# 95%?



## ChrisV (Nov 7, 2020)

Hello,
I am Ok with the WHS except for one thing. Can anyone explain why there is a need to apply 95% to my course handicap (which is really my handicap)? Needless to say I can't see the point.

Cheers.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 7, 2020)

Chris, I will try.

Take a player with a 0 handicap, and a player with a 20 handicap (index). The index is calculated from the best 8 scores. However, the scratch golfer will have a much tighter range of scores in their best 8 compared to the 20 handicapper, so the 20 handicappers best score (or 2) will be much better compared to their average in comparison to the scratch golfers lowest score compared to their average.

So, if Course handicap was used, and the bigger the field gets, the lower handicapper's odds of winning would get lower and lower. Because, as the field increases, the odds become higher that at least one higher handicapper will shoot their best round in 20, thus leaving the scratch golfer (or low handicap golfer) little to no chance of actually winning. The 95%, as I understand it, was based on the analysis of thousands of scores, to try and determine the value that would provide the most balanced chances of winning for all golfers.

It was not required in matchplay, as the low handicapper is only up against 1 higher handicapper. Although the higher handicapper may be unbeatable on their best day, the lower handicapper would typically win more often than not (not massively, slightly over 50% of the time)


----------



## rulefan (Nov 7, 2020)

USGA and other stats have shown that in any strokeplay competition a high handicapper is more likely to win than a low handicapper, even allowing for the proportion of players in the competition by handicap.

Edit: Just seen Swango's reply which is more comprehensive


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 7, 2020)

The slope system favours high handicap players and 95%  evens that out

Take two players one handicap 9 and the other 29 ie a difference of 20 shots in ability 

on a course with a slope of 125

The 9 has a Course and Playing handicap of 10

The 29 has a Course Handicap of 32 and a Playing Handicap of 30

so they remain with a difference of 20 shots when in a singles competition.


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 7, 2020)

Traminator said:



			So why not get the Slope and the CH right in the first place??

The more adjustments, the more it's just guesswork.
		
Click to expand...

  Changing slope and CH still results in a difference between high an lowish handicappers unless the slope is at 113 (or not much above it)  the point at which neither player gets additional strokes for CH i.e. their H.I. = their CH


----------



## rulefan (Nov 7, 2020)

Traminator said:



			So why not get the Slope and the CH right in the first place??

The more adjustments, the more it's just guesswork.
		
Click to expand...

If the CH and Slope were adjusted it would affect all formats of play including match play (see the last para of #2). 
Before WHS the US, Canada and Australia built in an adjustment of 93% or 96% to the HI. It was termed a 'bonus for excellence'. 
Now it only affects individual Stroke play.


----------



## ChrisV (Nov 7, 2020)

Thank you so much Swango1980, rulefan and jim8flog. I now have a reasonably good grasp of what is going on and can see the point of it. However, I feel that I am in agreement with Traminator in that the 95% is a calculation too far. Surely all these things you mention could have been 'hidden' in the calculation for the 'course' handicap so that I (and people like me) don't have to see it.
My situation might explain why I'm a little bit miffed about this. My CONGU handicap was 15.0. When I used our conversion chart for my WHS handicap I came out as 15. No surprise there I thought. On Monday we played our November Medal and I found that 95% was applied to get my playing handicap 14. I'm sorry to say that my best 8 only includes 1 score under my handicap and yet I have lost 1 shot.
While I was writing this it occurred to me that this could possibly be resolved by an algorithm. They seem to be popping up all over the place and are often referred to when explaining something that has gone belly up. I play in a seniors section and this, I'm sure, would be a much more acceptable reason to my playing buddies many of whom will never fully get to grips with the WHS.

Thanks again guys.

Chris


----------



## rulefan (Nov 7, 2020)

ChrisV said:



			Thank you so much Swango1980, rulefan and jim8flog. I now have a reasonably good grasp of what is going on and can see the point of it. However, I feel that I am in agreement with Traminator in that the 95% is a calculation too far. Surely all these things you mention could have been 'hidden' in the calculation for the 'course' handicap so that I (and people like me) don't have to see it.
Chris
		
Click to expand...

If it was 'hidden' in the CH then it would again affect other forms of play.
Further the Playing Handicap id only used to determine the competition result. It id Course Handicap that is used to calculate the Score Differential and subsequently the updated Handicap Index.

