Cat 1 golfers

[AliMc]

I remember some years ago GM ran, over 2 issues, listings of all people with +, scratch and 1 handicaps throughout the UK. I think Dunbar where I play was pretty near the top, we have always had a lot of low handicap players. So I took a few minutes to peruse the club list and came up with the following:
Lowest handicap +4
+ handicaps = 11
scratch = 3
1 and 2 handicaps = 18
3 to 5 handicaps = 63
So in total 95, no wonder i haven't won much over my 39 year membership (played mostly of 5 or 6) a couple of scratch prizes and 2 club trophies.

 

[hovis]

I remember some years ago GM ran, over 2 issues, listings of all people with +, scratch and 1 handicaps throughout the UK. I think Dunbar where I play was pretty near the top, we have always had a lot of low handicap players. So I took a few minutes to peruse the club list and came up with the following:
Lowest handicap +4
+ handicaps = 11
scratch = 3
1 and 2 handicaps = 18
3 to 5 handicaps = 63
So in total 95, no wonder i haven't won much over my 39 year membership (played mostly of 5 or 6) a couple of scratch prizes and 2 club trophies.

I'd say having a handicap of 4 to 8 ish is the hardest to have as far as winning comps go. It's that area between not being able to compete for gross and not scoring enough to beat the higher handicap golfers having "a good day".

 

[AliMc]

I'd say having a handicap of 4 to 8 ish is the hardest to have as far as winning comps go. It's that area between not being able to compete for gross and not scoring enough to beat the higher handicap golfers having "a good day".

You're correct, exactly what I have found over the years !

 

[SteveW86]

Stoneham does pretty well here I think.

Lowest: +5.3
Total += 17
Scratch: 15
1+2: 27
3-5: 61

I always thought it was very competitive when I was there.

 

[jim8flog]

There no categories of golfers any more with the WHS.

The only reason for having them was because downward adjustment of handicap was different dependent upon which Cat you were in.

There are now only types

Scratch or better men, 2 or better Women

and the rest.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

There no categories of golfers any more with the WHS.

The only reason for having them was because downward adjustment of handicap was different dependent upon which Cat you were in.

There are now only types

Scratch or better men, 2 or better Women

and the rest.

I'm not sure what this has to do with the thread. It's about the number of low handicap golfers, 'categories' is irrelevant.

 

[woofers]

I'm not sure what this has to do with the thread. It's about the number of low handicap golfers, 'categories' is irrelevant.

Aside from the fact that the thread title is “Cat 1....” duh!

 

[clubchamp98]

I'd say having a handicap of 4 to 8 ish is the hardest to have as far as winning comps go. It's that area between not being able to compete for gross and not scoring enough to beat the higher handicap golfers having "a good day".

Thank god for that off 6 I havnt won a thing for years.
So it’s my fault for not being good/ bad enough.
You are right it’s very difficult to win .

 

[clubchamp98]

There no categories of golfers any more with the WHS.

The only reason for having them was because downward adjustment of handicap was different dependent upon which Cat you were in.

There are now only types

Scratch or better men, 2 or better Women

and the rest.

Just as well my mate off 28 reckons he’s a mid handicap now.
But given the limit now he is correct.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Aside from the fact that the thread title is “Cat 1....” duh!

Did you read the text in the OP?

 

[patricks148]

it was sometime ago but we had something like 20ish scratch or better with the lowest +5, might be more now as loads of the youngsters are a couple of years older so must now be 10 juniors who are scratch as well. all the comps this year apart from one were won by scratch players all under 25...

 

[clubchamp98]

Can you elaborate on this? (Just for info not to pick an argument)

I was thinking this.
If all tees are rated for all members are the numbers inclusive ?

 

[woofers]

Did you read the text in the OP?

Of course I did, but I read the thread title first.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Of course I did, but I read the thread title first.

Well in this instance the title is not relevant to the context of the thread, it is purely about the number of low handicaps at each club.
Glad we have cleared that up now ?

 

[Imurg]

We have 40 who would have been Cat 1
-2 is the best with another on -0.9
3 at Scratch and the rest between 0.5 and 5.4.
We have Ladies at -0.5, 0.6 and 4.2

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Our lowest is 0.7 and we have 20 at the old Cat 1

Lowest lady is 9.3

 

[Deleted member 1147]

Off 2.6 I’m the 36th lowest player at Kedleston.
According to my WHS details I’m in the top 2% in both Derbyshire and England, but only top 7% at the club.

 

[woofers]

Well in this instance the title is not relevant to the context of the thread, .....

Fancy that, who‘d have thought such a thing ?
Wonder if anyone would mind if I started a thread with the title ‘Dogs’ and then posted about cats ? ?

 

[upsidedown]

54 lower than 5.4 , with 9 below 0 lowest on -3.3
3 ladies at -3.2, -2.6 and -1.7

 

[Mandofred]

I'm 7.9.........the only thing that matters......