# The First Year of WHS - Positives and Negatives



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2021)

So yesterday was our last comp round ( yes I know you can still put cards in but the course work will start etc etc ) so thought would see what people’s thinking etc about the first year 

So I started the year at 2.6 and have finished at 1.2

Using the old system I worked out that I would have finished at 2.0 

The good things for me - the ability to put any card in from any course , the EG App making it easier and the key one is prob handicap being more reflective of current playing 

Negatives - 

EG APP allowing people to quit rounds (that should be changing)
The lack of connection between the governing bodies ( it’s far from “World”)
The ability to start to enter a scorecard halfway round a round 
The overly complicated working out of - playing handicap at times 
The apparent way that for some handicaps have shot through the roof

And PCC being no different to CSS 

Overall I think it’s worked a little better than I thought but there is still a good way to go


----------



## Bazzatron (Nov 8, 2021)

I've loved it, not having to go into the shop to tell them I wanted to put a supp card in and just doing it on the app has been great. Haven't played any comps all year so doubt I would've put many in at all.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 8, 2021)

Positives - 

Handicaps are more reflective of playing ability much quicker. It hurts your ego but it is the truth, if you put enough cards in.
I like the way your h/cap alters for tougher courses.

Negatives - 

It is more complicated to understand than it should be. I doubt more than 10% of golfers, I am being generous, fully understand the calculation (I'm not one of them). Okay, the computer does the work but I am not sure that is overly impressive.
Having an index, a course handicap and a playing handicap is one to many. They should have found a way to simplify that.

I don't put in casual rounds, my club wont accept scores via the app, so I can't comment on the other points.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2021)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Positives -

Handicaps are more reflective of playing ability much quicker. It hurts your ego but it is the truth, if you put enough cards in.
I like the way your h/cap alters for tougher courses.

Negatives -

It is more complicated to understand than it should be. I doubt more than 10% of golfers, I am being generous, fully understand the calculation (I'm not one of them). Okay, the computer does the work but I am not sure that is overly impressive.
Having an index, a course handicap and a playing handicap is one to many. They should have found a way to simplify that.

I don't put in casual rounds, my club wont accept scores via the app, so I can't comment on the other points.
		
Click to expand...

Use the EG App to put your casual rounds in - it goes onto your handicap record straight away and the club can’t stop it


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 8, 2021)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Use the EG App to put your casual rounds in - it goes onto your handicap record straight away and the club can’t stop it
		
Click to expand...

They won't accept them for rounds put in at my home club. We were told that back in May, beginning of the season anyway. I think they manually remove them, might be wrong but that is what we were told. I know I could do it at away courses but I play them for fun, or in 4BBB Opens that wont count, so I don't want the pressure of thinking it counts for anything. Proprietary course, nothing we can do about changing the head honcho's attitude.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2021)

Lord Tyrion said:



			They won't accept them for rounds put in at my home club. We were told that back in May, beginning of the season anyway. I think they manually remove them, might be wrong but that is what we were told. I know I could do it at away courses but I play them for fun, or in 4BBB Opens that wont count, so I don't want the pressure of thinking it counts for anything. Proprietary course, nothing we can do about changing the head honcho's attitude.
		
Click to expand...

They can’t stop them being added - it goes straight onto your handicap record within WHS - use the EG App , then if they are going and deleting the round then all you do is email the county and EG and they will be told to stop removing the rounds. If they don’t there will be a chance of sanctions against the club - there is something you can do about it


----------



## timd77 (Nov 8, 2021)

Things I like:

-The transparency of it
-Being able to see the graph of your scores 
-The ‘course handicap’ thing so that you’re always playing with a the proper number of shots for each course

Things I don’t like:

-My handicap keeps going up and down with every score, just as I’m thinking I’m heading in the right direction, a good score drops off and I’m back up by 0.4 or whatever. 

-I don’t really totally understand it.

Overall though, I’m happy with it. I’ve only been playing properly for a couple of years so I guess I don’t really know any different.


----------



## pauljames87 (Nov 8, 2021)

Lord Tyrion said:



			They won't accept them for rounds put in at my home club. We were told that back in May, beginning of the season anyway. I think they manually remove them, might be wrong but that is what we were told. I know I could do it at away courses but I play them for fun, or in 4BBB Opens that wont count, so I don't want the pressure of thinking it counts for anything. Proprietary course, nothing we can do about changing the head honcho's attitude.
		
Click to expand...

I'm with Phil here (shocking I know 🤣) put them in via EG and sod the club they can't actually stop you 

If they delete them report it to EG and action will be taken against them and not you.

Onto the topic in hand 

Lots of positives for me love the whole thing 

Don't like a round can be deleted without much punishment 

But love that you don't have to have a club for a handicap. 3 of my mates signed up for it and it's great to follow their handicap trends 

Two have gone straight in at single figures.. one always moaned that he was too low (we always played him off 7) now he's off like 6 so he can't moan.. he just a good player lol


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 8, 2021)

Positives: The ease of entering a GP score compared with the old system

Negatives:
1. The frequency of ultra low net scoring
2. The imposition of mandatory allowances on formats of golf that have never been tracked before and have ruined the format
3. A "world" system that only works in your own country
4. A "world" system that is being implemented in many different ways in many different jurisdictions
5. A PCC that no-one understands, that almost never moves, and that the authorities can't explain
6. No winter period, all scores count regardless of playing conditions
7. Not having a "set" handicap, it changes course to course.


----------



## sweaty sock (Nov 8, 2021)

+ve's
Erm

-ve's
Its easlily and routinely abused.
The course ratings are a shambles, particularly in winter.
For the vast majority it's much less reflective of your ability.
Its way more work for hcap committee's
It provides much less satisfaction in achievements.
Its no more portable than any other handicap I've ever had.   And there still seems to be next to zero reason for it to be portable.

It's total cack, I wish it would go away. 

Our course is thoughtlessly requiring all our winter stableford to be counting.  As the course is shorter in winter the slope has dropped to 117, and despite losing less than 900 yards the course rating has dropped by 5 shots.

  Not sure about your home course, but in uk winter you lose 900 yards just from temperature and ground conditions so it plays practically the same distance.  

At the end of winter, if I play in stablefords, I will 100% hit the 5 shot hard cap.  Which will mean i cant enter scratch stuff, I will not be considerable for team golf,  and I'll be an absolute lock for all matchplay events.  Its effectively barring me from entering the winter stableford if i want to keep a fair handicap.  It means anyone who puts the effort in over the winter will be handicapped like a proper cheat at the start of the season.  It's absolutely doing my head in!


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 8, 2021)

sweaty sock said:



			Our course is thoughtlessly requiring all our winter stableford to be counting.  As the course is shorter in winter the slope has dropped to 117, and despite losing less than 900 yards the course rating has dropped by 5 shots.

  Not sure about your home course, but in uk winter you lose 900 yards just from temperature and ground conditions so it plays practically the same distance.

At the end of winter, if I play in stablefords, I will 100% hit the 5 shot hard cap.  Which will mean i cant enter scratch stuff, I will not be considerable for team golf,  and I'll be an absolute lock for all matchplay events.  Its effectively barring me from entering the winter stableford if i want to keep a fair handicap.  It means anyone who puts the effort in over the winter will be handicapped like a proper cheat at the start of the season.  It's absolutely doing my head in!
		
Click to expand...

Agree with your earlier negavtives.

On this though, if the course is measured, then SG insist that all rounds are qualifying "because GB&I" agrees.  That is the official response from Scottish Golf. Despite the fact that SG diverged on course handicaps and software, when it comes to this they hide behind "all the same".

They're literally admitting no thought has gone into the difference in January between Bournemouth & Bonar Bridge, it's ludicrous, and nor do they show any intention of reviewing it.

My club doesn't run anything over the winter, and we go onto winter tees Dec-Feb so the course is off anyway. But, I play a lot of Opens, I expect to see come April & May, a ton of players who have as you suggest, shot up over the winter now playing off an artificially high handicap until their summer scores kick in again, which depending is likely to be July for many of them.


----------



## Backache (Nov 8, 2021)

Introducing it as COVID hit was unlucky and for me has resulted in me not really engaging with it.
My casual golf does not really lend itself to counting strokes much, gimmees are frequent. I have entered few medals and as such my handicap probably doesn't mean a lot.


----------



## sweaty sock (Nov 8, 2021)

I should also not the powers that be have changed the par of the course too to 4 under...

Played my first winter comp yesterday, winnjng score 44.  Bearing in mind the winter tees are  currently just the front of the yellow tees, the player has in effect shot 48 points but will be handicapped as if they shot 43.  Thats before the freezing cold, driving rain effects the pcc to change the course rating by 0%....


----------



## DRW (Nov 8, 2021)

I am loving it.

+ve

Done more scoring rounds this year, than probably in total over all previous years (40 I think I just counted)
Scoring rounds are so easy to do, just turn up, register on phone and off we go
Handicap is being kept upto date
Actually liking the pressure of seeing when good rounds drop off
Will continue doing rounds during winter (never did before)
Like the england app for ease of use
You can easily compare scoring differences across different courses

-ve
My low index is set based on rounds done in 2019 and will take another 8 months worked out of that
At the moment can not do rounds outside of england, would be nice to see Wales or scotland etc included
Almost never any PCC irrelevant of weather conditions (twice out of 40 rounds, across a few different courses/weather conditions)

Big hit for me


----------



## howbow88 (Nov 8, 2021)

I've had a really good year, but in fairness, I've really put in the practice hours. 

At the start of the year my handicap was 9.5 and I've now got it down to 5.1. I think with the old handicap system I would have got it down, but probably not by 4.4 shots. 

I like the app, even if it is a little bit glitchy. And I like the idea that you add in every round. Although I must admit, there have been rounds I haven't added on when I've just gone to play with mates and we're not taking it too seriously. 

I think the course ratings have not been done properly in my area - almost like someone has just looked at course length and decided on the difficulty based on that. Some of them are completely laughable.


----------



## rosecott (Nov 8, 2021)

Liverpoolphil said:



			They can’t stop them being added - it goes straight onto your handicap record within WHS - use the EG App , then if they are going and deleting the round then all you do is email the county and EG and they will be told to stop removing the rounds. If they don’t there will be a chance of sanctions against the club - there is something you can do about it
		
Click to expand...

Club officials with Administrator access to WHS can indeed cancel a General Play card. It is obviously completely unacceptable for any club to have a blanket policy to do such cancellations and the Regional/County authority has to be made aware that this is going on.


----------



## nickjdavis (Nov 8, 2021)

Positives...

Portability of handicap from course to course as a result of slope
The ability to enter scores via the MyEG app
Generally more reactive to sudden changes in player ability (exceptions do occur)

Negatives...

Folks can too easily choose to not submit a score/delete their scoring intent, or register for a round after they have played and then wait a few hours to enter their score
PCC calculation is an utter waste of time
Forget the WORLD aspect of the WHS.....its not even a common UK wide system.


----------



## Orikoru (Nov 8, 2021)

Positive
- getting more shots at harder courses so you don't feel like you've slogged your heart out for 31 points is a nice touch.
- I like the app with the records of your rounds, handicap graph, being able to put cards in easily etc.
- the calculation being as baffling as it is, I've basically stopped caring about my handicap as much, which is probably a good thing.

Negative
- the 95% thing is just annoying. Why do you give me a course handicap and then tell me to play off 95% of that? Just include that in the bloody calculation and give me the number. 
- I still don't really like that you can have a good round but your handicap still goes up (if you knock a better one off your record), but as I touched upon above, in a way that has stopped me caring about it which could be seen as a positive.
- I think the course/slope rating at my club is too low, they've basically rated it as an easy course just because it's short, but the greens are more hellish than any other course in the surrounding areas - this seems to get ignored in the ratings.


----------



## jimbob.someroo (Nov 8, 2021)

Managed to put in 77 qualifying rounds this year, so feel I've given it a fair run.

*Overall* - think it's a really positive move. The ability to put scores in outside of official competitions has been a huge benefit for me, and made my social golf infinitely more enjoyably, as I don't hugely enjoy just slapping it round and playing for a fiver.

I think the app is generally pretty good, and improving all the time.

Have generally found the whole system incredibly easy to understand too, if you're prepared to spend a couple of minutes looking at it. There was a lot of "OMG ITS CRAP IT DOESNT MAKE SENSE" at the start, but people that have actively engaged in it, seem to be more on board.

It's also a nice way of keeping track of all the different courses I've played, and looking at how they compare for difficulty.

*Negatives*

Inability to 'police' it more effectively. Think you should have to sign in on a screen within the pro shop before the round, rather than just tapping the app, as it's too easy to do this after a couple of holes ...

Lower handicaps seem to have come down across the board, but particularly so for people that aren't playing a lot. This has meant me getting balloted out of Scratch Opens several times this year, when I'm 100% confident I would score lower than half the field that got in.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2021)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So I started the year at 2.6 and have finished at 1.2

Using the old system I worked out that *I would have finished at 2.0*

Click to expand...

Your course handicap on the tees you normally play would perhaps be a better comparison.


----------



## sweaty sock (Nov 8, 2021)

jimbob.someroo said:



			...

Lower handicaps seem to have come down across the board, but particularly so for people that aren't playing a lot. This has meant me getting balloted out of Scratch Opens several times this year, when I'm 100% confident I would score lower than half the field that got in.
		
Click to expand...

After a 'qualifying' winter, I think a lot of good players will be in this position...


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 8, 2021)

sweaty sock said:



			After a 'qualifying' winter, I think a lot of good players will be in this position...
		
Click to expand...

This is an interesting one. My club never had qualifiers in winter but are doing so this year. All off the yellows but that is still 6,400yds. In the past they have moved the odd tee forward but this is not happening this year so far. With little run, cold weather generally reducing distance etc I reckon I will go up 3 shots by April. That might be optimistic as well. I'm off 18 incidentally. Clearly, this is not the same impact that you will be having, scratch comps etc but your point about starting the new season with distorted handicaps will be a real issue. 

Maybe we just have to accept this with this system? It is a 12 month handicap that will be more eratic than we are used to. We have to change our mindset?


----------



## Humpy (Nov 8, 2021)

I'm enjoying WHS.

I think my enjoyment has been enhanced by understanding how everything is calculated, reviewing my counting scores on the EG app so I know when one drops off. Knowing this means that I know what I need to score to improve my index. (Excluding the PCC adjustment.) This appeals to my nerdy ways! 

One thing I don't think is right is the ability to sign in for a supplementary after you've played. This can be policed at courses which operate tee times but not so easily at courses that don't.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2021)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Maybe we just have to accept this with this system? It is a 12 month handicap that will be more eratic than we are used to. We have to change our mindset?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, as golf is played throughout the year, handicaps should follow suit. But as your better scores are more likely to be in the summer the winter will have relatively little effect.


----------



## jimbob.someroo (Nov 8, 2021)

rulefan said:



			Yes, as golf is played throughout the year, handicaps should follow suit. But as your better scores are more likely to be in the summer the winter will have relatively little effect.
		
Click to expand...

This is true ... to an extent. It obviously depends on the number of rounds you're playing. The amount I play, I will do more than 20 rounds between November-December, so all of these will be my counting rounds come the Spring. I don't have any rounds from before September in my most recent 20.

I played on Saturday and shot the lowest round that is currently in my 20 (71) - but didn't end up in too many muddy patches, with the one-time I did seeing me make a double. My playing partners were slightly more wayward, and had a few more issues with mud / leaves and now do not want to put scores in until Spring.

Horses for courses. I'll always put a score in, because I think that's how it should be - and if EVERYBODY did the same thing, there wouldn't be an issue. But it's unrealistic to expect everyone to play 100+ qualifiers in the year, which is where these discrepancies / frustrations are going to happen.


----------



## sweaty sock (Nov 8, 2021)

rulefan said:



			Yes, as golf is played throughout the year, handicaps should follow suit. But as your better scores are more likely to be in the summer the winter will have relatively little effect.
		
Click to expand...

Why?  The winter is 6 months, playing once a week the handicap record is entirely replaced (excepting your low point for soft/hard cap calculations) before the season begins?


----------



## sweaty sock (Nov 8, 2021)

Kaz said:



			Hard to see any positives, TBH.

Right from the botched data migration it's been a fiasco.

Breaking the link between handicaps and ability in favour of short term form was a bad mistake IMO.

I couldn't even get a score from an R&A competition south of the border to come through automatically so it's failed the most basic requirement.

Many, maybe even most of the positives people raised so far in the thread were perfectly possible under the old system.
		
Click to expand...

100%  Agree

The hardest score to get loaded to my record was from an R and A run event! Took nearly a month!


----------



## jimbob.someroo (Nov 8, 2021)

Kaz said:



			I couldn't even get a score from an R&A competition south of the border to come through automatically so it's failed the most basic requirement.

Many, maybe even most of the positives people raised so far in the thread were perfectly possible under the old system.
		
Click to expand...

Share your frustration re: comps north/south of the border - although my pro submitted rounds that I played in Scotland from the scorecard (told him before I played that I wanted to register it).

Definitely wasn't possible for Cat 1 golfers to put scores in as supplementaries down here previously - which meant those who couldn't make the weekly medal/stableford couldn't keep score as regularly. Would disagree with you here - that part has been a HUGE advantage to my overall enjoyment of the game (which I get from keeping score, rather than the walking / social element of golf).


----------



## Jimaroid (Nov 8, 2021)

I’ve not played enough this year due to time and injury so I still don’t feel like I’ve really experienced the WHS in a meaningfully positive way. Each experience of it so far has been negatively tainted by Scottish Golf App and implementation issues rather than the concept of WHS itself.

I like the concept. Hate the implementation.


----------



## Rlburnside (Nov 8, 2021)

My club never liked working with supplementarys wrong I know, so to be able to put scores in via the app anytime is a real positive for me. 

I think having a index, playing handicap and course handicap threw up a lot of confusion and could have been simplified, many players at my club don’t like when they add up their score/ points at the end of a round they find that is not the same score/ points when the results come in. 

I fully understand the 95% but there’s still many that’s baffled by it. 

I think overall it keeps a better track of your h/c and has been a positive step, but it could have been implemented so much better.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 8, 2021)

Jimaroid said:



			I’ve not played enough this year due to time and injury so I still don’t feel like I’ve really experienced the WHS in a meaningfully positive way. Each experience of it so far has been* negatively tainted by Scottish Golf App a*nd implementation issues rather than the concept of WHS itself.

I like the concept. Hate the implementation.
		
Click to expand...

That & VMS have certainly tainted the whole thing for me, but I've tried to take that out of it with my comments above. It's interesting that by contrast the positives folks in England are seeing, many comment on the App, but the App has nothing to do with WHS, so are there really many positives once that is taken away, you'd still have the App with the old system.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Nov 8, 2021)

Been ok for me .
Cap has more or less stayed the same.

