Annual review of handicaps

[louise_a]

We are having our annual review meeting on Monday and in light of the changes to handicaps that come into force in January, I would like us to consider increasing some handicap over the current maximum, we have 2 or 3 players who have never played to 36 even thought that has been their handicap for several years.

Can I do this now or should I wait until January to increase them?

 

[rosecott]

We are having our annual review meeting on Monday and in light of the changes to handicaps that come into force in January, I would like us to consider increasing some handicap over the current maximum, we have 2 or 3 players who have never played to 36 even thought that has been their handicap for several years.

Can I do this now or should I wait until January to increase them?

My interpretation of the timing of the Annual Review is that it should be carried out between 1 January and 28/29 February - the phrase used in the CONGU manual is "prior to 1 March each year."

If the AR is conducted during that 2-month period, then any changes introduced on 1 January would be used in the AR.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

My interpretation of the timing of the Annual Review is that it should be carried out between 1 January and 28/29 February - the phrase used in the CONGU manual is "prior to 1 March each year."

If the AR is conducted during that 2-month period, then any changes introduced on 1 January would be used in the AR.

We have the HC Qualifying season now from Jam 1 to Dec 31st we do our AR in Dec and apply the changes on 1st Jam

 

[rosecott]

We have the HC Qualifying season now from Jam 1 to Dec 31st we do our AR in Dec and apply the changes on 1st Jam

That sounds a reasonable approach, I assume you will be applying the 1 January changes. The big issue, as I see it, is the potential adjustments of 28 handicappers who have been unable to play to that handicap. I know that we have a handful who may well go up to Cat 5.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

That sounds a reasonable approach, I assume you will be applying the 1 January changes. The big issue, as I see it, is the potential adjustments of 28 handicappers who have been unable to play to that handicap. I know that we have a handful who may well go up to Cat 5.

The software will automatically increase people over the HC of 28 etc but we will be bringing in Comp rules to combat it - players over the HC of 28 will be able to play in board comps but must play of 28

 

[rosecott]

The software will automatically increase people over the HC of 28 etc but we will be bringing in Comp rules to combat it - players over the HC of 28 will be able to play in board comps but must play of 28

I'm a little uneasy about your phrase "to combat it". By that, do you mean you're unhappy about the introduction of cats 5 and 6 for men?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I'm a little uneasy about your phrase "to combat it". By that, do you mean you're unhappy about the introduction of cats 5 and 6 for men?

I think it’s a shocking idea to allow HC to go that high , so do my HC committee and Main Committee and indeed anyone I have spoken to at the club and at other clubs.

It’s a poor idea imo and adds nothing to the game

 

[duncan mackie]

I think it’s a shocking idea to allow HC to go that high , so do my HC committee and Main Committee and indeed anyone I have spoken to at the club and at other clubs.

It’s a poor idea imo and adds nothing to the game

Well that all depends on whether you see the future of the game as an inclusive or exclusive one.

From a principle perspective I see no difference between the allocation of 28 and 36 - a nd 37 to 54 is just an extension of that.

I completely accept that any clubs are entitled to wear the exclusive badge associated with knowing better; there are loads of battlegrounds waiting to be claimed to that end!

FWIW I believe we have 2 members with current CONGU handicaps of 28 who should be higher, not a great proportion, but I also know we have a very significant number of members who have never chosen to get one - A percentage of whom didn't believe they were good enough. That's not healthy.

Which ever way you look at it 28 is already an arbitrary number, arguably as is 18, 24, 36 etc despite the apparent logic associated with 18 hole courses.

 

[rosecott]

Well that all depends on whether you see the future of the game as an inclusive or exclusive one.

From a principle perspective I see no difference between the allocation of 28 and 36 - a nd 37 to 54 is just an extension of that.

I completely accept that any clubs are entitled to wear the exclusive badge associated with knowing better; there are loads of battlegrounds waiting to be claimed to that end!

