D
Deleted member 29109
Guest
If handicaps were based on how we played golf, then matchplay rounds would be included in handicap calculations.
Alterations to WHS?
- Thread starter Captain_Black.
- Start date
D-S
Well-known member
Seems a strange way of telling people that changes are being made to how match play allowances are calculated. Don’t say anything or give a rationale just keep on updating the calculator in the background.
For what it’s worth I think the changes are sensible but an odd way of doing them.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
That’s just not right.
In the same week maybe .
Alan Clifford
Well-known member
Alan Clifford
Well-known member
But at least you played the holes rather than making up a score to add on,
D
Deleted member 30522
Guest
The problem was course ratings giving strong/weak handicaps, that hasn't changed
IanMcC
Well-known member
Could the learned ones on here please point me in the right direction regarding one of our comps post April 2024?
We run a weekly 9 hole qualifier on our front 9 on Fridays during the season. Our course returns to the clubhouse after the 10th hole. Initially when I read the changes document, I thought that we could change this to a 10 hole comp, and WHS would scale up the score to produce a differential, but I am now having my doubts.
Guidance Rule 3.2 states that 10 holes are minimum for this to take place, so that would be fine. However, the text on page 35 of the Guidance Document states that the Holes Not Played adjustment is only relevant for 18 hole rounds. Our proposed comp would only be 10 holes.
Also, we would have issues allocating strokes. Its easy for a 9 hole comp at present, as the front 9 are sloped and rated. If we were to make this a 10 hole comp, how would we allocate strokes? Using full 18 hole allowance would not be equitable, I feel. Neither would rationalizing the Stroke Indexes over the 10 holes and printing a new card.
Using myself as an example, my Index is 11.0. I receive 5 strokes on the rated 9 hole course, 7 of my 11 shots on the shortened 18 hole course, and would get a shot on every hole and two shots on one of them if I used my full 18 hole handicap over a rationalized 10 hole course.
I’m a bit confused, but feel that this scaling up is not designed for a regular, shortened course, but only for instances where some holes are omitted from an 18 hole course temporarily, and we must therefore continue with our 9 hole comps. Is this correct?
We run a weekly 9 hole qualifier on our front 9 on Fridays during the season. Our course returns to the clubhouse after the 10th hole. Initially when I read the changes document, I thought that we could change this to a 10 hole comp, and WHS would scale up the score to produce a differential, but I am now having my doubts.
Guidance Rule 3.2 states that 10 holes are minimum for this to take place, so that would be fine. However, the text on page 35 of the Guidance Document states that the Holes Not Played adjustment is only relevant for 18 hole rounds. Our proposed comp would only be 10 holes.
Also, we would have issues allocating strokes. Its easy for a 9 hole comp at present, as the front 9 are sloped and rated. If we were to make this a 10 hole comp, how would we allocate strokes? Using full 18 hole allowance would not be equitable, I feel. Neither would rationalizing the Stroke Indexes over the 10 holes and printing a new card.
Using myself as an example, my Index is 11.0. I receive 5 strokes on the rated 9 hole course, 7 of my 11 shots on the shortened 18 hole course, and would get a shot on every hole and two shots on one of them if I used my full 18 hole handicap over a rationalized 10 hole course.
I’m a bit confused, but feel that this scaling up is not designed for a regular, shortened course, but only for instances where some holes are omitted from an 18 hole course temporarily, and we must therefore continue with our 9 hole comps. Is this correct?
wjemather
Well-known member
Yes, a 10-hole competition will be acceptable.
Strokes received per 18-hole handicap and Stroke Indexes on the card; unplayed holes get marked DNP for handicapping and scaled up using expected scores.
I'd say it's a safe bet that at least one ISV will not have updated their software to make this simple (i.e. holes can be specified for the comp and only scores for those holes can be entered). Until that happens an 18-hole comp will need to be setup and players must enter DNP for holes 11-18 when inputting scores - which will require checking!! - or you continue with 9-hole comps.
IanMcC
Well-known member
I may be wrong, but to my mind it does not produce equity for all players if we were to use the full 18 hole card and Stroke Indexes. Our front 9 are all of the even indexes, and hole 10 is stroke index 7. Again using myself as an example, I would receive 7 of my 11 shots. A scratch (0.0 index) player would receive +1 shots, the same as playing 18 holes. A PH of 22 would only receive 12 of his shots, 'missing out' on 10 of them. Maybe I am missing something.
