EG Webinar on New Handicap Rules in 2024

[mikejohnchapman]

Just listened to the above. Mostly stuff that had been released but a couple of points I hadn't appreciated (if I understood them correctly).

First, the ability to harmonise par is only within genders. Thus we could adjust our red tee par for men and our yellow tee par for women but not across the board.

Second, it appears the days of 9 hole scores counting for handicap are coming to an end. You can still play and submit a 9 hole score but the score differential will be calculated using your score plus an estimated score for the other 9. The estimation will use a proprietary formula (again) that will scale-up the score based on the performance of people with the same HI across all scores in WHS.

I was also a bit cool about the continued push to go to fully digital scoring to "improve the customer experience".

Maybe it's me but I always get a bit nervous when organisations say "trust the computer".

 

[rulie]

Just listened to the above. Mostly stuff that had been released but a couple of points I hadn't appreciated (if I understood them correctly).

First, the ability to harmonise par is only within genders. Thus we could adjust our red tee par for men and our yellow tee par for women but not across the board.

Second, it appears the days of 9 hole scores counting for handicap are coming to an end. You can still play and submit a 9 hole score but the score differential will be calculated using your score plus an estimated score for the other 9. The estimation will use a proprietary formula (again) that will scale-up the score based on the performance of people with the same HI across all scores in WHS.

I was also a bit cool about the continued push to go to fully digital scoring to "improve the customer experience".

Maybe it's me but I always get a bit nervous when organisations say "trust the computer".

"Improving the customer experience" may not be applicable to all generations.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

"Improving the customer experience" may not be applicable to all generations.

Should I be feeling insulted?

 

[D-S]

It was a shame that it was just explanatory of the changes and told us very little more than they have published to date. I assume the audience were mostly people (County and Club Committee members) who had already read and understood the changes. Answering the slightly trickier questions that people have and that members will be asking would have been a better use of the time.

 

[louise_a]

I listened to it yesterday, not sure I really learned anything i hadn't already read.

 

[2blue]

It was a shame that it was just explanatory of the changes and told us very little more than they have published to date. I assume the audience were mostly people (County and Club Committee members) who had already read and understood the changes. Answering the slightly trickier questions that people have and that members will be asking would have been a better use of the time.

What are you anticipating these to be? Genuine question.

 

[D-S]

What are you anticipating these to be? Genuine question.

For example more on the mechanics of 4BB - will players have to only put one score in per hole (now you cab make two entries)?
Also things such as - If there are two entries which one does the computer take? The scaling up process for expected score - in reality will it mean that in holes not played a lower index will be closer to net par and a higher index higher than net par or the other way round? Can you (is it recommended) standardise par for both genders? For very short (1500 yards) par 3 courses, will the course ratings (which apparently are slightly different for short courses) be very low say par 54 cr 40? etc.etc.

 

[2blue]

For example more on the mechanics of 4BB - will players have to only put one score in per hole (now you cab make two entries)?
Also things such as - If there are two entries which one does the computer take? The scaling up process for expected score - in reality will it mean that in holes not played a lower index will be closer to net par and a higher index higher than net par or the other way round? Can you (is it recommended) standardise par for both genders? For very short (1500 yards) par 3 courses, will the course ratings (which apparently are slightly different for short courses) be very low say par 54 cr 40? etc.etc.

Yes, good one this, as we routinely have pairs that can't be bothered to calc their PH so don't know when to 'pick-up', just leave it to the 'system' to work it out later. I guess that all the ISP's will have to be set to just accept one score per hole otherwise how will who 'scored on 9 or more holes' be established?
I think point 2 suggests that they are to be treated separately, though I guess they may still work out to be the same.
For the short courses, I'd guess we just wait to see what they give us as was with main course rating.
I like your thinking though!

 

[D-S]

Yes, good one this, as we routinely have pairs that can't be bothered to calc their PH so don't know when to 'pick-up', just leave it to the 'system' to work it out later. I guess that all the ISP's will have to be set to just accept one score per hole otherwise how will who 'scored on 9 or more holes' be established?
I think point 2 suggests that they are to be treated separately, though I guess they may still work out to be the same.
For the short courses, I'd guess we just wait to see what they give us as was with main course rating.
I like your thinking though!

I just get the feeling that there will be a series of these sort of questions that will come up, maybe only from a small section of the members and committees, that we don't have an answer for yet and my seminar is on 14/2, 6 weeks before implementation and a lot of comms should have gone out to members by then so questions will be asked and 6 weeks prior is a bit close.

 

[Wabinez]

Second, it appears the days of 9 hole scores counting for handicap are coming to an end. You can still play and submit a 9 hole score but the score differential will be calculated using your score plus an estimated score for the other 9.

This is how it is done now, is it not?

 

[D-S]

This is how it is done now, is it not?

It is but the current calculation is net par plus 1 for the 2nd 9 but in future it will be scaled up for the 2nd 9 (or unplayed holes) using a new, secret, proprietary formula.

 

[Wabinez]

It is but the current calculation is net par plus 1 for the 2nd 9 but in future it will be scaled up for the 2nd 9 (or unplayed holes) using a new, secret, proprietary formula.

Ahhh, so same same, but different. No dramas. I think I have submitted about 3 9 hole scores in the entirety of WHS, so all good.