Negs have been the ridiculous scores that have been winning our comps.
I have often just not entered some and just had a knock on the Sunday instead.
Culminated last weekend my scratch cap mate shot a 62 gross and came forth in the comp.
It’s created so many bandits that the game has changed for the worse for me.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 8, 2021)

rulefan said:



			Yes, as golf is played throughout the year, handicaps should follow suit. But as your better scores are more likely to be in the summer the winter will have relatively little effect.
		
Click to expand...

That is a worrying assumption.

If you acknowledge scoring is better in one season over another, then do you also not need to accept the handicap system is not suitable all year round?

Otherwise, you could have a player who does not play in the winter, and starts with the same handicap the following season. You would also have another player who plays loads over the winter. If, as you say, they tend to shoot worse scores, then it would be expected they'd have a handicap increase for the next season, giving them an advantage over the guy that didn't play during the winter. Seem fair?

Of course, the PCC calculation should theoretically take such factors into account. If conditions were tougher over the winter compared to the normal ratings, the PCC just adjust for that. Of course, it seems that PCC rarely actually changes, so maybe is not doing that job effectively?


----------



## Backsticks (Nov 8, 2021)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Positives -

Handicaps are more reflective of playing ability much quicker. It hurts your ego but it is the truth, if you put enough cards in.
I like the way your h/cap alters for tougher courses.

Having an index, a course handicap and a playing handicap is one to many. They should have found a way to simplify that.
		
Click to expand...

I dont think I would agree that it is more refelctive quickly - I think it is for rising handicaps or loss of form, but for the step improver, it is slower than UHS was to cut down. The need for a 7 shot differential for a single exceptional cut for example is very lenient. Twenty something hcs who get it together were easily cut 2-3 shots each for a couple of good scores. The system alone, without hc committee intervention would cut them 5-7 shots in two rounds. WHS unlikely to do that, more like 1 or 2 shots for the first good score, and only another 1 for a subequent one. Further cuts coming only with further steady if not spectacular scores.
Overall good though, but ESR was better in the old.

Would agree with the 'three' handicaps muddle. They should have left the course handicap out of it, which is effectively like showing your working out of a maths problem to a teacher. HI -> Competition h/c would have been fine.

HCs changing according to course is the big gain I think, but still disappointed CR isnt taken into account.

I think overall, it has a benefit of levelling the playing field and being more equitable throughout the handicap ranges. Low hcs, have been cut, and so no longer have their relative competitive advantage. Higher handicaps have risen, which from what we have seen in my club, is more reflective of their play.


----------



## sweaty sock (Nov 8, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			That is a worrying assumption.

If you acknowledge scoring is better in one season over another, then do you also not need to accept the handicap system is not suitable all year round?

Otherwise, you could have a player who does not play in the winter, and starts with the same handicap the following season. You would also have another player who plays loads over the winter. If, as you say, they tend to shoot worse scores, then it would be expected they'd have a handicap increase for the next season, giving them an advantage over the guy that didn't play during the winter. Seem fair?

Of course, the PCC calculation should theoretically take such factors into account. If conditions were tougher over the winter compared to the normal ratings, the PCC just adjust for that. Of course, it seems that PCC rarely actually changes, so maybe is not doing that job effectively?
		
Click to expand...

Its worse than that, due to the course rating system.  As nearly all courses run as a shorter track during winter the ratings plummet, meaning that its already harder to score, before you factor in, poor ground conditions, weather, etc etc.  Like i mentioned earlier my course is now a realtive par 67..!


----------



## Backsticks (Nov 8, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			Positives: The ease of entering a GP score compared with the old system

Negatives:
1. The frequency of ultra low net scoring
2. The imposition of mandatory allowances on formats of golf that have never been tracked before and have ruined the format
3. A "world" system that only works in your own country
4. A "world" system that is being implemented in many different ways in many different jurisdictions
5. A PCC that no-one understands, that almost never moves, and that the authorities can't explain
6. No winter period, all scores count regardless of playing conditions
7. Not having a "set" handicap, it changes course to course.
		
Click to expand...

1. Havent noticed that. Is there clear evidence of it ?
2. I didnt think they were mandatory ? Maybe depends on the region ? What is the EG position officially ?
3. 4. Thats a pity alright. I think they called it the WHS because it is a different system in every country in the world.
5. It does seem gentler than the old CSS alright. Could it be that the slope rating already keeps things in a better window, than that did ?
6. What ?!?!?  Surely shortened courses, temporary greens, dropping in the rough, are not counting ? (havent been out the last few weeks)
7. But thats the good thing !


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 8, 2021)

Backsticks said:



			1. Havent noticed that. Is there clear evidence of it ?
2. I didnt think they were mandatory ? Maybe depends on the region ? What is the EG position officially ?
3. 4. Thats a pity alright. I think they called it the WHS because it is a different system in every country in the world.
5. It does seem gentler than the old CSS alright. Could it be that the slope rating already keeps things in a better window, than that did ?
6. What ?!?!?  Surely shortened courses, temporary greens, dropping in the rough, are not counting ? (havent been out the last few weeks)
7. But thats the good thing !
		
Click to expand...

1. I did the stats at our club, they're not as bad as people thought, but yes scores are lower week in week out amongst higher handicaps
2. Yes all mandatory now
3/4. It'd be funny if it wasn't true 
5. Well no, slope doesn't change, conditions change, yet PCC almost never changes (my last 28 scores now have no PCC adjustments, think I only saw three all year, all in opens
6. If a course is measured, then it's going to count for handicap, there is now inter period
7. Not imo. Especially as folks have to work out their handicap on the day, not so bad in England where course handicap is runded, but in Scotland it's exact


----------



## IanM (Nov 8, 2021)

*Positives:*
- Score entering via the App
- Transparency of records
- Course handicaps, more overt "allowance differences" at different courses.

*Negatives:*
- Communication and implementation was awful - this was a major cultural and behavioural shift in what a HI actually is, and how they want us to use it.  (Virtually ignored in the initial briefings.)  Materials not tailored for the key stakeholders.  (i.e. _yer-average-player_!)   This is evidenced by the amount of information I never saw in materials, but only found out from the discussion on here.     Also evidenced by the huge variation in application of general play scores and some bonkers winning scores in comps.
-  Home Unions have gone it "alone" - so certainly not a "World System" - heck not even a UK system.  (a real issue for us folk who live near a border or who cross them to play regularly)
-  Over engineered - too many steps to get to your shot allowance.  I think the folk who did this must have shares in companies that make the charts that now proliferate golf clubs!


----------



## clubchamp98 (Nov 8, 2021)

Backsticks said:



			1. Havent noticed that. Is there clear evidence of it ?
2. I didnt think they were mandatory ? Maybe depends on the region ? What is the EG position officially ?
3. 4. Thats a pity alright. I think they called it the WHS because it is a different system in every country in the world.
5. It does seem gentler than the old CSS alright. Could it be that the slope rating already keeps things in a better window, than that did ?
6. What ?!?!?  Surely shortened courses, temporary greens, dropping in the rough, are not counting ? (havent been out the last few weeks)
7. But thats the good thing !
		
Click to expand...

To number 1.
Our club is 135 yrs old nobody has ever shot sub 60 net .
We had 4 scores of 58 net this year. 60/61/62/63 were common


----------



## Imurg (Nov 8, 2021)

I don't like the way that you can, in effect, give up on a round ( after 15 holes and your score is gone) and your index isn't affected, you know it won't be one of your 8
Similarly, if you post a half decent score and your index goes up...in a way it doesn't make sense....
I don't like that there's no requirement to put scores in to keep a handicap.


----------



## AliMc (Nov 8, 2021)

Jimaroid said:



			I’ve not played enough this year due to time and injury so I still don’t feel like I’ve really experienced the WHS in a meaningfully positive way. Each experience of it so far has been negatively tainted by Scottish Golf App and implementation issues rather than the concept of WHS itself.

I like the concept. Hate the implementation.
		
Click to expand...

Have to say I've got in excess of 20 gp scores recorded, all through the sg app and have had no issues whatsoever, same with many of my pp's tbh, maybe a lot of the issues were with the legacy systems data not being transferred over correctly ? don't know personally just remember a lot of negative comments around that time


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 8, 2021)

Playing off 9 at the end of the old system I was very good at playing to the buffer - so to 11 - less good at playing to 9 or less.  My H/I is now 10.0 and round my track that gives me a CH of 11.  I’m thinking the new system gives me a handicap that is a better reflection of my golfing ability.  I realise that I was probably a bit of a S/F ‘snob’.

Problem?  Off back tees CR is 72; off front tees CR is 70.  SR is 125 for both tees.  I play most of my competitive golf off the backs.  When off the fronts I generally don’t score 2 shots better than off the whites and so off fronts I often find my H/I going up as a result of what I would consider a good knock- say s/f 36pts…and that I struggle with.  Though I know why and I can accept it.


----------



## Val (Nov 8, 2021)

I like the system, had no issues at all and the largest plus I see is that someone who has had an injury doesn't need 10 medals any more to go up just 1 shot. I tore my achilles 2 years ago and played minimal golf as a result and the little i did play through 2019 and 2020 wasn't very pretty and had minimal impact on my handicap. Had it happened this year, I may have had a more enjoyable time where score to handicap was concerned.

I always said it would need a year or 2 to settle and it's proving to be the case. It's here to stay so time to try and embrace it.


----------



## Voyager EMH (Nov 8, 2021)

Positives.
1. Its better than the last system on the whole.

Negatives.
1. The amount of moaning it has produced.
2. Some people who still don't understand that you score stableford points according to your playing handicap for individual strokeplay NOT COURSE HANDICAP.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 8, 2021)

Voyager EMH said:



			Positives.
1. Its better than the last system on the whole.

Negatives.
1. The amount of moaning it has produced.
2. Some people who still don't understand that you score *stableford points according to your playing handicap for individual strokeplay *NOT COURSE HANDICAP.
		
Click to expand...

No you don't, there's a stableford adjustment for handicapping purposes after the fact, but in individual strokeplay you score what you score, every shot counts


----------



## chrisd (Nov 8, 2021)

It's not the handicap system that I struggle with, yes I've gone up to 16 but was struggling with the driver for quite a while and it did reflect my scores. The thing that I'm not so enamoured of is the fact that my 16 gives me an 18 handicap off both whites and yellows, and as much as 22 when I played Chart Hills recently, I do get why but would be quite happy to play off 16 and hope to score well enough to earn a cut on any course.


----------



## Val (Nov 8, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			No you don't, there's a stableford adjustment for handicapping purposes after the fact, but in individual strokeplay you score what you score, every shot counts
		
Click to expand...

I think he's added to many words in there, if you take out "for individual strokeplay" it makes more sense and would be correct.

"Some people who still don't understand that you score *stableford points according to your playing handicap *NOT COURSE HANDICAP."


----------



## Voyager EMH (Nov 8, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			No you don't, there's a stableford adjustment for handicapping purposes after the fact, but in individual strokeplay you score what you score, every shot counts
		
Click to expand...

For handicapping purposes there is a net double bogey limit according to course handicap.
Stableford is an individual strokeplay format and playing handicap for individual strokeplay applies.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2021)

Imurg said:



			I don't like that there's no requirement to put scores in to keep a handicap.
		
Click to expand...

There wasn't under CONGU either.


----------



## Voyager EMH (Nov 8, 2021)

Val said:



			I think he's added to many words in there, if you take out "for individual strokeplay" it makes more sense and would be correct.

"Some people who still don't understand that you score *stableford points according to your playing handicap *NOT COURSE HANDICAP."
		
Click to expand...

There are many types of playing handicap.
Playing handicap for betterball matchplay, playing handicap for betterball strokeplay, etc
That is why I specified which one I was discussing.


----------



## Val (Nov 8, 2021)

Voyager EMH said:



			There are many types of playing handicap.
Playing handicap for betterball matchplay, playing handicap for betterball strokeplay, etc
That is why I specified which one I was discussing.
		
Click to expand...

You already said stableford which is a form of strokeplay after all


----------



## Whereditgo (Nov 8, 2021)

I read it as:  in a singles Stableford competition you score stableford points according to your playing handicap for individual strokeplay NOT COURSE HANDICAP.


----------



## Val (Nov 8, 2021)

Whereditgo said:



			I read it as:  in a singles Stableford competition you score stableford points according to your playing handicap for individual strokeplay NOT COURSE HANDICAP.
		
Click to expand...

Which is what it is, pendantics and clarity maybe could re-word but hey ho, does it really matter?


----------



## Whereditgo (Nov 8, 2021)

Val said:



			Which is what it is, pendantics and clarity maybe could re-word but hey ho, does it really matter?
		
Click to expand...

I think the point being made was that some people still think they get the extra strokes afforded by their course handicap?


----------



## Voyager EMH (Nov 8, 2021)

Val said:



			You already said stableford which is a form of strokeplay after all
		
Click to expand...

Yes, but you can play betterball stableford and I've not heard of people not applying 85% so I did not want that to be included.


----------



## IanM (Nov 8, 2021)

The last half a dozen posts demonstrate my point about over engineering.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 8, 2021)

Handicap Allowances couldn't be simpler, surely everyone knows the following off by heart by now??? 

100% = Individual Match Play, best 3 of 4 stroke play, best 4 of 4 strokeplay, total score of 2 match play, 4 of 4 par/bogey
95% = Individual stroke play, individual stableford, individual par/bogey, individual maximum score
90% = four ball par/bogey, four ball match play, best 3 of 4 par / bogey
85% = four-ball strokeplay, four -ball stableford, best 2 of 4 stroke play
80% = best 2 of 4 par/bogey
75% = best 1 of 4 stroke play, best 1 of 4 par/bogey

When I arrange a four ball match play game now, I prepare at home by finding out each player's index. I then work out course handicaps, then playing handicaps and then shot allocation. It saves loads of time having to work it all out on the tee. It is ridiculous. The 90% bit is fine, and we always did that. But most people have no idea what their course handicap is, and they seem to frequently get confused by their playing handicap, the one they played with in their last individual club competition. Or, they sign in to play a general play round, and the App tells them their course handicap. That is fine, except they then insist this is the handicap their score must be based on if they are playing in a comp (say a roll up), simply because that is what the App tells them.

PLAYING HANDICAP is the most ridiculous concept of the WHS. It is great for those theoretical mathematicians / statisticians who love to crunch numbers, and then give us all these allowances to work with. Maybe impress us with their wisdom in coming up with these numbers. However, in practice it is one big mess. When I play golf with people and they express their WHS opinion, it is generally to mock it. The only positive comment is that you can easily enter general play scores. However, that is not really anything to do with WHS, except WHS accelerated the IT to be able to do this (i.e. this could have been achieved under any handicap system). The Australians seem to have got it better, and ditched playing handicap. They simply have Index and Course Handicap (albeit they call them something different)


----------



## Voyager EMH (Nov 8, 2021)

*The Australians seem to have got it better, and ditched playing handicap. They simply have Index and Course Handicap (albeit they call them something different) *

I have come round to this view as well. Although early this year I thought differently.
My perception is that the Auzzies have ditched Course Handicap (except they didn't ditch it, they never had it in the first place). They go straight from GA Index (note no use of the word "handicap") straight to Daily Handicap which is equivalent to our Playing Handicap for individual strokeplay. Thus for the average Auzzie, their "handicap" is just what it always used to be - that is "what I play off in medals and stablefords" with far less confusion than we appear to have the UK.
And they were ahead of us in implementing WHS. So we missed an opportunity to do what they had already done.


----------



## Wabinez (Nov 8, 2021)

The only negative I have is the fact that you can’t input scores from Scotland/Wales/Ireland easily. I understand this is changing at some point next year though.

The rest I am absolutely fine with, and love the new system.


----------



## Crow (Nov 8, 2021)

I'm old now so don't like change, ergo, I don't like the WHS.
(Did I just type "ergo"? I'm really getting old.)

Grumpy old git angle aside, I think the new system can go up too quickly, whereas the old one was generally too slow because handicap committees were too cautious in raising handicaps after annual reviews.

Even after a year the new system is still confusing to the majority.

My own experience; After several years of awful golf for various reasons I ended the CONGU system on 15.2, which if I remember correctly means my handicap was 15. I couldn't play to it at the time but felt it was more of a mental issue and in reality I wasn't far off.
WHS put me at 16.4 which gave me a course handicap from the whites at my new club of 19, playing 18.
I continued in poor form for the first four months and my HI went up to 17.5, CH 20, PH 19 so I was getting 2 shots on some holes.
I then found some form and a bit of confidence and started putting some good scores in which upset some people (cries of bandit) and to be honest I found quite embarrassing.

I'm now down to 12.1 HI, CH 14, PH 13, this is more realistic but possibly still a little high.

I've never liked the idea of supplementary cards if I'm able to play regularly in competitions so didn't enter any under CONGU and haven't under WHS.

On top of that, it's been soundly proven that the "World" part of the system, which was what we were told was the key reason for the change, has been a complete fiasco.
And how many golfers felt they'd ever need a "World" handicap and still feel that way?   Less than 0.1% I'd estimate.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 8, 2021)

Voyager EMH said:



*The Australians seem to have got it better, and ditched playing handicap. They simply have Index and Course Handicap (albeit they call them something different) *

I have come round to this view as well. Although early this year I thought differently.
My perception is that the Auzzies have ditched Course Handicap (except they didn't ditch it, they never had it in the first place). They go straight from GA Index (note no use of the word "handicap") straight to Daily Handicap which is equivalent to our Playing Handicap for individual strokeplay. Thus for the average Auzzie, their "handicap" is just what it used always used to be - that is "what I play off in medals and stablefords" with far less confusion than we appear to have the UK.
And they were ahead of us in implementing WHS. So we missed an opportunity to do what they had already done.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah, sort of. Well, their Daily handicap is their Course Handicap (with a factor of 93% applied) and they have no final process for the Playing Handicap. So, in effect, you could say their Course and Playing Handicaps are one and the same thing, as you say.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2021)

in regards PCC

Saturday Medal 15 people break HC - so PCC stays the same 

Sunday Medal - 1 person does - PCC doesn’t change -

So the course conditions clearly far tougher on the Sunday yet the PCC doesn’t change to reflect it

So what the heck needs to happen for PCC to change


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 8, 2021)

+ves for me
the the way it is quickly responsive to current ability.
I have had a variation of nearly two shots between low and high. Up and back down again.
It is a system which much better reflects potential - provided you are putting in plenty of scores with enough good ones the poor ones get ignored.

