Annual Handicap Review

[Deleted member 30522]

There is certainly evidence that rate of uptake of WHS casual scores is far greater than the use of CONGU Supplementary Scores. But in my club no indication of change by the seniors.

There is, but it's still a marginal uptake, the number of casual rounds we've had submitted is equivalent to less than one medal, and generally being submitted by the same five guys, only one of whom actually plays in the medals.

It's going to involve a huge change in mindset for GP scores to take off

 

[nickjdavis]

I've just had a look at our general play scores submitted....

Between 1st June and 30th September we have seen 2,283 general play scores submitted by 261 different players (roughly 50% of the club membership).

121 players have submitted 1-5 scores
61 players 6-10 scores
38 players 11-15 scores
19 players 16-20 scores
9 players 21-25 scores
7 players 26-30 scores
4 players 31-40 scores
2 players have each submitted 43 scores.

These rounds have been submitted from 96 different golf courses. 85% from our home course, 8% from course that are local (within county and courses "just across the border" into Essex) and 7% from courses further afield.

92% have been submitted using the my EG app, the remainder via the MasterScoreboard app (front end of Handicapmaster s/ware).

We used to get maybe half a dozen supplementaries a week prior to WHS and the availability of the myEG App.

Update...

Interestingly (?) the General Play submissions are being made by folks who largely do not play in club competitions....the average number of competition scores submitted by folks who have submitted GP scores is 1.8. For the 172 members who have not submitted any General Play scores at all the average number of competition scores submitted is 6.3. Ninety one members have not submitted a score of any type in the period from 1/6/21 to 30/9/21.

 

[rulie]

On the other side of the pond - I've submitted 86 scores for handicap purposes so far in 2021.

 

[jim8flog]

That is a serious distortion of the situation. Data from the season just finishing will be analysed and on the basis of that, reports will be devised and issued. The recommendation is that clubs therefore do not carry out any review till at least January/February. The expectation is that not many players will be highlighted by the review process.

I think that expectation may prove to be overly hopeful. I can't see that the WHS system can do anything to change the perennial problem of the declining player who doesn't put in scores and whose index will not, as a result. reflect their actual ability. "Twas ever thus.

We have always insisted that any player requesting a review has at least 7 scores in during the current handicap year. I see no reason to change that with the WHS. If it is due to injury the manual now requires any review to be based solely on scores since the injury was sustained.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

I don't know as much about h'caps as others clearly do and tbh don't have a great deal of interest in their workings but can see their point, with whs working why would you need an annual review

There a players who for various reasons cannot play to their current handicap. Some will have hit the hard cap and hence further changes may be significantly delayed. Others may be dropping too fast for the system to protect other players. In either or both cases a review is appropriate.

Just because you review it, it may not change!

 

[mikejohnchapman]

There is, but it's still a marginal uptake, the number of casual rounds we've had submitted is equivalent to less than one medal, and generally being submitted by the same five guys, only one of whom actually plays in the medals.

It's going to involve a huge change in mindset for GP scores to take off

Our experience is different - we have over 1100 GP rounds correctly submitted since the end of lockdown this spring. Most are from our senior section. I think the message that more rounds equals an appropriate handicap has sunk-in.

 

[tobybarker]

At our place we chose to make all seniors roll ups qualifiers and all scores go into the computer. People just do it now without (much) complaint. The really oldies just let the slightly less old do the donkey work of entering scores. Trouble is, now winter rules in place we aren't rated do HCP won't change until spring ?

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Our experience is different - we have over 1100 GP rounds correctly submitted since the end of lockdown this spring. Most are from our senior section. I think the message that more rounds equals an appropriate handicap has sunk-in.

We have a seniors roll up every Friday, not a lot, usually between 8-12 of them. GP Scores submitted all season = 0

 

[Deleted member 30522]

But is it up to an annual review to solve this, surely now with a bigger emphasis on submitting casual rounds surely it is down to players themselves.

That's exactly the problem, the system has been designed with USA/Aus in mind, where casual play scores rounds were commonplace, but it's not taking off here, so many players still not even gone through a full 20 score cycle yet. We have one guy who won the club matchplay last year, went up 3 shots under the switch to WHS, has won 3 trophies this year. 14 rounds played, none of them GP scores.

 

[IanM]

We have a seniors roll up every Friday, not a lot, usually between 8-12 of them. GP Scores submitted all season = 0

I can't remember exactly how the WHS communication handled "the new requirement" for entering GP scores.

But if unless it is a stipulated condition, you can't really raise an eyebrow at non compliance. Here we had a culture of competition rounds counting, everything else did not. That is embedded in many many years of play.

If they wanted to change that, they should have tried a bit harder! That assumes "they" have the right to do so too.