FWIW I believe we have 2 members with current CONGU handicaps of 28 who should be higher, not a great proportion, but I also know we have a very significant number of members who have never chosen to get one - A percentage of whom didn't believe they were good enough. That's not healthy.

Which ever way you look at it 28 is already an arbitrary number, arguably as is 18, 24, 36 etc despite the apparent logic associated with 18 hole courses.

Agree 100% but I expect unbelievable objections.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Well that all depends on whether you see the future of the game as an inclusive or exclusive one.

From a principle perspective I see no difference between the allocation of 28 and 36 - a nd 37 to 54 is just an extension of that.

I completely accept that any clubs are entitled to wear the exclusive badge associated with knowing better; there are loads of battlegrounds waiting to be claimed to that end!

FWIW I believe we have 2 members with current CONGU handicaps of 28 who should be higher, not a great proportion, but I also know we have a very significant number of members who have never chosen to get one - A percentage of whom didn't believe they were good enough. That's not healthy.

Which ever way you look at it 28 is already an arbitrary number, arguably as is 18, 24, 36 etc despite the apparent logic associated with 18 hole courses.

Is the game exclusive right now because the max HC is 28 ? Don’t believe it is - do people not take up the game because of the max HC is only 28 ?

So what’s their reasoning ? What’s the back drop to increase the HC level to such a high level ?

Right now two of the biggest problems in Golf are - cost and pace of play - what do you think allowing such HC will add to the pace of play ? Someone getting 40 shots for example. Also how does it add to the game when you have people who will be able to get over 40 shots against others in Matchplay ! How does it encourage people to strive to as low as possible when the game increases the higher celling.

For me it’s one of the worst changes they have done - I haven’t seen one reason for it to change that has any sort of sense . We haven’t needed the club HC and the game in this country doesn’t need the HC to go so high - I actually think it will put a lot of people entering comps.

If someone doesn’t believe he is good enough to get a HC of 28 - the answer shouldn’t be to increase the HC it should be for him to look to improve to enable himself to get a HC of 28.

By my club putting HC limits I’m very confident it won’t affect our membership levels or put people off joining clubs

 

[rosecott]

Is the game exclusive right now because the max HC is 28 ? Don’t believe it is - do people not take up the game because of the max HC is only 28 ?

So what’s their reasoning ? What’s the back drop to increase the HC level to such a high level ?

Right now two of the biggest problems in Golf are - cost and pace of play - what do you think allowing such HC will add to the pace of play ? Someone getting 40 shots for example. Also how does it add to the game when you have people who will be able to get over 40 shots against others in Matchplay ! How does it encourage people to strive to as low as possible when the game increases the higher celling.

For me it’s one of the worst changes they have done - I haven’t seen one reason for it to change that has any sort of sense . We haven’t needed the club HC and the game in this country doesn’t need the HC to go so high - I actually think it will put a lot of people entering comps.

If someone doesn’t believe he is good enough to get a HC of 28 - the answer shouldn’t be to increase the HC it should be for him to look to improve to enable himself to get a HC of 28.

By my club putting HC limits I’m very confident it won’t affect our membership levels or put people off joining clubs

Short answer - there are clubs who know better than the national unions.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Well that all depends on whether you see the future of the game as an inclusive or exclusive one.

From a principle perspective I see no difference between the allocation of 28 and 36 - a nd 37 to 54 is just an extension of that.

I completely accept that any clubs are entitled to wear the exclusive badge associated with knowing better; there are loads of battlegrounds waiting to be claimed to that end!

FWIW I believe we have 2 members with current CONGU handicaps of 28 who should be higher, not a great proportion, but I also know we have a very significant number of members who have never chosen to get one - A percentage of whom didn't believe they were good enough. That's not healthy.

Which ever way you look at it 28 is already an arbitrary number, arguably as is 18, 24, 36 etc despite the apparent logic associated with 18 hole courses.