-ves
Increased levels of administration needed to ensure the system is operated correctly.
Too easy to register for a card and not submit it.
Eg App does not have a comparison between start time and when a round is submitted (IG app does)
Course Handicap and not Handicap index is the 'must have' on the card. The latter is a constant and the former a variable. When checking cards manually it is a far easier thing to check.


As a side note PCC works where I play seems to be about the same as CSS.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 8, 2021)

Liverpoolphil said:



			in regards PCC

Saturday Medal 15 people break HC - so PCC stays the same

Sunday Medal - 1 person does - PCC doesn’t change -

So the course conditions clearly far tougher on the Sunday yet the PCC doesn’t change to reflect it

So what the heck needs to happen for PCC to change
		
Click to expand...

I think there was a Chapter in one of the Harry Potter novels that discussed PCC and the magic behind it.


----------



## richbeech (Nov 8, 2021)

Liverpoolphil said:



			in regards PCC

Saturday Medal 15 people break HC - so PCC stays the same

Sunday Medal - 1 person does - PCC doesn’t change -

So the course conditions clearly far tougher on the Sunday yet the PCC doesn’t change to reflect it

So what the heck needs to happen for PCC to change
		
Click to expand...

One of the biggest gripes I've got with WHS. Our place is quite prone to the elements and I remember on a few occasions where the conditions have been really tough, I think only 2-3 people played to handicap, nobody bettered their handicap out of a field of 70 golfers and PCC didn't budge.


----------



## BiMGuy (Nov 8, 2021)

Doesn’t make the slightest difference to me. I just go out and shoot what I shoot. I had no idea how the old system worked, and I have no intention of giving a thought as to how the WHS works.

It does appear that too many people are annoyed it’s now too difficult to do the maths to manipulate their scores to massage their handicap.


----------



## IainP (Nov 8, 2021)

Liverpoolphil said:



			in regards PCC

Saturday Medal 15 people break HC - so PCC stays the same

Sunday Medal - 1 person does - PCC doesn’t change -

So the course conditions clearly far tougher on the Sunday yet the PCC doesn’t change to reflect it

So what the heck needs to happen for PCC to change
		
Click to expand...

Don't have the answer but noticed the comp where I play on Sunday just gone had a PCC of 3. I have an EG "friend " at a course a few miles away, and noticed he played Sunday and PCC of 2.
So it does happen!


----------



## IainP (Nov 8, 2021)

sweaty sock said:



			Why?  *The winter is 6 months*, playing once a week the handicap record is entirely replaced (excepting your low point for soft/hard cap calculations) before the season begins?
		
Click to expand...

In your neck of woods are there 24 months in the year, or just 2 seasons? 🤷‍♂️
😉😉🙂


----------



## Wabinez (Nov 8, 2021)

Liverpoolphil said:



			in regards PCC

Saturday Medal 15 people break HC - so PCC stays the same 

Sunday Medal - 1 person does - PCC doesn’t change -

So the course conditions clearly far tougher on the Sunday yet the PCC doesn’t change to reflect it

So what the heck needs to happen for PCC to change
		
Click to expand...

We had a PCC of 2 last weekend. Medal, nett 74 won (par 72, CR 73.2)

Brutal conditions on a tough track. It will move in circumstances. I would guess it’s not to do with the amount of people breaking their handicap, but more about the number of players who play to an ‘expected’ level, which could be +/- 3 or 4 shots of ‘nett par’

It’s a dark art, and whilst it is frustrating not to know the calculation, don’t get too worked up by it


----------



## Backache (Nov 8, 2021)

BiMGuy said:



			It does appear that too many people are annoyed it’s now too difficult to do the maths to manipulate their scores to massage their handicap.
		
Click to expand...

Seems a bit cynical to me, most people seem to want to understand how it works and why PCC never appears to go up, which would reduce their handicap.


----------



## IanMcC (Nov 8, 2021)

I am a big fan of WHS.

From a player point of view, the best thing about WHS is the way that it accurately reflects your ability, especially if you play a lot. I remember I hit a hot streak in 2015, and received an ESR down to 5.5. It took me 2 years to get back to where I usually live, around the 9 mark. Now, with 20 scores totally refreshing your handicap record, that is no longer a worry.
The worst thing is the PCC adjustment. Not one PCC rating has been anything other than zero for all the men’s comps at our club since WHS kicked in, and not publishing the algorithm is dreadful.

From an M&H point of view, the best thing, despite what a few say on here, is the fact that competitions are more open. Now that we have a proper, rated, 9 hole course, our winter 9 hole comps are competitive and unpredictable. When we used to run comps with contrived handicaps, it was impossible for a large group of players to win. That is not the case now.
The 2nd worst thing about WHS from a M&H perspective is exposing many players ignorance and stupidity. It doesn’t matter how many emails or one-to-one sessions some people have, they just ‘don’t get it’. It’s not their fault. It’s just how it is. What is difficult about taking one number to the course, reading off a board to obtain another, then either doing a simple calculation or reading off another board to obtain the final number? Much easier than figuring out 7/8ths or 7/16ths, I reckon.

The worst thing is the shambles at the start, when many, many scores were lost in the changeover to WHS. What a terrible way to kick off a system many years in the planning.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			Too easy to register for a card and not submit it.
		
Click to expand...

That has been or is being addressed by EG.

_With the introduction of WHS, came the greater opportunity for players to submit general play scores.

While it remains the responsibility of the player to ensure they pre-register and submit their scores, we have seen this isn’t always the case. It can leave an unsatisfied score intent in the player’s record for your club's handicap committee to deal with through the application of a penalty score.

We want to make these processes easier for you and reduce your workload while still providing you with oversight. As a result, we have decided to introduce some automation around the submission of general play scores either by the MyEG app or via the club software.

*What does this mean for the handicap committee at your club?*

You will no longer have to track and chase players for non-submission of scores in general play. Where players fail to submit scores following automated reminder emails, a penalty score will be automatically applied.

Your handicap committee will have full sight of this and reports will be provided for you to see which players have received automatic penalty scores. This will provide you with the ability to adjust or remove the score if required.

The committee can also identify players who pre-registered a round by the MyEG app but subsequently delete it. As part of this process, they are asked to provide a reason for deleting the score and it would be up to the committee to review the Delete Score Intent Report, review the reasons and, should it be required (not a valid reason), apply a penalty score. We would recommend Course Rating + Course Handicap unless the committee wish to apply something different.

*What does this mean for the player?*

The player is now totally responsible for submitting their score once it has been pre-registered. If they fail to do so without providing the committee with a valid reason, an automated penalty score will be applied.

Should a score be deleted after it has been registered they will have to provide a reason for the deletion and it is then up to the committee if they accept the reason or apply a penalty score._


----------



## Backsticks (Nov 8, 2021)

Backache said:



			Seems a bit cynical to me, most people seem to want to understand how it works and why PCC never appears to go up, which would reduce their handicap.
		
Click to expand...

Only thinking aloud here on PCC, but wondering, does it matter? In a way, under the old system CSS adjustments, without slope, were a blunt adjustment. Tough conditions are more of a problem for the high handicapper than the low one. Yet the adjustment was the same.
In the WHS implementation, when we are not adjusting for CR anyway, and all that matters is the relative performance versus the field, are PCC adjustments of less relevance  - and all the better from being infrequently applied. The perception that they are much rarer than CSS adjuments may be coming from the fact that they are not needed, and only applied if the slope profile of the field, rather than the upper trance as was with CSS, is outside a tolerance. Understand that some are frustrated at both the algorithm not being public, and no explanation being given for its rare influence. But at heart, I have a feeling the PCC may be the superior solution. A true adjustment would require it 'sloped' to allow for different handicaps, and so probably better generally left out of the equation.


----------



## SammmeBee (Nov 8, 2021)

sweaty sock said:



			I should also not the powers that be have changed the par of the course too to 4 under...

Played my first winter comp yesterday, winnjng score 44.  Bearing in mind the winter tees are  currently just the front of the yellow tees, the player has in effect shot 48 points but will be handicapped as if they shot 43.  Thats before the freezing cold, driving rain effects the pcc to change the course rating by 0%....
		
Click to expand...

Surely the par is level par on any course?!


----------



## SammmeBee (Nov 8, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			Been ok for me .
Cap has more or less stayed the same.

Negs have been the ridiculous scores that have been winning our comps.
I have often just not entered some and just had a knock on the Sunday instead.
Culminated last weekend my scratch cap mate shot a 62 gross and came forth in the comp.
It’s created so many bandits that the game has changed for the worse for me.
		
Click to expand...

Just give up then fella…..


----------



## SammmeBee (Nov 8, 2021)

Liverpoolphil said:



			in regards PCC

Saturday Medal 15 people break HC - so PCC stays the same

Sunday Medal - 1 person does - PCC doesn’t change -

So the course conditions clearly far tougher on the Sunday yet the PCC doesn’t change to reflect it

So what the heck needs to happen for PCC to change
		
Click to expand...

Need to play a harder course….. not an easier one…..


----------



## Wildboy370 (Nov 8, 2021)

Liverpoolphil said:



			in regards PCC

Saturday Medal 15 people break HC - so PCC stays the same

Sunday Medal - 1 person does - PCC doesn’t change -

So the course conditions clearly far tougher on the Sunday yet the PCC doesn’t change to reflect it

So what the heck needs to happen for PCC to change
		
Click to expand...

Evening. The PCC seems a dark art very much so. Below is an email from England golf I got after asking why in a field of 86 and not one made Par was there no PCC.

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.​
so it would seem those that thrust the new system on us haven’t a scooby do how certain parts of it work. Officially so far since whs started we have had two PCC.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Nov 8, 2021)

SammmeBee said:



			Just give up then fella…..
		
Click to expand...

That’s basically what has happened .
There is a split in the membership who don’t play in the comps now.
Off 6 I just can’t compete with 58 sad but true.


----------



## Backsticks (Nov 8, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			That’s basically what has happened .
There is a split in the membership who don’t play in the comps now.
Off 6 I just can’t compete with 58 sad but true.
		
Click to expand...

Nor should you be able to compete with 58. No correct handicap is able to compete with one of the improving golfer. No low handicapper is ever able, nor supposed to compete with a score of that big a differential, which a high handicapper can shoot. Thats not a fault in the system. That is the system working correctly.
Unless your club really is an outlier (has it been queried? ) , and the slope is wrong by a big margin, then players not competing is due to a misunderstanding of the system, not a flaw in the system itself. I dont think that experience is widespread.

ps : are you seriously expecting to compete with a 58?


----------



## clubchamp98 (Nov 8, 2021)

Backsticks said:



			Nor should you be able to compete with 58. No correct handicap is able to compete with one of the improving golfer. No low handicapper is ever able, nor supposed to compete with a score of that big a differential, which a high handicapper can shoot. Thats not a fault in the system. That is the system working correctly.
Unless your club really is an outlier (has it been queried? ) , and the slope is wrong by a big margin, then players not competing is due to a misunderstanding of the system, not a flaw in the system itself. I dont think that experience is widespread.
		
Click to expand...

These are not improving golfers they have been playing for years 
It was the “system “ that increased these handicaps of half decent golfers to almost double what they were playing off.
It’s started to settle down a bit now but there is a stupidly low score almost every week.
The big problem is they can’t keep it to themselves so you know what you can’t beat before you tee off.


----------



## JonnyGutteridge (Nov 9, 2021)

The PCC is probably the biggest issue. It should be both a publicly available calculation and should be to 1decimal place, to be mathematically accurate in the same way that our handicaps are 1 decimal place.

Why can the weather and PCC only add 1 whole shot? If PCC calcs come in at 0.49 and rounds to 0, that is daylight robbery from a lot of the field. Likewise, if it comes in at 0.51, rounds up to 1 and half the field get a new “top 8” score as a result, that’s equally as bad. Why not just have it rounded to 1dp, meaning more minor changes in weather, course conditions and setup etc still have an impact.

Another negative; I think there should be a limit on the number of general play cards someone can enter in any given time period that ‘count’. Maybe a max of 4 of your best 8 can be general play - I don’t know. I am Bitter over losing a matchplay this year, to a chap who put in 15 cards during 1 month to move from 7 handicap to 9 or 10 and shot about +3 against me.

Firstly, no one playing that regularly is getting worse, and secondly you only had to go back 2-3 comps on his record (6 weeks) to find scores in the low 70s, yet they were all purged from his recent 20 because he kept shooting 90 with his mates on weekday evenings (everyone knows after a hard days work, rushing round to beat the light that those rounds should be entirely what your handicap is based on??)

Personal review; started at 4.4, dropped to 3.5 at the lowest and back to 3.8 now.
Won 1 board comp, 1 monthly stableford and the invitational pairs event so probably my most successful year of golf.


----------



## Backsticks (Nov 9, 2021)

JonnyGutteridge said:



			The PCC is probably the biggest issue.
		
Click to expand...

Is it than really an issue though, or just an irritation to a tiny minority at the fact that the calculation is published?
Which might be poor communication, but no evidence that it is a weakness of tge whs functioning itself.

Was CSS really effective though in its application. 'Tough' conditions which might have raised it in the past, were surely inequitable. The effect on the score of a scratchman, who plays with more control, can adjust his ball flight, and whose better shot level anyway is less vulnerable to its influence, and so it might cost him a shot or two. The high hc guys hooks, slices, and skys, balloon his score by 10 shots as he cannot adapt his play to the same degree. So it had quite a distorting effect, which was not sloped.
Just because we saw it applied more in the past, doesnt mean its a failing of whs that we now dont. It could be quite a good improvement in fact.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 9, 2021)

Voyager EMH said:



			For handicapping purposes there is a net double bogey limit according to course handicap.
Stableford is an individual strokeplay format and playing handicap for individual strokeplay applies.
		
Click to expand...

Of course, but you said for individual strokeplay, strokeplay is medal play


Voyager EMH said:



			There are many types of playing handicap.
Playing handicap for betterball matchplay, playing handicap for betterball strokeplay, etc
*That is why I specified which one I was discussing.*

Click to expand...

If you'd stopped at Stableford, then yes, but you then made it look like you were discussing strokeplay, while yes s/ford is a form of strokeplay, I don't think it's a stretch for anyone to mistake what you meant here.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 9, 2021)

BiMGuy said:



			Doesn’t make the slightest difference to me. I just go out and shoot what I shoot. I had no idea how the old system worked, and I have no intention of giving a thought as to how the WHS works.

It does appear that too many people are annoyed it’s now too difficult to do the maths to manipulate their scores to massage their handicap.
		
Click to expand...

Good to see your ignorance led to such an ill-informed conclusion.

So, to clarify, if you did spend any time looking at the system, you'd find that whereas under the old CONGU system, change was very slow, now you can get yourself a number of extra shots to win that big upcoming prize in only a few rounds. The ease of GP scoring, and the large jumps make the opportunity for bandits very easy to achieve. But thanks again for the ill-informed comment


----------



## DanFST (Nov 9, 2021)

Had a guy that manipulated his HC before to win things, still does the same thing now.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 9, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			The ease of GP scoring, and the large jumps make the opportunity for bandits very easy to achieve. But thanks again for the ill-informed comment
		
Click to expand...

The claimed ease of GP scoring has nothing to do with WHS. It is due to the introduction of apps which were already on their way. Supplementary Scores have been were available for years and it only needed an app to move the entry procedure from a PSI to a phone and bingo.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 9, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			Good to see your ignorance led to such an ill-informed conclusion.

So, to clarify, if you did spend any time looking at the system, you'd find that whereas under the old CONGU system, change was very slow, now you can get yourself a number of extra shots to win that big upcoming prize in only a few rounds. The ease of GP scoring, and the large jumps make the opportunity for bandits very easy to achieve. But thanks again for the ill-informed comment
		
Click to expand...

I've not played an awful lot the last few months, as I can't play midweek due to darkness. However, got some weekend rounds in. In that time my course handicap has increased by 3 shots. In next 2 rounds, assuming my form continues, my index will go up another 0.8, which hits the soft cap. Effectively giving me 4 extra shots on course handicap compared to 2 months ago. 

In 5 rounds time, I lose my best score of all. So, assuming my form continues, my index will actually be 5.0 higher than 2 months ago, course handicap 6 better. And yes, that takes the soft cap into account and only taking half the increase after the 3.0 increase.

So, some might say that this is good, as it reflects form. However, I know form is (usually) temporary. So, when I start playing reasonable again, I know I will start smashing my handicap. If I repeat my round on September the 3rd, 95% handicap, I'd get 46 points. And I'm not a 30 handicapper, my index was 6.6 a couple of months ago. 

In my situation, it is form. But it is easy for someone to manipulate their handicap upwards if they want.

It also puts myself and doubles partner in a situation were it will definitely pay to delay playing any more winter league games, until we get 2 or 3 cards in. He is also losing 2 fantastic rounds when he submits 2 scores, his index is currently 5.3. So, assuming we don't go out and play fantastic rounds in the winter conditions, we could both give ourselves a few more shots if we wait.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 9, 2021)

rulefan said:



			The claimed ease of GP scoring has nothing to do with WHS. It is due to the introduction of apps which were already on their way. Supplementary Scores have been were available for years and it only needed an app to move the entry procedure from a PSI to a phone and bingo.
		
Click to expand...

No it isn't, you had to inform your H'cap sec under CONGU, it was there in writing, now you just need to register, it's literally a change to the handicapping rules. Also supplementary scores were restricted for category one. There were other restrictions but I can't recall what they were now.


----------



## Backache (Nov 9, 2021)

Backsticks said:



			Is it than really an issue though, or just an irritation to a tiny minority at the fact that the calculation is published?
Which might be poor communication, but no evidence that it is a weakness of tge whs functioning itself.

Was CSS really effective though in its application. 'Tough' conditions which might have raised it in the past, were surely inequitable. The effect on the score of a scratchman, who plays with more control, can adjust his ball flight, and whose better shot level anyway is less vulnerable to its influence, and so it might cost him a shot or two. The high hc guys hooks, slices, and skys, balloon his score by 10 shots as he cannot adapt his play to the same degree. So it had quite a distorting effect, which was not sloped.
Just because we saw it applied more in the past, doesnt mean its a failing of whs that we now dont. It could be quite a good improvement in fact.
		
Click to expand...

I guess there will never be complete equity. However under the old rules from recall if the conditions were particularly bad there could be downward adjustments only as well as changing the CSS.
We have all seen conditions in tournament golf where the average score of the field changes by a couple of shots due to adverse weather. Even the best amateur golfers will have more difficulty in adverse weather than the pros. Bad rounds can be discarded effectively by everyone under the best 8 out of 20 however it does seem a pity that the person playing very well but 'only' shooting around his current handicap does not have a greater reward as it may represent very good golf under the conditions which your best 8 is meant to discover.


