• We'd like to take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Holidays and a very Merry Christmas from all at Golf Monthly. Thank you for sharing your 2025 with us!

95% Calculation to go?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 30522
  • Start date Start date
Swango1980 said:
How many golfers do research? I mean regular golfers, not the 1% geeky ones that use forums?
Click to expand...

if something was affecting one of the hobbies I played to the extent the change in handicap system, everyone with an existing handicap should have done some research.

a year down the line, if you haven’t figured it out….that’s on you
 
Wabinez said:
if something was affecting one of the hobbies I played to the extent the change in handicap system, everyone with an existing handicap should have done some research.

a year down the line, if you haven’t figured it out….that’s on you
Click to expand...
I'd love to hear England Golf or any of the other national authorities use that defence for any of the less than perfect issues with WHS.
 
jim8flog said:
Personally I do not see any problem with the current system just a problem with those incapable of reading the rules of the comp and the charts provided or checking or the computer where it is all displayed.
Click to expand...
Wabinez said:
bingo for me too.

and those who are too oblivious to do a bit of research and understand the topic a bit more, rather than just scream ‘it’s rubbish and everything needs changing’
Click to expand...


Wabinez said:
if something was affecting one of the hobbies I played to the extent the change in handicap system, everyone with an existing handicap should have done some research.

a year down the line, if you haven’t figured it out….that’s on you
Click to expand...

You seem to be complaining about the wrong thing, it's the folks who DO understand it that aren't happy with the system
 
Banchory Buddha said:
You seem to be complaining about the wrong thing, it's the folks who DO understand it that aren't happy with the system
Click to expand...


Good post!

Most of the others just play without being in comps/ ask someone to work out everything for them/spend ages at the calculations board trying to sort it out (then ask)

We played a vet greensomes this week 60% of this 40% of that and it still worked out at 50% of combined if I'm not mistaken.
 
Banchory Buddha said:
You seem to be complaining about the wrong thing, it's the folks who DO understand it that aren't happy with the system
Click to expand...
Or, at least...think they do!
And the question I'd ask is...Are those that complain doing it for the right reason(s), or merely in their own interest?
It seems to me that 'complaints' are about stuff that has very little real effect. While not suggesting it, I'm pretty sure changing use of '8 from 20' to 6 or 10 from 20 (or even from 15, or 12) would have a far greater effect on the index of most folk than the likes of if and how to apply a 95% statistical (?) adjustment!
I'm satisfied that 'the authorities' will look at all aspects of WHS and make any necessary changes. The only criticism I have is that, unfortunately, it's not truly a 'Worldwide' system.
 
Foxholer said:
Or, at least...think they do!
And the question I'd ask is...Are those that complain doing it for the right reason(s), or merely in their own interest?
It seems to me that 'complaints' are about stuff that has very little real effect. While not suggesting it, I'm pretty sure changing use of '8 from 20' to 6 or 10 from 20 (or even from 15, or 12) would have a far greater effect on the index of most folk than the likes of if and how to apply a 95% statistical (?) adjustment!
I'm satisfied that 'the authorities' will look at all aspects of WHS and make any necessary changes. The only criticism I have is that, unfortunately, it's not truly a 'Worldwide' system.
Click to expand...
Me and 3 friends played last weekend, them being very regular golfers and one a very good golfer, playing off 2. We decided to play fourball match play. I had the scorecard, so asked what everyone's handicap was. I had 3 numbers fly at me. I was obviously happy that the 2 handicapper was correct, but when the high teen handicappers quoted their figure, I had to ask whether this was course or playing. They STILL struggle to know the difference, and started quoting their Index, and what they think they played off last time. Anyway, after a short discussion, we settled on the numbers, the Playing handicaps and then determined the number of shots everyone got. After the 5th hole, which we won, we were told it was actually a half because one of the other guys had a shot. They thought they had 15 shots, not 13. It appeared they'd forgotten about the 90% after all the other discussions related to Playing Handicap on the first. I had to explain the system to them yet again.

This is not unusual, it is almost a weekly occurrence. So many golfers are simply confused as to what all the numbers are, when to apply a certain %, etc. They will simply rely on others to tell them what they are playing for. Now, maybe the the handicap authorities are OK with that, that many golfers simply have to rely on others to tell them their handicap because it is a black art to them. However, the system can certainly not claim to be simple, when after a year so many golfers are far from understanding it. The only real positive comments I've heard from regular golfers is the fact it is easy to submit general play scores, although that has nothing really to do with the system.
 
Swango1980 said:
Me and 3 friends played last weekend, them being very regular golfers and one a very good golfer, playing off 2. We decided to play fourball match play. I had the scorecard, so asked what everyone's handicap was. I had 3 numbers fly at me. I was obviously happy that the 2 handicapper was correct, but when the high teen handicappers quoted their figure, I had to ask whether this was course or playing. They STILL struggle to know the difference, and started quoting their Index, and what they think they played off last time. Anyway, after a short discussion, we settled on the numbers, the Playing handicaps and then determined the number of shots everyone got. After the 5th hole, which we won, we were told it was actually a half because one of the other guys had a shot. They thought they had 15 shots, not 13. It appeared they'd forgotten about the 90% after all the other discussions related to Playing Handicap on the first. I had to explain the system to them yet again.

