Continuous Handicap Review

[Canfordhacker]

I'm aware of the recommendation from 2016 that clubs run a "Decliner" report each quarter to identify players who have had 7 consecutive 0.1's from comps. But I've just had a mail from my club that says

"I would like to make members aware of a change in the CONGU h/cap system. This is a mandatory change that is being implemented and from the 1st of December adjustments will be made. The new adjustment is for any golfer that puts seven cards in a row over their playing h/cap to not only have an increase of 0.7 due to the seven cards, but also a full shot as well."

I can't find anything that confirms this is mandatory - can anybody enlighten me or point me at a link please?

Thanks

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Can’t recall anything in the changes that say the after 7 . 1’s it’s an automatic shot back - still under the control of the HC Committee to assess if a shot back is the right move

 

[Deleted member 16999]

At the end of September England Golf news announced the changes for CONGU for 01 Jan 18.

I read the change as the implementation of the review of handicaps, appendix M, is mandatory not optional.

http://www.englandgolf.org/news.asp...sitesectionid=38&sitesectiontitle=News&page=3

 

[rosecott]

I'm aware of the recommendation from 2016 that clubs run a "Decliner" report each quarter to identify players who have had 7 consecutive 0.1's from comps. But I've just had a mail from my club that says

"I would like to make members aware of a change in the CONGU h/cap system. This is a mandatory change that is being implemented and from the 1st of December adjustments will be made. The new adjustment is for any golfer that puts seven cards in a row over their playing h/cap to not only have an increase of 0.7 due to the seven cards, but also a full shot as well."

I can't find anything that confirms this is mandatory - can anybody enlighten me or point me at a link please?

Thanks

I concur with Phil in that I have had no notification that this becomes mandatory from 1 December. Since the already notified CONGU changes are due to come in on 1 January 2018 I cannot see this, if true, starting on 1 December. If the wording quoted is exact, then they are wrong in another way - it is 7 consecutive qualifiers outside buffer, not above playing handicap.

I can find no specific mention of the Continuous Handicap Review in the announced changes from 1 January 2018.

 

[Old Skier]

There was talk last year at various county meeting that the software would implement a 1 shot increase after 7 consecutive .1 but as nothing happened I presume it had been dropped.

Does seem a reasonably addition but not seen anything official although we as a handicap committee have been using this as a guideline during our monthly meetings.

 

[Colin L]

There is nothing in the Manual in the section on Continuous Handicap Review [p54] of this nature. It is quite clear that the Committee should review each player who is listed in the report and where appropriate increase their handicap:

Using the principles of the Annual Review and the General Play Adjustment Handicap Committees should apply a Continuous Review Increase (CRI) when deemed appropriate and continue to monitor the performance of such players closely.

The recommendation is that it should be done monthly.

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I concur with Phil in that I have had no notification that this becomes mandatory from 1 December. Since the already notified CONGU changes are due to come in on 1 January 2018 I cannot see this, if true, starting on 1 December. If the wording quoted is exact, then they are wrong in another way - it is 7 consecutive qualifiers outside buffer, not above playing handicap.

I can find no specific mention of the Continuous Handicap Review in the announced changes from 1 January 2017.

I believe some Clubs in our area thought they didn’t have to carry out the reviews if they didn’t wish.

If other clubs, maybe the op’s, weren’t doing them, it might be that CONGU have put out the note to clearly state it’s mandatory and they must carry out the review and then the op’s club has further confused themselves.

 

[Canfordhacker]

At the end of September England Golf news announced the changes for CONGU for 01 Jan 18.

I read the change as the implementation of the review of handicaps, appendix M, is mandatory not optional.

http://www.englandgolf.org/news.asp...sitesectionid=38&sitesectiontitle=News&page=3

Thanks - but doesn't Appendix M only refer to Annual Review, rather than the decliner report that is there purely to assist?

 

[Old Skier]

Seems like a reminder to all members that they are about to start the annual review process to me but badly worded.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Thanks - but doesn't Appendix M only refer to Annual Review, rather than the decliner report that is there purely to assist?

That’s correct - some clubs have ignored the annual review so the amendment is to state that all clubs must carry out the AR

The CHR is still all about running the report they recommend every month and then applying any changes if they deemed fit - nothing mandatory about giving shots back

 

[Deleted member 16999]

Thanks - but doesn't Appendix M only refer to Annual Review, rather than the decliner report that is there purely to assist?

Yes mate, sent the link to show that’s the only mandatory change to Handicap reviews currently put out, as others stated, not received anything else to cover your initial points.

 

[Old Skier]

The CHR is still all about running the report they recommend every month and then applying any changes if they deemed fit - nothing mandatory about giving shots back

Although given ColinL post above should be considered.

 

[jim8flog]

I cannot see the 1 shot as mandatory as the guide that anybody who has shot to their handicap or lower in the last 12 months or in the current season to their buffer zone should not be given a full review and left to the annual review.

The guide also recommends that the CR should be done at least once every 3 months.

 

[duncan mackie]

A more general comment from me - I really really wish that the system, including the AR, delivered all the elements and that the committee then had to reverse them, obviously including a note justifying their action in the same way that they would for the implementation of any non system derived adjustment.

I suspect that we are heading that way, but it would make everything so so much more balanced.

With so many detailed tuning elements in the system now the difference between those who implement all of it all the time (unless there are really solid justifications for not doing so) and those who take more of a 'noted but we know better' approach, is huge, and definitely significant.

 

[rulefan]

• Continuous Handicap Review: There is now a computer-generated report which flags players with 7 consecutive 0.1 handicap increases. Handicap Committees are recommended to review the performance of such players giving due consideration to applying a handicap increase.

And this tells you what to do.


http://www.englandgolf.org/page.aspx?sitesectionid=2568&sitesectiontitle=Continuous+Handicap+Review

 

[Canfordhacker]

Many thanks for the input, really useful gents. I'll use it to write back and gain clarity/point them in right direction.

Much appreciated.

 

[lukeysafc100]

I believe they have mis-interpreted the rules.

I believe the CONGU recommendations are something like "if you miss your buffer zone in 7 consecutive rounds - you will be offered to have your handicap reviewed" I don't think you have to accept it though.

 

[rosecott]

I believe they have mis-interpreted the rules.

I believe the CONGU recommendations are something like "if you miss your buffer zone in 7 consecutive rounds - you will be offered to have your handicap reviewed" I don't think you have to accept it though.

I'm pretty sure that it is the job of the Handicap Committee to decide on - not offer - a review and to inform the player of the outcome.

 

[rulefan]

I believe they have mis-interpreted the rules.

I believe the CONGU recommendations are something like "if you miss your buffer zone in 7 consecutive rounds - you will be offered to have your handicap reviewed" I don't think you have to accept it though.

The implementation of the software is mandatory. Reviewing and/or modifying handicaps are a recommendation.

Incidentally, EG is recommending all 28/36 handicaps are reviewed at the Annual Review which it recommends should be done after the end of the year.

 

[lex!]

I was reading up on this, this morning and agree with a previous post that the only Mandatory commitment is to the Annual Review. This is a bullet from the communication. Appendix M refers to the AR:

• Handicap Adjustments – Confirmation that the adherence to Appendix M (Guidelines for Handicap Reviews) is mandatory, not optional.