Great post. To some degree I do see the current handicap caps as limiting and to some, especially just starting, is still a level they are not capable of reaching yet. To that end then, why join a club and play competitions with no chance of winning and no chance to find their handicap level at this stage. These new handicaps will go a long way to changing that pre-conception and I hope will entice more to join. Also, we have some who are already at the higher end of the handicap scale that enjoy being members but are no longer playing comps. Again I hope this will let them to enjoy playing with card and pencil in hand again

 

[Imurg]

Is the game exclusive right now because the max HC is 28 ? Don’t believe it is - do people not take up the game because of the max HC is only 28 ?

So what’s their reasoning ? What’s the back drop to increase the HC level to such a high level ?

Right now two of the biggest problems in Golf are - cost and pace of play - what do you think allowing such HC will add to the pace of play ? Someone getting 40 shots for example. Also how does it add to the game when you have people who will be able to get over 40 shots against others in Matchplay ! How does it encourage people to strive to as low as possible when the game increases the higher celling.

If someone doesn’t believe he is good enough to get a HC of 28 - the answer shouldn’t be to increase the HC it should be for him to look to improve to enable himself to get a HC of 28.

Wow!
A tad elitist there methinks....
If someone gains a handicap of 40 isn't it because they're not very good at the game and therefore need 40 shots in order to compete?
You could argue that instead of 28, make the maximum 18 and anyone who can't play to it needs to spend time on the practice ground to get better
Hell, let's make it 10 or even 6....
A handicap is a handicap
It's the number you need to be competitive.
Why does it matter if it's 1 or 50?
We all know that it's not only high handicappers who are slow, plenty of every handicap level could use a kick up the arse.
I know an older guy who's Society handicap is 53 or 54 - why? Because he's crap!
But he loves to play and does so, trundling along in the mid 20's with the occasional 30+ and some -20.....
If he joined a club and got 28 he'd be lucky to break 20 every time he goes out.
I'm sure he's going to love that.

Golf is for everyone, regardless of ability/handicap

 

[duncan mackie]

Is the game exclusive right now because the max HC is 28 ? Don’t believe it is - do people not take up the game because of the max HC is only 28 ?

So what’s their reasoning ? What’s the back drop to increase the HC level to such a high level ?

Right now two of the biggest problems in Golf are - cost and pace of play - what do you think allowing such HC will add to the pace of play ? Someone getting 40 shots for example. Also how does it add to the game when you have people who will be able to get over 40 shots against others in Matchplay ! How does it encourage people to strive to as low as possible when the game increases the higher celling.

For me it’s one of the worst changes they have done - I haven’t seen one reason for it to change that has any sort of sense . We haven’t needed the club HC and the game in this country doesn’t need the HC to go so high - I actually think it will put a lot of people entering comps.

If someone doesn’t believe he is good enough to get a HC of 28 - the answer shouldn’t be to increase the HC it should be for him to look to improve to enable himself to get a HC of 28.

By my club putting HC limits I’m very confident it won’t affect our membership levels or put people off joining clubs

Basically you are saying that it doesn't impact your club - wonderful.

What I fail to comprehend is why you are so against it if it doesn't affect your club? Please leave it to those clubs that are affected - we ended up with the fiasco of club handicaps (as highlighted on here in posts) and this was always going to happen at some point to make sense of such issues as cat 4 contributions to CSS when they included players who had elected to remain at 28.0 when they should have been 30, 31 or whatever.

Why an ex single figure golfer who, aged 80, plays to about 32 shouldn't be able to join in on a social basis with his friends without the stigma of courtesy shots is beyond my comprehension - as clearly the question of how competition handicaps of 38 or so can be working fine in the rest of the world is to you.

Yes, there are courses and tees that would make the game somewhat slow and tedious for such players but may I point out that the top professionals already manage to play so slowly that they are hardly likely to get even slower as a result of copying these incompetent hackers! Take out impossible course set ups, inappropriate tees for every competition (if you can't play from them don't enter competitions....) are there are actually (sic) course out there where 4 Senior 28 handicappers will get round a good hour ahead of many 'elite groups'- if they aren't put out at the tail of the field / not invited to play through etc

 

[louise_a]

My interpretation of the timing of the Annual Review is that it should be carried out between 1 January and 28/29 February - the phrase used in the CONGU manual is "prior to 1 March each year."

