Changes to WHS in April 2024

[Deleted member 30522]

With regard to the possibility of an acceptable score in 4BB if the criteria are met - one of the criteria is the pair must achieve 42 points or more, is that 42 points using the Playing Handicaps (i.e. 85% of the CH) or of their Course Handicap? Equally a player must have an upscaled score of 36 points or more, again is that at 85% of their PH?
Secondly, if for example the 4 ball better ball comp takes up all the available tee times in a day will a PCC be created by the players playing in a 'sort of' non acceptable format and would that apply to the 4BB scores? And if a PCC is created by the non acceptable scores and other players put in GP rounds, would that PCC apply to their scores?

On the SG guidance document it doesn't specify, but you have to assume that it is playing handicap as that would make most sense

 

[wjemather]

With regard to the possibility of an acceptable score in 4BB if the criteria are met - one of the criteria is the pair must achieve 42 points or more, is that 42 points using the Playing Handicaps (i.e. 85% of the CH) or of their Course Handicap? Equally a player must have an upscaled score of 36 points or more, again is that at 85% of their PH?
Secondly, if for example the 4 ball better ball comp takes up all the available tee times in a day will a PCC be created by the players playing in a 'sort of' non acceptable format and would that apply to the 4BB scores? And if a PCC is created by the non acceptable scores and other players put in GP rounds, would that PCC apply to their scores?

Assuming we follow what happens in Australia...
Yes. The actual points they achieved including allowances plus their upscaled scores must total 36 points or more for a score differential to be calculated.
No. The PCC is only calculated from complete individual scores (i.e. upscaled scores are ignored).

 

[D-S]

Assuming we follow what happens in Australia...
Yes. The actual points they achieved including allowances plus their upscaled scores must total 36 points or more for a score differential to be calculated.

I assume the upscale 36 points or more is calculated from the 85% of CH as well?

 

[wjemather]

I assume the upscale 36 points or more is calculated from the 85% of CH as well?

Not really. If I remember correctly, for each hole score not counting, the player gets 1.5 points if the partner's counting score is 2 or more points, or 1 point if it's 1 point (if both players score 0, it's a counting hole score for both).

 

[D-S]

Not really. If I remember correctly, for each hole score not counting, the player gets 1.5 points if the partner's counting score is 2or more points, or 1 point if it's 1 point (if both players score 0, it's a counting hole score for both).

Yes that it what James Luke said I believe, but the ‘real scores’ i.e. the 9 or more that are on the card would be the scores that would have been calculated at the 85% rate? If that makes sense.
Also, if both players appear on the card 9 or more times, then both players may, if they fulfil the criteria, have their score be counting on their record?

 

[wjemather]

Yes that it what James Luke said I believe, but the ‘real scores’ i.e. the 9 or more that are on the card would be the scores that would have been calculated at the 85% rate? If that makes sense.
Also, if both players appear on the card 9 or more times, then both players may, if they fulfil the criteria, have their score be counting on their record?

Yes - as I understand it, it's the points scored using the 85% allowance.
In theory, yes, both players could meet the criteria. For that to happen, (if my maths is correct) each would need to have scored a minimum of 23 points for the 9 holes scored (off 85%); the fewer the number of 2+ point holes from their partner, the higher their actual total would need to be in order to get to the 36 point threshold.

 

[D-S]

Yes - as I understand it, it's the points scored using the 85% allowance.
In theory, yes, both players could meet the criteria. For that to happen, (if my maths is correct) each would need to have scored a minimum of 23 points for the 9 holes scored (off 85%); the fewer the number of 2+ point holes from their partner, the higher their actual total would need to be in order to get to the 36 point threshold.

Thank you.
As it’s not stipulated as far as I can see that only one score per hole must be recorded, then I assume that both players could record 37 points each on lets say 17 holes each and, if the team total is 42 points plus, then they would both have an acceptable score?

 

[wjemather]

Thank you.
As it’s not stipulated as far as I can see that only one score per hole must be recorded, then I assume that both players could record 37 points each on lets say 17 holes each and, if the team total is 42 points plus, then they would both have an acceptable score?

CONGU's guidance isn't that clear, but it does say that scores can be disregarded for handicapping if "scores for both players are recorded on a significant number of holes on a regular basis".
The guidance in Australia is stronger and explicitly states that only the counting score is to be recorded.

 

[D-S]

CONGU's guidance isn't that clear, but it does say that scores can be disregarded for handicapping if "scores for both players are recorded on a significant number of holes on a regular basis".
The guidance in Australia is stronger and explicitly states that only the counting score is to be recorded.

