in to it working from the tables.
		
Click to expand...

And - did it serve any purpose?

Just what do any of the posters, who are demanding the calculation formula, intend to do with it?


----------



## jim8flog (Aug 12, 2021)

I can only go by own scores (we have many more comps than the ones I go in). My last 20 have all been since coming out of lockdown and there have 3 out of the 20 with a PCC alteration.


----------



## jim8flog (Aug 12, 2021)

rosecott said:



			And - did it serve any purpose?

Just what do any of the posters, who are demanding the calculation formula, intend to do with it?
		
Click to expand...

 I should have a had a small cut but did not get it but I was the only who played better than SSS. He had used all players scores but at the time some of the players scores should have been excluded from the calculation.


----------



## Wildboy370 (Aug 12, 2021)

As the one who asked the question, those that are saying what are we going to do with the calculation are missing the point. We were told this is how calculate this that and the other while WHS was being set up and implemented except the PCC. We now all understand how this works. But when you have time again less than 10% of a field of 100 plus playing to par and mainly due to the weather at my course and appear lots more up and down the country you expect the system to acknowledge this and reset it self with the PCC to offset any big changes in the HI. But what we now see and know is this is not the case anywhere, so when you ask the question to the main body England Golf, how is this calculated you expect and answer like all the other calculations we have to follow. But as it now appears abundantly clear they have not got a clue and have asked the R n A and USPGA to give them and answer. So I don’t want anything from what ever calculation, won’t use it, I just want to know it is doing what it is supposed to do and it quiet clearly isnt and is effectping everyone’s HI week in week out and will possibly get worse as winter draws in and the weather gets worse. So if nothing e.she comes from this at least we may get a broken system fixed.


----------



## SammmeBee (Aug 12, 2021)

Wildboy370 said:



			As the one who asked the question, those that are saying what are we going to do with the calculation are missing the point. We were told this is how calculate this that and the other while WHS was being set up and implemented except the PCC. We now all understand how this works. But when you have time again less than 10% of a field of 100 plus playing to par and mainly due to the weather at my course and appear lots more up and down the country you expect the system to acknowledge this and reset it self with the PCC to offset any big changes in the HI. But what we now see and know is this is not the case anywhere, so when you ask the question to the main body England Golf, how is this calculated you expect and answer like all the other calculations we have to follow. But as it now appears abundantly clear they have not got a clue and have asked the R n A and USPGA to give them and answer. So I don’t want anything from what ever calculation, won’t use it, I just want to know it is doing what it is supposed to do and it quiet clearly isnt and is effectping everyone’s HI week in week out and will possibly get worse as winter draws in and the weather gets worse. So if nothing e.she comes from this at least we may get a broken system fixed.
		
Click to expand...

Handicap should go up in the winter and then back down again when you come back into warmer climes…..

That said PCC is bollocks…..especially if you play somewhere where the wind is the major obstacle…..I don’t believe wind is taken into any account for slope or CR either…..


----------



## rulefan (Aug 12, 2021)

Wildboy370 said:



			But when you have time again less than 10% of a field of 100 plus playing to par
		
Click to expand...

Of course par has nothing to do with playing to handicap.


----------



## rulefan (Aug 12, 2021)

This is how Golf Australia describes PCC.

"The formulas used to assess the DSR _(ie PCC)_ are complex as our statisticians have advised that simple formula options are not efficient enough to produce reliable ratings

Through GOLF Link (_their WHS Software)_ , the DSR_ (ie PCC)_ system will establish each of the following:
The average net score for a field.••
The average handicap of a field.••
The field size.••
The type of competition (Stableford, Par, or Stroke).••
The gender of the competitors.••

Once it has established each of these factors, GOLF Link will compare the ACTUAL average net score on the day with the average net score GOLF Link EXPECTS for this precise field composition. (The EXPECTED average is determined by GOLF Link from millions of prior rounds.) GOLF Link will then determine the DSR by using the difference between what ACTUALLY happened on the day and what was EXPECTED to happen.


----------



## Wildboy370 (Aug 12, 2021)

rulefan said:



			This is how Golf Australia describes PCC.

