# No Returns - Policy vs Reality



## mikejohnchapman (Aug 8, 2020)

With WHS getting closer we are looking at our NR policy. I have read the CONGU manual but in reality I don't believe we currently follow this process as the normal sanction of +0.1 applies anyway in the vast majority of cases. I suspect a lot of time cards are not returned at all.

Thus we need to change some hearts and minds to get people to return all cards and more importantly to take the rest of the holes seriously following a blob in a medal round.

I'm interested in how others educate / threaten / cajole players to return all cards and whether you have conditions written into competitions to encourage them to do so.

Don't think quoting the CONGU manual is going to work as a first step.


----------



## Ethan (Aug 8, 2020)

Under WHS, 10 holes played is needed for a valid 18 hole score, as far as I recall. Presumably that does not cover a situation where you play on but simply don't record a score.


----------



## upsidedown (Aug 8, 2020)

We went through a period of re education. Published what expected of players around competitions from booking in, no shows, scores and cards not enterd plus NRs. Then committee wrote to those that transgressed, started around 5 to 6 players a comp but now it's just one player every 2 to 3  comps😉👍


----------



## Ethan (Aug 8, 2020)

mikejohnchapman said:



			With WHS getting closer we are looking at our NR policy. I have read the CONGU manual but in reality I don't believe we currently follow this process as the normal sanction of +0.1 applies anyway in the vast majority of cases. I suspect a lot of time cards are not returned at all.

Thus we need to change some hearts and minds to get people to return all cards and more importantly to take the rest of the holes seriously following a blob in a medal round.

I'm interested in how others educate / threaten / cajole players to return all cards and whether you have conditions written into competitions to encourage them to do so.

Don't think quoting the CONGU manual is going to work as a first step.
		
Click to expand...

Does it actually make a difference? Is it not very likely that the NR, even if scored out using net double bogey will just end up in the bottom of the 20 scores and therefore are effectively irrelevant to the Handicap Index calculation? If you scoring is such that NR climbs into the top 8 of 20 scores, you need some time off golf.


----------



## mikejohnchapman (Aug 8, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Does it actually make a difference? Is it not very likely that the NR, even if scored out using net double bogey will just end up in the bottom of the 20 scores and therefore are effectively irrelevant to the Handicap Index calculation? If you scoring is such that NR climbs into the top 8 of 20 scores, you need some time off golf.
		
Click to expand...

That's what we are trying to work through. If you get paranoid it could be a way to artificially manipulate a handicap. However, in reality I think it's really trying to be fair and consistent to other competitors and members to encourage people to complete a round even if they will be disqualified from the competition.


----------



## rulefan (Aug 8, 2020)

WHS Rule 7.1b makes provision for acceptance or refusal of scores and potential penalty scores in the case of scores not returned. It seems pretty comprehensive.


----------



## mikejohnchapman (Aug 8, 2020)

rulefan said:



			WHS Rule 7.1b makes provision for acceptance or refusal of scores and potential penalty scores in the case of scores not returned. It seems pretty comprehensive.
		
Click to expand...

I agree it is.

Really probing for how clubs educate and incent players to complete a round even if they have a problem. I see lots about the stick but not too many carrots!

BTW what is a penalty score - NDB + 1?


----------



## fundy (Aug 8, 2020)

mikejohnchapman said:



			With WHS getting closer we are looking at our NR policy. I have read the CONGU manual but in reality I don't believe we currently follow this process as the normal sanction of +0.1 applies anyway in the vast majority of cases. I suspect a lot of time cards are not returned at all.

*Thus we need to change some hearts and minds to get people to return all cards and more importantly to take the rest of the holes seriously following a blob in a medal round.

I'm interested in how others educate / threaten / cajole players to return all cards and whether you have conditions written into competitions to encourage them to do so.*

Don't think quoting the CONGU manual is going to work as a first step.
		
Click to expand...


Seriously?
You want to threaten players to return cards? (educate by all means but threaten?)
You want to dictate that I take it seriously after Ive already NRed a comp?

This is supposed to be fun, a game, leisure time for the vast majority, really think you need to look at it from a different angle than obsessing with the impact a +0.1 can have on a handicap


----------



## moogie (Aug 8, 2020)

I've no issue with anybody N/R
For any reason,  no problem

But my pet gripe is somebody entering a comp,  then Coz they've had a crap score,  just entering 18 x zeros....!!! 

