Swango1980
Well-known member
What is a Course Index!?What's your issue with that? We've just ordered the same so that folks understand what is being asked for.
What is a Course Index!?What's your issue with that? We've just ordered the same so that folks understand what is being asked for.
"The Committee MAY request that players assist the Committee by completing scorecard related tasks that are the Committee's responsibility. The Committee must not apply a penalty to a player under the Rules of Golf if he or she fails to comply with these requests or makes a mistake in doing so, but the Committee may provide a disciplinary sanction for a player who fails repeatedly to comply with such a request"
I see you've never heard of 9 hole courses, or courses that don't have pros, or courses that are entirely run by volunteers?
So?"The Committee MAY request that players assist the Committee by completing scorecard related tasks that are the Committee's responsibility. The Committee must not apply a penalty to a player under the Rules of Golf if he or she fails to comply with these requests or makes a mistake in doing so, but the Committee may provide a disciplinary sanction for a player who fails repeatedly to comply with such a request"
Simply irrelevant if the circumstance described doesn't happen - just like many other Rules. In fact there are relatively few actual direct (what you must do) Rules but plenty of such indirect (what happens if...?) ones.I was pointing out that there is a rule that Says the committee may do something but that it isn't binding..... Not much of a rule.
All our scorecard and labelling is done by volunteers and we still manage it - why would the number of holes matter or who runs the club ?
It isn't a Rule. It is guidance to Committees on what they may/must/must not do in fulfilling their role.I was pointing out that there is a rule that Says the committee may do something but that it isn't binding..... Not much of a rule.
What's your issue with that? We've just ordered the same so that folks understand what is being asked for.
Interesting. England Golf strongly recommended having all 3 when I asked, and I strongly agree. They may not all be required, but they certainly make it a hell of a lot clearer for club golfers, many of whom struggle to distinguish between index, course handicap and playing handicap.Neither Handicap Index nor Playing Handicap are asked for. What's the point of the the boxes - especially for Playing Handicap which in a medal in our part of the world would mean working our 95% of the exact value of your CourseIndexHandicap, not only an unnecessary taks but also a wholly unreasonable one.
I argued at my own club that the card should only have a box for what is required of the player by the Rules - Course Handicap. Keep it simple and avoid creating opportunities for error.
I lost
It's very unusual indeed for a 9 holer to have a pro, or any paid staff - was my point.All our scorecard and labelling is done by volunteers and we still manage it - why would the number of holes matter or who runs the club ?
Maybe don't assume all 9-hole courses are the same, or that your observations are the norm? There are several round here, and all have a pro, assistants and other staff.It's very unusual indeed for a 9 holer to have a pro, or any paid staff - was my point.
Interesting. England Golf strongly recommended having all 3 when I asked, and I strongly agree..
Did you also ask the to remove the following boxes for the same reason: Competition, Time, Marker's Scores, (Points, +/-)As I said, I lost.
Probably a lone voice.
Neither Handicap Index nor Playing Handicap are asked for. What's the point of the the boxes - especially for Playing Handicap which in a medal in our part of the world would mean working our 95% of the exact value of your CourseIndexHandicap, not only an unnecessary task but also a wholly unreasonable one.
I argued at my own club that the card should only have a box for what is required of the player by the Rules - Course Handicap. Keep it simple and avoid creating opportunities for error.
I lost
Strokes Allowed (playing handicap) has been on virtually every card I have ever seen in over 40 years of playing. Remember is a card is not just for singles medal/stblfrd play. I do not think repeatedly asking an opponent in match play "how many shots are you getting" would do go down well.
What would have been simpler is if the National Authority had said it is Handicap Index that must be on the card.
I think they suggest all three in the hope that players put all three in avoiding all the “what’s required “ questions.Interesting. England Golf strongly recommended having all 3 when I asked, and I strongly agree. They may not all be required, but they certainly make it a hell of a lot clearer for club golfers, many of whom struggle to distinguish between index, course handicap and playing handicap.
That's exactly our logicI think they suggest all three in the hope that players put all three in avoiding all the “what’s required “ questions.
I'm not pushing the matter as there are, I recognise, other reasons for including the ones that are not required, just curious about the thinking. On this point alone of avoiding the "what's required" question , doesn't a single box for your handicap, labelled Course Handicap, better avoid it by indicating the one and only figure to be entered? There are, after all, six different ways in which you can order three numbers in three boxes, only one of which is correct.
Just asking, as they say.