----------



## sweaty sock (Nov 9, 2021)

While I  agree supplementary scores have always been a thing.  And not particularly complicated to arrange.  (We could log into hdid in the pro shop just as fast as we can now).  The very term 'supplementary' implies why the were there.  To supplement your competitive rounds if you couldnt get enough comps in.

WHS has not only raised awareness, but has changed the purpose of the rounds, and in some cases enforced them.

I can think of no club in the UK that made there member organised sweeps hand in supplementary cards.  Many are now forced (maybe unfairly.... i dont know the particular details) to register on WHS.  So its definitely not possible to say nothing has changed.

Whether its positive change for more accurate handicaps, or negative change for more manipulation is a case by case situation.

A member at our club has played over 100 days of golf consecutively.  If youre trying to tell me congu would have accepted 100 supplementary scores without a major incident, then I beg to differ....


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 9, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			No it isn't, you had to inform your H'cap sec under CONGU, it was there in writing, now you just need to register, it's literally a change to the handicapping rules. Also supplementary scores were restricted for category one. There were other restrictions but I can't recall what they were now.
		
Click to expand...

Actually, before WHS I believe you could still pre-register using the PSI screen, you didn't need to directly inform your handicap sec. Many clubs would also have books to register in writing, but that would simply be because registering on the PSI was still only relatively new. Ultimately, it was down to the club how they chose to administer it. And there were plenty of clubs who blatantly ignore the CONGU guidelines anyway, in terms of pre-registration (even our old handicap secretary did), but that is another issue entirely.

For me, the two big issues between pre and post WHS in terms of this particular issue are:


Pre-WHS, the club had to verify any general play score came in. It was an active procedure. So, if it wasn't pre-registered properly or there was some other suspicious pattern, it would be there for the handicap secretary to deal with before allowing it to touch a players record. Also, either the handicap sec typed in the score or checked the score entered by the player against the scorecard, and it was a safety net against errors in score input. Post WHS, the player enters this directly and it goes straight to their record before any Committee checks. The score could have been typed in wrong, they may have not had anyone mark their score, etc and there is little to stop this. The caveat is that it seems the software is being improved to try and deal with as many of these issues as best it can, so hopefully in a few years things will settle down.
As per my example, handicaps can fluctuate significantly from round to round, including in the upwards direction. So, if a player does have a big event coming up, and they notice that in their next 4 or 4 rounds they'll lose a bunch of their best scores, then a reasonable amount of those players may be tempted to purposely put in some bad scores over the next week or so to get a good handicap increase (double the increase if the big event is a two round event). Sure, pre EHS some players might have done that if they were edging towards x.5, thus getting an extra shot back. But realistically, a 1 shot increase per round would be the biggest increase they get. But, that is where we are. The advantage is that WHS will give players back more shots more quickly when they have declining ability, but you then need to accept that the same will be true for players who temporarily hit bad form.


----------



## IanM (Nov 9, 2021)

DanFST said:



			Had a guy that manipulated his HC before to win things, still does the same thing now.
		
Click to expand...

Only now it is easier!


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 9, 2021)

sweaty sock said:



			While I  agree supplementary scores have always been a thing.  And not particularly complicated to arrange.  (We could log into hdid in the pro shop just as fast as we can now).  The very term 'supplementary' implies why the were there.  To supplement your competitive rounds if you couldnt get enough comps in.

WHS has not only raised awareness, but has changed the purpose of the rounds, and in some cases enforced them.

I can think of no club in the UK that made there member organised sweeps hand in supplementary cards.  Many are now forced (maybe unfairly.... i dont know the particular details) to register on WHS.  So its definitely not possible to say nothing has changed.

Whether its positive change for more accurate handicaps, or negative change for more manipulation is a case by case situation.

*A member at our club has played over 100 days of golf consecutively.  If youre trying to tell me congu would have accepted 100 supplementary scores without a major incident, then I beg to differ....*

Click to expand...

 Is he doing it for charity, or is he just crazy? The weather must have been horrific on at least one day. However, there would not have been an issue submitting 100 supplementary scores pre-WHS (excluding Cat 1 players). However, if they were all shockers, perhaps the handicap sec would act if he felt the player was trying to get 10 shots back. However, that is a hell of a lot of effort to achieve that, and pretty much any reasonable handicap secretary would have seen through it and simply adjusted the handicap downwards again


----------



## rulefan (Nov 9, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			No it isn't, *you had to inform your H'cap sec under CONGU, it was there in writing,* now you just need to register, it's literally a change to the handicapping rules. .
		
Click to expand...

Not so.
*21.6* A player intending to return a Supplementary Score is required to signify his intention prior to commencement of play in the manner determined by the Affiliated Club.




			it's literally a change to the handicapping rules.
		
Click to expand...

As is the whole of WHS. Which was the intention of course.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 9, 2021)

sweaty sock said:



			If youre trying to tell me congu would have accepted 100 supplementary scores without a major incident, then I beg to differ....
		
Click to expand...

*21.4 (b)* any number of Supplementary Scores may be returned annually by players in Categories 2 to 6;
*21.11 *Returns may be subject to action under Clause 23 B if malpractice is suspected.


----------



## IanM (Nov 9, 2021)

Are the clause numbers in post s #97 and #98 CONGU or WHS?    



rulefan said:



			Not so.
*21.6* A player intending to return a Supplementary Score is required to signify his intention prior to commencement of play in the manner determined by the Affiliated Club..
		
Click to expand...

There certainly are folk keying in scores without signifying intention.  I've asked in several pro shops about this and got a shrug!  



This thread has now descended into a repeat of the other thread... normal golfers pointing out the "sillies" and the "rulies" defending it!


----------



## mikejohnchapman (Nov 9, 2021)

To answer the initial question - I think overall my reaction is positive (just). It took me a while to realise that it isn't right or wrong - it's just different!

Yes you can complain about the implementation (and I did) and EG dodged a bullet or two due to lockdown but overall it's encouraging people to add cards for handicap and generally their handicaps now reflect their playing ability more closely.

Took me a while to get my head around the fact that handicaps would vary throughout the year and not be like the more linear older system. However, taking into account the differing conditions throughout the year that's pretty logical.

By and large it works - you can argue about course ratings and slope ratings but they are what they are and have been used around the world for decades. I wish we had gone for gender neutral tees from the start but I'm sure we will sort this out in the next 12 months.

We have had some exceptional winning scores but generally we have had more people contending than previously, which is a good thing.

The course / playing handicap changes are a negative in my opinion and have skewed thing too far the other way from the previous system. Whether these will be looked at over time who knows.

Finally, the new system has set a direction of travel where handicaps will basically be approximate rather than exact. When matchplay, 4 ball and MLS rounds will be counted we will need binoculars to see the old system. 

As I say, just (very) different.


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 9, 2021)

JonnyGutteridge said:



			.

Firstly, no one playing that regularly is getting worse, /QUOTE]

I would strongly argue that point. My trend has been upwards for several years now despite playing 2-3 times every week.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 9, 2021)

rulefan said:



			Not so.
*21.6* A player intending to return a Supplementary Score is required to signify his intention prior to commencement of play in the manner determined by the Affiliated Club.



*As is the whole of WHS. Which was the intention of course.*

Click to expand...

Apology accepted


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 9, 2021)

sweaty sock said:



			A member at our club has played over 100 days of golf consecutively.  If youre trying to tell me congu would have accepted 100 supplementary scores without a major incident, then I beg to differ....
		
Click to expand...

Having had conversations at the club there are many that see submitting a card every time they play is the 'correct' thing to do. It just one of the areas where our WHS differs from another countries WHS.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 9, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			Having had conversations at the club there are many that see submitting a card every time they play is the 'correct' thing to do. It just one of the areas where our WHS differs from another countries WHS.
		
Click to expand...

Scotland isn't different from England, he's referring to WHS v CONGU.


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 9, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			Scotland isn't different from England, he's referring to WHS v CONGU.
		
Click to expand...

 I did not say Scotland I was referring to the world in general.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 9, 2021)

IanM said:



			Are the clause numbers in post s #97 and #98 CONGU or WHS?   

Click to expand...

CONGU manual. I was responding to posts that suggested CONGU stated something it didn't. I was pointing out just what CONGU did say.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 9, 2021)

IanM said:



			There certainly are folk keying in scores without signifying intention.  I've asked in several pro shops about this and got a shrug!
		
Click to expand...

Where are they keying in the scores? The first step in the apps *is* the intent to return a score. That intention is recorded in the system. Players don't need to inform the pro (if that is what the clubs did under CONGU).


----------



## rulefan (Nov 9, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			Apology accepted
		
Click to expand...

It was you who got it wrong on two counts. The book never said 
_(1)you had to inform your H'cap sec under CONGU,
and 
(2) it was *not* there in writing," _


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 9, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			I did not say Scotland I was referring to the world in general.
		
Click to expand...

GP scores are a part of WHS, we're all meant to put in GP scores at every opportunity, your experience of people knowing and entering many GP scores, varies greatly from my experience in the NE, that's not happening at all.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 9, 2021)

rulefan said:



			Not so.
*21.6* A player intending to return a Supplementary Score is required to signify his intention prior to commencement of play in the manner determined by the Affiliated Club.



As is the whole of WHS. Which was the intention of course.
		
Click to expand...

Potayto, potahto. It was there in writing that *someone* needed to be informed.

You then *agreed* that it was a change in WHS. Jeez man.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 9, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			Potayto, potahto. It was there in writing that *someone* needed to be informed.

You then *agreed* that it was a change in WHS. Jeez man.
		
Click to expand...

You said: "No it isn't, you had to inform your H'cap sec under CONGU"

I believe Rulefan was simply stating that this is not the case. "in the manner determined by the Affiliated Club" does not translate as you had to inform your handicap secretary. Some clubs may have put that condition down, others may have had a log book, others may have asked players to register via howdidido (i.e. register in a similar way most of us do now). No one, therefore, actually needed to be informed about your pre-registration. A record would hopefully exist, however, so if anyone checks at a later date then they can check whether pre-registration occurred.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 9, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			You said: "No it isn't, you had to inform your H'cap sec under CONGU"

I believe Rulefan was simply stating that this is not the case. "in the manner determined by the Affiliated Club" does not translate as you had to inform your handicap secretary. Some clubs may have put that condition down, others may have had a log book, others may have asked players to register via howdidido (i.e. register in a similar way most of us do now). No one, therefore, actually needed to be informed about your pre-registration. A record would hopefully exist, however, so if anyone checks at a later date then they can check whether pre-registration occurred.
		
Click to expand...

Point being, there was an effort involved in it, which is not a requirement of WHS


----------



## Voyager EMH (Nov 9, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			1.Of course, but you said for individual strokeplay, *strokeplay is medal play*

2. If you'd stopped at Stableford, then yes, but you then made it look like you were discussing strokeplay, while yes s/ford is a form of strokeplay, I don't think it's a stretch for anyone to mistake what you meant here.
		
Click to expand...

1. Individual stableford is also strokeplay.

2. I don't understand what point you are making here.
I know that people are playing roll-ups, individual stableford, and scoring points according to their course handicap instead of doing the correct thing which is to score points according to their playing handicaps for individual strokeplay. They are wrong to do this, they don't understand why they are wrong and I see it a a negative consequence of the introduction of WHS.
I believe my original post made this very clear and you read something into my statement that was not there.


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 9, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			we're all meant to put in GP scores at every opportunity,
		
Click to expand...

There was no mention of that in the WHS briefing I attended just an emphasis on players getting to 20 scores in their record ASAP.

On a personal note I would not want to put in scores at every opportunity, I do not take my 'general play' that seriously and often treat them as rounds where I am trying/working things out.


----------



## 4LEX (Nov 9, 2021)

It's worked out well for me. I've had a really poor season yet my handicap has been cut on the basis of a couple of decent rounds on tough courses off the tips.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 9, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			Point being, there was an effort involved in it, which is not a requirement of WHS
		
Click to expand...

So what do you reckon this means?

*2.1a(iii) Registering Intent to Submit a Score in General Play.*_ A player is required to pre-register their intent to submit an acceptable score in general play for handicap purposes. Such pre-registration must be made: l Before the player starts the round,_


----------



## JonnyGutteridge (Nov 9, 2021)

I haven't actually put a supplementary score in, I doubt I ever will. Just me in that boat?

When I play a social round at my home club, everyone is just happy to be not playing a medal. Better ball matchplay is everyone's preferred game, gimmies and ready golf, lots of piss taking, never have I shot a competitive score.
When I play with my mates (away from my home club) it can be stressful enough with everyone getting competitive, or getting frustrated by their own game. Imagine that amplified if we were all holding scorecards to be handed in!! It'd be thoroughly miserable.

If I did put supplementary home and away scores in, my handicap would increase from 3.8 to 8 or 9 I would say. I would clean up every single comp.

And that's exactly why no more than X supplementary cards should count towards your best 8. In fact, i'd almost say supplementary scores should not be a part of the system at all.


----------



## IanM (Nov 9, 2021)

I haven't put a single supplementary in either.  We have comps EVERY Saturday so plenty if scope for getting scores in.

Every other round we play is in the sort of format you say above.  Up the rebels!

No doubt  fun golf will be banned soon!


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 9, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			GP scores are a part of WHS, we're all meant to put in GP scores at every opportunity, your experience of people knowing and entering many GP scores, varies greatly from my experience in the NE, that's not happening at all.
		
Click to expand...

 One of the things I would add is that the Captain and I made sure that all members could not say "nobody told me that".  We set up a dedicated section our website, drip feeding bit by bit briefings long before the WHS came in and similarly we set to two notice board areas within the clubhouse and followed England Golf's briefing schedule and notices to do the same.

The only excuse that members have for not knowing how it works is because they could not be bothered to read the notices and believe me I know there are a few in that situation judging by the questions I continue to get asked.


----------



## badgergm (Nov 9, 2021)

Backsticks said:



			Is it than really an issue though, or just an irritation to a tiny minority at the fact that the calculation is published?
Which might be poor communication, but no evidence that it is a weakness of tge whs functioning itself.

Was CSS really effective though in its application. 'Tough' conditions which might have raised it in the past, were surely inequitable. The effect on the score of a scratchman, who plays with more control, can adjust his ball flight, and whose better shot level anyway is less vulnerable to its influence, and so it might cost him a shot or two. The high hc guys hooks, slices, and skys, balloon his score by 10 shots as he cannot adapt his play to the same degree. So it had quite a distorting effect, which was not sloped.
Just because we saw it applied more in the past, doesnt mean its a failing of whs that we now dont. It could be quite a good improvement in fact.
		
Click to expand...

if The stats back it up, then apply some sort of factor. It isn’t an excuse to make it nigh on impossible to be greater than 0.
Im not sure about it anyway - I play off 5ish and I’m sure a 20-25 mph wind in bouncy conditions like this summer affects my ability to hit greens and make pars a lot more than a few of the older 16 hcap guys that I play with who barely get the ball off the ground.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 9, 2021)

badgergm said:



			if The stats back it up, then apply some sort of factor. It isn’t an excuse to make it nigh on impossible to be greater than 0.
Im not sure about it anyway - I play off 5ish and I’m sure a 20-25 mph wind in bouncy conditions like this summer affects my ability to hit greens and make pars a lot more than a few of the older 16 hcap guys that I play with who barely get the ball off the ground.
		
Click to expand...

Does it affect the scratch player and the 54 handicapper equally?


----------



## Backache (Nov 9, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			One of the things I would add is that the Captain and I made sure that all members could not say "nobody told me that".  We set up a dedicated section our website, drip feeding bit by bit briefings long before the WHS came in and similarly we set to two notice board areas within the clubhouse and followed England Golf's briefing schedule and notices to do the same.

The only excuse that members have for not knowing how it works is because they could not be bothered to read the notices and believe me I know there are a few in that situation judging by the questions I continue to get asked.
		
Click to expand...

Lets be fair to your members ,doubtless you did your best to inform them but for many there was an awful lot  of other things going on when WHS was introduced and garnering an understanding was probably low on their list of priorities. For much of the time golfing was only sporadic so the concepts were abstract rather than currently useful so the information less easily retained. And whereas noticeboards may be an excellent place to convey information about preferred lies being in use. They are not really a realistic place to read and digest the complexeities of a new handicapping system for most.


----------



## Captainron (Nov 10, 2021)

I love it. Works easily and quickly. Just wish it was integrated with the other unions so you didn’t have to send off cards when playing up in Scotland.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 10, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			There was no mention of that in the WHS briefing I attended just an emphasis on players getting to 20 scores in their record ASAP.

*On a personal note I would not want to put in scores at every opportunity, I do not take my 'general play' that seriously and often treat them as rounds where I am trying/working things out*.
		
Click to expand...

100% agree, but that's not the message pushed by SG, you should be putting in a card whenever you tee it up (and are not solo). 

In fairness to them (not a phrase I use often), that is the idea behind WHS, that by submitting every score you can, your handicap is more accurate. This is of course nonsense, a bounce game is nothing like a medal game, without a shadow of a doubt, if I started putting in every score I'd be in double digits rather than mid-single digits. It's nonsense. The opportunity to put in cards easily for those who can;t play many medal rounds is great, if they want to do it, but that should be it, this idea that there should be a compulsion is nonsense, and totally align to golf in Scotland.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 10, 2021)

rulefan said:



			So what do you reckon this means?

*2.1a(iii) Registering Intent to Submit a Score in General Play.*_ A player is required to pre-register their intent to submit an acceptable score in general play for handicap purposes. Such pre-registration must be made: l Before the player starts the round,_

Click to expand...

You click a button an an App.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 10, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			You click a button an an App.
		
Click to expand...

Is that much different from signing your name in a book? Especially if you name is really short, there would be little effort in both. In fact, arguably it is more effort by doing it on a phone, as you have to get your phone out, open the app, and then register and confirm the various round details. Also, pre-WHS, you could simply click a button on the PSI screen to do the same. And, if WHS hadn't come along, no doubt Apps would have been developed at some point anyway to submit general play rounds. WHS simply accelerated that due to the need to submit rounds before midnight.


----------



## yandabrown (Nov 10, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			You click a button an an App.
		
Click to expand...

Which surely could have been done in CONGU rules too? The switch to WHS has driven the creation and use of these apps but it could have happened under CONGU.


----------



## Orikoru (Nov 10, 2021)

JonnyGutteridge said:



*I haven't actually put a supplementary score in, I doubt I ever will. Just me in that boat?*

When I play a social round at my home club, everyone is just happy to be not playing a medal. Better ball matchplay is everyone's preferred game, gimmies and ready golf, lots of piss taking, never have I shot a competitive score.
When I play with my mates (away from my home club) it can be stressful enough with everyone getting competitive, or getting frustrated by their own game. Imagine that amplified if we were all holding scorecards to be handed in!! It'd be thoroughly miserable.