"The formulas used to assess the DSR _(ie PCC)_ are complex as our statisticians have advised that simple formula options are not efficient enough to produce reliable ratings

Through GOLF Link (_their WHS Software)_ , the DSR_ (ie PCC)_ system will establish each of the following:
The average net score for a field.••
The average handicap of a field.••
The field size.••
The type of competition (Stableford, Par, or Stroke).••
The gender of the competitors.••

Once it has established each of these factors, GOLF Link will compare the ACTUAL average net score on the day with the average net score GOLF Link EXPECTS for this precise field composition. (The EXPECTED average is determined by GOLF Link from millions of prior rounds.) GOLF Link will then determine the DSR by using the difference between what ACTUALLY happened on the day and what was EXPECTED to happen.
		
Click to expand...

So basically a pile of tosh in a new pile of tosh system written by people in suits who have no understanding of reality...


----------



## SammmeBee (Aug 12, 2021)

Wildboy370 said:



			So basically a pile of tosh in a new pile of tosh system written by people in suits who have no understanding of reality...
		
Click to expand...

Yes!


----------



## IanMcC (Aug 12, 2021)

rulefan said:



			What will you do with the information if you get it?
How often did you check the CSS process? Did the tables make sense?
		
Click to expand...

These are very poor arguments for a complete lack of transparency in the process. 
I'm sorry rulefan, you are defending the indefensible here.


----------



## IanM (Aug 12, 2021)

rulefan said:



			This is how Golf Australia describes PCC.

"The formulas used to assess the DSR _(ie PCC)_ are complex as our statisticians have advised that simple formula options are not efficient enough to produce reliable ratings

Through GOLF Link (_their WHS Software)_ , the DSR_ (ie PCC)_ system will establish each of the following:
The average net score for a field.••
The average handicap of a field.••
The field size.••
The type of competition (Stableford, Par, or Stroke).••
The gender of the competitors.••

Once it has established each of these factors, GOLF Link will compare the ACTUAL average net score on the day with the average net score GOLF Link EXPECTS for this precise field composition. (The EXPECTED average is determined by GOLF Link from millions of prior rounds.) GOLF Link will then determine the DSR by using the difference between what ACTUALLY happened on the day and what was EXPECTED to happen.
		
Click to expand...

Good.  That's sorted that out then.


----------



## jim8flog (Aug 13, 2021)

SammmeBee said:



			Handicap should go up in the winter and then back down again when you come back into warmer climes…..
		
Click to expand...

This never used to be true for me, most of downs came in winter. Softer greens and not so many unpredictable bounces from rock solid fairways and approaches .


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Aug 13, 2021)

rulefan said:



			Of course par has nothing to do with playing to handicap.
		
Click to expand...

There's no need for that pedantry, we all knew what he meant.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Aug 13, 2021)

rulefan said:



			This is how Golf Australia describes PCC.

"The formulas used to assess the DSR _(ie PCC)_ are complex as our statisticians have advised that simple formula options are not efficient enough to produce reliable ratings

Through GOLF Link (_their WHS Software)_ , the DSR_ (ie PCC)_ system will establish each of the following:
The average net score for a field.••
The average handicap of a field.••
The field size.••
The type of competition (Stableford, Par, or Stroke).••
The gender of the competitors.••

Once it has established each of these factors, GOLF Link will compare the ACTUAL average net score on the day with the average net score GOLF Link EXPECTS for this precise field composition. (The EXPECTED average is determined by GOLF Link from millions of prior rounds.) GOLF Link will then determine the DSR by using the difference between what ACTUALLY happened on the day and what was EXPECTED to happen.
		
Click to expand...

So you got nothing, but decided to post it anyway? You realise this is backing the argument that nobody knows what's going on?


----------



## jim8flog (Aug 13, 2021)

At the end of the day with the UHS and SSS/CSS you never new the CSS until the results were published by the club which could be days later then the comp. In the mean time if you played well you had to self adjust and how many new how to do that?

With the WHS you will see the your 'new 'handicap the next day ( the early hours of the morning if you are desperate to know and cannot sleep without knowing it) and any PCC calculation.