NB. Your PH may be lower than your CH and you may be tempted to pick up when you think you have got to net double bogey - but it's CH which is the important figure. One reason that it required to be on your card. H Index and PH are optional.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 7, 2020)

Kaz said:



			On a slight tangent, I still can't grasp why the 95% applies to individual strokeplay but not individual matchplay.
		
Click to expand...

Because contrary to the stroke play stats, match play shows a very different outcome. Even on 100% the lower capper wind nearly 55% of matches against the higher capper.

I can't lay my hands on my notes but I'm sure Swango will have the rationale somewhere.


----------



## IanM (Nov 7, 2020)

Cos it does.  You don’t really want to know why.  Smile and wave... and run out of the bar before one of the blighters tries to explain it to you!


----------



## Mozza14 (Nov 7, 2020)

rulefan said:



			Further the Playing Handicap id only used to determine the competition result. *It id Course Handicap that is used to calculate the Score Differential and subsequently the updated Handicap Index.*

Click to expand...

Think you meant Course Rating. The course handicap is not relevant to the updated HI.


----------



## williamalex1 (Nov 7, 2020)

Kaz said:



			On a slight tangent, I still can't grasp why the 95% applies to individual strokeplay but not individual matchplay.
		
Click to expand...

Easy , low handicappers just don't like getting beat by high handicappers  [no matter what the format ]. But they tend to forget their early  learning days.
  Plus they're usually on the committees that make the decisions, or influence them in a big way.


----------



## williamalex1 (Nov 8, 2020)

Agr


Kaz said:



			If that was the case it'd be 3/4 difference and we wouldn't be having any of this chat. I just don't understand why it's used for one format and not the other - it's still the same game. Either apply 95% in both or don't use it in either.
		
Click to expand...

 Exactly , your handicap should be as stated on your h/c certificate, not 75% , 95% or 90%. to suit the minority.


----------



## Canary_Yellow (Nov 8, 2020)

Im not an expert, but distilling what I’ve read into its simplest form, the answer to your question Kaz, is that the point of the handicap system is to give those that don’t play off scratch the opportunity to play against those that do on a level playing field. The statistics show that 100% handicap in a big field gives high handicappers (as a group, not individually) an advantage, using 95% removes that advantage. In match play it’s not necessary to remove it because there is no advantage.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 8, 2020)

Kaz said:



			If that was the case it'd be 3/4 difference and we wouldn't be having any of this chat. I just don't understand why it's used for one format and not the other - it's still the same game. Either apply 95% in both or don't use it in either.
		
Click to expand...

Kaz, as I said in my previous post:

Stroke Play: there are many in the field, so the odds increase a high handicapper will have their best round in 20, and give low handicappers a very very small chance of winning. But, it should be remembered, on average the lower handicapper will usually finish higher up the leaderboard than higher handicappers due to consistency, they will just rarely see themselves at top of leaderboard. So, the 95% supposedly gives a more balanced chance of winning for low handicappers.

Match Play: the low handicapper is only playing one high handicapper. Due to consistency, as mentioned above, the low handicapper will more frequently win (rulefan stated 55% of time). Therefore, no need to apply 95%

Generally: I agree, it is just one of those additional complications / annoyances that we didn't really need to worry about in the old system (though we did apply 90% in 4 ball match play).  However, if we are to accept that the purpose of a handicap is to provide people of all abilities an equal chance of winning, then we need to accept stroke play and match play are 2 different beasts, and therefore different handicaps may be required. That's backed up by the analysis of thousands of scores.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 8, 2020)

Will 95% apply in stableford comps as well? I've seen lots of comments relating to stroke play, I'm guessing it's the same, but no one has specifically mentioned stableford.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Will 95% apply in stableford comps as well? I've seen lots of comments relating to stroke play, I'm guessing it's the same, but no one has specifically mentioned stableford.
		
Click to expand...

Stableford *is* strokeplay. See Rules of Golf 21.1


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

Mozza14 said:



			Think you meant Course Rating. The course handicap is not relevant to the updated HI.
		
Click to expand...

Oops


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

Kaz said:



			If that was the case it'd be 3/4 difference and we wouldn't be having any of this chat. I just don't understand why it's used for one format and not the other - it's still the same game. Either apply 95% in both or don't use it in either.
		
Click to expand...

Kaz
Don't you remember under CONGU when the higher capper only got 75% of their handicap in a match. The stats showed that the lower capper won 61% of matches.
A comment made by CONGU a few years ago was to the effect that the higher capper would need up to 120% (depending on the numerical difference in strokes) to change the balance.