If I did put supplementary home and away scores in, my handicap would increase from 3.8 to 8 or 9 I would say. I would clean up every single comp.

And that's exactly why no more than X supplementary cards should count towards your best 8. In fact, i'd almost say supplementary scores should not be a part of the system at all.
		
Click to expand...

I haven't either. I've only entered comp rounds. Our friendly rounds are off the yellows, gimmes, dropping from out of bounds etc etc, just get round have a laugh and then have a pint really. I've not had any desire to make those rounds competitive by handing a card in. Although this has worked to my detriment slightly, as I haven't actually put many scores in at all, and if I'd have put a few of those in I'd probably be off 14 or 13 by now based on how I've been playing. But I still prefer to just enjoy the rounds and not worry about making two footers for the card.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 10, 2021)

yandabrown said:



			Which surely could have been done in CONGU rules too? The switch to WHS has driven the creation and use of these apps but it could have happened under CONGU.
		
Click to expand...

Except we already had the technology, but weren't using it. And again, there was a requirement to "inform" pre-round, that isn't actually the case now, but the App makes you register.


----------



## wjemather (Nov 10, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			Except we already had the technology, but weren't using it. And again, there was a requirement to "inform" pre-round, *that isn't actually the case now*, but the App makes you register.
		
Click to expand...

Not true. There is essentially no change in the requirement - just the terminology (and methods used) have changed.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 10, 2021)

Orikoru said:



			I haven't either. I've only entered comp rounds. *Our friendly rounds are off the yellows, gimmes, dropping from out of bounds etc etc,* just get round have a laugh and then have a pint really. I've not had any desire to make those rounds competitive by handing a card in. Although this has worked to my detriment slightly, as I haven't actually put many scores in at all, and if I'd have put a few of those in I'd probably be off 14 or 13 by now based on how I've been playing. But I still prefer to just enjoy the rounds and not worry about making two footers for the card.
		
Click to expand...

Playing of yellows is a non-issue. Gimmes are, but let's be honest, if you are stressed out about having to make a putt that would have been a gimme, it shouldn't have been a gimme anyway. Fair enough, you cannot drop when it goes out of bounds. However, hopefully it happens rarely, and when it does you could just blob the hole for handicap purposes (or why not just hit provsionals if you think it could be OB)?

Ultimately, it is up to you whether you hand in a score or not. But, I can assure you, it does not have to feel "competitive" when you submit a score. I have got into the habit of submitting every round, and it has actually enhanced my experience in social golf. Previously, I'd just go out and play socially, and take it as it is. But, so many rounds just felt so meaningless, especially if I started having a bad day. Even good days all felt a little pointless. However, now that I submit each score, everything feels a lot more worthwhile. I get rewarded for a good round, but when I have a bad run at least I know it will all ultimately factor into my handicap record.

I can understand people not wanting to submit scores if they tend to work on aspects of their game during social golf. Fair enough, it is more practice than a scoring round of golf. I also felt I'd be a bit like that, because when my head used to go down, I just started messing about, "experimenting" on different shots. Whereas now I feel I've something to play for each time.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 10, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			Except we already had the technology, but weren't using it. And again, *there was a requirement to "inform" pre-round, that isn't actually the case now, but the App makes you register.*

Click to expand...

I'm confused. Some of the technology was there to pre-register and submit scores using the PSI screen on Club V1 (and maybe other ISVs). But, the technology has come on massively since WHS, albeit many many teething problems. Furthermore, there was no drive to educate clubs and players to submit supplementary scores, so few did. 

The bit in bold, I do not know what you are saying? Pre and post WHS, a general play round has always had to be pre-registered. There is no change there. Is it that you simply do not like the methods of how pre-registration is done now compered to pre WHS, rather than the actual requirement of pre-registration?


----------



## Backache (Nov 10, 2021)

For me even marking a card is a bit of a pain if I'm playing social golf.
I never do it,  nowadays I need glasses for near vision, happy to do it for medal rounds but not all the time.


----------



## wjemather (Nov 10, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			Playing of yellows is a non-issue. Gimmes are, but let's be honest, if you are stressed out about having to make a putt that would have been a gimme, it shouldn't have been a gimme anyway. Fair enough, *you cannot drop when it goes out of bounds*. However, hopefully it happens rarely, and when it does you could just blob the hole for handicap purposes (or why not just hit provsionals if you think it could be OB)?
		
Click to expand...

This is only partly true. RoH 2.1b (ii) states the following: "Where a player follows the provisions set down in a Model Local Rule, even when the Committee in charge of the course has not adopted that Model Local Rule, the score may still be acceptable for handicap purposes. The same situation applies where a player is in breach of a Model Local Rule that has been adopted by the Committee." As such, rounds where the alternative option to stroke-and-distance has been used may be acceptable for handicapping.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 10, 2021)

wjemather said:



			This is only partly true. RoH 2.1b (ii) states the following: "Where a player follows the provisions set down in a Model Local Rule, even when the Committee in charge of the course has not adopted that Model Local Rule, the score may still be acceptable for handicap purposes. The same situation applies where a player is in breach of a Model Local Rule that has been adopted by the Committee." As such, rounds where the alternative option to stroke-and-distance has been used may be acceptable for handicapping.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting. Because I was under the impression that, although clubs could adopt this local rule, if they did rounds would not be acceptable for handicapping? To be fair, I cannot remember where I got this impression, whether it be by reading about it at the time directly, or from conversations  in golf monthly.


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 10, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			I'm confused. Some of the technology was there to pre-register and submit scores using the PSI screen on Club V1 (and maybe other ISVs). But, the technology has come on massively since WHS, albeit many many teething problems. Furthermore, there was no drive to educate clubs and players *to submit supplementary scores,* so few did.

The bit in bold, I do not know what you are saying? Pre and post WHS, a general play round has always had to be pre-registered. There is no change there. Is it that you simply do not like the methods of how pre-registration is done now compered to pre WHS, rather than the actual requirement of pre-registration?
		
Click to expand...

The clue is in the name, and the old wording, they were meant to be supplementary if you weren't getting enough scores in. And if you were Cat 1, forget it.


----------



## SurreyGolfer (Nov 10, 2021)

For me as a beginner, it's brilliant and has allowed me to get a handicap much sooner and get hooked on watching it progress than I think the previous system would. A few reasons for that:
- All of our comps are off whites and I'm not yet at the standard where I can play off whites at my course (long carries off the tee and tee box is my nemesis right now). By using the app/WHS I can play with friends off of yellows on not just my course but other courses and get a h'cap.
- Feels quite transparent to me compared to 'handing a card into the secretary and seeing what happens'
- Love being able to add friends from different clubs and see how we are all progressing

Granted I am a relatively newcomer so dont have experience of the old system, but if one of the aims of WHS was to make it easier for beginners and newcomers to obtain, track and keep a handicap, mission accomplished in my view


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 10, 2021)

SurreyGolfer said:



			For me as a beginner, it's brilliant and has allowed me to get a handicap much sooner and get hooked on watching it progress than I think the previous system would. A few reasons for that:
- All of our comps are off whites and I'm not yet at the standard where I can play off whites at my course (long carries off the tee and tee box is my nemesis right now). By using the app/WHS I can play with friends off of yellows on not just my course but other courses and get a h'cap.
*- Feels quite transparent to me compared to 'handing a card into the secretary and seeing what happens'
- Love being able to add friends from different clubs and see how we are all progressing*

Granted I am a relatively newcomer so dont have experience of the old system, but if one of the aims of WHS was to make it easier for beginners and newcomers to obtain, track and keep a handicap, mission accomplished in my view
		
Click to expand...

Neither of those are a function of WHS, the second one must be something to do with the EG App presumably? Not something you can do in the Scottish App.


----------



## Garush34 (Nov 10, 2021)

I only rejoined a club in late June and don't know anyone at the club, so I only managed 6 comp rounds and one casual round under the new system. But I did like how it worked, I think it's a truer reflection of where your golf will be if you play enough.

If I was at a club where I had a regular game each week I would definitely be putting in general play scores each week. That's what I like best about the new system, you don't need to wait for comps to be able to submit cards. Not everyone can play when the comps are on so why not allow people to do it when they can play.

I hope I can get some more rounds in next year and hopefully find a regular game so I can get extras in too.


----------



## Orikoru (Nov 10, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			Playing of yellows is a non-issue. Gimmes are, but let's be honest, if you are stressed out about having to make a putt that would have been a gimme, it shouldn't have been a gimme anyway. Fair enough, you cannot drop when it goes out of bounds. However, hopefully it happens rarely, and when it does you could just blob the hole for handicap purposes (or why not just hit provsionals if you think it could be OB)?

Ultimately, it is up to you whether you hand in a score or not. But, I can assure you, it does not have to feel "competitive" when you submit a score. I have got into the habit of submitting every round, and it has actually enhanced my experience in social golf. Previously, I'd just go out and play socially, and take it as it is. But, so many rounds just felt so meaningless, especially if I started having a bad day. Even good days all felt a little pointless. However, now that I submit each score, everything feels a lot more worthwhile. I get rewarded for a good round, but when I have a bad run at least I know it will all ultimately factor into my handicap record.

I can understand people not wanting to submit scores if they tend to work on aspects of their game during social golf. Fair enough, it is more practice than a scoring round of golf. I also felt I'd be a bit like that, because when my head used to go down, I just started messing about, "experimenting" on different shots. Whereas now I feel I've something to play for each time.
		
Click to expand...

I don't know, it's more of a mood thing, when we're playing for fun I can do without the pressure of having to hole a two foot putt or making sure I drop in the exact right place. We just get on with it and don't care. Hitting a provisional takes longer than just dropping it in bounds when you get there. Sometimes we'll even blob a hole just because we played it badly, even though we could have possibly made a point if we finished out, if you just want to forgot it and move onto the next hole. Plus, as you touch upon there, you'll go for more difficult shots to practise them whereas in competitive rounds you play more sensibly. Knowing you're putting a card in changes the whole mindset I feel, it's not just putting out here and there. I'm quite happy to keep that just for comps.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 10, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			The clue is in the name, and the old wording, they were meant to be supplementary if you weren't getting enough scores in. And if you were Cat 1, forget it.
		
Click to expand...

You seem to making a completely separate argument now, unless I mistook you to begin with. I thought you WERE arguing about the pre-registration process. NOW, it seems you are arguing about the name change from supplementary scores to general play scores, and the fact low handicappers can also now submit these? Two completely different arguments.

In terms of the second argument, any player outside a Cat 1 handicap COULD submit as many supplementary cards as they wanted. Call them supplementary, call them general play, call them what you like, you could hand these scores in even if you played in 1-2 qualifying competitions every week.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 10, 2021)

Orikoru said:



			I don't know, it's more of a mood thing, when we're playing for fun *I can do without the pressure of having to hole a two foot putt* or making sure I drop in the exact right place. We just get on with it and don't care. Hitting a provisional takes longer than just dropping it in bounds when you get there. Sometimes we'll even blob a hole just because we played it badly, even though we could have possibly made a point if we finished out, if you just want to forgot it and move onto the next hole. Plus, as you touch upon there, you'll go for more difficult shots to practise them whereas in competitive rounds you play more sensibly. Knowing you're putting a card in changes the whole mindset I feel, it's not just putting out here and there. I'm quite happy to keep that just for comps.
		
Click to expand...

If I played with you and read this, I'd never give you a putt of this length again  . I'd make you play every one, and remind you before you hit it that you miss these, the pressure is on (in a friendly piss taking way that mates do when playing golf)


----------



## Orikoru (Nov 10, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			If I played with you and read this, I'd never give you a putt of this length again  . I'd make you play every one, and remind you before you hit it that you miss these, the pressure is on (in a friendly piss taking way that mates do when playing golf)
		
Click to expand...

Honestly we don't even wait to be given them sometimes we just pick them up. As I think I'm conveying, we don't take it _that _seriously that anyone cares. One of my mates will just give himself a six footer if he's pissed off - I don't really care it's his score at the end of the day that doesn't count for anything. We pretty much decide ourselves if we want to practise the putt or take it as a gimme.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 10, 2021)

yandabrown said:



			Which surely could have been done in CONGU rules too? The switch to WHS has driven the creation and use of these apps but it could have happened under CONGU.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed. The pre-registering requirement was built in to the ISVs' pre WHS PSIs.
EG have confirmed that the initial step in using a PSI or app and the resultant link message to WHS is considered to be 'pre-registering'.


----------



## Backache (Nov 10, 2021)

Personally I've no objection to the idea that you can put in cards from social play, it's the idea that you should put in cards from social play.
I've no wish to cheat the system but it just does not suit the way I play golf socially.


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 10, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			Playing of yellows is a non-issue..
		
Click to expand...

Putting in cards from the yellows where I play is an issue for me

The difference between the course ratings is 1.4 however for me the difference between yellows and whites is 3 shots.


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 10, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			The clue is in the name, and the old wording, they were meant to be supplementary if you weren't getting enough scores in. And if you were Cat 1, forget it.
		
Click to expand...

Under Congu you could put in  as many as you liked (ex Cat1) and we positively encouraged it in the year leading up to the WHS.
 Even prior to that we had a few putting in one a week.


----------



## sweaty sock (Nov 10, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			Putting in cards from the yellows where I play is an issue for me

The difference between the course ratings is 1.4 however for me the difference between yellows and whites is 3 shots.
		
Click to expand...

How so?  Slope?


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 10, 2021)

sweaty sock said:



			How so?  Slope?
		
Click to expand...

Not a lot between the slope of the two tees (124/128)  and  I get the same number of shots on either tee most of the time.
It's is a length thing,
one hole I cannot reach in 2 off the whites and
two par 5s become 'true' par 5s ie 3 shotters tee to green for me from the white whereas I can make the green in 2 from the yellows

The same problems do not exist for relatively longer hitters hence only a small difference in course rating.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 10, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			Putting in cards from the yellows where I play is an issue for me

The difference between the course ratings is 1.4 however for me the difference between yellows and whites is 3 shots.
		
Click to expand...

I suppose if you evaluate your own personal ability, then arguably this would always be the case when playing on any different course. For example, you may find that there is a bigger difference between whites and yellows at your club compared to what the Course Rating suggests. However, that would also be true when you go to play any other club. Some clubs you may find the Course Rating suits you and your handicap, others you'll think the course plays much harder or easier for you, compared to how you fee at your own club off whites.

Ultimately, if you want a handicap that you, as an individual, can be absolutely sure is as accurate as possible for a particular course, then you'd want all scores on you record from that course. If you play more course, you'll start to get a broader handicap that is applicable to courses in general. Unless, of course, there is a feeling that either your whites or yellows are rated incorrectly


----------



## sweaty sock (Nov 10, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			Not a lot between the slope of the two tees (124/128)  and  I get the same number of shots on either tee most of the time.
It's is a length thing,
one hole I cannot reach in 2 off the whites and
two par 5s become 'true' par 5s ie 3 shotters tee to green for me from the white whereas I can make the green in 2 from the yellows

The same problems do not exist for relatively longer hitters hence only a small difference in course rating.
		
Click to expand...

I find the opposite problem, our course is rated 2.5 shots easier off the yellows, but apart from 1 par three that goes from wedge to 7 iron, there's negligible difference in second shots for me, all the par 5s are reachable from either tee and the only difference is 1 club max into the greens. Where I'm supposed to find 3 shots from is a total mystery...


----------



## Backache (Nov 10, 2021)

Unless the difference between two tees is massive the actual difference in strokes on the same hole for two sets of tees for any but the most incompetent of golfers is always going to be fractional.
Unless you have kept meticulous records over many rounds I'm not to sure how anyone can say there is a definitive lack of difference between two sets of tees.


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 10, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			I suppose if you evaluate your own personal ability, then arguably this would always be the case when playing on any different course. For example, you may find that there is a bigger difference between whites and yellows at your club compared to what the Course Rating suggests. However, that would also be true when you go to play any other club. Some clubs you may find the Course Rating suits you and your handicap, others you'll think the course plays much harder or easier for you, compared to how you fee at your own club off whites.

Ultimately, if you want a handicap that you, as an individual, can be absolutely sure is as accurate as possible for a particular course, then you'd want all scores on you record from that course. If you play more course, you'll start to get a broader handicap that is applicable to courses in general. Unless, of course, there is a feeling that either your whites or yellows are rated incorrectly
		
Click to expand...

 My days of playing away are in the dim and distant past

No arguments with the ratings it just my age and ability, particularly length (40-50 yards down on my irons compared to when I was at my longest) these days.


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Nov 10, 2021)

Garush34 said:



			I only rejoined a club in late June and don't know anyone at the club, so I only managed 6 comp rounds and one casual round under the new system. But I did like how it worked, I think it's a truer reflection of where your golf will be if you play enough.

If I was at a club where I had a regular game each week I would definitely be putting in general play scores each week. That's what I like best about the new system, you don't need to wait for comps to be able to submit cards. Not everyone can play when the comps are on so why not allow people to do it when they can play.

I hope I can get some more rounds in next year and hopefully find a regular game so I can get extras in too.
		
Click to expand...

That's fine, if you want to do it- great😀

But many, including me, do not want to play a round to the full rules of golf, most times I play.
I want to take a shot again if I want to, or try s particular shot that I wouldn't do, if trying for my best score.
IOW, I want to relax and enjoy my golf and the company.
Others can do as they wish, but what is worrying me since this WHS thing started is that there are a number of people almost coercing others to put in cards. Making noises about people being bandits if they don't etc.
Forgetting that if someone was minded to cheat by keeping a false handicap, then it is easy to put in general play cards with a score that is "accidentally on purpose " of a score to send their index higher!
Indeed, could it be said that the system now could make it easier to cheat.?
Suppose our cheat wants to take a high (er) handicap to a tasty Open in a months time.
His club have just two competitions beforehand.
However he also submits 6 or more casual rounds in the interim, not scoring very well it seems😉
Not being an expert on the system, I might have this completely wrong, but, 
Am I right in thinking his index could be higher for the Open than it would be if his only qualifying scores were from the two club competitions.?


----------



## rulefan (Nov 10, 2021)

Swinglowandslow said:



			Am I right in thinking his index could be higher for the Open than it would be if his only qualifying scores were from the two club competitions.?
		
Click to expand...