This is not unusual, it is almost a weekly occurrence. So many golfers are simply confused as to what all the numbers are, when to apply a certain %, etc. They will simply rely on others to tell them what they are playing for. Now, maybe the the handicap authorities are OK with that, that many golfers simply have to rely on others to tell them their handicap because it is a black art to them. However, the system can certainly not claim to be simple, when after a year so many golfers are far from understanding it. The only real positive comments I've heard from regular golfers is the fact it is easy to submit general play scores, although that has nothing really to do with the system.
Click to expand...
Not uncommon I'd suspect.
It's a communication problem, so is always likely to happen. The best, or at least one, way round it, is to (delicately) get them to state, or even write down, how many shots they get. That way it shortens any discussion and lets everyone concentrate on the golf cf shots.
 
Foxholer said:
Not uncommon I'd suspect.
It's a communication problem, so is always likely to happen. The best, or at least one, way round it, is to (delicately) get them to state, or even write down, how many shots they get. That way it shortens any discussion an lets everyone concentrate on the golf cf shots.
Click to expand...
Yeah, true. There are ways and methods. It is why I try and write it all up on a card at the start of the game. But, it doesn't get rid of the issue that so many regular golfers are confused between course and playing handicap (and dare I say it, Index). Some might use the board, some may use the ISV (like howdidido), some may use MyEG and others may just rely on what others tell them how many shots they get. It gets particularly confusing when an APP like howdidido simply tells them their course handicap (and even says their Playing handicap is the same) when signing in for general play, then they question why they have to play of 95% when they're playing in a social roll up. And, if they DON'T have to play off 95%, they question why they have to then play off 95% in a club competition. There are plenty of examples of confusion, that simply would and could never have existed under the old system.

Yes, part of the review will be the actual percentages applied, but I think a huge part will be whether it can be inbuilt into the course handicap calculation. It doesn't stop the necessity of having to translate the Index into the Course Handicap, but at least the process pretty much stops there in most instances.
 
jim8flog said:
Just make one of the players a scratch player and "do the maths"
Click to expand...

It's a game of golf, not flippin Countdown "what's your handicap index, playing handicap, how many shots, what's 40% of your playing handicap or is it the handicap index, do we have to then knock off 5%, oh bugger we've been half an hour sorting it out and now its snowing "
 
Swango1980 said:
Me and 3 friends played last weekend, them being very regular golfers and one a very good golfer, playing off 2. We decided to play fourball match play. I had the scorecard, so asked what everyone's handicap was. I had 3 numbers fly at me. I was obviously happy that the 2 handicapper was correct, but when the high teen handicappers quoted their figure, I had to ask whether this was course or playing. They STILL struggle to know the difference, and started quoting their Index, and what they think they played off last time. Anyway, after a short discussion, we settled on the numbers, the Playing handicaps and then determined the number of shots everyone got. After the 5th hole, which we won, we were told it was actually a half because one of the other guys had a shot. They thought they had 15 shots, not 13. It appeared they'd forgotten about the 90% after all the other discussions related to Playing Handicap on the first. I had to explain the system to them yet again.

This is not unusual, it is almost a weekly occurrence. So many golfers are simply confused as to what all the numbers are, when to apply a certain %, etc. They will simply rely on others to tell them what they are playing for. Now, maybe the the handicap authorities are OK with that, that many golfers simply have to rely on others to tell them their handicap because it is a black art to them. However, the system can certainly not claim to be simple, when after a year so many golfers are far from understanding it. The only real positive comments I've heard from regular golfers is the fact it is easy to submit general play scores, although that has nothing really to do with the system.
Click to expand...
(y)(y)(y)Make that daily occurrence. Just depends how often you play.
 
chrisd said:
It's a game of golf, not flippin Countdown "what's your handicap index, playing handicap, how many shots, what's 40% of your playing handicap or is it the handicap index, do we have to then knock off 5%, oh bugger we've been half an hour sorting it out and now its snowing "
Click to expand...

My comment was about you assuming that 40% of one and 60% of the other equals 50% of combined.


What calculations did you do in these sort of comps before the WHS (not a lot has changed in that respect).
 
jim8flog said:
I am with Foxholer on this

When I try to explain why 95% most players just stop listening including some very intelligent people.
Click to expand...
Yes you've already said that some folks arent interested, and those moaning should find out how it works.

The problem is those moaning are those who've found out how it works, clearly the shoulder shruggers are not those moaning.

Essentially we're agreeing, if people are interested and find out how it works, they think it's a nonsense, if people are not interested they're not moaning
 
rulefan said:
I agree. Given that it could very easily have been 'hidden' in the CH (a la Australia), I believe it is the weakest part of the system and difficult to defend.
Click to expand...
It's certainly difficult to defend 95% in small fields when the system recommends 100%. It's also difficult to defend diverging from the rest of the world - Australia are very much an exception here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top