A big improvement in my opinion.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Aug 13, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			At the end of the day with the UHS and SSS/CSS you never new the CSS until the results were published by the club which could be days later then the comp.
		
Click to expand...

 Maybe your club, most clubs published when they closed the comp, now you're waiting until the next morning every day, plus you had a fair idea what sort of day it was and whether it was an easy or hard day, now it seems there is almost nothing that will change the PCC, your course plays the same day in day out. 



jim8flog said:



			In the mean time if you played well you had to self adjust and how many new how to do that?
		
Click to expand...

 Very few people play Opens, in my experience those that did knew perfectly well (yes I played a heap of opens)



jim8flog said:



			With the WHS you will see the your 'new 'handicap the next day ( the early hours of the morning if you are desperate to know and cannot sleep without knowing it) and any PCC calculation.

A big improvement in my opinion.
		
Click to expand...

Completely disagree on timeline, and PCC being better than CSS


----------



## jim8flog (Aug 13, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			Maybe your club, most clubs published when they closed the comp, now you're waiting until the next morning every day, plus you had a fair idea what sort of day it was and whether it was an easy or hard day, now it seems there is almost nothing that will change the PCC, your course plays the same day in day out.

Very few people play Opens, in my experience those that did knew perfectly well (yes I played a heap of opens)


Completely disagree on timeline, and PCC being better than CSS
		
Click to expand...

Point 1.  A lot of clubs, like mine, use office staff to administer comps those staff leave work before the comp has finished and do not start work until the following morning.

Pont 2 . My experience is that the average club member was not aware of the need to self adjust if playing in another comp on the same day e.g  comp in the morning match in the afternoon and a lot only found out after a loss of match due to failure to do so following a complaint from those that did after seeing a comp result the next day or so.

Point 3.   I did not mean the PCC is better than CSS but simply the you know the former next day unlike the CSS on many an occasion.

As already said as part of this thread I have seen 3 PCC changes in the comps I have played in this summer.


----------



## Swango1980 (Aug 16, 2021)

I've played 38 times since the changeover to WHS. PCC has been zero for all 38 rounds. In the 38 rounds pre WHS, CSS was different to SCC 7 times. (Note, the % would be higher than 7 out of 38 rounds if only competition rounds were used pre WHS, as some of those rounds include general play were CSS would clearly not change).

It does still seem that it is very unlikely for PCC to change unless scores are drastically different to what is expected. During the WHS Workshops, England Golf were keen to enforce the point that golf and handicaps are acceptable all year round, and thus acceptable rounds should be played regardless of the time of year (which of course was also recommended pre-WHS). However, if PCC is very unlikely to change, even when weather conditions are terrible and player perception is that scores are worse than normal, then realistically how many golfers will not play during the winter if they wish to keep a lower handicap? I suspect these types of players are less likely to submit scores over the winter than they would have done pre WHS. Pre WHS, during terrible conditions, it was not uncommon to have a +1 to +3 CSS, and even Reductions Only at times. Worst Case, your handicap goes up 0.1 a round pre WHS.

I certainly won't state that PCC is wrong, as I've no idea how it is calculated. All I can say it does seem unusual that it barely ever changes from my own experience, and others.


----------



## Swango1980 (Aug 16, 2021)

saving_par said:



			Found it, cheers.

Got to ask the question why it is not shown on IG comp results or EG app along side players record. Pain in the backside to have to go on WHS portal when the info should be shown on one or both of the other platforms surely...
		
Click to expand...

PCC won't be shown on the competition results, because the competition may be closed before the end of the day, and thus PCC would not be known. I guess it would be nice to see it on the MyEG App list of scores, but I suppose they do not want to show too much info in one view. Thankfully they now show the Score Diff at least. Previously they did not, just the gross differential. That was a nightmare in trying to work out which scores would count to handicap, especially your latest round, as rounds would be played on different tees / courses, thus making the gross differentials incomparable


----------



## Wildboy370 (Aug 17, 2021)

Below are just a few replies I have had from England golf. It beggars the question why can’t they let clubs know, what’s the big secret. As stated before when WHS was set up we were told more formula and equations than an A level exam, but the secrecy behind this is simply bizarre. And as you say Swango. No one will want to play in the winter due to potential poor scoring and wild fluctuations in scores entered into your 20 scores, which will and do become one or more of your best 8. I have pointed out to EG how my HI has gone from 9.3 to 11.8 and back to 10.3 in three months due to poor scores which were weather affected and no PCC to offset this in some way. 

