95% Calculation to go?

Thread starter #1

Banchory Buddha

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 10, 2021
Messages
1,055
https://www.nationalclubgolfer.com/news/whs-95-handicap-allowances-scrapped/

The Good - It's a mess

The Bad - So now higher handicaps get an even bigger advantage?

The Ugly - After just one year, complaints have now been so loud in two of the main areas of change that they're already having to review? They made much play of how much effort had gone into the new system, yet as soon as it was launched people were scratching their heads. Does nobody among the governing bodies have the balls to challenge idiocy when they see it?
 

Imurg

Grand Slam Winner
Joined
Mar 15, 2008
Messages
32,517
Location
Aylesbury Bucks
https://www.nationalclubgolfer.com/news/whs-95-handicap-allowances-scrapped/

The Good - It's a mess

The Bad - So now higher handicaps get an even bigger advantage?

The Ugly - After just one year, complaints have now been so loud in two of the main areas of change that they're already having to review? They made much play of how much effort had gone into the new system, yet as soon as it was launched people were scratching their heads. Does nobody among the governing bodies have the balls to challenge idiocy when they see it?
They were probably planning to review it anyway.....;)
 

BiMGuy

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 9, 2020
Messages
3,066
The headline doesn’t quite represent what the article says.

If people are so confused by the new handicap system a year after it’s implementation. I would question their capacity to leave the house on their own.

Merging it into the HI or course HC could make it easier. But I suspect the “but that’s not how we’ve always done it” brigade would still complain.
 

Jimaroid

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
2,883
Location
Fife
Undoubtedly, but with changes in the past it's been around 3 years to get the relevant data, we're now seeing two major areas of concern after one year
That is an argument in favour of having a more centralised system of data that WHS provides - the ability to quickly react and design around the data rather than go through slow and opinionated interpretation of many fragments of data.

The ability to react quickly is the WHS's strength although I generally agree that some authorities appear to have not got it right first time.
 

wjemather

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2020
Messages
1,084
Location
Bristol
Well that's a grossly misleading clickbait headline, given GH says that the allowance is "not going to go away".

And just like last week with SG, this is nothing more than confirmation that the promised reviews are happening at a global level.
 

rulefan

Tour Winner
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
Messages
11,752
It seems that 95% is being blamed for 46 stableford points. Can 95% really make that difference? It gives a PH of 29 for a CH of 30!
Doesn't Slope make the difference?
 

Foxholer

Major Champion
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
23,466
Location
Wasting away again in Margaritaville
Whinge, whinge, whinge!
Firstly about about 'not reviewing' something; now about reviewing something!
The common denominator is that it might affect results of low cappers adversely compared to medium and high ones! So I call 'a touch of personal bias' here!

The actual effect of a change to this parm, compared to now, is an extra shot for a 20 capper, hardly noticeable imo, or a 50% chance of an extra shot for 10-capper. Oh, and a 25% chance off an extra shot for a 5-capper.

They ('the appropriate authorities') should, and obviously have, schedule reviews of way the system is working - and tweak it where necessary.

Stop the whingeing and wait for the result. Then accept any change and get on with the golf!
 

Colin L

Tour Winner
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
4,536
Location
Edinburgh
https://www.nationalclubgolfer.com/news/whs-95-handicap-allowances-scrapped/

The Good - It's a mess

The Bad - So now higher handicaps get an even bigger advantage?

The Ugly - After just one year, complaints have now been so loud in two of the main areas of change that they're already having to review? They made much play of how much effort had gone into the new system, yet as soon as it was launched people were scratching their heads. Does nobody among the governing bodies have the balls to challenge idiocy when they see it?
Did you actually read Gemma Hunter's explanation that this allowance was overtly in use in other parts of the world pre-WHS and used but unseen in the UHS? That it's nothing new?

The notion that reviewing the system at this point is the result of loud complaints is, I expect, unfounded. It's a basic to implementing change in any context to plan a review after a period of operation. Given the seasonal nature of golf here, a review after a full season of implementation is obviously sensible.

By the way, the incidence of newspaper/magazine headlines which distort the content of an article is so high that it's generally best to ignore them and concentrate on what the writer actually says.
 

chrisd

Major Champion
Joined
Sep 22, 2009
Messages
23,734
Location
Kent
We had a conversation this morning whilst playing and without knowing about this thread. I just couldn't see why the 95% couldn't have somehow be taken care of in the players handicap index and just leave that, and the playing handicap, to worry about. If a lower handicapper needs more stokes, or a higher less strokes to play equal golf then just sort it on the handicap index they give us.
 

Swango1980

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
4,526
Still don't know why they didn't just embed the 95% into the Course handicap calculation in the first place, instead of golfers having to apply a playing allowance in virtually every competitive round they play (unless singles match play), or not applying it at all if all they are worried about is handicap. Just stick it in there, give players a course handicap, and let them get on with playing golf. The only time they need worry about applying something would be fourball match-play, but they were used to that from pre-WHS anyway. Any other playing allowances are likely to be in less common formats, in which a competition organiser is likely to provide playing handicaps to players (like in Opens, in which that was frequently the case pre-WHS)

The Australians were bold enough to do this, but I guess they are happy to make bold decisions after kicking a World No 1 tennis player out of their country.
 

Colin L

Tour Winner
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
4,536
Location
Edinburgh
Who has said anything about perfection?

There are two possible outcomes to the review :
the allowance gets changed up or down; or,
it doesn't get changed.

What the outcome is will be the result of number crunching of data we don't have access to and so we will be in exactly the same position of as we already are in with all the percentage allowances - knowing what their purposes are but not having the data or knowing how those data were processed.
 

Colin L

Tour Winner
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
4,536
Location
Edinburgh
We had a conversation this morning whilst playing and without knowing about this thread. I just couldn't see why the 95% couldn't have somehow be taken care of in the players handicap index and just leave that, and the playing handicap, to worry about. If a lower handicapper needs more stokes, or a higher less strokes to play equal golf then just sort it on the handicap index they give us.
Different formats, different imbalances to redress.
 

Swango1980

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
4,526
Who has said anything about perfection?

There are two possible outcomes to the review :
the allowance gets changed up or down; or,
it doesn't get changed.

What the outcome is will be the result of number crunching of data we don't have access to and so we will be in exactly the same position of as we already are in with all the percentage allowances - knowing what their purposes are but not having the data or knowing how those data were processed.
Or a 3rd outcome, it could be embedded into Course Handicap
 

Colin L

Tour Winner
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
4,536
Location
Edinburgh
You mean they might have had to come up with a bright idea?? 🤔🤔
In a singles match, the two course handicaps achieve parity whereas in a stroke play competition you make a proportional reduction to counter the fact that the field will have a higher proportion of higher handicappers and there will consequently be a greater possibility of an exceptional score. That possibility is not going to go away which is presumably why Gemma mentioned that the handicap allowance is not going to go away.

If you embed the allowance in the course handicap, all you have done is to shift the disparity to singles match play and probably other formats.
 
Top