Surely you completed atleast 1 hole in that round,  even in stableford

There's a few at my place do this
Low cappers too

Seems pointless
Maybe just ashamed of a bad round,  and others seeing it
I don't get it


----------



## ger147 (Aug 8, 2020)

moogie said:



			I've no issue with anybody N/R
For any reason,  no problem

But my pet gripe is somebody entering a comp,  then Coz they've had a crap score,  just entering 18 x zeros....!!!

Surely you completed atleast 1 hole in that round,  even in stableford

There's a few at my place do this
Low cappers too

Seems pointless
Maybe just ashamed of a bad round,  and others seeing it
I don't get it
		
Click to expand...

The one thing I would do is stop paying out prize money to guys who do this.

A recent medal round, one player entered 17 NR's against 17 holes and a 2 on one of the Par 3's. Personally, I would not pay out any 2's money to someone who played all 18 holes but couldn't be bothered entering his actual score on 17 out of 18 holes but still expects his 2's money.

NR'ing on 1 or 2 holes is perfectly acceptable, happens to all of us, I do it myself. But as the post I quoted points out, having an actual score on most of the holes played but just NR'ing every hole is lazy at best, downright dishonest at worst.


----------



## Ethan (Aug 8, 2020)

ger147 said:



			The one thing I would do is stop paying out prize money to guys who do this.

A recent medal round, one player entered 17 NR's against 17 holes and a 2 on one of the Par 3's. Personally, I would not pay out any 2's money to someone who played all 18 holes but couldn't be bothered entering his actual score on 17 out of 18 holes but still expects his 2's money.

NR'ing on 1 or 2 holes is perfectly acceptable, happens to all of us, I do it myself. But as the post I quoted points out, having an actual score on most of the holes played but just NR'ing every hole is lazy at best, downright dishonest at worst.
		
Click to expand...

A twos comp is not governed by the rules of golf, it is just a bet on whether you get a 2 on any hole and is unrelated to any other score. If the player did indeed get a 2, they are entitled to a share, in my opinion.


----------



## Ethan (Aug 8, 2020)

mikejohnchapman said:



			That's what we are trying to work through. If you get paranoid it could be a way to artificially manipulate a handicap. However, in reality I think it's really trying to be fair and consistent to other competitors and members to encourage people to complete a round even if they will be disqualified from the competition.
		
Click to expand...

Well, it is slightly less work than entering a bunch of 7s and 8s, to be fair, but both achieve much the same effect, don't they? In the overwhelming majority of cases, the NR will be one of the other 12 scores, and if not an NR, it will be a cricket score.


----------



## ger147 (Aug 8, 2020)

Ethan said:



			A twos comp is not governed by the rules of golf, it is just a bet on whether you get a 2 on any hole and is unrelated to any other score. If the player did indeed get a 2, they are entitled to a share, in my opinion.
		
Click to expand...

Not at our club, entry to the sweep and 2's in mandatory, no option to opt out. Just my opinion but in those circumstances, people entering a card that is clearly not what they scored that day shouldn't get paid out any prize money.


----------



## jim8flog (Aug 8, 2020)

At one time we had a 3 stage disciplinary procedure for cards not returned, individual warnings etc. With one really bad culprit it got as far as him having his handicap suspended for a month for him to learn we were serious. When word got round that we were prepared to do it to a very good golfer who sometimes represented the club we saw a big fall off in players doing it.


 If some one only plays a few holes and then NRs they are deleted from the comp.



Ethan said:



			Under WHS, 10 holes played is needed for a valid 18 hole score, as far as I recall. Presumably that does not cover a situation where you play on but simply don't record a score.
		
Click to expand...

 The WHS rules allow the committee to apply penalty scores for holes where there is no score recorded when there are more than 10 scores 

•If all holes have not been played or recorded on the scorecard, recording a Net Par on the holes not played. Exception: if less than 14 holes of an 18 hole round have been played, net par + 1 stroke must be added to the first hole not played and net par to the remaining un-played holes

Hopefully when the WHS comes in there will be far fewer NRing  a lot  holes when they see what happens.


----------



## Ethan (Aug 8, 2020)

jim8flog said:



			At one time we had a 3 stage disciplinary procedure for cards not returned, individual warnings etc. With one really bad culprit it got as far as him having his handicap suspended for a month for him to learn we were serious. When word got round that we were prepared to do it to a very good golfer who sometimes represented the club we saw a big fall off in players doing it.


If some one only plays a few holes and then NRs they are deleted from the comp.



The WHS rules allow the committee to apply penalty scores for holes where there is no score recorded when there are more than 10 scores

•If all holes have not been played or recorded on the scorecard, recording a Net Par on the holes not played. Exception: if less than 14 holes of an 18 hole round have been played, net par + 1 stroke must be added to the first hole not played and net par to the remaining un-played holes

Hopefully when the WHS comes in there will be far fewer NRing  a lot  holes when they see what happens.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting, that plays the holes better than I do. There seems to be an assumption inherent in the system that people want to inflate their handicap. I don't, I want to see it drop.


