Buffer Zone -

[Arthur Wedge]

I miss the days of grinding to hit the buffer zone - handicaps are worse without it

Having something to play for, even when it wasn’t going as you’d planned, instilled a competitive spirit that is lacking in the WHS

www.nationalclubgolfer.com

Do you miss the old days of grinding away and trying to get into the buffer to ensure you didn’t get .1 back

In those days there were no “free shots” at a round as well

 

[Deleted member 35927]

No, much prefer new system. More reflective of form.
I thought we played the game for fun blah blah blah

 

[Lord Tyrion]

No, don't miss it at all. You could keep buffering and not move. If you keep being in that zone, can you really play to your given h/c? The new system is more reflective of how you actually play, imo, not how you might play on a good day.

People need to stop hankering for the past, yes I know it's clickbait stuff........

 

[wjemather]

No. Buffer zones were utterly disfunctional, especially for cat 1 and cat 4/5 handicappers, and were one of the main reasons handicaps were not fair.
Also, the reverse of the headline is actually true.

 

[Slab]

In the days of buffer I was a pretty high handicapper & never felt it was something to aim for during a round so never targeted buffer for its (lack of) impact on handicap. Weirdly yesterdays 34 pts would’ve been buffer in the past but actually got me a .1 reduction instead down to a new PB index and I know in a few weeks that same score might see me go up

While pleased etc, since it is a new PB, I didn’t really have any sense of achievement when I saw it this morning

 

[Imurg]

I like the new system to a point but I do feel that it's too easy to slip into autopilot when you know the card is not going to count.
Grinding to make buffer kept the challenge going a bit longer.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

No. Buffer zones were utterly disfunctional, especially for cat 1 and cat 4/5 handicappers, and were one of the main reasons handicaps were not fair.
Also, the reverse of the headline is actually true.

The headline is the persons opinion at the end of the day

 

[Arthur Wedge]

I like the new system to a point but I do feel that it's too easy to slip into autopilot when you know the card is not going to count.
Grinding to make buffer kept the challenge going a bit longer.

That’s what I don’t like

Where you have rounds that may just have no affect at all because you’re replacing a round that’s not counting or never will count

 

[Backache]

Preferred the old but we probably don't need another thread on it at the moment.

 

[Orikoru]

I like the new system to a point but I do feel that it's too easy to slip into autopilot when you know the card is not going to count.
Grinding to make buffer kept the challenge going a bit longer.

I'm probably similar to this. It did give you something to play for if you weren't setting the world alight. But generally I don't give it much thought. If anything, with nothing left to play for, I relax and play better anyway.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

I had a stinking front 9 on Saturday. On the 10th tee I turned to one of my playing partners and said 'front 9 v back 9', he was in the same boat. We both smiled and that was the target, to beat the front 9. As it happens, it ended up being a non counting score but not by much so it may end up becoming a counting score at some point.

There is personal pride at stake plus making the best of a bad job as at some point, it may still become a counting score. That's the new buffer.

 

[nickjdavis]

Even before opening the article i just knew it was going to be written by Steve Carroll who, since its inception, has done nothing but moan and post negatively slanted articles about WHS.

What he fails to realise is, that in most cases, a score that would just creep in to buffer, or even be 1 shot outside of buffer in the old UHS system is highly likely to be one of your best 8 scores under WHS. So there is still the incentive to keep fighting for your score.

For example...if I play tomorrow and shoot a gross 81 (nett 72), under the old system this would have resulted in being one shot outside of the buffer zone (SSS 69) and I'd have gone up 0.1. But in the new world of the WHS it would actually result in a differential of 11.3, replacing my current worst differential of 11.9, resulting in a small cut.

Another golfer who I played with yesterday...index 17.6 gets 17 shots off our white tees. His buffer zone under the old UHS would be nett 70,71,72...so he would have to shoot nett 73 (gross 90) to get a 0.1 increase under the old system. A gross 90 under WHS would result in a differential of 19.8...which again would knock his current worst differential out of his best 8...giving him a small cut.

Simply put, a round that was close to being in buffer in the old system, is likely going to be a round that will be close to being one of your best eight in the new system. Obviously this depends on the spread of your differentials (especially at the "bad" end of the 8) but looking at a lot of scores I'm reasonably confident that it is true in most cases...and the same motivation to keep fighting for your score exists under WHS as it did in the Congu UHS.

 

[sjw]

There's always a chance a score could end up counting for WHS even if it feels like it might not at the time. If you can't stay motivated for a whole round of golf when things aren't going well, it sounds like a mindset problem.

