Alterations to WHS?

[Swango1980]

Do we have to now?

Can’t say I have had to do anything more complicated than work out the number of shots given in match play.

Working out the number of shots given in match play is the end of goal, always has been.

It is how you get to that point is what is more complicated / time consuming. In some respects, I get it. Different course handicaps at different courses is a much better idea that what we had, so the players need to do a bit of ground work to get to that point. Previously, all they needed was their Handicap. Now, they need their Index (no more effort than before), but the extra effort is then converting that into a Course Handicap and then a Playing Handicap (although the 90% also had to be done before anyway, just in a different order). So, since WHS, it takes longer on the first tee to get to that point. Although in official matches, I'll always do the workings at home now, and then arrive at the match prepared with the figures.

How the process varies in April, I still am not entirely sure. I've heard a bit on how it theoretically works, but not sure how that will play out in practice. Changing Course Handicaps to decimals, changing what the Playing Handicap is and the order that 90% is applied, and talking about machine precision or not machine precision just seems like a lot of chat that is going to be way beyond the vast majority of golfers who turn up to play golf once a week, and outside that have zero interest in researching changes in golf rules, handicapping or talking about golf on forums.

Maybe the chat in here has made things sound way more complicated than they will actually be in reality, so we'll find out soon enough.

 

[D-S]

Ok…so after the simple long multi you get 3.992 and that is your CH

But you have then factored by 95% that CH … to get your individual stableford PH - which I assume you’d then round. And I have read and understood from earlier posts that PH is simply the nearest whole number to you CH…and that you then apply the 95% .

Your HI is say 6.7 then you calculate your CH (HI x slope/113 + (CR-Par))from this your CH is an unrounded number let’s say 7.54 .
The allowance for an individual Stableford competition is 95%. So your Playing Hamdicap is 7.54 x 95% = 7.163 - as your playing Handicap is a rounded number it is therefore 7.
This is not a simple sum to do in your head first thing in the morning so therefore you must(in a comp)/should get the result ether from a handicap calculator APP, your ISV touchscreen or tables with the various allowances (in EG language ‘machine precision’).

 

[wjemather]

Although some say WHS is simpler than what we had before, those mathematical workings makes me think this isn't strictly true. I don't remember golfers having to get involved in such mathematics in the old days to understand what handicap / shots given they get.

I think the most complex it ever got was to work out 90% of a whole number

I don't know what it is voyager is doing, but it isn't WHS.

With actual WHS, golfers need to do fewer (and simpler) calculations than ever before.

 

[Deleted member 29109]

Working out the number of shots given in match play is the end of goal, always has been.

It is how you get to that point is what is more complicated / time consuming. In some respects, I get it. Different course handicaps at different courses is a much better idea that what we had, so the players need to do a bit of ground work to get to that point. Previously, all they needed was their Handicap. Now, they need their Index (no more effort than before), but the extra effort is then converting that into a Course Handicap and then a Playing Handicap (although the 90% also had to be done before anyway, just in a different order). So, since WHS, it takes longer on the first tee to get to that point. Although in official matches, I'll always do the workings at home now, and then arrive at the match prepared with the figures.

How the process varies in April, I still am not entirely sure. I've heard a bit on how it theoretically works, but not sure how that will play out in practice. Changing Course Handicaps to decimals, changing what the Playing Handicap is and the order that 90% is applied, and talking about machine precision or not machine precision just seems like a lot of chat that is going to be way beyond the vast majority of golfers who turn up to play golf once a week, and outside that have zero interest in researching changes in golf rules, handicapping or talking about golf on forums.

Maybe the chat in here has made things sound way more complicated than they will actually be in reality, so we'll find out soon enough.

Maybe I’ve missed something. But I’ve not had to stand on the first tee working anything out.

I know my CH at my club. So in match play the only concern is the defence between players.

At another course I will have used the England golf app to look up my CH before arriving on the first tee.

If I’m playing in a club comp I don’t care about any of it. I just enter my gross score into the computer after the round.