----------



## mikejohnchapman (Aug 8, 2020)

fundy said:



			Seriously?
You want to threaten players to return cards? (educate by all means but threaten?)
You want to dictate that I take it seriously after Ive already NRed a comp?

This is supposed to be fun, a game, leisure time for the vast majority, really think you need to look at it from a different angle than obsessing with the impact a +0.1 can have on a handicap
		
Click to expand...

The last thing I (we) want to do is threaten / sanction people but I was trying to gauge what other people are doing or going to do when WHS comes in.


----------



## jim8flog (Aug 8, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Interesting, that plays the holes better than I do. There seems to be an assumption inherent in the system that people want to inflate their handicap. I don't, I want to see it drop.
		
Click to expand...

Our experience over the years has been that it is low handicappers that often NR as soon as they think they will not win and or not return their cards. We are are required to monitor players who may be seen to do it repeatedly to inflate their handicap 

l If the Handicap Committee concludes that a player failed to submit a score
for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage, it should consider
withdrawing the player’s Handicap Index, and/or applying an appropriate
penalty score (high or low depending on intent).
l The Handicap Committee or the Authorized Association should consider
disciplinary procedures for players who repeatedly fail to submit their
scores or who fail to complete rounds.


----------



## rulefan (Aug 8, 2020)

jim8flog said:



			At one time we had a 3 stage disciplinary procedure for cards not returned, individual warnings etc. With one really bad culprit it got as far as him having his handicap suspended for a month for him to learn we were serious. When word got round that we were prepared to do it to a very good golfer who sometimes represented the club we saw a big fall off in players doing it.
		
Click to expand...

We have something similar.
1 offence - quite word
2 - formal letter and warning
3 - suspension of playing rights
Another offence after rights restored - extra longer suspension

After word got around that two players had received letters, no further problems.


----------



## ExRabbit (Aug 19, 2020)

ger147 said:



			Not at our club, entry to the sweep and 2's in mandatory, no option to opt out. Just my opinion but in those circumstances, people entering a card that is clearly not what they scored that day shouldn't get paid out any prize money.
		
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that should not be mandatory. Entry to a sweep is not enforceable as far as I know.


----------



## Jimbof (Aug 19, 2020)

Another aspect is to consider the transition to WHS.  I have done some testing of the process and found some anomolies where players consistently post no scores at all for a No Return.  When checking one player, he had 3 'proper' returns where his handicap had decreased, but the other 17 scores (presumably not going to get a reduction) were all blank, including Stablefords where the posting was for zero points.  Given the player had a CONGU handicap of 9, it is likely that he had simply not been bothered to enter any scores.  When using all of these scores to deteremine a WHS Index, the Index came out as 21.6 due to all of the NRs and Zero points giving a very high Score Differential.  I've not doubt that the process will highlight such instances, but it will require a Committee to review and ensure a reasonable allocation.


----------



## rulefan (Aug 19, 2020)

Jimbof said:



			Another aspect is to consider the transition to WHS.  I have done some testing of the process and found some anomolies where players consistently post no scores at all for a No Return.  When checking one player, he had 3 'proper' returns where his handicap had decreased, but the other 17 scores (presumably not going to get a reduction) were all blank, including Stablefords where the posting was for zero points.  Given the player had a CONGU handicap of 9, it is likely that he had simply not been bothered to enter any scores.  When using all of these scores to deteremine a WHS Index, the Index came out as 21.6 due to all of the NRs and Zero points giving a very high Score Differential.  I've not doubt that the process will highlight such instances, but it will require a Committee to review and ensure a reasonable allocation.
		
Click to expand...

I wonder if the committee will, seeing that they seemingly haven't done a very good job in monitoring NRs under CONGU


----------



## Swango1980 (Aug 19, 2020)

Jimbof said:



			Another aspect is to consider the transition to WHS.  I have done some testing of the process and found some anomolies where players consistently post no scores at all for a No Return.  When checking one player, he had 3 'proper' returns where his handicap had decreased, but the other 17 scores (presumably not going to get a reduction) were all blank, including Stablefords where the posting was for zero points.  Given the player had a CONGU handicap of 9, it is likely that he had simply not been bothered to enter any scores.  When using all of these scores to deteremine a WHS Index, the Index came out as 21.6 due to all of the NRs and Zero points giving a very high Score Differential.  I've not doubt that the process will highlight such instances, but it will require a Committee to review and ensure a reasonable allocation.
		