Cultural change is rarely achieved with the written word alone!

 

[jim8flog]

We have a seniors roll up every Friday, not a lot, usually between 8-12 of them. GP Scores submitted all season = 0

I play in a few roll ups but I will never submit a GP score from playing in one (although quite a few do). My reason being simply all the roll ups play from the yellow tees and I do not want a handicap largely based upon the yellow tees. The difference between the course rating for whites and yellows is only 1.4 but for me, personally, the difference is 3 shots (length of holes).

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Oh I'm not Ian, just highlighting that WHS only really works if folks enter every, or nearly every score they take, and that will involve a seismic shift in how we treat our golf, and frankly, it's not going to happen. We are used to reloading when we've hit a duff, just to clear the air, we're not scoring, it's a bounce game. We're used to dragging a missed putt back that we should have holed, drop a second ball after a bad chip etc. Not *all* the time, but it's how we play a *casual* round.

 

[rulefan]

We are used to reloading when we've hit a duff, just to clear the air, we're not scoring, it's a bounce game. We're used to dragging a missed putt back that we should have holed, drop a second ball after a bad chip etc. Not *all* the time, but it's how we play a *casual* round.

One side benefit from the actions of those who do and return the scores, is that they are unlikely to disturb the genuine trophy winners. I would prefer to play in a comp of vanity cappers than bandits
Having said that, I prefer my casual golf to be casual.

 

[nickjdavis]

I play in a few roll ups but I will never submit a GP score from playing in one (although quite a few do). My reason being simply all the roll ups play from the yellow tees and I do not want a handicap largely based upon the yellow tees. The difference between the course rating for whites and yellows is only 1.4 but for me, personally, the difference is 3 shots (length of holes).

Funnily enough I played a game off the yellows at my place on Friday....I don't think I've played off the yellows in a casual game for over two years. Like at your place the difference between the CR is 1.4 but there is a world of difference in the actual play of some holes....especially on the par 3 holes where the distance reduction means you can hit an iron off the tee rather than a hybrid/wood. I had actually forgotten how relatively much more easier the yellows are than the CR difference would suggest.

My best score off the whites at my place in the last four years has been a gross 74....on Friday I played a relatively easy gross 75 which included a double bogey on the last hole after leaving myself just 80 yards in to the green after the tee shot!!!

 

[nickjdavis]

One side benefit from the actions of those who do and return the scores, is that they are unlikely to disturb the genuine trophy winners.l.

But have you done any analysis to see the number of competition scores that are being submitted by players who regularly submit GP scores? To be honest I wasn't surprised by what I stated in post 22...

Interestingly (?) the General Play submissions are being made by folks who largely do not play in club competitions....the average number of competition scores submitted by folks who have submitted GP scores is 1.8. For the 172 members who have not submitted any General Play scores at all, the average number of competition scores submitted is 6.3.

I am well aware that there are a decent portion of the club who consider that there is little necessity to submit GP rounds when they are regularly submitting scores from competitions, so the above came as no surprise.

 

[Colin L]

I wouldn’t have any concern about members who regularly return comp scores but not GP ones. Their handicaps will be a good reflection of their actual ability. Or about those who don’t want to play in comps but do want an accurate handicap and put in plenty of GP scores. A score’s a score. It’a a continuation of underhandicapping from not returning scores that bothers me.

 

[rulefan]

It’a a continuation of underhandicapping from not returning scores that bothers me.

And that is a vicious circle.
Handicap too low. No point in playing comps.
Annual review. No scores reported so no scores to consider performance.
Handicap too low. No point in playing comps.
Annual review. No scores reported so no scores to consider performance.
Repeat every year.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

I can't remember exactly how the WHS communication handled "the new requirement" for entering GP scores.

But if unless it is a stipulated condition, you can't really raise an eyebrow at non compliance. Here we had a culture of competition rounds counting, everything else did not. That is embedded in many many years of play.

If they wanted to change that, they should have tried a bit harder! That assumes "they" have the right to do so too.

Cultural change is rarely achieved with the written word alone!

I would agree and forwarding notes from England Golf or sticking up the odd poster would, in my opinion, be an abdication of responsibility for the handicap management group in the club. (Note not just the handicap committee but also the section leaders and course management if appropriate).

You have to engage with the key groups and explain the logic and benefits of entering more scores and if necessary ensure you identify thought leaders in the various sections who can lead / inspire others. Will everyone get on board? - No. However, if you begin to make progress on some areas you will have a track record to build on.

The other side is to demonstrate and show that you manage the scores effectively by checking scores and removing those that don't conform to your stated standards. The message soon spreads.

If a club isn't interested in effectively engaging in changing the mindset then that is to their detriment.