I want to know more about the 4BBB scoring adjustments, but I also do believe in the ‘Trust the Computer’ theory.

 

[rulefan]

I want to know more about the 4BBB scoring adjustments, but I also do believe in the ‘Trust the Computer’ theory.

I guess it will be very similar to the PCC algorithm, player's likeliest score based of previous history..

 

[wjemather]

For example more on the mechanics of 4BB - will players have to only put one score in per hole (now you cab make two entries)?
Also things such as - If there are two entries which one does the computer take? The scaling up process for expected score - in reality will it mean that in holes not played a lower index will be closer to net par and a higher index higher than net par or the other way round? Can you (is it recommended) standardise par for both genders? For very short (1500 yards) par 3 courses, will the course ratings (which apparently are slightly different for short courses) be very low say par 54 cr 40? etc.etc.

4BBB is covered in the new guidance - only the counting score should be recorded on each hole.

I assume you refer to the comment that provisional ratings are not possible for short courses - this is because provisional ratings are almost entirely based on length, and for short courses, length is much less of a dominant factor and so the rate of widely inaccurate provisional ratings would be unacceptably high.

 

[D-S]

4BBB is covered in the new guidance - only the counting score should be recorded on each hole.

The advice (from the 2024 Guidance on the rules of Handicapping) to committees is:-
"The standard approach to Fourball competition should continue to be used – as soon as the best score has been recorded, the other player should pick up in order not to impact pace of play. Handicap Committees will be justified in disregarding scores for handicapping purposes where scores for both players are recorded on a significant number of holes on a regular basis.'

It does not state only the counting score must be recorded. In fact on current software you have to put two values in for every hole even if one of them is often but not always a zero. Many people just record both scores (if both players have holed out) just in case they they forget where they get shots and do this for 'safety'.

If there is a card presented to the competition organisers with 2 scores on many or every hole how do they know which is the 'counting score?

The advice actually acknowledges that both scores will be sometimes recorded as it is only a problem if this becomes a 'significant' number. Also what is a significant number and what is a regular basis? Examples would help.

Also, if this is an Open how does the committee know that away players are doing this on a regular basis so that they can disregard scores or will it be their home club handicap committee? If the players are from different clubs how again of their home clubs know?

 

[rulie]

The advice (from the 2024 Guidance on the rules of Handicapping) to committees is:-
"The standard approach to Fourball competition should continue to be used – as soon as the best score has been recorded, the other player should pick up in order not to impact pace of play. Handicap Committees will be justified in disregarding scores for handicapping purposes where scores for both players are recorded on a significant number of holes on a regular basis.'

It does not state only the counting score must be recorded. In fact on current software you have to put two values in for every hole even if one of them is often but not always a zero. Many people just record both scores (if both players have holed out) just in case they they forget where they get shots and do this for 'safety'.

If there is a card presented to the competition organisers with 2 scores on many or every hole how do they know which is the 'counting score?

The advice actually acknowledges that both scores will be sometimes recorded as it is only a problem if this becomes a 'significant' number. Also what is a significant number and what is a regular basis? Examples would help.

Also, if this is an Open how does the committee know that away players are doing this on a regular basis so that they can disregard scores or will it be their home club handicap committee? If the players are from different clubs how again of their home clubs know?

What is a Handicap Committee going to do about it anyways?

 

[wjemather]

What is a Handicap Committee going to do about it anyways?

Remove the relevant scores from the handicap system and advise the players to only enter the counting score for each hole in future.

 

[D-S]

What is a Handicap Committee going to do about it anyways?

Disregard the scores apparently. So I assume you must have to delete just those scores entirely not for these holes.
However your question is one of those that would have been good to be raised or answered in yesterday’s webinar, rather than just repeating exactly the same information that has been already sent out.

 

[D-S]

Remove the relevant scores from the handicap system and advise the players to only enter the counting score for each hole in future.

The entire score or just the hole with two scores? Again what is a significant number? What is a regular basis? What do you do if say there are only 4 holes with two scores recorded, do both count?

 

[wjemather]

The advice (from the 2024 Guidance on the rules of Handicapping) to committees is:-
"The standard approach to Fourball competition should continue to be used – as soon as the best score has been recorded, the other player should pick up in order not to impact pace of play. Handicap Committees will be justified in disregarding scores for handicapping purposes where scores for both players are recorded on a significant number of holes on a regular basis.'

It does not state only the counting score must be recorded. In fact on current software you have to put two values in for every hole even if one of them is often but not always a zero. Many people just record both scores (if both players have holed out) just in case they they forget where they get shots and do this for 'safety'.

If there is a card presented to the competition organisers with 2 scores on many or every hole how do they know which is the 'counting score?

The advice actually acknowledges that both scores will be sometimes recorded as it is only a problem if this becomes a 'significant' number. Also what is a significant number and what is a regular basis? Examples would help.

Also, if this is an Open how does the committee know that away players are doing this on a regular basis so that they can disregard scores or will it be their home club handicap committee? If the players are from different clubs how again of their home clubs know?

To me, it is clear guidance that only the counting score on each hole should be recorded.
Since there is never any reason to record the non-counting score, I see no reason why players won't be able to simply not do it.