A table of full difference results


----------



## IainP (Nov 8, 2020)

rulefan said:



			Stableford *is* strokeplay. See Rules of Golf 21.1
		
Click to expand...

@Lord Tyrion thanks for maybe backing up the point I was trying to make here 👍
https://forums.golf-monthly.co.uk/threads/world-handicap-system-whs.104054/post-2252826

The various bodies/authorities don't make it easy 🤨


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 8, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Will 95% apply in stableford comps as well? I've seen lots of comments relating to stroke play, I'm guessing it's the same, but no one has specifically mentioned stableford.
		
Click to expand...

 As already said it does apply in a Stableford comp but only for deciding the winners of the competition.

It does not apply to handicap alterations which are based upon your Course Handicap and it is important not to pick up before you should. You should only pick up when you would score zero points based upon your Course Handicap.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 8, 2020)

jim8flog said:



			As already said it does apply in a Stableford comp but only for deciding the winners of the competition.

It does not apply to handicap alterations which are based upon your Course Handicap and it is important not to pick up before you should. You should only pick up when you would score zero points based upon your Course Handicap.
		
Click to expand...

So for actually marking the card I score off full handicap? Only when the scores are in does it get reduced? I must be understanding that incorrectly

Okay, just thought about this. I mark the card normally but on the hole or holes where shots are taken away by the 95% rule the player has to remember not to pick up when they can't score on that hole. Is that right? Not conducive to the idea of speeding up play as people may play that extra shot more often, just in case.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			So for actually marking the card I score off full handicap? Only when the scores are in does it get reduced? I must be understanding that incorrectly
		
Click to expand...

You mark your scorecard from your playing handicap - ie the handicap allowance for the format that you are playing so in a Stableford it will be 95% of your course handicap 

So if you have a course handicap of 11 your playing handicap in strokeplay will be 10


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			You mark your scorecard from your playing handicap - ie the handicap allowance for the format that you are playing so in a Stableford it will be 95% of your course handicap 

So if you have a course handicap of 11 your playing handicap in strokeplay will be 10
		
Click to expand...

In that example though, according to jim8flog, on SI 11, I keep going past the point where I can no longer score, by one extra shot. Is that right?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			In that example though, according to jim8flog, on SI 11, I keep going past the point where I can no longer score, by one extra shot. Is that right?
		
Click to expand...

All depends on what format you are playing

If it’s a Stableford and you don’t get a shot and you can’t score then pick up - if your playing handicap says you don’t have a shot there then that’s it

Simple way - put your course handicap in the box , enter your gross scores and let the computer work it out. Far easier


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			So for actually marking the card I score off full handicap? Only when the scores are in does it get reduced? I must be understanding that incorrectly

Okay, just thought about this. I mark the card normally but on the hole or holes where shots are taken away by the 95% rule the player has to remember not to pick up when they can't score on that hole. Is that right? Not conducive to the idea of speeding up play as people may play that extra shot more often, just in case.
		
Click to expand...

The *only* requirement is to enter your no of strokes for the hole. The computer (or committee) will sort out the results of the competition (whether stableford or medal) and any handicap details. If you want to enter your stableford points for your own interest you can but it is not a requirement. But as said, use your playing Course Handicap to ensure you don't pick up too soon.


As an aside, if you don't hole out in a medal it is not a disaster. Although you would be DQd from the comp, in certain circumstances, the WHS makes provision for a number of holes not completed and makes the appropriate handicap adjustment.


----------



## IainP (Nov 8, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			In that example though, according to jim8flog, on SI 11, I keep going past the point where I can no longer score, by one extra shot. Is that right?
		
Click to expand...

That was my understanding from here:
https://forums.golf-monthly.co.uk/threads/world-handicap-system-whs.104054/post-2247224


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 8, 2020)

rulefan said:



			. But as said, use your *playing handicap* to ensure you don't pick up too soon.


.
		
Click to expand...

Needs an edit to *Course Handicap*


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			All depends on what format you are playing

If it’s a Stableford and you don’t get a shot and you can’t score then pick up - if your playing handicap says you don’t have a shot there then that’s it
		
Click to expand...

 As already said - if your *Course Handicap *says you do not get a point......


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 8, 2020)

rulefan said:



			The *only* requirement is to enter your no of strokes for the hole. The computer (or committee) will sort out the results of the competition (whether stableford or medal) and any handicap details. If you want to enter your stableford points for your own interest you can but it is not a requirement. But as said, use your playing handicap to ensure you don't pick up too soon.