If the AR is conducted during that 2-month period, then any changes introduced on 1 January would be used in the AR.

I was under the impression that it had to be done by the 1st of Jan, although having checked it says during the winter after the 1st October, as all our qualifiers have been completed I guess next week is fine.

 

[rosecott]

I was under the impression that it had to be done by the 1st of Jan, although having checked it says during the winter after the 1st October, as all our qualifiers have been completed I guess next week is fine.

I'm afraid you've got me there. I'm struggling to see where it says after 1st October. I conclude I missed that. Put me right.

 

[louise_a]

I'm afraid you've got me there. I'm struggling to see where it says after 1st October. I conclude I missed that. Put me right.

Its in the Q & A 23/2 right at the bottom of page 50 in the Congu online manual.

 

[rosecott]

Its in the Q & A 23/2 right at the bottom of page 50 in the Congu online manual.

Thanks Louise - missed that. It rather conflicts with "prior to 1 March each year". I have always assumed that we had the two months of January and February to review the entire previous year.

 

[2blue]

Basically you are saying that it doesn't impact your club - wonderful.

What I fail to comprehend is why you are so against it if it doesn't affect your club? Please leave it to those clubs that are affected - we ended up with the fiasco of club handicaps (as highlighted on here in posts) and this was always going to happen at some point to make sense of such issues as cat 4 contributions to CSS when they included players who had elected to remain at 28.0 when they should have been 30, 31 or whatever.

Why an ex single figure golfer who, aged 80, plays to about 32 shouldn't be able to join in on a social basis with his friends without the stigma of courtesy shots is beyond my comprehension - as clearly the question of how competition handicaps of 38 or so can be working fine in the rest of the world is to you.

Yes, there are courses and tees that would make the game somewhat slow and tedious for such players but may I point out that the top professionals already manage to play so slowly that they are hardly likely to get even slower as a result of copying these incompetent hackers! Take out impossible course set ups, inappropriate tees for every competition (if you can't play from them don't enter competitions....) are there are actually (sic) course out there where 4 Senior 28 handicappers will get round a good hour ahead of many 'elite groups'- if they aren't put out at the tail of the field / not invited to play through etc

Couldn't agree more...... if Cat 5 is the appropriate H/cap then I can't see what the problem is. On a 'good day' like everybody has now & again, they'll come in with a good score & come down at a hell of a lick.
This last year, our only Club H/capper came down 2 shots from 34 to 32 won Div2 but sadly didn't appear at the head of the results because our software is set to put none 'c' players at the bottom.... aimed, really, to exclude those who cant be bothered to play 3 x Q Comps a year, but unfortunately caught him as well, though he did get the prize winnings as he plays many Q Comps.
A month earlier he had requested to ditch his Club H/cap due to people raising eye-brows but we convinced him to stay & so gain the 'pleasure' of a the 2 shot cut he certainly would never have achieved playing off 28.
We have at least half a doz more who declined Club-H/caps because they weren't 'c' & also come with that stigma that needs to be addressed, as does the idea that they'll 'clog-up' the course. They're already out there playing loads of strokes off 28....... half a doz or so more hits is simply not going to lead to congestion.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I see the rise in handicaps helping to retain people, age/fitness/time whatever, some peoples handicap will go in to reverse, at the moment, regardless of years playing the game, we don't allow them to go any lower than 28 in Comps, we've lost some seniors from our comps because they see the entry fee as a donation to the club as they can't compete, they'll never be competitive off 28 anymore.

As for people taking the game up, the upper no is irrelevant, you could make the first No 18 and they may still play off 40 in reality, that's no difference in giving them 28 and playing to 40, I can't believe for one minute anybody in any club in the Country is going to strive to stay off 30+ something.