LincolnShep
Head Pro
Filling in a voluntary feedback survey does not give you any entitlement to see the results. EG commissioned the survey, so they own the data, they can publish all, some or none of it as they see fit.
Comp rounds to enter “majors”
- Thread starter VVega
- Start date
rulefan
Tour Winner
But wjemather tells us:- it was a global R&A/USGA survey
D-S
Well-known member
It was a global survey and EG obviously had access to the results from their own region. They did inform clubs of the headline results, discussion around this can be seen on the webinar of one of this year’s Handicap update seminars, this is available on a central website that has huge amounts of explanations and information for all to see, but seemingly this is not what people want to hear.
Backache
Assistant Pro
The point is not that there is an entitlement to see the results but that an organisation that wants to gain the trust and support of it's stakeholders would extend the courtesy of feeding back to those who have taken the trouble to respond to them.
If it doesn't it is doing nothing illegal just treating people with contempt.
D-S
Well-known member
If they have actually given feedback would you say that they have not treated people with contempt and have extended them courtesy?
For example if they had conducted interviews with the golf press or sent out info to interested people who subscribe to their newsletters or discussed it at seminars to which all clubs were invited and which were held all round the country - would that have been ok?
wjemather
Well-known member
You participated in multiple related threads on here, at the end of last year and the beginning of this, where EGs feedback and comments on the survey were discussed.
I'm not sure why you are now denying they have done anything.
D-S
Well-known member
Also bemoaning the lack of a ‘central website’.
Then ignoring the fact that this ‘central database’ does exist and actually has the information which is claimed to be hidden.
IanM
Journeyman Pro
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
- Messages
- 14,594
- Location
- Monmouthshire, UK via Guildford!
If anyone has anything new to say on this subject, please post in red so that we can just go straight there! 
Crazyface
Tour Winner
Yes, seen that. Think is, it's the only place where we have ever finished in the prizes. How frustrating would it be to do that and not win anything. The wife has never won any sporting thing and I cannot imagine the disappointment if we did win and not get anything. She would just shrug and say well we knew before we played etc etc, but deep down.....
Crazyface
Tour Winner
Just had a thought. Are the comp requirements singles comps or can they be any comps. We play in at least four open comps per year. Do you think they would count?
D-S
Well-known member
The only way 'rounds' can get on your record is for them to be 'qualifying' comps which means singles or 4BB, however 4BB will only get on to your record if you hit the criteria i.e. team score of 42 points or 6 under net, player to be on card 9 times, individual scaled up score 36 points or more.
So just participating in Team Opens or non counting 4BB scores will not count.
POst 171 answers this ^^^
Slab
Occasional Tour Caddy
Sorry late to this, just read the article this morning
The writer says his club (Banchory) have done this counting rounds change as “The club is having to take matters into its own hands to prevent players with inflated or incorrect handicaps from entering and winning the most prestigious club competitions”
I really wish he’d included the info as to exactly how many members at his club were identified as having an inflated/incorrect handicap and what action was taken ?
(numbers only needed, obv no need for names)
Edit to add:
No members have actually been identified has having an incorrect or inflated handicap but change made to pacify an element of members who have convinced themselves a problem exists
You'd think someone that writes news articles for a living would be interested in which of the above it is
The writer says his club (Banchory) have done this counting rounds change as “The club is having to take matters into its own hands to prevent players with inflated or incorrect handicaps from entering and winning the most prestigious club competitions”
I really wish he’d included the info as to exactly how many members at his club were identified as having an inflated/incorrect handicap and what action was taken ?
(numbers only needed, obv no need for names)
Edit to add:
- If its none then why make the change? (or maybe the change wasn’t done solely for the reason Fergus stated & is outwith his anti-WHS narrative)
- If its just 1 or 2 why not deal with the miscreants and its job done, no need for a qualifying change and the example is set for other members to toe the line
- If it’s a meaningful number of members why not include that data as the (necessary) justification for the change?
No members have actually been identified has having an incorrect or inflated handicap but change made to pacify an element of members who have convinced themselves a problem exists
You'd think someone that writes news articles for a living would be interested in which of the above it is
Last edited:
D-S
Well-known member
Also, as stated earlier, the ‘drastic action’ that the club is being forced to take is asking for 4 cards in the last 12 months.
I assume, when the previous system UHS demanded 3 cards in a calendar year to keep a handicap active, he was equally horrified and incensed as to the appalling system that has ruined club golf.
I fully understand that people may have gripes about certain aspects of WHS but such clickbait articles do nothing to further the cause of, or debate about, any potential improvements/changes.
wjemather
Well-known member
In one of the countless threads we've had on the subject, I actually analysed the results from Banchory over the last few years (not this year) and found no obvious signs of any dodgy handicaps or low handicappers being unable to compete - they regularly finished in the places, won in proportion to their number and few comps were won with exceptional net/Stableford scores that could be considered unachievable for very low handicappers.
You might expect a "journalist" to do some similar research as a bare minimum but that evidently hasn't happened or the facts and data are being ignored in favour of their perception. Either way, it's poor.
And to address the action that precipitated the article, requiring a few scores won't change anything as far as their competition results go.
Arthur Wedge
Well-known member
I wonder if those that immediately leap to the passionate defence of all aspects of WHS actually think there is valid concerns that people have
A HC system will never be perfect
People in the past found ways to manipulate their HC
But the WHS and maybe the administration of it has made it easier for manipulation
The idea or the framework seems to work well in other places so are EG etc just making a mess of it
People have to stop arrogantly dismissing others concerns about the HC system - there are valid concerns - clubs and even governing bodies are putting in access requirements to comps because of WHS and there isn’t this universal love in on the system
A HC system will never be perfect
People in the past found ways to manipulate their HC
But the WHS and maybe the administration of it has made it easier for manipulation
The idea or the framework seems to work well in other places so are EG etc just making a mess of it
People have to stop arrogantly dismissing others concerns about the HC system - there are valid concerns - clubs and even governing bodies are putting in access requirements to comps because of WHS and there isn’t this universal love in on the system
Swango1980
Well-known member
I imagine golfers all around the world moan about their own handicap authority. It is what people do, react to the negatives and take the positives for granted. I doubt many have the attitude "our handicap authority is great, and they have the balance perfect".
And when I reference "many", I really mean of the people that continually express their opinions on social media. Because, in actual fact, 99% of golfers probably have either a good opinion or no strong opinion at all on the handicap authorities or system, but they just get on with their lives without having to go on social media to tell everyone how happy or non-opinionated they are.
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
Sadly, it seems, the majority of output from most golf media sources is aimed squarely at increasing clicks rather than having much to do with reality...
If some players at this club are on dodgy handicaps - what is the handicap committee doing..?
Slab
Occasional Tour Caddy
For me at least its not a case of dismissing concerns (I actually believe there are valid concerns that needs attention involving WHS)
But it is more difficult to listen to them or take them seriously when they present in such an OTT manner. They don't do themselves any favours
Backache
Assistant Pro
Thank you for replying the only response I can recall responding to was this one
Which was not a response from the R&A who made the survey but a response by English golf who appeared to be 'victim blaming' people are saying it is easy to cheat and its the fault of the players and the handicap commitees.
Personally I think this is a rather gutless answer and doesn't actually address any concerns and is not a response from the R&A who undertook the survey.
There is no information as to how widespread the concerns are and nothing is obviously being done to address them.
Similar threads
- Deleted member 17920
- Arrange a Game