As an aside, if you don't hole out in a medal it is not a disaster. Although you would be DQd from the comp, in certain circumstances, the WHS makes provision for a number of holes not completed and makes the appropriate handicap adjustment.
		
Click to expand...

In reality I don't know anyone who doesn't score as they go along in stableford. We may not have to but people do.

Good info anyway, thanks.


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 8, 2020)

Lord Tyrion said:



			In reality I don't know anyone who doesn't score as they go along in stableford. We may not have to but people do.

Good info anyway, thanks.
		
Click to expand...

 Virtually all  player's I play with score the points as they as they go but it has taken a lot of getting through to them, over the years,  it is the gross score on each hole on the card that needs to be checked at the end of the round and not the Stableford points.

I have seen more than one player lose out because they had only agreed the Stableford points with their marker and not the grosses,  when the former was correct but the latter wrong.


One of the things I really like in the current situation is that I am responsible for marking the gross score on my own card, make a mistake and it is only me to blame.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

Think it was 4/5 years ago the 4BBB allowance changed from 3/4 to 90%


----------



## williamalex1 (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Think it was 4/5 years ago the 4BBB allowance changed from 3/4 to 90%
		
Click to expand...

I remember it was 7/8ths for stableford


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			All depends on what format you are playing

If it’s a Stableford and you don’t get a shot and you can’t score then pick up - if your playing handicap says you don’t have a shot there then that’s it

Simple way - put your course handicap in the box , enter your gross scores and let the computer work it out. Far easier
		
Click to expand...

Your second paragraph is incorrect. It is your course handicap that should dictate when you can pick up, not playing handicap.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 8, 2020)

williamalex1 said:



			I remember it was 7/8ths for stableford 

Click to expand...

Thank heavens for metrification, and calculators on phones.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

jim8flog said:



			Needs an edit to *Course Handicap*

Click to expand...

Oops again.
Done


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

williamalex1 said:



			I remember it was 7/8ths for stableford 

Click to expand...

Wasn't that for BetterBall stableford?


----------



## williamalex1 (Nov 8, 2020)

rulefan said:



			Wasn't that for BetterBall stableford?
		
Click to expand...

Sorry I can't remember, but there was a few different allowances way back , I think there may have been 1/3rd as well, they had ready reckoner charts on the back of tee holders and pitch repairers.
Rosecott [ Jim  ] or DFT will know for sure  .


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

Swango1980 said:



			Your second paragraph is incorrect. It is your course handicap that should dictate when you can pick up, not playing handicap.
		
Click to expand...

So what exactly is the purpose of a playing handicap being created at 95% - it’s just trying to manufacture results.


----------



## rosecott (Nov 8, 2020)

williamalex1 said:



			Sorry I can't remember, but there was a few different allowances way back , I think there may have been 1/3rd as well, they had ready reckoner charts on the back of tee holders and pitch repairers.
Rosecott [ Jim  ] or DFT will know for sure  .
		
Click to expand...

Despite Billy's veiled suggestion that I'm as old as Methusela, I only have CONGU manuals going back to 2001 - no mention of 3/8 or 1/3 in them, just full in singles and 3/4 elsewhere (1/2 in the dreaded foursomes).


----------



## tnjgb (Nov 8, 2020)

To beat it all you have to round the Course Handicap to a whole figure before applying the 95% which can take you down another shot. At least you have to do that in England.


----------



## williamalex1 (Nov 8, 2020)

rosecott said:



			Despite Billy's veiled suggestion that I'm as old as Methusela, I only have CONGU manuals going back to 2001 - no mention of 3/8 or 1/3 in them, just full in singles and 3/4 elsewhere (1/2 in the dreaded foursomes).
		
Click to expand...

I remember we used 9/14th years ago, so that 24 h/cs wouldn't get 2 strokes at any hole, when 24 was the maximum H/C allowance back in the day.


----------



## williamalex1 (Nov 8, 2020)

Traminator said:



			Off the top of my head, and some of these are going back a bit:
7/8 ind Stableford
3/4 individual and fourball matchplay
7/16 foursomes strokeplay and matchplay (7/16 the difference of combined)
3/8 greensomes
Never heard of 1/3 in any format.

It was easier than it might sound, we just "knew" the numbers after a while, if you didn't you just looked at the chart on the noticeboard.
		
Click to expand...