If I’m playing a casual round I personally just count my shots, CH/PH have no meaning. If I’m playing with someone who wants to play a stableford they can crack on and work out the points using the CH.

Anything else is over complicating things unnecessarily.

 

[Voyager EMH]

I don't know what it is voyager is doing, but it isn't WHS.

With actual WHS, golfers need to do fewer (and simpler) calculations than ever before.

"Actual WHS" involves lots of arithmetic. What I did was the actual arithmetic involved in the calculation of PH for individual strokeplay.

"Need to do" is a matter of choice as to how much one engages with that arithmetic and to what level is the desired understanding for an individual.

I think most golfers, come 1st April, will not have much desire to engage with the arithmetic. Similar to the level of engagement with the rules of golf.
Most will simply rail against "Stupid WHS" and the perceived complications.

I however, positively enjoy arithmetic. Shame on me, maybe.

I do find the term "machine precision" laughable with regard to PH calculation, when HI is not calculated with machine precision.

 

[wjemather]

OK. Good. That’s clear to me now. And CR is NOT a round number and for the course and tees I am playing will be provided to me somehow. My PH is then very simply the nearest whole number to my CH and that too will be provided to me - or maybe I get provided with my PH as CH is not easily provided in table form, and is of no use in any case as what matters as my starting point for me working out shots received/allowance for any round and/or match is now my PH and NOT my CH.

If I am still getting this wrong I apologise, but that only highlights my continued confusion. And I haven’t even thought further about shots given/received for different formats.

For handicapping, your rounded Course Handicap remains the reference for holing out. This remains the value on boards at clubs.

There will never be any requirement to know or calculate (or do anything else with) your unrounded Course Handicap. However, this is what will be used by software to calculate your Playing Handicap, which will be made known to you, e.g. via an app or pre-printed on your scorecard.

 

[Swango1980]

Maybe I’ve missed something. But I’ve not had to stand on the first tee working anything out.

I know my CH at my club. So in match play the only concern is the defence between players.

At another course I will have used the England golf app to look up my CH before arriving on the first tee.

If I’m playing in a club comp I don’t care about any of it. I just enter my gross score into the computer after the round.

If I’m playing a casual round I personally just count my shots, CH/PH have no meaning. If I’m playing with someone who wants to play a stableford they can crack on and work out the points using the CH.

Anything else is over complicating things unnecessarily.

In my experience, most people know their Index. They don't know their course handicap, as it changes when they play off white tees / yellow tees or go from one course to another. What they played off in their last competition isn't much reference to them, as it applies the 95% anyway (club stroke play comps are easy, as everyone is given a card with their handicaps already on it).

So, it is the conversion process from Index to CH that is the most timely bit (not complicated for most, although there are some that can't handle it). Some might use their phone, others use the board at the club. It is just another step that adds to the time.

 

[wjemather]

... for those with a HI that is 3 significant figures.

This is not WHS.

"Actual WHS" involves lots of arithmetic. What I did was the actual arithmetic involved in the calculation of PH for individual strokeplay.

"Need to do" is a matter of choice as to how much one engages with that arithmetic and to what level is the desired understanding for an individual.

I think most golfers, come 1st April, will not have much desire to engage with the arithmetic. Similar to the level of engagement with the rules of golf.
Most will simply rail against "Stupid WHS" and the perceived complications.

I however, positively enjoy arithmetic. Shame on me, maybe.

I do find the term "machine precision" laughable with regard to PH calculation, when HI is not calculated with machine precision.

As usual, you are overcomplicating things for your own amusement, which is generally unhelpful and confusing to the vast majority.

 

[rosecott]

I am wondering whether a worked example might help you.
A little more complicated for those with a HI that is 3 significant figures.

View attachment 51560

OK, can you get out your pencil and paper again?

Slope 120, Par 68, CR 67.5

Player’s HI 22.2

Calculate PH for singles strokeplay (95%, but you know that) before 1/4/24 and from 1/4/24 onwards and I’ll compare it with my calculation and get back to you if there is an issue. Just want to make sure I'm not going mad

 

[Swango1980]

OK, can you get out your pencil and paper again?

