Changes to WHS in April 2024

[rulefan]

Of course, it is easy to express frustration with the theoretical 54 Indexer who plays off the gold tees at a course such as this.

But, in practice, how many 54 Index golfers will play this course, let alone off the gold tees? I've been a member of a course that is cheap and attracts many beginner golfers. Yet, for all those with handicaps, even the worst has never been near a 54 index. There was one chap in the low 40's at one point, and he really was poor (with various health issues that didn't help). There were a few in the 30's, including a handful of older Seniors.

I think the 54 Index is simply high enough to cater for some of these rare individuals, and the absolute beginner juniors who struggle to reach a green anywhere near regulation. Not only do I think these golfers are extremely rare (the ones with the maximum 54 index), I doubt they'd be attracted to play very long, very tough golf courses.

I suspect there is a higher proportion of women 45+ than men.

 

[Swango1980]

I suspect there is a higher proportion of women 45+ than men.

I guess that is very likely.

Some will therefore be relieved that, in this specific example at Rockliffe Hall, ladies are not rated for the Gold Tees. Men are rated 8 different sets of tees at this club, women just the one.

A lady with a 54 Index would play off 62 now, and 65 from next month.

 

[D-S]

Of course, it is easy to express frustration with the theoretical 54 Indexer who plays off the gold tees at a course such as this.

I wasn’t expressing any frustration just highlighting what the Handicapping Rules could mean using one end of the spectrum - similar to posts saying x Pro Golfer would be off +12 or whatever based on their last 20 rounds - they aren’t going to play in any handicap events so it is not a realistic case.

By the way the reason I mentioned Rockliffe Hall is that it’s the course EG have used to highlight the extremes within the new system.

 

[Swango1980]

I wasn’t expressing any frustration just highlighting what the Handicapping Rules could mean using one end of the spectrum - similar to posts saying x Pro Golfer would be off +12 or whatever based on their last 20 rounds - they aren’t going to play in any handicap events so it is not a realistic case.

By the way the reason I mentioned Rockliffe Hall is that it’s the course EG have used to highlight the extremes within the new system.

Apologies. I wasn't really saying you were specifically frustrated. It was a more general remark, as it is a comment I've heard many golfers, both on these forums and at my club, say over and over again when they are slating the system. So, in many of these cases, the golfers are directly expressing their annoyance and frustration, despite probably never having seen a 54 Index golfer in their life, and certainly not playing at one of the hardest courses in the UK.

 

[rosecott]

Of course, it is easy to express frustration with the theoretical 54 Indexer who plays off the gold tees at a course such as this.

But, in practice, how many 54 Index golfers will play this course, let alone off the gold tees? I've been a member of a course that is cheap and attracts many beginner golfers. Yet, for all those with handicaps, even the worst has never been near a 54 index. There was one chap in the low 40's at one point, and he really was poor (with various health issues that didn't help). There were a few in the 30's, including a handful of older Seniors.

I think the 54 Index is simply high enough to cater for some of these rare individuals, and the absolute beginner juniors who struggle to reach a green anywhere near regulation. Not only do I think these golfers are extremely rare (the ones with the maximum 54 index), I doubt they'd be attracted to play very long, very tough golf courses.

Yes, you have to have pretty high scores to get to 54 on initial handicap. Our last one was a lady who was +57, +66, +55 against CR/Par of 70. She was allocated 46.8. Since then she has played 3 times with SDs of 48.8, 51.5, 54.3.

 

[IanM]

View attachment 52373

Wow... but I had an fx-39. A levels circa 1980-82

 

[rulie]

Yes, you have to have pretty high scores to get to 54 on initial handicap. Our last one was a lady who was +57, +66, +55 against CR/Par of 70. She was allocated 46.8. Since then she has played 3 times with SDs of 48.8, 51.5, 54.3.

At the risk of being offensive, but none intended, every participant gets a ribbon.

 

[tobybarker]

The "correct handicap" when not playing in a comp involves the rounded Course Handicap - same as it does now.

This is one of my issues.... You didn't be getting different numbers of strokes just because it's not on the computer

 

[wjemather]

This is one of my issues.... You didn't be getting different numbers of strokes just because it's not on the computer

Why is simplicity an issue?

 

[Voyager EMH]

Played twice this month. So talked to 6 very active playing members.
Only two of them had heard about CR-Par coming in.
None of them had heard about the return of 90% of the difference for BB-matchplay. That format is widely played in social golf at my club.
After WHS came in, many continued doing 90% of difference between CH for two years, because "That's what we've always done." Change was slow.

There will be a lot of confusion coming soon. Same as before.

I suspect some roll-ups will ignore CR-Par as these are played from yellow tees which would mean subtracting 0.9 from their handicaps.
They won't like "losing a shot" in the same way as 95% gets ignored for individual strokeplay format.

We can debate the "shoulds" and "oughts" as much as we like, but the reality is going to be widespread confusion and misconception.

 

[tobybarker]

26.49 * 0.85 = 22.5165. That would round to a playing handicap of 23.

If you round the course handicap first

26 * 0.85= 22.1, that would round to a playing handicap of 22.

Having both methods is insane.

Having both methods potentially on the same day, as people don't always look at the computer or app before playing and instead she they can look up their numbers on the side of the clubhouse

 

[tobybarker]

I’m sure there will be a vocal minority doing just this.

I have never stood on the first tee wondering what my HC is. The thought of standing there working out what I’m playing off, and having any kind of discussion about it with someone else before a casual round does not compute.

You don't play Stableford friendlies then? Everyone needs to know what PH they are on at various times.