Probably 3/8ths I was thinking of , nearly  1/3rd


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So what exactly is the purpose of a playing handicap being created at 95% - it’s just trying to manufacture results.
		
Click to expand...


 See post #5

95% works quite as you have to be over 10 handicap to lose shots off the Course handicap.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

jim8flog said:



			See post #5

95% works quite as you have to be over 10 handicap to lose shots off the Course handicap.
		
Click to expand...

It’s nonsense - complete nonsense that just add more confusion to a situation that is full of it. It’s a mess and there is zero need to add in 95% strokeplay allowances , it adds nothing and there is no justification for it. They have done a great job of making everything over complicated and you can clearly see that they are very lucky lockdown happened - right now some people still can’t even see all their handicap information via their own ISV and have to go to a separate website


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Nov 8, 2020)

Swango1980 said:



			Your second paragraph is incorrect. It is your course handicap that should dictate when you can pick up, not playing handicap.
		
Click to expand...

That is indeed the guidance that I have from our golf manager...play in accordance with my CH.


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 8, 2020)

I have got one of those cards with it all from about 2002
Singles Matchplay was still 3/4 
Stableford was full handicap

I remember stableford at 7/8 when I first joined this club in the late 80s. 

Doing a little bit of digging around I came across
Ever wonder why Stableford competitions often use 7/8 of handicap?   In the early days, the maximum man's handicap was 21.  Dr Stableford believed that no-one should have more than one stroke per hole in his system; this adjustment allowed no more than 18 strokes per round.


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 8, 2020)

Traminator said:



			Here's how my handicap looks still:

1. EG website.
It shows a number (+1.6) that is completely wrong. I have worked out that the scores have been averaged against CSS only, CR hasn't been used which contradicts all advice on here, and no scores have been de-sloped.
Correct number should be around +.0.5, so a whole shot out.
My score from 1st November isn't showing so I don't have enough scores used.

2. Club website.
No information showing via "My Golf" and "Handicap Record" only "Error connecting to WHS" , but via "Competitions", "Handicaps" the same number is listed and magically the score from 1st Nov is listed.

3.  IG App.
The same number is listed, but only 10 scores are showing, but as you scroll down the list, the same 10 appear in order time after time ad infinitum.

🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️
		
Click to expand...

I find the IG ones a bit odd.. Maybe they have not got round to you club yet.

Via the club website 

Nothing in handicap record-  unable to connect to WHS portal but that is a rights issue with DOTGOLF that is ongoing

I can see in Mygolf/*MY ROUNDS* - my H.I. my Course Handicap on each tee and what 95% is, and my full score and handicap history going back to January 2018

on the app

I can see some the above including low H.I. except as you say I can only go back to July for individual Score


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

Traminator said:



			Here's how my handicap looks still:

1. EG website.
It shows a number (+1.6) that is completely wrong. I have worked out that the scores have been averaged against CSS only, CR hasn't been used which contradicts all advice on here, and no scores have been de-sloped.
Correct number should be around +.0.5, so a whole shot out.
My score from 1st November isn't showing so I don't have enough scores used.

2. Club website.
No information showing via "My Golf" and "Handicap Record" only "Error connecting to WHS" , but via "Competitions", "Handicaps" the same number is listed and magically the score from 1st Nov is listed.

3.  IG App.
The same number is listed, but only 10 scores are showing, but as you scroll down the list, the same 10 appear in order time after time ad infinitum.

🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️
		
Click to expand...

1. My HI on the EG website is fine , worked out ok and can see all my scores and which ones count 

2. On IG my HI has been different 5 times from 6 to 0.3 - right now it’s ok

3. I can see all my scores but the same as you we can’t see which ones Count and it shows unable to connect to WHS

I believe the unable to connect is because Dotgolf are not allowing ISV to connect to their database at the moment - why I have no idea


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

jim8flog said:



			I find the IG ones a bit odd.. Maybe they have not got round to you club yet.

Via the club website

Nothing in handicap record-  unable to connect to WHS portal but that is a rights issue with DOTGOLF that is ongoing

I can see in Mygolf/*MY ROUNDS* - my H.I. my Course Handicap on each tee and what 95% is, and my full score and handicap history going back to January 2018

on the app

I can see some the above including low H.I. except as you say I can only go back to July for individual Score
		
Click to expand...

