So now your posturing, what a complete and utter snob spelt with a capital K.
90% versus 3/4
- Thread starter Vikingman
- Start date
So now your posturing, what a complete and utter snob spelt with a capital K.
Slab
Occasional Tour Caddy
I wonder if it really matters whether its 90% or ¾
From the number of times its mentioned on GM it seems Opens can be pretty notorious for entrants having less than accurate handicaps compared to ability
So what does it matter if the winning team had 50 points over the 47 point guys in 2nd playing off 90% or if it was 46 points over 44 played off ¾ handicap
Everyone will incrementally score better and pretty much the same team still wins
I have to assume the decision to play comps off 90% would definitely have been based on the assumption that all handicaps accurately reflected the players ability, so until that part is sorted we can’t 2nd guess whether 90% is the way to go and we need to trust the guys who came up with the rule
Edit: although as soon as the comp is no longer played off a measured course then all bets should be off in terms of complying with handicap allowances and the committee should determine and set this
From the number of times its mentioned on GM it seems Opens can be pretty notorious for entrants having less than accurate handicaps compared to ability
So what does it matter if the winning team had 50 points over the 47 point guys in 2nd playing off 90% or if it was 46 points over 44 played off ¾ handicap
Everyone will incrementally score better and pretty much the same team still wins
I have to assume the decision to play comps off 90% would definitely have been based on the assumption that all handicaps accurately reflected the players ability, so until that part is sorted we can’t 2nd guess whether 90% is the way to go and we need to trust the guys who came up with the rule
Edit: although as soon as the comp is no longer played off a measured course then all bets should be off in terms of complying with handicap allowances and the committee should determine and set this
Last edited:
Makes me laugh sometimes especially when the Cat1's go hunting for the high handicappers to partner them as they know they come in on a small handful of holes which can make all the difference to a card 😜
When I was off 20+ I had to play better than my buffer off 3/4 to be anywhere near competitive, was that fair 🤔
When I was off 20+ I had to play better than my buffer off 3/4 to be anywhere near competitive, was that fair 🤔
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
But by inference of the OP, you shouldn't have been allowed on the course being inferior in all aspects.
Beezerk
Money List Winner
Why did you keep replying mate? He's quite obviously just a wind up merchant.
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
Agreed, but unfortunately his posts reinforce the widely held view of golf being an elitist sport.
I dont think it was the OP so much as of 14 he ain't got that much to complain about, it was the trolling snob that joining the party.
#WereNotWorthy
chrisd
Major Champion
My understanding of the change to 90% was that reseach showed that off 3/4 a much greater % of low handicappers got through to the latter stages of ko comps, and that changing to 90% wouldnt stop the lower guys winning but would allow more spread of handicaps through to the latter stages
I certainly feel being off 12 that i dont gain much when playing lower guys/pairs but on a short winter course it certainly makes a difference the other way.
I certainly feel being off 12 that i dont gain much when playing lower guys/pairs but on a short winter course it certainly makes a difference the other way.
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
I don't disagree, but if your course is like mine, all board comes are off the whites, and never off a shortened course. The winter league can be depending on conditions, but then that isn't an official board comp and is run by a member purely as a "fun" event as much as winter golf can be fun
Am I missing something, off 12 you'll lose 1 shot now where as against a 4 handicapper they'd lose nothing, so it still falls in favour to the lower handicapper who will be far more consistent and probably more times than not, will win through.
As for shortened courses that's only at winter so for me we shouldn't take much from it but based on the above it just probably evens it up a bit.
#StampHandicapSnobberyOut
Slab
Occasional Tour Caddy
Found the answer in their FAQ's (my highlight)
The handicap allowances for these competitions have remained unchanged at 75% in the CONGU® UHS for years and indeed probably have an empirical basis that precedes CONGU.
It is interesting to note that some of the other major handicapping systems of the world, e.g. the EGA and the USGA, use higher allowances.
Following extensive research by CONGU’s Handicap Research Committee it has been established that 90% allowance is more equitable and so the allowance has been changed to this from 1st January 2016.
Good to read that research was done rather than just aligning to other territories
Seems to also be saying that 75% value was not much more than a stick your finger in the air number and probably wasn't based on any actual theory (much like the '1 shot a hole' brigade)
The handicap allowances for these competitions have remained unchanged at 75% in the CONGU® UHS for years and indeed probably have an empirical basis that precedes CONGU.
It is interesting to note that some of the other major handicapping systems of the world, e.g. the EGA and the USGA, use higher allowances.
Following extensive research by CONGU’s Handicap Research Committee it has been established that 90% allowance is more equitable and so the allowance has been changed to this from 1st January 2016.
Good to read that research was done rather than just aligning to other territories
Seems to also be saying that 75% value was not much more than a stick your finger in the air number and probably wasn't based on any actual theory (much like the '1 shot a hole' brigade)
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
Being a forum everyone is allowed an opinion, but when anyone becomes ignorant they shoukd be told, ignoring these types they gain the upper hand, there's enough on here moaning about the forum going through a nasty spell or people becoming intolerant to others, why don't though say something to these types rather than bitching on other threads.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
To do research into the results of BB they would have had to ask the clubs - they didn't
They used the results of singles play on medals etc that they could get from CDH - how is that a fair representation of matchplay
We have decided to keep a maximum of 18 shots in the singles matchplay and will expect to go back to 3/4 for our Winter League
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
That's no answer, have you's completed a winter season yet under the 90% rule?
Surely you have all the data from previous seasons and can prove the 90% hasn't worked or is it simply you haven't given it a chance.
but isn't it 90% of the difference in match play?? so its not the case a 4 handicap loses no shot, he won't get any shots and say he was playing a 20 handicap, they would get 90% of 16 so still 14 shots while the 4 handicap gets not.
are there individual stroke play comps where 90% is used?
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
To those that keep using a winter league as a reason not to use 90%, are those winter leagues an official board comp? If they are, doesn't that undermine the integrity of your board competitions being as nature normally dictates shorter courses with temp greens?
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Being a board competition makes no difference to anything beyond having someone's name on a board - there is no extra rules based on it being a board comp
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
Perhaps my club is different then, but our board comes/knockouts are always off the whites, so always full length. They are also all played during the better part of the year.
GreggerKBR
Head Pro
Is it true that CONGU only attempt to offer advice for proper "qualifying" competitions - as such, I don't think they meant for this rule to be implemented in non-qualifying comps do they?
That would mean any course shorter than a certain yardage of the full competition tees (whites) CSS for the course could not count.
Perhaps this is where the confusion between CONGU and club comps is happening?
So CONGU coming up with a change and subsequently club committees perhaps not appreciating the effect of winter conditions and a much shorter yardages.
That would mean any course shorter than a certain yardage of the full competition tees (whites) CSS for the course could not count.
Perhaps this is where the confusion between CONGU and club comps is happening?
So CONGU coming up with a change and subsequently club committees perhaps not appreciating the effect of winter conditions and a much shorter yardages.