 

[Swango1980]

Played twice this month. So talked to 6 very active playing members.
Only two of them had heard about CR-Par coming in.
None of them had heard about the return of 90% of the difference for BB-matchplay. That format is widely played in social golf at my club.
After WHS came in, many continued doing 90% of difference between CH for two years, because "That's what we've always done." Change was slow.

There will be a lot of confusion coming soon. Same as before.

I suspect some roll-ups will ignore CR-Par as these are played from yellow tees which would mean subtracting 0.9 from their handicaps.
They won't like "losing a shot" in the same way as 95% gets ignored for individual strokeplay format.

We can debate the "shoulds" and "oughts" as much as we like, but the reality is going to be widespread confusion and misconception.

Why will they ignore CR-Par when that will now be built into Course Handicap? In fact, surely if they didn't include it, they couldn't ignore it. Because they'd have to manually add 0.9 back on to their course handicap?

Sounds like the club have not done a great job of communicating this. Although, maybe that is because things have been slow to get finalised. Our club sent every member a fairly detailed e-mail about 2 weeks ago.

 

[Deleted member 29109]

You don't play Stableford friendlies then? Everyone needs to know what PH they are on at various times.

Maybe twice a year. And I’d just use my course handicap. What else would you need to work out?

In fact, the couple of times I did last year, we used the EG app to work out the scores as we went. Couldn’t have been more simple.

Edited to add. I/we don’t play stablefords outside of entering comps. Even then, I only keep note of gross scores as I have absolutely no interest in keeping a track of stableford points.

 

[Swango1980]

I am liking, personally, the CR-Par addition. Had an interesting discussion with my mate yesterday, who is just about to join a club with Slope 106 and CR 64.4 off yellows (Par 68). His Index is 8.0.

Currently, his course handicap would be 8 at his new course. At my course, Slope 141, CR 70.1 and Par 71, his Index would be 10

Next month, his Course Handicap will be 4 at his new place, it would be 9 at my place. Given that his new course is likely perceived by many to be a very easy course (it is very short, just over 5000 yards I think), I suspect the bigger difference in handicaps will be understood much better by most golfers. However, what I do agree with is that it is going to be a shock when it comes in, based on what we have done since WHS came in. At his new course, golfers will suddenly lose 3/4 shots on the handicap they are used to playing with. It is why I think it was an error for the UK to ignore it in the first place.

 

[Swango1980]

Maybe twice a year. And I’d just use my course handicap. What else would you need to work out?

In fact, the couple of times I did last year, we used the EG app to work out the scores as we went. Couldn’t have been more simple.

Edited to add. I/we don’t play stablefords outside of entering comps. Even then, I only keep note of gross scores as I have absolutely no interest in keeping a track of stableford points.

Exactly what I do now. Use MyEG, no need to waste ink on a scorecard, it adds up the points, and if someone else is doing it in the group, it warns you both if the scores put down do not match for any hole. And, at end of round, accept the score, have your marker verify it, and it goes on your handicap record.

In early days of WHS, we tried to include the 95% to be consisten with competition golf. But, it was just more hassle than it was worth, added confusion, and every round started with the discussion "are we including 95% or not?????"

 

[Voyager EMH]

Why will they ignore CR-Par when that will now be built into Course Handicap? In fact, surely if they didn't include it, they couldn't ignore it. Because they'd have to manually add 0.9 back on to their course handicap?

Sounds like the club have not done a great job of communicating this. Although, maybe that is because things have been slow to get finalised. Our club sent every member a fairly detailed e-mail about 2 weeks ago.

They will continue to apply SR only as this is what they have got used to doing. No need for them, as I'm sure they will see it, to adopt any change immediately.
"Free to play off whatever handicaps they agree" is how wjemather puts it.
Subtract 0.9 from CH or ignore it. Easier to ignore it rather than adopt another change.

You have debated the "oughts" and "shoulds" again. I state what will happen. This is what they will most likely do and continue to do for some time.

 

[Swango1980]

They will continue to apply SR only as this is what they have got used to doing. No need for them, as I'm sure they will see it, to adopt any change immediately.
"Free to play off whatever handicaps they agree" is how wjemather puts it.
Subtract 0.9 from CH or ignore it. Easier to ignore it rather than adopt another change.

You have debated the "oughts" and "shoulds" again. I state what will happen. This is what they will most likely do and continue to do for some time.

I know absolutely nobody that gets their course handicap by getting a calculator out, and multiplying their Index by Slope/113. I'm not saying these people don't exist. But, in my experience, most people look up their CH on the board or get it from the App when playing social golf. Assuming the vast majority do this, then they will automatically include the CR-Par in their course handicap. And, even if they didn't want to, if most of them don't even know about the CR-Par change coming in (from what you implied), they certainly won't be thinking of adding Par-CR back.

So, I completely disagree with your assumption that most golfers will not include CR-Par. Most golfers will include it, because they will still get their CH from a board or an App

 

[rulefan]

I am liking, personally, the CR-Par addition. Had an interesting discussion with my mate yesterday, who is just about to join a club with Slope 106 and CR 64.4 off yellows (Par 68). His Index is 8.0.

Currently, his course handicap would be 8 at his new course. At my course, Slope 141, CR 70.1 and Par 71, his Index would be 10

Why would a Handicap Index change from course to course?

 

[wjemather]

They will continue to apply SR only as this is what they have got used to doing. No need for them, as I'm sure they will see it, to adopt any change immediately.
"Free to play off whatever handicaps they agree" is how wjemather puts it.
Subtract 0.9 from CH or ignore it. Easier to ignore it rather than adopt another change.

You have debated the "oughts" and "shoulds" again. I state what will happen. This is what they will most likely do and continue to do for some time.

What?!

Surely they've gotten used to just reading their CH from a chart/app/touchscreen/other or asking the pro shop to look it up for them. There is no ignoring the change as these things will no longer give them the old value.