How on earth can there be a “rights” issue when this whole transition has been on the cards for a number of years now - why the hell hasn’t it been sorted before we transferred- it’s a disgrace that Dotgolf are not allowing ISV the API connection for handicap information


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

Traminator said:



			Here's how my handicap looks still:

1. EG website.
It shows a number (+1.6) that is completely wrong. I have worked out that the scores have been averaged against CSS only,
		
Click to expand...

CSS was used by allocating the difference between CSS and SSS to PCC. The SSS and CR are interchangeable.




			and no scores have been de-sloped
		
Click to expand...

What figures (column heading) did you use? All of ours seem to be ok.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

Traminator said:



			Here's how my handicap looks still:
2. Club website.
No information showing via "My Golf" and "Handicap Record" only "Error connecting to WHS" , but via "Competitions", "Handicaps" the same number is listed and magically the score from 1st Nov is listed.
♂️
		
Click to expand...

We understand that DotGolf has re-activated the Handicap Score record API for clubs in England (previously disabled by DotGolf on Tuesday).

However, the data is missing "Score Differential" values and this is causing HandicapMaster software to issue an "Unexpected Error" when the Handicap Record is requested in HandicapMaster.

The DotGolf WHS test system is not exhibiting this problem and we therefore presume this is a problem with the WHS production service only. We await further advice from DotGolf.

DotGolf have confirmed that they are investigating the cause of this problem.

HandicapMaster Ltd.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It’s nonsense - complete nonsense that just add more confusion to a situation that is full of it. It’s a mess and there is zero need to add in 95% strokeplay allowances , it adds nothing and there is no justification for it. They have done a great job of making everything over complicated and you can clearly see that they are very lucky lockdown happened - right now some people still can’t even see all their handicap information via their own ISV and have to go to a separate website
		
Click to expand...

I know you don't like it, and clearly do not understand it. Unfortunately, I'm assuming you have no expertise in the handicapping system, but those that do have expertise in it have been able to justify the 95%. They didn't just pull it out of thin air. I agree, it is another thing to remember compared to the old method, so is not ideal in that sense. However, I have tried to explain earlier in this thread the logic behind it. Whether you understand it or not, is another matter. I'd be all ears if you had an alternative solution that dealt with the problem, without requiring the 95%.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

Swango1980 said:



			I know you don't like it, and *clearly do not understand it. Unfortunately, I'm assuming you have no expertise in the handicapping system, *but those that do have expertise in it have been able to justify the 95%. They didn't just pull it out of thin air. I agree, it is another thing to remember compared to the old method, so is not ideal in that sense. However, I have tried to explain earlier in this thread the logic behind it. Whether you understand it or not, is another matter. I'd be all ears if you had an alternative solution that dealt with the problem, without requiring the 95%.
		
Click to expand...

I believe you shouldn’t make assumptions pal 

And what exactly do you believe is the problem that 95% resolves ?


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

Traminator said:



			Sorry I can't work out what that means.

It has been stated multiple times on here that the "differential" is the gross score minus the CR (for me 71.5), and recently added that the CR goes up or down exactly as CSS.

So correct me if I'm wrong, but if I shot 72,the differential was 0.5, but if CSS went up one, the differential would be - 0.5. (CSS only varied from SSS once.

My scores though have clearly all been worked out versus 72 (and 73 once) and not 71.5.
They haven't been multiplied by 113/128, ie 0.88 (or *0.9 which*ever *is correct*).
		
Click to expand...

The arithmetic should be the same.
Pre WHS CONGU had no such as animal as PCC. But for the conversion it was determined that CSS - SSS was a suitable alternative. So the WHS output shows CR as the value of the SSS and the difference between CSS and SSS is shown as the PCC.

The Score Differential is = (113/Slope) x (Gross - CR[ie SSS] - PCC[ie CSS-SSS])

I can't explain why you aren't getting that result. Are you looking at the WHS Platform https://org.whsplatform.englandgolf.org/


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I believe you shouldn’t make assumptions pal

And what exactly do you believe is the problem that 95% resolves ?
		
Click to expand...

See post #2 for answer to your question.

I have to make assumptions, when I don't know you. But, from tone of your emails, it certainly doesn't sound like you are an expert. I also assume you have had zero involvement in the development of the World Handicap System


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I believe you shouldn’t make assumptions pal

And what exactly do you believe is the problem that 95% resolves ?
		
Click to expand...

That in stroke play higher handicappers are more likely to win competitions out of proportion to to the number of entries.


----------



## Ethan (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I believe you shouldn’t make assumptions pal

And what exactly do you believe is the problem that 95% resolves ?
		