Our ISV is Club Systems, and we can build shortened courses easily, where the player does not have to enter DNP for the omitted holes. We have built some of these for our Winter comps. I'm leaning towards keeping the 9 hole comps.
wjemather
Well-known member
Surely you are only getting 5 strokes over 10 holes if your 18 hole handicap is 11? The 22 PH is receiving their correct proportional number of strokes.
It's not something I've looked at for a while, but with ClubV1 you probably won't be able to create a WHS linked 10-hole card which is needed for scores to be submitted for handicapping (and experience days they're the least likely to update their system).
IanMcC
Well-known member
Sorry. We are both wrong. I receive 6 strokes. (I originally counted hole 11, which is SI 1). Shots at indexes 2,4,6,8,10 on the front, and the 10th hole which is SI 7.
It may be true about receiving the correct number of strokes, but I know that a lot of high handicappers will not see it that way.
And yes, you are correct about creating the courses. Its only Winter courses we have created, so they were not WHS qualifiers. We don't play qualifiers in the Winter months at our course, as conditions are unsuitable.
wjemather
Well-known member
Yes, 6 strokes. Not sure what I was thinking earlier!
tobybarker
Active member
Having just ploughed through all 41 pages I have to say I'm amazed the argument in favour of the changes seems to be, in part, "well, the computer does it all anyway"......you're living in a cloud cuckoo land if you think that computers are always used....our inter-club matches are 4BBB matchplays, we dont enter scores into a computer, and these strokes given to each player needs to be calculated before the 1st tee.....our seniors in winter dont enter scores into the computer as we are not qualifiers over the winter: they will need to work out 95% of some rounded or non-rounded number, or 15, 25,35% for scrambles, etc etc. I could make a long list of real situations that wont use a computer (and some still won't/don't use a phone). Its taken long enough to get them used to HI, CH and PH.
Genu9
Active member
41? Didn't bother with Appendices then.......
Genu9
Active member
Seriously, I agree. It's beyond the capability of most players to calculate casual Handicaps without some form of assistance.41? Didn't bother with Appendices then.......
D
Deleted member 29109
Guest
Really?
D-S
Well-known member
The stock official answer you will get is that if it’s not calculated through ‘machine precision’ you can use rounded course handicaps and the fact that some players will get a different amount of shots than if ‘machine precision‘ is used well ’that’s life’.
They don’t say what happens if someone has a handicap calculator and someone else does the maths from a rounded course handicap board and they both have different results who is right?
Also if you quiz EG about this basically they say if it is not in a comp, it is social golf and they don’t care what allowances people use or how they calculate it.
They (EG) seem to have admitted that unrounded course handicaps are a bit of a nightmare in 4BB matchplay, so they have changed the way shots are calculated - they have not made the same admission for 4BB strokeplay, team games etc. etc.
I assume there are a lot of questions at their seminars but these will not reach, I assume, even the majority of clubs in England so I would like to think there is some really good publicity information that is in plain Englis and will be readily understandable for a lot of golfers as clubs are going to be having to send it out in the next few weeks as April 1st is not long away.
Voyager EMH
Slipper Wearing Plucker of Pheasants
Yes, in my experience, it is.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
Mine also. In a 4BBB context so many I play with seem unable to grasp that all is (currently) required to get their 4BBB PH is to divide their CH (which they usually know or know where to get it) by ten, which most folk over ten yrs old can do, round that up or down and take the result off their CH. Then find someone in their group who knows how to do subtraction
Either they are unable or simply can‘t be bothered and so feign confusion.
Fortunately the revision takes away all the above complicated (
) mathematics for the player as all he needs to tell the person in his four ball doing the shots is his CH - and that will be on a board or his app will tell him. The person doing the sums then does the divisions by ten annd rounding to get the PHs, and then subtractions for the shots - and shots sorted.Well at least thats what I’ve come to understand for 4BBB.
tobybarker
Active member
In other words you just pile the responsibilities onto one person who claims they once did sums at school.....this is not simplifying or making the system in nearly any way better for the users of that system. The way WHS has been rolled out has been, from an ex-project manager's view.Mine also. In a 4BBB context so many I play with seem unable to grasp that all is (currently) required to get their 4BBB PH is to divide their CH (which they usually know or know where to get it) by ten, which most folk over ten yrs old can do, round that up or down and take the result off their CH. Then find someone in their group who knows how to do subtraction
Either they are unable or simply can‘t be bothered and so feign confusion.
Fortunately the revision takes away all the above complicated (
Well at least thats what I’ve come to understand for 4BBB.
Last edited by a moderator:
