Alterations to WHS?

[clubchamp98]

Yes, we should have different systems by country, to refect different social norms, different attitudes to golf, and accept that handicaps made during a competition on a links course in scotland dont travel to a bounce game on a stadium courses in florida.

Totally agree.
I am in Florida atm and havnt played to my handicap once yet.
The courses are poles apart mostly because of the type of grasses used here.
you need to totally adjust your swing to play Bermuda grass, that’s not easy.
Grain on the greens can send a ball the opposite way you read them.
it’s a different game!

 

[wjemather]

Totally agree.
I am in Florida atm and havnt played to my handicap once yet.
The courses are poles apart mostly because of the type of grasses used here.
you need to totally adjust your swing to play Bermuda grass, that’s not easy.
Grain on the greens can send a ball the opposite way you read them.
it’s a different game!

The problems you describe relate to local knowledge (which includes lack of practice in those conditions). Some players learn and adapt better than others. No handicap system has ever accounted for that, and likely never will.

 

[Alan Clifford]

Is that not due to a flaw in WHS, that taking 8 best for all HIs does not take account of the wider span of scores that a high HI player will have compared to a low ?

Even with the 8 scores, the span will be lower for a scratch than a 36. Should these not be normalised (roughly at least) so that the span of the scores taken gor the average HI is similar to a scratch players. Just for eg, best 8 for a scratch, best 7 for a 10hi, best 6 for a 20hi, best 5 for a 30hi. Or whatever. So high HIs less likely to be discarding a big difference score, and, their HI will skew closer to their capability, reducing the cases of scores that the low HI simply can never compete with.

A flaw in WHS? It was designed by world beating statisticians.

But I wonder what the world beating statisticians were asked to do. Was it

1. What statistic should we use for a handicap
or
2. The statistic we are going to use for a handicap index is an average. Should we use 10 scores or 8 from the last 20?

 

[Alan Clifford]

Totally agree.
I am in Florida atm and havnt played to my handicap once yet.
The courses are poles apart mostly because of the type of grasses used here.
you need to totally adjust your swing to play Bermuda grass, that’s not easy.
Grain on the greens can send a ball the opposite way you read them.
it’s a different game!

I struggle in South Africa because I find the kikuyu grass is grippy and the courses are longer.

 

[Backsticks]

A flaw in WHS? It was designed by world beating statisticians.

But I wonder what the world beating statisticians were asked to do. Was it

1. What statistic should we use for a handicap
or
2. The statistic we are going to use for a handicap index is an average. Should we use 10 scores or 8 from the last 20?

Was the original averaging x from 20 system based on 8 or 10 ?
And, was it devised, for men at least, in a time when 28 was the max HI ?

But yes, I agree, 93% of world beating statisticians will be 85% accurate 79% of the time so that low HIs have a 4% better chance of a win than the higher 92%. You cant argue with the 100% fairness in that.

 

[sweaty sock]

A flaw in WHS? It was designed by world beating statisticians.

But I wonder what the world beating statisticians were asked to do. Was it

1. What statistic should we use for a handicap
or
2. The statistic we are going to use for a handicap index is an average. Should we use 10 scores or 8 from the last 20?

I would love to know what statisticians were involved, it seems very much like we just asked which system most people used then forced the rest of the world in line....

 

[clubchamp98]

The problems you describe relate to local knowledge (which includes lack of practice in those conditions). Some players learn and adapt better than others. No handicap system has ever accounted for that, and likely never will.

Agree so why have one that thinks it can ?

 

[Backsticks]

Agree so why have one that thinks it can ?

Because is can do that - but requires data to adapt your HI. The system works - better than UHS btw - at quickly adapting to your play.

WHS is better than UHS, fundamentally, and quite aside from its universality. Most of the charges levelled at it, are beyond any handicap system to resolve (banditry, ability to played different syles of coursed : Bermuda grass, links, initial HI accuracy), not related to how good or not it is (max HI limits, PCC calculation not public), or just luddism - people who are still living in a UHS frame of reference.

It possibly could be improved, but that would be refinement, and would still not solve people issues with elements external to it, that people mistakenly ascribe to WHS.

 

[wjemather]

Agree so why have one that thinks it can ?

It doesn't claim to.

 

[D-S]

It doesn't claim to.

From EG website:-
“From there, it will enable you and every golfer to compete fairly across any golf course in the world”
“Enables a player’s handicap to be easily portable from club-to-club and country-to-country”
“In short, the WHS has created a handicapping method that is adaptable, easy to use and enables players of all abilities to play and compete on a fair and equal basis.”