Slope 120, Par 68, CR 67.5

Player’s HI 22.2

Calculate PH for singles strokeplay (95%, but you know that) before 1/4/24 and from 1/4/24 onwards and I’ll compare it with my calculation and get back to you if there is an issue. Just want to make sure I'm not going mad

Edited

I'll have a go at this game

PH before April changes = 23

PH after the April changes = 22 (I didn't do any rounding until the PH was calculated)

 

[Voyager EMH]

This is not WHS.


As usual, you are overcomplicating things for your own amusement, which is generally unhelpful and confusing to the vast majority.

Funny that.
"Complicating things for your own amusement" is something you could perhaps be accused of.

"This is not WHS" is wrong. Some people have an HI of two significant figures eg 4.3 and some three significant figures eg 17.6

I believe that I gave an accurate example of the actual arithmetic that occurs.
You give accurate examples of the wording that describes that arithmetical process. This does not always create a level of understanding of the process. Sometimes, but not always.
Different people have different desires for a level of understanding. Theirs may not be the same as yours.
I give an alternative perspective than yours. That's all.
I don't have the same desire to put you down, as you have with me.
That's because we have a different way of expressing ourselves. That's all there is to that as well.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Edited

I'll have a go at this game

PH before April changes = 23

PH after the April changes = 22 (I didn't do any rounding until the PH was calculated)

Shall we leave it at that. Or does Rosecott need to see your "working out"?

 

[rosecott]

Edited

I'll have a go at this game

PH before April changes = 23

PH after the April changes = 22 (I didn't do any rounding until the PH was calculated)

50%, must try harder. Edit, Ok you changed 24 to 23.

 

[Swango1980]

50%, must try harder.

Do I get 75% if I show my workings?

Pre Changes

CH = 22.2 x 120 / 113 = 24
PH = 24 x 0.95 = 23

Post Changes

CH = 22.2 x 120/113 - 0.5 (CR-Par) = 23.075
PH = 23.075 x 0.95 = 22

 

[clubchamp98]

I don't know what it is voyager is doing, but it isn't WHS.

With actual WHS, golfers need to do fewer (and simpler) calculations than ever before.

Really??
Before WHS 6.4 =6
6.5=7

That was it.

 

[Voyager EMH]

For clarity,

4.3 is two significant figures.

22.2 is three significant figures.

And this is WHS reality.

But I think most of you will have accepted that as true.

 

[rosecott]

Shall we leave it at that. Or does Rosecott need to see your "working out"?

No workings required.

Yesterday I attended an EG WHS workshop and they revealed that the "Course/Playing handicap tables" reports on the WHS platform had been updated to show before and after 1/4/24. They have also expanded to show the various % allowances.

When I accessed the "before and after" for the 22.2 HI, I expected a difference. The PH remained unchanged at 23.

OK, I probably am going a bit doolally. I have gone back to the WHS platform. They have been very sneaky. There is a box which allows you to specify the "effective from" date so I put 1/4/24. What I missed was another box further down the page - labelled rule set - which toggled between "current" and "CR - Par". Maybe there's hope for me yet.

 

[Swango1980]

No workings required.

Yesterday I attended an EG WHS workshop and they revealed that the "Course/Playing handicap tables" reports on the WHS platform had been updated to show before and after 1/4/24. They have also expanded to show the various % allowances.

When I accessed the "before and after" for the 22.2 HI, I expected a difference. The PH remained unchanged at 23.

Where did I go wrong in my calculations, where I got a PH of 22, not 23?

 

[wjemather]

Really??
Before WHS 6.4 =6
6.5=7

That was it.

Before, you had to do rounding - you'd be surprised how many struggled with that, especially with x.5 exacts.
Now you just look at a chart or app.

 

[clubchamp98]

Before, you had to do rounding.
Now you just look at a chart or app.

So your statement isn’t correct that “ golfers are doing fewer calculations now”

Theres 600+ posts debating about it!

Under the old method you didn’t need a “ chart or app”