If his scoring record has 3 scores, his Index would be his best (de-sloped) Differential minus 2.0


----------



## Garush34 (Nov 10, 2021)

Swinglowandslow said:



			That's fine, if you want to do it- great😀

But many, including me, do not want to play a round to the full rules of golf, most times I play.
I want to take a shot again if I want to, or try s particular shot that I wouldn't do, if trying for my best score.
IOW, I want to relax and enjoy my golf and the company.
Others can do as they wish, but what is worrying me since this WHS thing started is that there are a number of people almost coercing others to put in cards. Making noises about people being bandits if they don't etc.
Forgetting that if someone was minded to cheat by keeping a false handicap, then it is easy to put in general play cards with a score that is "accidentally on purpose " of a score to send their index higher!
Indeed, could it be said that the system now could make it easier to cheat.?
Suppose our cheat wants to take a high (er) handicap to a tasty Open in a months time.
His club have just two competitions beforehand.
However he also submits 6 or more casual rounds in the interim, not scoring very well it seems😉
Not being an expert on the system, I might have this completely wrong, but, 
Am I right in thinking his index could be higher for the Open than it would be if his only qualifying scores were from the two club competitions.?
		
Click to expand...

I guess it would all depend on his last 20 counting scores really. It would also depend on how well he plays in said open. No guarantees he's going to play well so it could all be for nought.

I get what people say about being called bandits but on the other side, why is it bad that someone like me would want all their scores to count. I just want to improve my Handicap and get it as low as possible. This system allows me to do that all year round if my club doesn't have many comps.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 10, 2021)

Swinglowandslow said:



			That's fine, if you want to do it- great😀

But many, including me, do not want to play a round to the full rules of golf, most times I play.
I want to take a shot again if I want to, or try s particular shot that I wouldn't do, if trying for my best score.
IOW, I want to relax and enjoy my golf and the company.
Others can do as they wish, but what is worrying me since this WHS thing started is that there are a number of people almost coercing others to put in cards. Making noises about people being bandits if they don't etc.
Forgetting that if someone was minded to cheat by keeping a false handicap, then it is easy to put in general play cards with a score that is "accidentally on purpose " of a score to send their index higher!
Indeed, could it be said that the system now could make it easier to cheat.?
Suppose our cheat wants to take a high (er) handicap to a tasty Open in a months time.
His club have just two competitions beforehand.
However he also submits 6 or more casual rounds in the interim, not scoring very well it seems😉
Not being an expert on the system, I might have this completely wrong, but,
Am I right in thinking his index could be higher for the Open than it would be if his only qualifying scores were from the two club competitions.?
		
Click to expand...

Yes, Index would increase, if a player put in a load of poor general play rounds. These would remove older scores from last 20, and if any of these were in the players top 8, they'd be replaced by worse scores


----------



## Backsticks (Nov 10, 2021)

The linking of handicap manipulation to the handicap system is a red herring. Neither WHS, nor the previous system, have as goals, the elimination of handicap cheats. It is like criticising WHS because it really does little for peace in the middle East. If people are going to cheat, they are going to cheat. Handicap systems are not honesty police. Yet it is where many golfers, and even committees, start and finish in their thinking. Cheats will always find ways to exploit any system. Why the concern about handicap manipulators, when the system has no role in policing them ? The same characters are likely nundging their ball in the rough while 'identifying' it to a better lie, dropping 'innocently' from a path on the advantageous side rather than the nearest point of relief, or deciding after 10 minutes of looking for their ball, that since it wasnt found, it must be in the stream and so dropping one. Deal with that sort of thing as fellow golfers, rather than expecting a system which was designed on the basis that golfers are honest, to solve a cloudy ''bandit' problem.


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Nov 10, 2021)

Garush34 said:



			I guess it would all depend on his last 20 counting scores really. It would also depend on how well he plays in said open. No guarantees he's going to play well so it could all be for nought.

I get what people say about being called bandits but on the other side, why is it bad that someone like me would want all their scores to count. I just want to improve my Handicap and get it as low as possible. This system allows me to do that all year round if my club doesn't have many comps.
		
Click to expand...

Ref you really last paragraph, I am not criticising you for putting in as many cards as you like. I'm not saying it is bad😀
You are fully entitled to do that and good luck to you,
I am merely defending against the now increasing attitude that is criticising myself and others for not putting in casual rounds for handicap.
Something that didn't happen before WHS.


----------



## HeftyHacker (Nov 10, 2021)

I've just been looking through my handicap record and I would definitely be higher if it was comps only because I haven't entered all that many comps with busy weekends and a young family.

As it stands I'll meet up with a mate, usually on a Sunday afternoon or midweek evening (in summer) and we'll chat whilst in the car park prior to the round and decide whether or not we fancy putting a card in or just having a social knock, with reloads, gimmies etc.

The result is I reckon my handicap is about 3 lower than what it would be if it was based on comps only as I seem to play better in that more relaxed environment (whilst abiding by the RoG).

I would agree though, no one should be chastising others for not putting cards in all the time. Its their prerogative, and golf is ultimately meant to be a fun a past time.


----------



## badgergm (Nov 11, 2021)

rulefan said:



			Does it affect the scratch player and the 54 handicapper equally?
		
Click to expand...

Probably not, but then again IMO the difference between such golfers is sufficiently large that any comparisons are pretty meaningless. And any attempt to have them in the same competition via handicapping system is misguided.

But leaving that aside, I have no objection to a slope being applied to PCC if the stats support it. I’m also interested In idea of more granular PCC. What I am against is a PCC that seems to be nowhere near reactive enough to actual scores.


----------



## jimbob.someroo (Nov 11, 2021)

Backsticks said:



			The linking of handicap manipulation to the handicap system is a red herring. Neither WHS, nor the previous system, have as goals, the elimination of handicap cheats. It is like criticising WHS because it really does little for peace in the middle East. If people are going to cheat, they are going to cheat. Handicap systems are not honesty police. Yet it is where many golfers, and even committees, start and finish in their thinking. Cheats will always find ways to exploit any system. Why the concern about handicap manipulators, when the system has no role in policing them ? The same characters are likely nundging their ball in the rough while 'identifying' it to a better lie, dropping 'innocently' from a path on the advantageous side rather than the nearest point of relief, or deciding after 10 minutes of looking for their ball, that since it wasnt found, it must be in the stream and so dropping one. Deal with that sort of thing as fellow golfers, rather than expecting a system which was designed on the basis that golfers are honest, to solve a cloudy ''bandit' problem.
		
Click to expand...

This is a fantastic point. 90% of the negatives towards WHS in this thread have been based on what people think others might do (or might not do). 

The lack of linking with other unions is a totally valid issue, as are a few others chucked about. But will never be able to get my head around some of the vitriol around WHS when it's pretty much exclusively based on people's fear that others might cheat ... Particularly when there's rules that are far more fragrantly broken - bad drops, 3+ mins for lost ball etc.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 11, 2021)

jimbob.someroo said:



			This is a fantastic point. 90% of the negatives towards WHS in this thread have been based on what people think others might do (or might not do).

The lack of linking with other unions is a totally valid issue, as are a few others chucked about. But will never be able to get my head around some of the vitriol around WHS when it's pretty much exclusively based on people's fear that others might cheat ... Particularly when there's rules that are far more fragrantly broken - bad drops, 3+ mins for lost ball etc.
		
Click to expand...

There was some chat at our place that there were several people at our place who were only putting in scores for their bad rounds, as they realised their handicap went up very quickly once they lost any of their best 8 scores. Too early to tell what how WHS will impact people's mindset, however there could be a selection of people, like this, who quite like the idea of these rapid increases to handicap. Virtually any system can be cheated, of course, it is just that WHS is more rewarding for those types of people than the old system.


----------



## woofers (Nov 11, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			There was some chat at our place that there were several people at our place who were only putting in scores for their bad rounds, as they realised their handicap *went up very quickly* once they lost any of their best 8 scores. Too early to tell what how WHS will impact people's mindset, however there could be a selection of people, like this, who quite like the idea of these *rapid increases* to handicap. Virtually any system can be cheated, of course, it is just that WHS is more rewarding for those types of people than the old system.
		
Click to expand...

Subject of course to the soft cap and hard cap ‘limits’ built into the system, and any observant handicap committee member.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 11, 2021)

woofers said:



			Subject of course to the soft cap and hard cap ‘limits’ built into the system, and any observant handicap committee member.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed, but a 5 shot increase to your Index, and potentially 6 shots to course handicap are still quite appealing compared to what could be achieved pre WHS. 

Also, a club with several hundred members, the handicap sec isn't exactly going to get a big alarm going off in his house when a member has submitted a few dodgy scores. They may go through all the handicap reports, but no idea how good they are now (I left my role as handicap sec a few months ago). But, even if it is flagged a few general play rounds have caused a reasonably big increase, how can the handicap sec determine whether there has been foul play, or the player has just played badly. The latter would need to be the assumption without any other evidence, such as the player blatantly admitting it.

Certainly, our club is a fairly well established club in the area, and general play scores where being entered by handicap sec from all scores on submitted scorecard, without noticing some of these had already been entered by the player and others were never pre registered. So good luck assuming handicap secretaries will be able to spot bad general play scores coming in, and determining whether these are fair or not.

Ultimately it is how the system works. One of the benefits is it provides bigger increases than before for those who have declining ability. Of course, that benefit can also be abused by those who are that way inclined.


----------



## badgergm (Nov 11, 2021)

Backsticks said:



			The linking of handicap manipulation to the handicap system is a red herring. Neither WHS, nor the previous system, have as goals, the elimination of handicap cheats. It is like criticising WHS because it really does little for peace in the middle East. If people are going to cheat, they are going to cheat. Handicap systems are not honesty police. Yet it is where many golfers, and even committees, start and finish in their thinking. Cheats will always find ways to exploit any system. Why the concern about handicap manipulators, when the system has no role in policing them ? The same characters are likely nundging their ball in the rough while 'identifying' it to a better lie, dropping 'innocently' from a path on the advantageous side rather than the nearest point of relief, or deciding after 10 minutes of looking for their ball, that since it wasnt found, it must be in the stream and so dropping one. Deal with that sort of thing as fellow golfers, rather than expecting a system which was designed on the basis that golfers are honest, to solve a cloudy ''bandit' problem.
		
Click to expand...

But if you take this argument to it’s logical conclusion then you wouldn’t have any anti cheating measures at all. Why bother with pre registering a GP score? Why bother insisting on a marker for a GP score? If the system is going to have some measures then it’s perfectly legitimate to comment on whether there should be more (or less).


----------



## Wilson (Nov 12, 2021)

I think it's great, the MYEG app is great, (and long overdue), I try and put in a card every time I play.


----------



## pauljames87 (Nov 12, 2021)

Another postive 

Yesterday I was all set for a one ball , all my playing partners had either teed off at 9 (this was midday) or were working 

However on the tee is a 3 ball of 2 Marshall's and a committee member.. invited to join..play best front 9 I've played for ages and don't have to go to the shop to say "oh I want this card to count" just get phone out and start it


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 12, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Another postive

Yesterday I was all set for a one ball , all my playing partners had either teed off at 9 (this was midday) or were working

However on the tee is a 3 ball of 2 Marshall's and a committee member.. invited to join..play best front 9 I've played for ages and don't have to go to the shop to say "oh I want this card to count" just get phone out and start it
		
Click to expand...

I assume you pre-registered the round, and so you'd have submitted a terrible score if you had a bad day?


----------



## pauljames87 (Nov 12, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			I assume you pre-registered the round, and so you'd have submitted a terrible score if you had a bad day?
		
Click to expand...

Indeed. On the tee 

Don't get why people wouldn't submit a bad day ..


----------



## wjemather (Nov 12, 2021)

Kaz said:



			Fundamentally, the whole point of a handicap system is to contrive a competitive competition between players of different abilities. *The new system just doesn't do that as effectively as the old system did.*

Click to expand...

Thanks to Slope, WHS actually does a far better job of contriving a level playing field than the old system (UHS), especially when it comes to players from courses that present a significantly different challenge, and even more so for players from different jurisdictions.

WHS is also not substantially biased in favour of lower handicappers like UHS was, so we see more mid and higher handicappers a the top of leaderboards, and winning trophies. This is also a good thing.


----------



## Deleted member 3432 (Nov 12, 2021)

Kaz said:



			Completely disagree, sorry. If there was a bias before there’s been a massive over correction now. 

Happy to see high handicaps winning. Just not happy to see people shooting 9, 10 or even more shots under their handicap.
		
Click to expand...

Agree 100% with this, we are seeing winning scores that lower handicaps have zero chance of getting close to.

I only enter comps now to play off the Blue or White tees since we have to play off yellows the rest of the time apart from a small window on Tuesday afternoons.


----------



## jimbob.someroo (Nov 12, 2021)

saving_par said:



			Agree 100% with this, we are seeing winning scores that lower handicaps have zero chance of getting close to.
		
Click to expand...

I know that this is happening, because people have brought it up a few times on here - but it's really not been the experience at our club. Most Medals this year have been won with a score of 66+ which seems pretty fair in a field of 100+ folk. Surely there's always going to be one or two people who have a great day and fire something low. Even the odd score of 64 seems entirely plausible (15 handicapper, getting 18 shots, shoots 79). 

Additionally, we've also played all of our comps at 'mixed tees' this year, which means those going off the whites get an additional 2 shots for the competition. Even with this, there has been just one score of 40+ in the last 10 stableford comps.


----------



## Imurg (Nov 12, 2021)

Not for one moment disputing the high scores claims but, as with Jim, we're not seeing them.
High 30's, maybe the odd 40 or 41 points or equivalent but nothing out of the ordinary 
Today's Senior comp won with 39, last weekend was 38...
Is the reason these high scores come in down to people having had their new index, which put a lot of people up a few shots, and not putting in recent cards?


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 12, 2021)

wjemather said:



			Thanks to Slope, WHS actually does a far better job of contriving a level playing field than the old system (UHS), especially when it comes to players from courses that present a significantly different challenge, and even more so for players from different jurisdictions.

WHS is also not substantially biased in favour of lower handicappers like UHS was, so we see more mid and higher handicappers a the top of leaderboards, and winning trophies. This is also a good thing.
		
Click to expand...

It is interesting in terms of what the statistics say, and what the perception of most golfers is.

Pre-WHS, the biggest complaint regarding handicaps was always in relation to higher handicappers shooting exceptional scores. Often from lower handicappers of course (this is not isolated to single figure handicaps, an 18 handicapper could quite as easily complain when a 28 handicapper shoots a very low score). I know of clubs, probably many, that put handicap limits on competitions, especially board competitions, because there is a perception of either unfairness when higher handicappers shoot low scores that cannot be beaten by very low handicappers. And it is therefore considered not in the interest of the club to have these types of scores winning major events? Of course, there will always be the improving golfer, more likely starting from a higher handicap, that will at some point get great scores to initiate handicap reductions, so most often these low scores could be attributed to that. Whether that is a comfort to the other competitors is another matter.

Personally, I never remember an occasion where a high handicapper complained about not having enough shots when they just lost out to winning a comp, but got beat by a lower handicap. I'd imagine if you told a higher handicap the old system was biased towards low handicappers, I still doubt you'd have had a huge call from high handicappers to be given more shots? My first handicap was 20, I'd have felt a bit red faced to be asked for another shot or 2 so I could beat a single figure handicapper. My main goal was to put my head down and try and get my handicap down, if I did that then I'm sure I'd have a few decent comps along the way anyway.

So, to develop a system that effectively provides a more statistically balanced system, is a system from a golfers perception point of view that favours higher handicappers even MORE than before. Is this a good thing? If it intensifies the arguments about handicaps even more than before? Will more golfers have a drive to improve their game, when it means that as they approach their potential they will be worse off than before WHS in terms of competing? When I analysed the changes to course handicap (now) compared to handicap before WHS at our club, the average increase was approximately equal to the slope of our course. So, scratch would still be scratch, a 30 handicapper would increase to 35 (133 slope). I never remember 30 handicappers demanding an extra 5 shots to be competitive, and I can imagine scratch players would have been saddened / angered if they knew this would happen. Perhaps it could have been slightly mitigated by applying bigger penalties to higher handicappers pre-submission of 20 scores, so that it protects against new golfers rapidly improving (which is natural, a new golfer will generally get much better by simply playing golf, let alone it may be the time they start having a lesson or 2), but they decided to apply a simple flat -2.0 on all players once 3 scores are in, which quickly disappears as a few more scores are entered. If they'd done that, then perhaps the great scores would only be limited to those who had played for some time, and then actively worked to improve their game.

Anyway, WHS does have its positives, and different people will take different things away from it. But, if "we see more mid and higher handicappers a the top of leaderboards, and winning trophies" is used to to highlight one of the positives, I'd imagine some might disagree? It certainly was not used to promote WHS, and presumably the statisticians would have known this would be an impact of WHS. The key promotional points were your index was globally compatible, and more reflective when you go to different courses. But, had they simplified it even more to say higher handicappers will win more, I think they'd have conceded a bit of an own goal?


----------



## wjemather (Nov 12, 2021)

Kaz said:



			Completely disagree, sorry. If there was a bias before there’s been a massive over correction now.

Happy to see high handicaps winning. Just *not happy to see people shooting 9, 10 or even more shots under their handicap*.
		
Click to expand...

This happened did under the old system as well, and no less frequently than it is now. Improving golfers are always going to have the potential to post scores that are beyond the reach of low handicappers - it is why comps should be broken down into divisions (I've been surprised to learn how many clubs do not do this).


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 12, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Indeed. On the tee

Don't get why people wouldn't submit a bad day ..
		
Click to expand...

If you have read this did you mean- why would somebody preregister on a bad weather day?

else

  The whole point is you have no choice. Preregister before starting and enter the round whatever the score when you finish. If you are doing enough a bad round is not going to be one of your 8.

Worth noting an earlier post now

Pre register on the EG app and fail to score the card on the app and a penalty score will be applied automatically


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 12, 2021)

Imurg said:



			Not for one moment disputing the high scores claims but, as with Jim, we're not seeing them.
High 30's, maybe the odd 40 or 41 points or equivalent but nothing out of the ordinary
Today's Senior comp won with 39, last weekend was 38...
Is the reason these high scores come in down to people having had their new index, which put a lot of people up a few shots, and not putting in recent cards?
		
Click to expand...

At my last place, winning scores significantly increased after WHS, often ranging from about 43-49 points. It was a club with cheap membership, so contains more "beginner" type golfers, and we also didn't have any handicap limits. Not sure about my new place in terms of before and after, but they limit handicaps in competitions to 24. Mind you, we did play our first fourball match play in the winter league last weekend. We played well (our indexes being 5.3 and 8.8), but were beaten 5&4 by a couple of higher handicappers who had a better ball score of 50 points, despite a dodgy first 3 holes start. A one off match of course, so won't read to much into that just yet.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 12, 2021)

wjemather said:



			This happened did under the old system as well, and no less frequently than it is now. Improving golfers are always going to have the potential to post scores that are beyond the reach of low handicappers - it is why comps should be broken down into divisions (I've been surprised to learn how many clubs do not do this).
		