Click to expand...

That's pretty extreme, I wonder how many players are like him

Under the current system, it is not really an issue with handicaps, as he'd go up 0.1 anyway, every time he NR'd (assuming he was NRing due to a score that would not make his buffer)

However, under WHS, then this is exactly why Committees will need to enforce tougher policies for players who NR consistently. If a player NR's that often, they are not fulfilling their responsibilities in having a handicap.


----------



## jim8flog (Aug 19, 2020)

Jimbof said:



			Another aspect is to consider the transition to WHS.  I have done some testing of the process and found some anomolies where players consistently post no scores at all for a No Return.  When checking one player, he had 3 'proper' returns where his handicap had decreased, but the other 17 scores (presumably not going to get a reduction) were all blank, including Stablefords where the posting was for zero points.  Given the player had a CONGU handicap of 9, it is likely that he had simply not been bothered to enter any scores.  When using all of these scores to deteremine a WHS Index, the Index came out as 21.6 due to all of the NRs and Zero points giving a very high Score Differential.  I've not doubt that the process will highlight such instances, but it will require a Committee to review and ensure a reasonable allocation.
		
Click to expand...

It is one of the things I like about the new system - less than 10 holes scored do not accept the card.

Penalty scores to be applied as appropriate.


----------



## rosecott (Aug 19, 2020)

ExRabbit said:



			I'm pretty sure that should not be mandatory. Entry to a sweep is not enforceable as far as I know.
		
Click to expand...

It may be a matter of terminology. Perhaps he is talking about what I would recognise as a competition fee which a club can make mandatory as a condition of entry.


----------



## Swango1980 (Aug 19, 2020)

jim8flog said:



			It is one of the things I like about the new system - less than 10 holes scored do not accept the card.

Penalty scores to be applied as appropriate.
		
Click to expand...

I guess for golfers who don't want a handicap increase, they can NR before completing 10 holes?


----------



## rulefan (Aug 19, 2020)

Swango1980 said:



			I guess for golfers who don't want a handicap increase, they can NR before completing 10 holes?
		
Click to expand...

But they can be penalised for it now.


----------



## Swango1980 (Aug 19, 2020)

rulefan said:



			But they can be penalised for it now.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, they automatically go up 0.1


----------



## rulefan (Aug 19, 2020)

Swango1980 said:



			Yes, they automatically go up 0.1
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, I meant in the future. 
But disciplinary action can be taken now.


----------



## Swango1980 (Aug 19, 2020)

rulefan said:



			Sorry, I meant in the future.
But disciplinary action can be taken now.
		
Click to expand...

They can, but as Jimbof mentioned above, will they, given that they are not at the moment? Play for a well established members club, no doubt strict policies will be enforced. Play at a club run by an owner, with a small Committee of volunteers, and members who play cheapish membership (more casual golfers) who are less concerned about strict policies, and will sooner walk than be told they MUST not NR, then let us see how those Committees penalise players for putting in an NR.

If a golfer invests in a high membership fee, they are usually the type to strict to club policies rather than risk and disciplinary measures. If a golfer joins a club with a ridiculously cheap membership, they are more likely (in general) to have golf as a very much secondary activity (behind things like family, work, etc), pay it to join in the odd comp or effectively have cheap rounds of golf all year round, and are more likely going to tell you to get stuffed if you tell them they can't play in a comp for a few weeks because they NRed.

At least the current system simply put them up 0.1, even if no disciplinary measures were introduced. Under WHS, and certainly in the extreme case of Jimbof's example when NR rounds enter the best 8, it just seems to be a right nightmare for the Committee.


----------



## ger147 (Aug 20, 2020)

rosecott said:



			It may be a matter of terminology. Perhaps he is talking about what I would recognise as a competition fee which a club can make mandatory as a condition of entry.
		
Click to expand...

Nope, a total of £3 is charged for every comp. £1 entry fee, £1 for the 2's and £1 for the sweep. £3 is automatically deducted when you sign in, no option to only pay the £1 entry fee.


----------



## rosecott (Aug 20, 2020)

ger147 said:



			Nope, a total of £3 is charged for every comp. £1 entry fee, £1 for the 2's and £1 for the sweep. £3 is automatically deducted when you sign in, no option to only pay the £1 entry fee.
		
Click to expand...

Am I correct in thinking that the payout is based on the £1 sweep and the £1 2s money? If that is the case, it's the same principle here. £4 comp fee plus £1 for 2s. All the 2s money is paid out and 20% of the comp fee is retained for club funds.


----------