Click to expand...

It is a statistical correction, determined after analysis of scoring patterns by handicap. Higher handicap players have a greater variability in score, and the day your variability is in a positive direction is the day you win. One reason handicaps aren't anchored around average or typical score is to take care of this problem, but it doesn't quite fix it, so a correction factor is helpful. Less needed in matchplay because the higher handicapper does not use their shots evenly across a round, which means they waste a few in matchplay because you can only win or lose any one hole once.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

rulefan said:



			That in stroke play higher handicappers are more likely to win competitions out of proportion to to the number of entries.
		
Click to expand...

Based on what because it’s certainly not something that I have witnessed in 8 plus years doing comps - if anything it’s the mid handicaps that clear up as opposed to high handicaps. There is no need for 95% - they have already given you a handicap for that course - it’s supposed to now be a fairer reflection in regards your play so why then add further adjustments to try and manufacture some further levelling when the handicap is supposed to do that.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

Swango1980 said:



			See post #2 for answer to your question.

I have to make assumptions, when I don't know you. But, from tone of your emails, it certainly doesn't sound like you are an expert. I also assume you have had zero involvement in the development of the World Handicap System
		
Click to expand...

You have to make zero assumptions at all - and as for tone - have a look in the mirror next time you pass one.


----------



## SammmeBee (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Based on what because it’s certainly not something that I have witnessed in 8 plus years doing comps - if anything it’s the mid handicaps that clear up as opposed to high handicaps. There is no need for 95% - they have already given you a handicap for that course - it’s supposed to now be a fairer reflection in regards your play so why then add further adjustments to try and manufacture some further levelling when the handicap is supposed to do that.
		
Click to expand...

Easy courses - mid handicaps will clear up

Better/harder courses - will always favour the low handicaps......


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

SammmeBee said:



			Easy courses - mid handicaps will clear up

Better/harder courses - will always favour the low handicaps......
		
Click to expand...

That’s pretty much my experience over the years - they brought in these high handicaps to supposedly encourage and then just add allowances that punish them - just stick with a celling of 28 if that’s the case then


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Based on what because it’s certainly not something that I have witnessed in 8 plus years doing comps - if anything it’s the mid handicaps that clear up as opposed to high handicaps. There is no need for 95% - they have already given you a handicap for that course - it’s supposed to now be a fairer reflection in regards your play so why then add further adjustments to try and manufacture some further levelling when the handicap is supposed to do that.
		
Click to expand...

How many competitions in the last 8 years experience have used the World Handicap System!?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

Swango1980 said:



			How many competitions in the last 8 years experience have used the World Handicap System!?
		
Click to expand...

whats the relevance ? No clubs in the UK have played comps using the system so how can anything be judged that requires an adjustment that punishes high handicaps


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Based on what because it’s certainly not something that I have witnessed in 8 plus years doing comps - if anything it’s the mid handicaps that clear up as opposed to high handicaps. There is no need for 95% - they have already given you a handicap for that course - it’s supposed to now be a fairer reflection in regards your play so why then add further adjustments to try and manufacture some further levelling when the handicap is supposed to do that.
		
Click to expand...

Mid handicappers win more often because they typically have the largest proportion of entrants. That does not mean that a particular mid capper will win a lot of comps. 
It does mean that an unspecified high capper will win more often than the number of entrants in the field would suggest.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			whats the relevance ? No clubs in the UK have played comps using the system so how can anything be judged that requires an adjustment that punishes high handicaps
		
Click to expand...

How can anything be judged?? Exactly. Yet, you seem perfectly happy to do so. What was the point in mentioning your 8 years experience, when it has no relevance to the new handicapping system.

You do realise the course handicaps players have now are not the same as the handicaps players had under Congu? At my club, players who had single figure handicaps now have a course handicap on average 0.3 higher. But, 30+ handicappers have a course handicap 3.5 shots higher. The higher the congu handicap, the bigger the average increase a player gets to their course handicap in average.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Nov 8, 2020)

rulefan said:



			Mid handicappers win more often because they typically have the largest proportion of entrants. That does not mean that a particular mid capper will win a lot of comps.
It does mean that an unspecified high capper will win more often than the number of entrants in the field would suggest.
		
Click to expand...

What are you classing as a high handicapper these days ? Above 19/20 ? 