The author alludes to being proud of grinding out good scores when it wasn't going his way... the only thing stopping him from still doing that is himself, not a change in system. I suggest he's not as belligerent as he might want us to believe.

 

[Orikoru]

Even before opening the article i just knew it was going to be written by Steve Carroll who, since its inception, has done nothing but moan and post negatively slanted articles about WHS.

What he fails to realise is, that in most cases, a score that would just creep in to buffer, or even be 1 shot outside of buffer in the old UHS system is highly likely to be one of your best 8 scores under WHS. So there is still the incentive to keep fighting for your score.

For example...if I play tomorrow and shoot a gross 81 (nett 72), under the old system this would have resulted in being one shot outside of the buffer zone (SSS 69) and I'd have gone up 0.1. But in the new world of the WHS it would actually result in a differential of 11.3, replacing my current worst differential of 11.9, resulting in a small cut.

Another golfer who I played with yesterday...index 17.6 gets 17 shots off our white tees. His buffer zone under the old UHS would be nett 70,71,72...so he would have to shoot nett 73 (gross 90) to get a 0.1 increase under the old system. A gross 90 under WHS would result in a differential of 19.8...which again would knock his current worst differential out of his best 8...giving him a small cut.

Simply put, a round that was close to being in buffer in the old system, is likely going to be a round that will be close to being one of your best eight in the new system. Obviously this depends on the spread of your differentials (especially at the "bad" end of the 8) but looking at a lot of scores I'm reasonably confident that it is true in most cases...and the same motivation to keep fighting for your score exists under WHS as it did in the Congu UHS.

This is a great point actually, which I've overlooked. The concept of making buffer used to be 34 or 33 points or something like that didn't it? Whereas now the equivalent is trying to match your lowest counting score, which could potentially be around 33 or 34 points. The only difference is when one of your best scores is dropping off the bottom that day.

 

[Imurg]

It is a mental thing..and a short-sighted thing but...
If you know that one of your 8 isn't dropping out of your 20 it's easy to, subconsciously, relax as your Index won't change.
It's the notion that this score won't count so you don't need to worry about it...even if it will at some point.
A really bad score, say 90 for me, would have meant a certain 0.1 increase whereas now it will, likely, mean absolutely nothing.
And that can be a big thing for some people to get their heads round....

 

[Slab]

It is a mental thing..and a short-sighted thing but...
If you know that one of your 8 isn't dropping out of your 20 it's easy to, subconsciously, relax as your Index won't change.
It's the notion that this score won't count so you don't need to worry about it...even if it will at some point.
A really bad score, say 90 for me, would have meant a certain 0.1 increase whereas now it will, likely, mean absolutely nothing.
And that can be a big thing for some people to get their heads round....

Yeah I agree. He goes on about buffer target and the fight to reach it, hanging in there, willpower etc etc (as if going up a meagre .1 was/is a failure) but somehow can’t give himself his equivalent ‘buffer’ target under whs. When I tee up I know roughly what gross score is going to have little/no effect on my index.

Makes me wonder was he using buffer as something to strive for and an accomplishment on a bad day… or as some kind of protection blanket

 

[KenL]

The longer we are into whs, the more I think I prefer the old system. PCC seems to be more useless than the old CSS. Dont like that there is no “reductions only”

Playing in our wee group of 6 recently where, for simplicity, we use stableford and course handicaps. One course, my index was 5.3 and I got 5.
My mate with his 40.2 index got 45 shots.
Guess who won by about 10 shots.

Edit… I do like the encouragement to put in scores outwith comps as there are not very many comps at my club.

And yes, I miss the buffer zone.

 

[jim8flog]

No back then I either wanted to win or go up 0.1 but I never manipulated the last few holes to achieve the latter.

 

[jim8flog]

This is a great point actually, which I've overlooked. The concept of making buffer used to be 34 or 33 points or something like that didn't it? Whereas now the equivalent is trying to match your lowest counting score, which could potentially be around 33 or 34 points. The only difference is when one of your best scores is dropping off the bottom that day.

Buffer zone was plus 1 or 2 shots of the CSS.

Thinking in terms of stableford points only applied to the course you were playing, where I play that would have been 36 or 37 points if the CSS was the same as the SSS (38 points was playing to handicap).

 

[Oddsocks]

I miss the days of grinding to hit the buffer zone - handicaps are worse without it

Having something to play for, even when it wasn’t going as you’d planned, instilled a competitive spirit that is lacking in the WHS

www.nationalclubgolfer.com

Do you miss the old days of grinding away and trying to get into the buffer to ensure you didn’t get .1 back

In those days there were no “free shots” at a round as well

Yup, on a shocker buffer was a target. The new system you already know what you have dropping off.

I don’t like change.