It’ll be interesting as to how clubs will, or will be allowed, to interpret that guidance, especially if these rounds are by away players in Opens - will their own clubs ’re open’ their scores that are now in their record and ‘disregard’ some of their scores?

 

[rulefan]

Yes - as I understand it, it's the points scored using the 85% allowance.
In theory, yes, both players could meet the criteria. For that to happen, (if my maths is correct) each would need to have scored a minimum of 23 points for the 9 holes scored (off 85%); the fewer the number of 2+ point holes from their partner, the higher their actual total would need to be in order to get to the 36 point threshold.

I am surprised by but not contesting your view given that CH not PH (and therefore AGS) is the driver for other forms of play.

 

[wjemather]

I am surprised by but not contesting your view given that CH not PH (and therefore AGS) is the driver for other forms of play.

We'll find out exactly how it's going to work in due course - hopefully when the manual is published in January, and certainly before it's gone live.
Fwiw, it's not explicitly clear in the Australian manual ("When a player’s score counts on the four-ball card for a hole, they are given the appropriate number of Stableford points for that hole").

 

[rulefan]

We'll find out exactly how it's going to work in due course - hopefully when the manual is published in January, and certainly before it's gone live.
Fwiw, it's not explicitly clear in the Australian manual ("When a player’s score counts on the four-ball card for a hole, they are given the appropriate number of Stableford points for that hole").

But they haven't got two handicaps (CH & PH) to distinguish between. They only have the Daily Handicap.

 

[wjemather]

But they haven't got two handicaps (CH & PH) to distinguish between. They only have the Daily Handicap.

They still have handicap allowances for various formats, but having checked, seemingly (and bizarrely) yes, not for four-ball strokeplay, only matchplay.

 

[D-S]

We had a 4BB comp yesterday. Due to the course condition, it was held over 14 holes. The winners got 38 points, winning by 4, they were 10 to the good - 28 being the par. Admittedly this was over our shortest measured course, so if CR-Par was in force the pair would have had 2.4 shots less each so would have, in all likelihood, got less points. My long-winded question is next year might this possibly result in a cut for one or both or must it be over 18 holes or, with the new upscaling algorithm, can a lesser number of holes be used?

 

[clubchamp98]

We had a 4BB comp yesterday. Due to the course condition, it was held over 14 holes. The winners got 38 points, winning by 4, they were 10 to the good - 28 being the par. Admittedly this was over our shortest measured course, so if CR-Par was in force the pair would have had 2.4 shots less each so would have, in all likelihood, got less points. My long-winded question is next year might this possibly result in a cut for one or both or must it be over 18 holes or, with the new upscaling algorithm, can a lesser number of holes be used?

It’s a secret so nobody knows!
But given the dumbing down in golf lately probably.

two at ours yesterday shot 31 pts over 11 holes. 9 under in three less holes.

 

[Mozza14]

Catching up with these proposals. I welcome both as they appear to positively improve competition play. Cr -Par will make for a more satisfying outcome for golfers at our course where the white tee course rating exceeds the par. This will have a welcome feel good factor in getting scores into perspective. The inclusion of 4BBB scores is even more welcome imho. There appears to be a focus on bandits which this will help reduce and for those competing and performing well, I don't see any difference in handicap adjustments for these comps from single comps to reflect demonstrated ability. The methods proposed seem a good compromise solution to me.
Over time, this latter proposal will hopefully resolve the bandit issue and become the norm for golfers competing in all 4BBB comps. The mechanics are not difficult as it appears that the software will handle the process. I can see no good reason for any club to not abide with the new proposals.

 

[YandaB]

Each handicapping authority produces their own version of the Rules of Handicapping. The accompanying guidance documents they provide merely provide additional clarifications and examples beyond what is included in the standard manual (including available options).

Just going back to this. I can find the GB & I guidance but not ge 2024 rules to which they apply. Where do I find them?

 

[wjemather]

Just going back to this. I can find the GB & I guidance but not ge 2024 rules to which they apply. Where do I find them?

Afaik, the Rules of Handicapping v2 (2024) for GB&I have yet to be made available for download.

 

[tobybarker]

Is there a document yet that describes the new (2024) allowances (90% of the differences) for 4BBB matchplay? I'm sure Ive read something somewhere but can't for the life of me recall where....

 

[wjemather]

Is there a document yet that describes the new (2024) allowances (90% of the differences) for 4BBB matchplay? I'm sure Ive read something somewhere but can't for the life of me recall where....

v2.3 of the guidance published by EG/SG/WG/GI.