Click to expand...

Surely if the new system will result in more higher handicappers win more competitions, then surely this will also naturally increase the occurrences of these very high scores. After all, if the system is giving high handicappers more shots to potentially win a competition they would not have done before, then it is also giving the other rapidly improving high handicappers more shots to shoot even higher scores?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 12, 2021)

jimbob.someroo said:



			I know that this is happening, because people have brought it up a few times on here - but it's really not been the experience at our club. Most Medals this year have been won with a score of 66+ which seems pretty fair in a field of 100+ folk. Surely there's always going to be one or two people who have a great day and fire something low. Even the odd score of 64 seems entirely plausible (15 handicapper, getting 18 shots, shoots 79).

Additionally, we've also played all of our comps at 'mixed tees' this year, which means those going off the whites get an additional 2 shots for the competition. Even with this, there has been just one score of 40+ in the last 10 stableford comps.
		
Click to expand...

For us it seems to have calmed down now 

The last three medals have been by a 

8 HC , 5 HC and 4 HC 

Net 66 from the 5 HC the lowest 

At the start it was net 61/62 with a 59 winning - Stableford points of above 45 were needed 

But we now have a lot more putting cards in and handicaps seem to be looking more realistic 

There are still the people that do well in KOs but struggle with a card


----------



## HeftyHacker (Nov 12, 2021)

saving_par said:



			Agree 100% with this, we are seeing winning scores that lower handicaps have zero chance of getting close to.

I only enter comps now to play off the Blue or White tees since we have to play off yellows the rest of the time apart from a small window on Tuesday afternoons.
		
Click to expand...

I wonder if the course has an impact here as well.

At my place you can always put a score together as its not the most punishing course if you're off your game.

Your place is very different, I could imagine if you had a terrible spell or form you could see your handicap increase pretty quickly if you handed cards in regularly. Then it only takes a decent day and you've shot 5 or 6 under your new handicap with relative ease.


----------



## pauljames87 (Nov 12, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			If you have read this did you mean- why would somebody preregister on a bad weather day?

else

  The whole point is you have no choice. Preregister before starting and enter the round whatever the score when you finish. If you are doing enough a bad round is not going to be one of your 8.

Worth noting an earlier post now

Pre register on the EG app and fail to score the card on the app and a penalty score will be applied automatically
		
Click to expand...

Read the post I replied to.

People have been bending the system .. I don't get why not just put it in


----------



## Backsticks (Nov 12, 2021)

Kaz said:



			Completely disagree, sorry. If there was a bias before there’s been a massive over correction now.

Happy to see high handicaps winning. Just not happy to see people shooting 9, 10 or even more shots under their handicap.
		
Click to expand...

I feel that is a mistake in perception. Given that there are far more high handicappers than low ones, and that high handicappers are going to shoot bigger winning scores, the slight levelling will result in a very large number of wins and low scores from high handicappers. It is not inconsistent that the small correction towards fairness, has large effect on the the results. Nor is there an unfairness in the fact that a low handicap golfer cannot shoot a 9 or 10 under hc and a high hcper can do that.


----------



## Backsticks (Nov 12, 2021)

badgergm said:



			But if you take this argument to it’s logical conclusion then you wouldn’t have any anti cheating measures at all. Why bother with pre registering a GP score? Why bother insisting on a marker for a GP score? If the system is going to have some measures then it’s perfectly legitimate to comment on whether there should be more (or less).
		
Click to expand...

I dont think either assumption there are correct. Pre registering, and a marker, are not there to prevent cheating, but only to be consistent with the conditions of a competition round, which by the rules of golf requires entry and a signed card. The WHS, and UHS as well, are fairly dispassionate mathematical attempts to rate each golfers play, on the evidence of past scores, to equalise all golfers. And both are imperfect at that which is difficult enough. And correctly, they avoid straying into the sphere of honesty policing.


----------



## Deleted member 3432 (Nov 12, 2021)

HeftyHacker said:



			I wonder if the course has an impact here as well.

At my place you can always put a score together as its not the most punishing course if you're off your game.

Your place is very different, I could imagine if you had a terrible spell or form you could see your handicap increase pretty quickly if you handed cards in regularly. Then it only takes a decent day and you've shot 5 or 6 under your new handicap with relative ease.
		
Click to expand...

This is one thing I have thought about. The summer certainly saw more calmer conditions than we normally have. It was dry and the course was very fiery which definitely helps the short straight hitter of which many of our members are. 

The problem is many of this group are 2 comps a week players so a short spell of bad weather conditions gets their handicaps up a few shots and once its good weather the cycle starts again.

Scores were getting less silly at the end of the season as the course softened and played a bit longer 31 points won last weekend (dreadfully day which would have RO under old system but as I didn't play I will never know the pcc) although back to 45 points this midweek.

It would be interesting to see how winning scores compare between courses with low, mid and high slope.


----------



## badgergm (Nov 13, 2021)

Kaz said:



			Interested in this.

My take is that anyone shooting 9 or 10 under HC has a duff handicap. Don't see why it should be different for low or high HCs. What makes you think that's OK? Clearly low handicappers shoot more consistent scores so less range between good and bad. Is that it?

So is that another aspect of the form vs ability distinction? Should handicaps be pegged in the middle of a player's scoring range, raising the possibility of very low net scores, or at closer to their lowest scores (their ability)?
		
Click to expand...

it is obvious that the bias towards form rather than ability leads to greater variance in handicap for an individual. In turn that means lower winning scores (higher stableFord). I agree with you that this a bad thing.

There are other scenarios other than form as well. We have had a couple of wins from players with a higher handicapnthan normal due to the players having had a period where minor injury had  hampered them to some degree for a while. Handicap had risen more than under the old system.


----------



## badgergm (Nov 13, 2021)

Backsticks said:



			I dont think either assumption there are correct. Pre registering, and a marker, are not there to prevent cheating, but only to be consistent with the conditions of a competition round, which by the rules of golf requires entry and a signed card. The WHS, and UHS as well, are fairly dispassionate mathematical attempts to rate each golfers play, on the evidence of past scores, to equalise all golfers. And both are imperfect at that which is difficult enough. And correctly, they avoid straying into the sphere of honesty policing.
		
Click to expand...

Of course WHS strays into honesty policing - see Section 7 of the manual.


----------



## Backsticks (Nov 13, 2021)

badgergm said:



			Of course WHS strays into honesty policing - see Section 7 of the manual.
		
Click to expand...

What are you referring to ? As far as I know, it has nothing of the sort, and is concerned only compliance with the WHS rules themselves.


----------



## badgergm (Nov 13, 2021)

Backsticks said:



			What are you referring to ? As far as I know, it has nothing of the sort, and is concerned only compliance with the WHS rules themselves.
		
Click to expand...

Rules of Handicapping, rule 7. Describes various actions of the Committee, including determining whether a player is attempting to manipulate their handicap. When discussing success or otherwise of the  WHS it is entirely legitimate to discuss ease of manipulation, rather than limiting to the mathematical algorithms (not all of whoch are even available for scrutiny).


----------



## Backsticks (Nov 13, 2021)

Where does it mention manipulation ?


----------



## badgergm (Nov 13, 2021)

Backsticks said:



			Where does it mention manipulation ?
		
Click to expand...

“For the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage”

im not going to continue spoon feeding you here. My view is stated in 192.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 14, 2021)

wjemather said:



			This happened did under the old system as well, and no less frequently than it is now. Improving golfers are always going to have the potential to post scores that are beyond the reach of low handicappers - it is why comps should be broken down into divisions (I've been surprised to learn how many clubs do not do this).
		
Click to expand...

Some years ago CONGU pointed out that winners in strokeplay competitions won in direct proportion to the number of entrants in that handicap category. So if 70% of the field are 18 cappers and 1% are scratch, the likelihood of an 18-54 capper winning is greater than a scratch player.


----------



## RobertB (Nov 16, 2021)

Lots of anecdotal on high scoring winning this year ... I've looked at approx 41 large field (club only) events at our club... 6 won with PH of 10 or less and lowest PH winner 7 in stableford. Average points 43.9 ... highest 47, lowest 41.  The 4 medals - two won by single index PH ... against course of 70/71 nets of 61, 62, 63, 64. Nobody on index < 7 won anything as far as I can see - all knockouts won by equivalent Cat3/4s. 

We've good % of low index at club - I'm 5.7 but only in top 5% at club but in top 4% on Ireland - across the place lots of comments on social media about need to shoot a level par or better to win Saturday/Wednesday comps.  

Would really like to see some historical analysis. If I look at number of instances a single index is placed in top 5 of all these comps over season it is 0.88% ... ~4670 rounds entered vs. 41 places ...seems low ... but would be great to have some reference points ...maybe Year 1 of WHS is an outlier ... surely simple enough analysis for National bodies to do to dismiss perceptions/assumptions or make revisions....


----------



## nickjdavis (Nov 16, 2021)

I re did an analysis of 24 competitions played in 2020 pre November the 2nd 2020 (when WHS kicked off) and 29 competitions played post November 2nd 2020.

I looked at the average scores typically scored by players finishing 1st, 2nd or 3rd.

*Medals (nett score pre WHS / post WHS)*
1st Place: 62.9 / 62.7
2nd Place: 64.4 / 65.5
3rd Place: 65.1 / 66.3

*Stableford (points pre/post)*
1st Place: 42.4 / 41.9
2nd Place: 40.7 / 40.5
3rd Place: 39.6 / 39.9

So....on the face of it, as presented above, there has been no discernible difference in scores required to come in the top 3 in a competition as a result of the WHS. However....I know that, fuelled by escape from lockdown, we had a surge in membership in the early summer of 2020 and we had many new members who joined, some of whom took to the game very quickly, played an awful lot, practised an awful lot and actually scored very well and if pressed, I would say that the above pre-WHS averages are maybe half to three quarters of a stroke better than they would have been. Taking this (subjective) "adjustment" into account would indicate that scoring levels under WHS are slightly better.....but certainly not the anecdotal crushing increases that are widely being reported (in many places, not just here) as "fact".


----------



## Backsticks (Nov 16, 2021)

Thanks, but we really don't need your facts at this stage. I have my pitchfork in hand, and my torch lit, ready for these WHS toting low score shooting golfers I can't beat.


----------



## woofers (Nov 18, 2021)

On the whole I like the new system and believe it is a fairer representation of current playing ability provided scores are returned regularly.
And the bit I don’t like, is that there is no minimum number of scores to be returned within a specific timeframe to maintain a ‘valid‘ handicap.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 18, 2021)

woofers said:



			And the bit I don’t like, is that there is no minimum number of scores to be returned within a specific timeframe to maintain a ‘valid‘ handicap.
		
Click to expand...

This of course can be done by your club to suit their requirements.


----------



## woofers (Nov 18, 2021)

rulefan said:



			This of course can be done by your club to suit their requirements.
		
Click to expand...

Can it? I believe a club could state in the terms of a competition that ‘x’ number of scores should be recorded in order to enter a competition, although I have never seen this requirement featured in say, the open competitions I have played in.
Are you saying that a club can override the WHS and insist that ‘x’ number of scores must be returned annually, for example, in order to maintain a handicap? If so, I’d be interested in how this could be done, and under what rule / authority.
As it stands, it irks me that a handicap can be obtained after 3 rounds and then held for evermore, granted it would be updated from organised competitions, but if the player just turned up to society or team events it wouldn’t change.
I know of players whose handicap converted from CONGU to WHS with scores from 2018 and 2019 who are playing today with valid handicaps, although they wouldn’t be accepted as valid under the old system.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 18, 2021)

woofers said:



			Can it? I believe a club could state in the terms of a competition that ‘x’ number of scores should be recorded in order to enter a competition, although I have never seen this requirement featured in say, the open competitions I have played in.
Are you saying that a club can override the WHS and insist that ‘x’ number of scores must be returned annually, for example, in order to maintain a handicap? If so, I’d be interested in how this could be done, and under what rule / authority.
As it stands, it irks me that a handicap can be obtained after 3 rounds and then held for evermore, granted it would be updated from organised competitions, but if the player just turned up to society or team events it wouldn’t change.
I know of players whose handicap converted from CONGU to WHS with scores from 2018 and 2019 who are playing today with valid handicaps, although they wouldn’t be accepted as valid under the old system.
		
Click to expand...

No, I think rulefan was simply suggesting the conditions of a competition can be set to say you can only enter if you have x scores on your WHS scoring history in the last year. So, it is separate from WHS, the player will still have an official WHS index.

However, I can't imagine many competitions will do this. Firstly, they'd need to make an active decision to do so. Secondly, I can't imagine it is easy from a practical point of view. They can't just click a setting on the competition settings and players will automatically be flagged if they do not meet this criteria. It would take the comp sec to go through every player and check their WHS Scoring History


----------



## rulefan (Nov 18, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			No, I think rulefan was simply suggesting the conditions of a competition can be set to say you can only enter if you have x scores on your WHS scoring history in the last year. So, it is separate from WHS, the player will still have an official WHS index.
		
Click to expand...

Correct. 
As it happens we have a few competitions where entry is 'limited' to those who have played a minimum no of times. However the limit is on prize winning only. Anyone can enter for handicap purposes. It's only prizes winners that are checked.


----------



## woofers (Nov 18, 2021)

Thank you both, however as I said “And the bit I don’t like, is that there is no minimum number of scores to be returned within a specific timeframe to maintain a ‘valid‘ handicap.”…….. which is relevant to the WHS Positives and Negatives topic under discussion.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 18, 2021)

Given last weeks Thursday rollup scores when you had to have 42pts to come in top 10 and as it was a non-Q and there were no R/U H/I adjustments, I didnt bother with it today.  

I have not raised issue of this rollup not being a qualifier (on grounds of it being organised and over 60 competitors) as we do not currently have a qualifying course due to ongoing work on three holes.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2021)

Can anyone help me this, I'm most confused..
Today I played Moor Allerton, Leeds. It's a course with three 9 hole loops.

Out of the three I played two, off the yellow tees.

Front 9
Name: Lakes
Score: 43
Course Rating: 35.1
Slope Rating: 125

Back 9
Name: High
Score: 41
Course Rating: 35.6
Slope Rating: 132

Total Par: 71
Course Handicap: 16
Gross Score: 84
Adjusted score: 84

Note: Course ratings and Slope ratings are from USPGA site.

On the handicap page on my golf app it lists the differential score as 44.1, and the rating as 35.2, which seems incorrect? How do I work this out?


----------



## rulefan (Nov 21, 2021)

Barking_Mad said:



			Can anyone help me this, I'm most confused..
Today I played Moor Allerton, Leeds. It's a course with three 9 hole loops.

Out of the three I played two, off the yellow tees.

Front 9
Name: Lakes
Score: 43
Course Rating: 35.1
Slope Rating: 125

Back 9
Name: High
Score: 41
Course Rating: 35.6
Slope Rating: 132

Total Par: 71
Course Handicap: 16
Gross Score: 84
Adjusted score: 84

Note: Course ratings and Slope ratings are from USPGA site.

On the handicap page on my golf app it lists the differential score as 44.1, and the rating as 35.2, which seems incorrect? How do I work this out?
		
Click to expand...



Moor Allerton Golf Club (1011478) - Blackmoor 10 to 18; 19 to 27;

Moor Allerton Golf Club (1011478) - High 1 to 9; 19 to 27;

Moor Allerton Golf Club (1011478) - Lakes 1 to 18

It would appear that you actually played the High course

https://www.randa.org/worldhandicapsystem/Lookup?CourseID=22448&ClubCountry=0&ClubName=Moor Allerton&ClubCity=&ClubCounty=undefined

PS: The link above is to the R&A site but the US site is via the USGA not the USPGA.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 21, 2021)

rulefan said:



Moor Allerton Golf Club (1011478) - Blackmoor 10 to 18; 19 to 27;

Moor Allerton Golf Club (1011478) - High 1 to 9; 19 to 27;

Moor Allerton Golf Club (1011478) - Lakes 1 to 18

It would appear that you actually played the High course

https://www.randa.org/worldhandicapsystem/Lookup?CourseID=22448&ClubCountry=0&ClubName=Moor Allerton&ClubCity=&ClubCounty=undefined

PS: The link above is to the R&A site but the US site is via the USGA not the USPGA.
		
Click to expand...

Clearly I'm not understanding something.

There's three loops of 9 holes. Blackmoor, Lakes and High. I played Lakes as the first 9 and Blackmoor as the 2nd nine. I didn't play the same 9 holes twice. The pro in the shop said those two loops were for 18 holes, or Blackmoor for just the 9.


----------



## abjectplop (Nov 21, 2021)

Barking_Mad said:



			Clearly I'm not understanding something.

There's three loops of 9 holes. Blackmoor, Lakes and High. I played Lakes as the first 9 and Blackmoor as the 2nd nine. I didn't play the same 9 holes twice. The pro in the shop said those two loops were for 18 holes, or Blackmoor for just the 9.
		
Click to expand...

Possibly you've registered for a 9 hole round then returned an 18 hole score, thus the huge differential??


----------



## rulefan (Nov 21, 2021)

Barking_Mad said:



			Clearly I'm not understanding something.

There's three loops of 9 holes. Blackmoor, Lakes and High. I played Lakes as the first 9 and Blackmoor as the 2nd nine. I didn't play the same 9 holes twice. The pro in the shop said those two loops were for 18 holes, or Blackmoor for just the 9.
		
Click to expand...

The first 9 holes of the Lakes are the same first 9 of the High (ie 1-9 of the 27 holes). 
The second 9 holes of the High are the same back 9 of the Blackmoor (19-27 of the 27 holes).
You played holes 1-9 & 19-27 (which makes up the High). Off the yellow tees the Course Rating for the 18 you played is 70.7 and the Slope is 129.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 22, 2021)

rulefan said:



			The first 9 holes of the Lakes are the same first 9 of the High (ie 1-9 of the 27 holes).
The second 9 holes of the High are the same back 9 of the Blackmoor (19-27 of the 27 holes).
You played holes 1-9 & 19-27 (which makes up the High). Off the yellow tees the Course Rating for the 18 you played is 70.7 and the Slope is 129.
		
Click to expand...

What a bonkers system. We I said my app is giving me a differential of 44.1 which can't be right so I've emailed them. Thanks for the help 👍


----------



## SammmeBee (Nov 22, 2021)

Barking_Mad said:



			What a bonkers system. We I said my app is giving me a differential of 44.1 which can't be right so I've emailed them. Thanks for the help 👍
		
Click to expand...