We are not able to share any details of the PCC calculation currently (as instructed by the USGA) - As soon as we can, this detail will be shared with counties and clubs.

The PCC is functioning as my own record has seen several PCC adjustments - as previously mentioned, we have also shared concerns with the USGA regarding their calculator.

The PCC calculator is supplied under mandate by the USGA globally, we have no access to it, only a very complex document on how works.


----------



## Swango1980 (Aug 17, 2021)

Wildboy370 said:



			Below are just a few replies I have had from England golf. It beggars the question why can’t they let clubs know, what’s the big secret. As stated before when WHS was set up we were told more formula and equations than an A level exam, but the secrecy behind this is simply bizarre. And as you say Swango. No one will want to play in the winter due to potential poor scoring and wild fluctuations in scores entered into your 20 scores, which will and do become one or more of your best 8. I have pointed out to EG how my HI has gone from 9.3 to 11.8 and back to 10.3 in three months due to poor scores which were weather affected and no PCC to offset this in some way.

We are not able to share any details of the PCC calculation currently (as instructed by the USGA) - As soon as we can, this detail will be shared with counties and clubs.

The PCC is functioning as my own record has seen several PCC adjustments - as previously mentioned, we have also shared concerns with the USGA regarding their calculator.

The PCC calculator is supplied under mandate by the USGA globally, we have no access to it, only a very complex document on how works.
		
Click to expand...

Interestingly, the only time PCC is not zero on my record was pre Nov 2020. In other words, pre WHS. The reason it is non zero is that they changed it to be equivalent to the CSS at the time. 

It is pretty apparent that had those rounds been played post WHS then PCC would most likely have been zero, rather than the change to CSS at the time. If PCC is better than CSS, then it may be they should never included the adjusted CSS in player records between Jan 2018 to Nov 2020. On the other hand, if they were right in matching PCC to CSS in those scores, then big questions need to be asked why PCC rarely changes at all in comparison to CSS.


----------



## wjemather (Aug 17, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			Interestingly, the only time PCC is not zero on my record was pre Nov 2020. In other words, pre WHS. The reason it is non zero is that they changed it to be equivalent to the CSS at the time.

It is pretty apparent that had those rounds been played post WHS then PCC would most likely have been zero, rather than the change to CSS at the time. If PCC is better than CSS, then it may be they should never included the adjusted CSS in player records between Jan 2018 to Nov 2020. On the other hand, if they were right in matching PCC to CSS in those scores, then big questions need to be asked why PCC rarely changes at all in comparison to CSS.
		
Click to expand...

It was originally announced that CSS was not going to be ported at transition because PCC could not be retrospectively calculated. In response to complaints (mostly from low handicappers who claimed that their indexes should be significantly lower due to the regularity of CSS increases in the scratch events they played in - incidentally, this phenomenon only illustrates how bad CSS was) there was a u-turn and the old CSSs were blindly transposed onto PCC.


----------



## rulefan (Aug 17, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			then big questions need to be asked why PCC rarely changes at all in comparison to CSS.
		
Click to expand...

The big answer to that question is that is a completely different formula. The real question is why do scores need to be adjusted at all and if so, is PCC making an appropriate adjustment. I don't remember anyone ever querying the details of CSS. Did the tables really produce the right answer? They may only have been making a gesture. How accurate was CSS really? If conditions were poor it went up. That sounds right but should it have been 1 or 3? And why 3 as opposed to 1?
I wonder how many people ever asked the question why are columns 1-3 in Table A in multiples of 10%?