Personally, I think we’re as about as close as I think we’re going to get without trying major cultural shifts which are unlikely to happen.
However, I think players having equivalent indexes across the world is a pipe dream. Also, as far as I understand, in many clubs and societies in Spain where just this sort of multi nationality comps should work, the system is a mess with Spanish clubs not accepting UK handicaps, therefore players have two indexes (despite being advised to the contrary) as the UK one isn’t accepted or maintained.

 

[wjemather]

From EG website:-
“From there, it will enable you and every golfer to compete fairly across any golf course in the world”
“Enables a player’s handicap to be easily portable from club-to-club and country-to-country”
“In short, the WHS has created a handicapping method that is adaptable, easy to use and enables players of all abilities to play and compete on a fair and equal basis.”

Personally, I think we’re as about as close as I think we’re going to get without trying major cultural shifts which are unlikely to happen.
However, I think players having equivalent indexes across the world is a pipe dream. Also, as far as I understand, in many clubs and societies in Spain where just this sort of multi nationality comps should work, the system is a mess with Spanish clubs not accepting UK handicaps, therefore players have two indexes (despite being advised to the contrary) as the UK one isn’t accepted or maintained.

Exactly; nothing about accounting for local knowledge - which is something that applies to neighbouring courses as much as it does to courses in different countries or continents.

The system cannot be held accountable for local intransigence, ignorance or incompetence.

 

[Alan Clifford]

Congu advice for me is, "If the period is of a longer nature (e.g. the player regularly spends a month or more abroad) then they should take with them a copy of the last 20 scores supporting their Handicap Index."

But what if I'm hard capped in England? Free handicap boost! Then get accused of cheating when your competitors find out. 20 scores is not enough; you need a year's scores if you are going to change jurisdictions.

This was not a hypothetical situation. Obviously I didn't follow this absurd advice.

 

[clubchamp98]

It doesn't claim to.

Yes it does.!
anything with World and System would suggest it works Worldwide!

 

[wjemather]

Yes it does.!
anything with World and System would suggest it works Worldwide!

Working worldwide (which WHS actually does very well) has absolutely nothing to do with accounting for things like local knowledge (see #211) and adaptability of the individual to unfamiliar conditions.

 

[Swango1980]

Yes it does.!
anything with World and System would suggest it works Worldwide!

What is the argument here? Are you suggesting a handicap system should have a "local knowledge factor" or a tick box to declare if an individual golfer has experience playing out of "Bermuda Grass"? What next, should handicaps take into account the amount of sleep golfers have on average each night, jet lag, alcohol intake, etc?

 

[sjn]

How does the average of best 8 from 20 fit in with the result of one event?
To cause this the 20th oldest must be massively greater or lower than the most recent.

if I understand your point ; theres a 9 shot difference between my 20th oldest (which is the best in the 20) , and the 9th best of the last 20 . So if I retrun an indifferent score in the next round , the 20th oldest fall away and my handicap index goes up 1.1 from that one round .
Not sure if its sbeen mentioned in the replies , but England golf have a webinar this mont , & one of the items on the agenda is WHS update so hopefull find out more then about next years changes.

 

[doublebogey7]

if I understand your point ; theres a 9 shot difference between my 20th oldest (which is the best in the 20) , and the 9th best of the last 20 . So if I retrun an indifferent score in the next round , the 20th oldest fall away and my handicap index goes up 1.1 from that one round .
Not sure if its sbeen mentioned in the replies , but England golf have a webinar this mont , & one of the items on the agenda is WHS update so hopefull find out more then about next years changes.

All true but Rulefan was replying to the claim that he has seen high handicapped players win events and go up a shot. To do that they would have to have had a score at least 8 shots higher than their 20th score, pretty difficult to win with such a score.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Is it not true that your playing handicap can go up by one whole shot, but your handicap index has gone up by merely 0.1 ?

In a rare case, a winning score could be only one shot higher than the disappearing score, the HI goes up by 0.1 but the PH goes up one whole shot.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

I live in a fairly wealthy area (I'm not though) and many members of my and other local clubs take long holidays in Spain, Portugal, Florida etc where they are members of local clubs. They play in the club and other local club's competitions and had always commented on the variations in handicaps. They still complain about the US lax approach to general play scores but have commented favourably on the standardisation re handicaps in general.

There was standardisation before, they should have been cross-reporting all scores to the respective clubs, and then their handicaps would have been fine. Laziness of a very small niche of wealthy folks is no justification for tearing up a perfectly good system

 

[wjemather]

There was standardisation before, they should have been cross-reporting all scores to the respective clubs, and then their handicaps would have been fine. Laziness of a very small niche of wealthy folks is no justification for tearing up a perfectly good system

It was only a good system with respect to being built in and for a pre-digital age, and constrained by the need to be able to perform all calculations manually (and relatively easily). We also accepted other limitations, such as not being able to compete equitably against players with handicaps produced by other systems.

With those constraints and limitations removed, the old system was adequate, at best.