Have you considered user error/incompetence/stupidity may be the issue here?


----------



## IanM (Nov 22, 2021)

SammmeBee said:



			Have you considered user error/incompetence/stupidity may be the issue here?
		
Click to expand...

Not if it has the right gross score.  (I hope!!)


----------



## BiMGuy (Nov 22, 2021)

Barking_Mad said:



			What a bonkers system. We I said my app is giving me a differential of 44.1 which can't be right so I've emailed them. Thanks for the help 👍
		
Click to expand...

Have you input your stableford points?
Can you post a screenshot of your round details?


----------



## rulefan (Nov 22, 2021)

Barking_Mad said:



			What a bonkers system. We I said my app is giving me a differential of 44.1 which can't be right so I've emailed them. Thanks for the help 👍
		
Click to expand...

Pretty well all 27 hole circuits use the same system. Three courses each combining a different 18 holes.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 22, 2021)

SammmeBee said:



			Have you considered user error/incompetence/stupidity may be the issue here?
		
Click to expand...

Hi, 

I have double checked my gross score on Golfpad and checked the 9 hole loops were correctly assigned. All appears to be correct. On the screen where I select my tee for the round it gives a Course Rating of just 35.2. That looks wonky. The slope is correct and my course handicap. 

FWIW it just seems, on the face of it confusing to not make them all 9 holes and let you pair two together, rather than listing them as above. To be fair the bloke in the proshop said it was a confusing place to play 🤔


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 22, 2021)

rulefan said:



			Pretty well all 27 hole circuits use the same system. Three courses each combining a different 18 holes.
		
Click to expand...

Cheers, to the uninitiated it's a bit baffling. Thanks for your help 👍


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 22, 2021)

BiMGuy said:



			Have you input your stableford points?
Can you post a screenshot of your round details?
		
Click to expand...

Stableford gives me 24 gross points, 39 net. That's right I think with 8 pars and 8 bogeys (one double, one triple bogey).


----------



## rulefan (Nov 22, 2021)

Barking_Mad said:



			Hi,

I have double checked my gross score on Golfpad and checked the 9 hole loops were correctly assigned. All appears to be correct. On the screen where I select my tee for the round it gives a Course Rating of just 35.2. That looks wonky. The slope is correct and my course handicap.

FWIW it just seems, on the face of it confusing to not make them all 9 holes and *let you pair two together,* rather than listing them as above. To be fair the bloke in the proshop said it was a confusing place to play 🤔
		
Click to expand...

They have done exactly that. Holes 1-9 and 19-29 have been paired together to make the High course

The R&A website that I pointed you to shows that the 18 holes you actually played are correctly rated as the High course.
The Yellow tees have a Course Rating of 70.7 and a Slope of 129. As shown in this link.

https://www.randa.org/courseteeinfo?CourseID=22447&ClubCountry=0&ClubName=Moor Allerton&ClubCity=&ClubCounty=undefined

You will also see under *Club/Course Name* that it is described as the High course

Incidentally the USGA site is exactly the same as the R&A site.

https://ncrdb.usga.org/courseTeeInfo.aspx?CourseID=22447

Your differential would seem to be 11.7 (e&oe)


----------



## Banchory Buddha (Nov 23, 2021)

Barking_Mad said:



			Hi,

I have double checked my gross score on Golfpad and checked the 9 hole loops were correctly assigned. All appears to be correct. *On the screen where I select my tee for the round it gives a Course Rating of just 35.2.* That looks wonky. The slope is correct and my course handicap.

FWIW it just seems, on the face of it confusing to not make them all 9 holes and let you pair two together, rather than listing them as above. To be fair the bloke in the proshop said it was a confusing place to play 🤔
		
Click to expand...

You've selected the 9 hole option instead of the 18. Rulefan has done the hard work for you, lesson learned.


----------



## 2blue (Nov 23, 2021)

Barking_Mad said:



			Clearly I'm not understanding something.

There's three loops of 9 holes. Blackmoor, Lakes and High. I played Lakes as the first 9 and Blackmoor as the 2nd nine. I didn't play the same 9 holes twice. The pro in the shop said those two loops were for 18 holes, or Blackmoor for just the 9.
		
Click to expand...

If you found these course combinations complicated then how did you get on with the S.I.'s? Each course being numbered from 1 to 9. 
Yes, I'd agree that it appears you've registered for just 9 holes.
However, you have managed to choose a remarkably dry Nov to play one of N Leeds's best courses which in a normal Nov would have been pretty heavy going.


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 23, 2021)

Banchory Buddha said:



			You've selected the 9 hole option instead of the 18. Rulefan has done the hard work for you, lesson learned.
		
Click to expand...

It's not me, it's an issue with the app. They've emailed to say they've amended the course details, but now when I go to reassign the 9 hole loops one of 9 (High course) is missing from the list entirely 😂

They're in the process of fixing it....

I might not understand the hole loops and how they assign them but the app calculations weren't my doing 😉


----------



## Barking_Mad (Nov 23, 2021)

2blue said:



			If you found these course combinations complicated then how did you get on with the S.I.'s? Each course being numbered from 1 to 9.
Yes, I'd agree that it appears you've registered for just 9 holes.
However, you have managed to choose a remarkably dry Nov to play one of N Leeds's best courses which in a normal Nov would have been pretty heavy going. 

Click to expand...

Thankfully the app got those bits correct, so all good there. 

It was a bit fresh, sunny and very windy. Course was in good condition, especially the greens, but soft on the fairways. I'd say it would be pretty unplayable with the usual amount of rain we get. 

Played well though for an 84 👍


----------



## rulefan (Nov 23, 2021)

Barking_Mad said:



			Played well though for an 84 👍
		
Click to expand...

All's well that ends well


----------



## Imurg (Nov 24, 2021)

Apologies if this has been covered elsewhere - if it has then I've missed it.
As per an email from EG, if pre-registered rounds are not entered into the system in a timely manner....an automated penalty score will be applied to the handicap record.
A penalty score will be applied....that implies that they're going tomguess your score and add a bit....
Isn't this just playing into the hands of the Sandbagger?
How is this going to work?
The email says your HI could be adjusted up or down...again, are they going to guess your numbers?
Confused.......


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 24, 2021)

Imurg said:



			Apologies if this has been covered elsewhere - if it has then I've missed it.
As per an email from EG, if pre-registered rounds are not entered into the system in a timely manner....an automated penalty score will be applied to the handicap record.
A penalty score will be applied....that implies that they're going tomguess your score and add a bit....
Isn't this just playing into the hands of the Sandbagger?
How is this going to work?
The email says your HI could be adjusted up or down...again, are they going to guess your numbers?
Confused.......
		
Click to expand...

I'm not 100% what the automatic penalty score will be, but I'm almost sure it will be a score equal to Course Rating + Course Handicap. This will actually usually result in a reduced handicap, as a score equal to your course handicap will become one of your top 8 and remove your 8th best score (I say usually, because occasionally you may be losing a very good score that WAS your 20th oldest).

Therefore, the penalty score should not result in increasing handicap and benefit sandbaggers.

However, I also assume these will be flagged to Committee so they can easily check when this occurs? They can then adjust the penalty score if appropriate, as per WHS guidance. For example, if they feel low handicappers are not returning a score from bad rounds (to keep a low handicap), they can set a penalty score equal to the players worst score in last 20. If they feel a player is not returning good scores as they do not want big decreases in handicap, they can set the penalty score equal to the players best score in 20.


----------



## sweaty sock (Nov 24, 2021)

Penalty scores are 'recommended' to be course rating + handicap.  But seem to be totally at the discretion of your handicap committee....

Seems to widen the gap even further between handicaps, now it can be different club to club, never mind country to country....

WHS indeed...


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 24, 2021)

sweaty sock said:



			Penalty scores are 'recommended' to be course rating + handicap.  But seem to be totally at the discretion of your handicap committee....

Seems to widen the gap even further between handicaps, now it can be different club to club, never mind country to country....

WHS indeed...
		
Click to expand...

I'd imagine most handicap committees will stick to the automatic penalty, and only apply a different penalty score if they have evidence to do so. This would almost certainly be because they know the player has not returned a score to either keep a higher handicap (intentionally fail to submit a good score) or keep a low handicap (intentionally fail to submit a bad score). In both cases, the Committee would also almost certainly give the player a heavy warning, because the above actions are clearly inappropriate.

Most NRs are likely down to things like forgetfulness, and so the automatic penalty score likely to be left as it is. Hopefully these NRs are still easily highlighted, so that Committees can remind / warn persistent offenders. The biggest issue is likely going to be at clubs where handicap Committees simply leave general play rounds and the tech to its own devices, and never really check what is going on. You could then get many players who constantly fail to submit scores and never get a warning (unless the tech is set up to pretty much put a big red flag of some sort next to such players)

I think the automatic penalty is likely to make WHS more consistent between clubs, rather than less. It is simply another safety net to deal with such issues. But, the Committee still need to act where appropriate. Pre WHS, handicaps were still at the discretion of the Committee. A prime example was at the Annual Review or Continuous Reviews. Some Committees actually failed to adhere to their duties, and did things such as force players to only hand in good scores from roll ups, or chop handicaps further for anyone that won a comp regardless of score (these are 2 examples I know happened at certain clubs). There are always going to be variations on how Committees do things, so hopefully most clubs, and your club have a well educated Committee who act with the best integrity that they can.


----------



## SteveJay (Nov 24, 2021)

I laughed when I read "you are expected to complete the round and attempt to make the best score possible at each hole"

The latter is totally unenforceable and can never be checked or verified, even by someone playing with you. Imagine the conversation....I think you missed that 2 foot putt deliberately, or, wasn't that shank an attempt to increase your score/handicap


----------



## sweaty sock (Nov 24, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			I'd imagine most handicap committees will stick to the automatic penalty, and only apply a different penalty score if they have evidence to do so. This would almost certainly be because they know the player has not returned a score to either keep a higher handicap (intentionally fail to submit a good score) or keep a low handicap (intentionally fail to submit a bad score). In both cases, the Committee would also almost certainly give the player a heavy warning, because the above actions are clearly inappropriate.

Most NRs are likely down to things like forgetfulness, and so the automatic penalty score likely to be left as it is. Hopefully these NRs are still easily highlighted, so that Committees can remind / warn persistent offenders. The biggest issue is likely going to be at clubs where handicap Committees simply leave general play rounds and the tech to its own devices, and never really check what is going on. You could then get many players who constantly fail to submit scores and never get a warning (unless the tech is set up to pretty much put a big red flag of some sort next to such players)

I think the automatic penalty is likely to make WHS more consistent between clubs, rather than less. It is simply another safety net to deal with such issues. But, the Committee still need to act where appropriate. Pre WHS, handicaps were still at the discretion of the Committee. A prime example was at the Annual Review or Continuous Reviews. Some Committees actually failed to adhere to their duties, and did things such as force players to only hand in good scores from roll ups, or chop handicaps further for anyone that won a comp regardless of score (these are 2 examples I know happened at certain clubs). There are always going to be variations on how Committees do things, so hopefully most clubs, and your club have a well educated Committee who act with the best integrity that they can.
		
Click to expand...

Not sure if our club is common or not, but we've got regular repeat offenders.  The handicap committee continually unable to close comps as they've torn up their card, walked past and ignored the terminal and went home...

Without understanding the finer details, I'm  not sure if this makes things better or worse? Just adding 0.1 everytime it happens seems alot easier...


----------



## ExRabbit (Nov 24, 2021)

sweaty sock said:



			Not sure if our club is common or not, but we've got regular repeat offenders.  The handicap committee continually unable to close comps as they've torn up their card, walked past and ignored the terminal and went home...

Without understanding the finer details, I'm  not sure if this makes things better or worse? Just adding 0.1 everytime it happens seems alot easier...
		
Click to expand...

The handicap committee should warn them, and then if they continue to do it, suspend them from competitions for a period of time.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 24, 2021)

sweaty sock said:



			Not sure if our club is common or not, but we've got regular repeat offenders.  The handicap committee continually unable to close comps as they've torn up their card, walked past and ignored the terminal and went home...

Without understanding the finer details, I'm  not sure if this makes things better or worse? Just adding 0.1 everytime it happens seems alot easier...
		
Click to expand...

This is why committees need to be even more on the ball now. No such thing as going up 0.1 for a bad round / no return


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 24, 2021)

SteveJay said:



			I laughed when I read "you are expected to complete the round and attempt to make the best score possible at each hole"

The latter is totally unenforceable and can never be checked or verified, even by someone playing with you. Imagine the conversation....I think you missed that 2 foot putt deliberately, or, wasn't that shank an attempt to increase your score/handicap 

Click to expand...

Basically, it is asking players to play with integrity. It shouldn't have to be enforced if players have that integrity. If they don't, then I'm sure they could just as easily ignore the rules of golf let alone the rules of handicapping.

Also, if players start back handing short putts and missing them, it would be fairly easy for any of their playing partners to question them.


----------



## badgergm (Nov 24, 2021)

SteveJay said:



			I laughed when I read "you are expected to complete the round and attempt to make the best score possible at each hole"

The latter is totally unenforceable and can never be checked or verified, even by someone playing with you. Imagine the conversation....I think you missed that 2 foot putt deliberately, or, wasn't that shank an attempt to increase your score/handicap 

Click to expand...

It’s a key element of the approach of encouraging social golf to be used for handicapping purposes. And a major reason why that is a bad idea.


----------



## wjemather (Nov 24, 2021)

sweaty sock said:



			Not sure if our club is common or not, but we've got regular repeat offenders.  The handicap committee continually unable to close comps as they've torn up their card, walked past and ignored the terminal and went home...

Without understanding the finer details, I'm  not sure if this makes things better or worse? Just adding 0.1 everytime it happens seems alot easier...
		
Click to expand...

Every club has (or had) repeat offenders. However, committees that have been doing their job will have educated their members and such things should be pretty rare at this point. If your club still has a problem, serious questions need to be asked of your committee.

0.1 each time may have been easier, but it was also completely arbitrary, being the same increase regardless of how many strokes above css+buffer was returned, and effectively encouraged no-returns of non-winning scores. Such habitual no-returners routinely wound up with much higher-handicaps than they should due to these missing buffer or better scores.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Nov 24, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			I'm not 100% what the automatic penalty score will be, but I'm almost sure it will be a score equal to Course Rating + Course Handicap. This will actually usually result in a reduced handicap, as a score equal to your course handicap will become one of your top 8 and remove your 8th best score (I say usually, because occasionally you may be losing a very good score that WAS your 20th oldest).

Therefore, the penalty score should not result in increasing handicap and benefit sandbaggers.

However, I also assume these will be flagged to Committee so they can easily check when this occurs? They can then adjust the penalty score if appropriate, as per WHS guidance. For example, if they feel low handicappers are not returning a score from bad rounds (to keep a low handicap), they can set a penalty score equal to the players worst score in last 20. If they feel a player is not returning good scores as they do not want big decreases in handicap, they can set the penalty score equal to the players best score in 20.
		
Click to expand...

I got a penalty score of 36 over par.
I was off 6 cap.
It took us 3 1/2 hours to play 11 holes so we walked off and put cards in the bin. (First offence )
They know that score will never count on my best 8 so seems a bit harsh.
Slow play is a major problem and lots of players walk off all the time.
But penalty scores won’t solve that old chestnut.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 24, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			I got a penalty score of 36 over par.
I was off 6 cap.
It took us 3 1/2 hours to play 11 holes so we walked off and put cards in the bin. (First offence )
They know that score will never count on my best 8 so seems a bit harsh.
Slow play is a major problem and lots of players walk off all the time.
But penalty scores won’t solve that old chestnut.
		
Click to expand...

That penalty score does not follow the guidelines. This was before automatic penalty scores came into effect, so presumably someone on Committee entered this score themselves?


----------



## IanMcC (Nov 24, 2021)

SammmeBee said:



			Have you considered user error/incompetence/stupidity may be the issue here?
		
Click to expand...

Personally, I think you should be ashamed of yourself for posting this response.
Someone here needed help, not abuse.


----------



## SammmeBee (Nov 25, 2021)

IanMcC said:



			Personally, I think you should be ashamed of yourself for posting this response.
Someone here needed help, not abuse.
		
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting the post contained inaccuracies…..?!


----------



## IanM (Nov 25, 2021)

SammmeBee said:



			Are you suggesting the post contained inaccuracies…..?!
		
Click to expand...

I thought that the point he was making was fairly obvious


----------



## SteveJay (Nov 25, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			Basically, it is asking players to play with integrity. It shouldn't have to be enforced if players have that integrity. If they don't, then I'm sure they could just as easily ignore the rules of golf let alone the rules of handicapping.

Also, if players start back handing short putts and missing them, it would be fairly easy for any of their playing partners to question them.
		
Click to expand...

Not sure playing with integrity is the same as attempting to make the best possible score on each hole. I consider integrity to be about not cheating. If I don't take as much care with a shot because I duffed the last one (inadvertently) and already lost the hole in the friendly side bet matchplay game I am having, then I still feel I am acting with integrity, but appear to fall foul of the ridiculous EG statement.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 25, 2021)

SteveJay said:



			Not sure playing with integrity is the same as attempting to make the best possible score on each hole. I consider integrity to be about not cheating. If I don't take as much care with a shot because I duffed the last one (inadvertently) and already lost the hole in the friendly side bet matchplay game I am having, then I still feel I am acting with integrity, but appear to fall foul of the ridiculous EG statement.
		
Click to expand...

If you lose your head momentarily in a game of golf, and that result in you not executing the next shot with your maximum focus, I doubt the authorities will be coming down on you like a ton of bricks. The mental part of the game is all part of golf.

If you are playing a friendly match play side bet, and you end up not taking much care in shots after you lose the hole, then clearly this "side bet" game is your priority. You shouldn't be submitting a card for handicap, if you are letting match play dictate your actions. It is one of the reasons why match play rounds are not currently acceptable for handicapping in the UK, because there would be a concern of this type of behaviour. If players noticed that you were submitting scores for handicap, but frequently observed this behaviour where you didn't take care on shots when the hole was lost on a frequent basis, then they would be within their own right to call you up on it. It is effectively cheating, because you are intentionally submitting scores for your handicap that could have been better had you tried to score as best you can on each hole. This could give you a higher handicap, and thus give you an unfair advantage in future. So, if that is you, act with integrity and don't submit a card. You probably won't get called up on it, especially if you are playing with a mate. So, if golfers are choosing to submit a score for handicap, we primarily rely on that golfer to try to do their best, even if there is the odd mental break down.


----------