For example we have had no one above the handicap of 18 win a competition in 18 months - we have had 4BBB high handicaps win but not singles


----------



## Ethan (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Based on what because it’s certainly not something that I have witnessed in 8 plus years doing comps - if anything it’s the mid handicaps that clear up as opposed to high handicaps. There is no need for 95% - they have already given you a handicap for that course - it’s supposed to now be a fairer reflection in regards your play so why then add further adjustments to try and manufacture some further levelling when the handicap is supposed to do that.
		
Click to expand...

It is a basic statistical truism that variability increases as numbers get larger. That is why both CONGU and (USGA) WHS systems are zeroed around something better than average, this reduces the impact of variability where it matters, on the better than expected end. There are, of course some fairly consistent high handicappers and some wildly inconsistent lower handicaps, but in a big data set, variability increases with handicap.

WHS and CONGU are both zeroed around similar pivot points, in the case of WHS, around the 4th or 5th (midpoint of best 8) best of 20 scores, and CONGU used an asymmetrical push-pull system which tended to end up around the same place.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

Swango1980 said:



			How many competitions in the last 8 years experience have used the World Handicap System!?
		
Click to expand...

The principle of 95% (93% and 96%) has been used in Australia, Canada and the USA for many years. Between them they play well over 50% of all the golf played in the world. Taking thousands of legitimately scored rounds from there and Europe, the authorities decided that 95% was the fairest. They also determining that in match play the bias was in the opposite direction, so moved the adjustment from the Index to the Playing Handicap for stroke play.


----------



## rulefan (Nov 8, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What are you classing as a high handicapper these days ? Above 19/20 ?

For example we have had no one above the handicap of 18 win a competition in 18 months - we have had 4BBB high handicaps win but not singles
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps it will change next year 

What proportion of your competitions are stroke play eliminators for KO rounds? How many are straight medals?

But the number of competitions played at one club is hardly significant in the scheme of things.


----------



## IanM (Nov 9, 2020)

Made my first trip in months to my home club this morning... our club pro said the 95% was _because there were insufficient steps in the process!    _ (he was kidding)

Once you've navigated to the page to discover today's HI, you need to look at the chart on the wall (Newport has done a grand job with these)  - remember what tee you are off and your gender.  Of course is that birth gender?  I guess you get more shots if you identify as a woman... maybe the club will face legal action for "assuming a player's gender."   Well who knows?

....after all that and the impending court case.... lets add another step.  90% is too easy to work out... so lets make it 95%    Shame they didn't make it 91.74%


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 9, 2020)

IanM said:



			Made my first trip in months to my home club this morning... our club pro said the 95% was _because there were insufficient steps in the process!   _ (he was kidding)

Once you've navigated to the page to discover today's HI, you need to look at the chart on the wall (Newport has done a grand job with these)  - remember what tee you are off and your gender.  Of course is that birth gender?  I guess you get more shots if you identify as a woman... maybe the club will face legal action for "assuming a player's gender."   Well who knows?

....after all that and the impending court case.... lets add another step.  90% is too easy to work out... so lets make it 95%    Shame they didn't make it 91.74% 

Click to expand...

You need to post that scenario to Good Morning Britain, so Piers Morgan can have his say


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 10, 2020)

IanM said:



			Made my first trip in months to my home club this morning... our club pro said the 95% was _because there were insufficient steps in the process!   _ (he was kidding)

Once you've navigated to the page to discover today's HI, you need to look at the chart on the wall (Newport has done a grand job with these)  - remember what tee you are off and your gender.  Of course is that birth gender?  I guess you get more shots if you identify as a woman... maybe the club will face legal action for "assuming a player's gender."   Well who knows?

....after all that and the impending court case.... lets add another step.  90% is too easy to work out... so lets make it 95%    Shame they didn't make it 91.74% 

Click to expand...

All you really have to remember is - have I submitted a qualifying score since I last played?  If no - am I playing the the same course and tee as the last time I played? - if yes nothing has changed since the last time I played.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 10, 2020)

jim8flog said:



			All you really have to remember is - have I submitted a qualifying score since I last played?  If no - am I playing the the same course and tee as the last time I played? - if yes nothing has changed since the last time I played.
		
Click to expand...

Except that there could be a change, as the score from last time you played could have changed your Index for the next time you play.


----------



## jim8flog (Nov 10, 2020)

Swango1980 said:



			Except that there could be a change, as the score from last time you played could have changed your Index for the next time you play.
		
Click to expand...

 It would not have changed if a player did not *submit a qualifying score*.

i.e a score from a qualifying competition or a preregistered social round


----------