----------



## Swango1980 (Aug 17, 2021)

rulefan said:



			The big answer to that question is that is a completely different formula. The real question is why do scores need to be adjusted at all and if so, is PCC making an appropriate adjustment. I don't remember anyone ever querying the details of CSS. Did the tables really produce the right answer? They may only have been making a gesture. How accurate was CSS really? If conditions were poor it went up. That sounds right but should it have been 1 or 3? And why 3 as opposed to 1?
I wonder how many people ever asked the question why are columns 1-3 in Table A in multiples of 10%?
		
Click to expand...

It is easy to criticise CSS now. However, if we went back 3 or 4 years ago, well before WHS, I am sure anybody working within the handicap authorities, and those supporters of the handicap system, would be singing its praises. Defending it to the hilt. If someone came on to a forum and said CSS was terrible, then I've no doubt that the likes of yourself would have defended it (and I would have been in that camp as well).

PCC comes along, and now it seems a piece of cake to say CSS was rubbish, but don't worry, clearly PCC is much better. But realistically, it is difficult for any of us to defend or criticise PCC either way, none of us know how it is calculated or have looked at the in depth stats. We can accept it on faith, because we can have faith the authorities have got it right. But, the authorities also gave us CSS. Once WHS has had a chance to settle, I've no doubt things will change within the system (just like they did under CONGU over the years) to improve it. Perhaps one of those things may be the PCC calculation, perhaps not. But, I'd be uncomfortable defending something as it stands, as I'd have to assume they've got it spot on from the outset.

Why do scores need to be adjusted? Well, if I shot 35 points on a terrible day, and finish in the top 2 or 3 of the field, I'd feel that is a better score than shooting 37 points on a lovely day and finishing 10th. On most occasions, CSS did change to reflect conditions. There was no need for a player to review the CSS tables, as the change in CSS very often simply felt right to most club golfers. If there were lots of great scores in on a lovely day, it would be virtually expected CSS would be SSS-1. On a terrible day, there would be no surprised to see CSS = SSS+3 and even slip into reductions only. I never remember anyone questioning CSS and saying it was rubbish, as it seemed to reflect the submitted scores well (no idea what it was like when first introduced, and how much it was refined over the years). It did exactly was it said on the tin, reflect the vastly different weather conditions we get in the UK.

I could go out and play tomorrow, weather could be horrible and shoot 32-35 points. That may slip into my top 8, or maybe not. However, that round would likely feel much better than many scores already in my top 8 (with higher points), as all those have been played in good weather and little wind. I'd expect to see PCC increase to reflect the bad conditions. However, I've little faith it would and have no way of knowing what it would take for it to be anything other than zero.

You ask "The real question is why do scores need to be adjusted at all?". Well, if they didn't why have PCC at all? If it was simply a gesture, I'd argue the authorities are more incompetent and spineless than I thought. I am sure that is not the case, and they acknowledge, as I demonstrate above, that PCC should be an important part of the process, just as CSS was.


----------



## IanM (Aug 17, 2021)

rulefan said:



			I don't remember anyone ever querying the* details *of CSS.
		
Click to expand...

I wonder if the issue is "Ordinary Golfers" are debating the impact, while the "WHS Police" are defending the calculations?  They are quite different discussions.   

Surely you would have heard "crikey, I can't believe that CSS did not go up/down" in every clubhouse in the land at some point.


----------



## wjemather (Aug 17, 2021)

rulefan said:



			The big answer to that question is that is a completely different formula. The real question is why do scores need to be adjusted at all and if so, is PCC making an appropriate adjustment. *I don't remember anyone ever querying the details of CSS*. Did the tables really produce the right answer? They may only have been making a gesture. How accurate was CSS really? If conditions were poor it went up. That sounds right but should it have been 1 or 3? And why 3 as opposed to 1?
I wonder how many people ever asked the question why are columns 1-3 in Table A in multiples of 10%?
		
Click to expand...

For what it's worth CSS was often questioned. In addition to the same gripes over it "not moving when it should", the biggest real issues were how often and how far it went up in low handicap (who played to buffer far less often than CSS accounted for) and senior (who's abilities are generally diminishing) events; and smaller fields exacerbated the issue. Both (but especially the seniors, in the absence of effective annual reviews) ultimately resulted in players with lower handicaps than their ability warranted which in turn affected future CSS calculations.


----------

