England Golf General Play Restrictions

[Swango1980]

Ratings are subjective and with my own circumstances I don't see the ratings at my own course between whites and yellows as being accurate. They might be in the eyes of others, that's fine, but I doubt I am on my own there. Extending that to other courses, again the rating is subjective but even allowing for that it has to be better than not allowing for course difficulty at all. I'm not knocking the system as a whole but I do think that most courses will produce lower h/c for players off the yellows than whites than the ratings account for (based on no large scale statistical analysis but finding it to be the case when playing multiple courses myself and finding it to be true )

Are ratings subjective? I've never been a rater, but I'm told the system follows very strict guidelines, and removes subjectivity?

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Are ratings subjective? I've never been a rater, but I'm told the system follows very strict guidelines, and removes subjectivity?

I'm sure they aim to reduce subjectivity as best they can but no rating can ever fully remove it imo.

I suspect we are trying the patience of others on this thread now with our little afternoon diversion. I'll let this one go and contemplate the fact that ratings don't mean anything if your course is closed due to snow and ice

 

[Swango1980]

I'm sure they aim to reduce subjectivity as best they can but no rating can ever fully remove it imo.

I suspect we are trying the patience of others on this thread now with our little afternoon diversion. I'll let this one go and contemplate the fact that ratings don't mean anything if your course is closed due to snow and ice

Guess it would be interesting to hear from someone who knows the process. A quick search on it, I found:

"While with previous rating systems there might have been a bit more subjectivity, with the new system it’s all about measurements. The raters and team leaders are all trained to ensure the right measurements are taken at the right places. Therefore, there can’t be any inconsistency around who was rating a course."

 

[3offTheTee]

These are Elite Competitions and would be surprised if they affect less than 0.5% members on here. If as RF states the balloting out will be at around +2 it will have minimal effect.

From what I have seen the majority of these people do not need to submit “General Play” scores as they are playing in many County Competitions.

Sure somebody will prove my comment wrong

 

[doublebogey7]

Wonder if SG is thinking of this?
We don't have much In the way of low handicap comps, certainly not up here apart from elite comps. One thing we do have is a real drop in participation in comps that are geared at lower handicaps. The county champs are really poorly attended, our one has even been cancelled twice fue to lack of entries. The big comp the Northern open, which used to be a scratch and better, you could get in this year with a handicap of 5.

If SG are struggling to attract participants to their competitions, how would this help them?

 

[D-S]

Guess it would be interesting to hear from someone who knows the process. A quick search on it, I found:

"While with previous rating systems there might have been a bit more subjectivity, with the new system it’s all about measurements. The raters and team leaders are all trained to ensure the right measurements are taken at the right places. Therefore, there can’t be any inconsistency around who was rating a course."

I work on a rating team and can confirm that the vast majority of the input is factual and not subjective. We take a lot of measurements per hole, carry to the fairway, width of fairway at landing zones, elevation, distance to hazards, nature and size of hazards (e.g. depth of bunkers) green sizes etc. these are just a few. There is some supoosition as to whether a ball will roll out maybe 5 or 10 yards less when hitting an upslope for example but in the scope of it these have very little impact. It is a rigorous process and the lead raters that I have had dealings with are really well versed and experts in the field who have had a lot of training.

 

[D-S]

These are Elite Competitions and would be surprised if they affect less than 0.5% members on here. If as RF states the balloting out will be at around +2 it will have minimal effect.

From what I have seen the majority of these people do not need to submit “General Play” scores as they are playing in many County Competitions.

Sure somebody will prove my comment wrong

One of the main drivers for this new term of competition was that indeed some ‘elite‘ players had huge differences in their record between their GP and competition scores, the example quoted by EG was something like someone with a GP scoring average of +4 and a competition average of 5 and with most of his 8 counting rounds being GP his HI allowed him entry into an elite competition.
Handicap manipulation, for different sorts of gains, happens across the spectrum of golfers - this is just one good tool to seek it out at an elite level, others are needed at a local level. In an ideal world Handicap Committees should eliminate a lot of this, but the diligence, expertise and experience of committees varies hugely across clubs.

 

[fundy]

I work on a rating team and can confirm that the vast majority of the input is factual and not subjective. We take a lot of measurements per hole, carry to the fairway, width of fairway at landing zones, elevation, distance to hazards, nature and size of hazards (e.g. depth of bunkers) green sizes etc. these are just a few. There is some supoosition as to whether a ball will roll out maybe 5 or 10 yards less when hitting an upslope for example but in the scope of it these have very little impact. It is a rigorous process and the lead raters that I have had dealings with are really well versed and experts in the field who have had a lot of training.

Taking the measurements is the easy part, taking them and turning them into a rating is the harder, and subjective part surely?

 

[D-S]

Taking the measurements is the easy part, taking them and turning them into a rating is the harder, and subjective part surely?

Not really, it is all fed into a spreadsheet then double checked so the measurements form the basis of the input and subsequently the numbers which are spat out.

 

[Swango1980]

Taking the measurements is the easy part, taking them and turning them into a rating is the harder, and subjective part surely?

I'd have thought that would be the least subjective part? Once you have the numbers, you just throw them into equations and let them give you the ratings. Maybe that is a simplistic summary. But, if you made hard measurements at one course that theoretically were the same as another course, I'd have thought it would be difficult to get from that point (all same measurements for each course), to then get a different set of ratings by interpreting or using those numbers differently?

 

[patricks148]

If SG are struggling to attract participants to their competitions, how would this help them?

I don't think said anything of the sort

 

[fundy]

I'd have thought that would be the least subjective part? Once you have the numbers, you just throw them into equations and let them give you the ratings. Maybe that is a simplistic summary. But, if you made hard measurements at one course that theoretically were the same as another course, I'd have thought it would be difficult to get from that point (all same measurements for each course), to then get a different set of ratings by interpreting or using those numbers differently?

and how do you allocate the weightings to each measurement? you still have to build a model to translate all of those measurements into an overall rating

 

[doublebogey7]

Wonder if SG is thinking of this?
We don't have much In the way of low handicap comps, certainly not up here apart from elite comps. One thing we do have is a real drop in participation in comps that are geared at lower handicaps. The county champs are really poorly attended, our one has even been cancelled twice fue to lack of entries. The big comp the Northern open, which used to be a scratch and better, you could get in this year with a handicap of 5.

If SG are struggling to attract participants to their competitions, how would this help them?

Sorry if I have mis-interpreted your post. Your second para says that there are not many elite events and they are not well attended. If its not to improve this what is the point of the first para. Guessing I am missing something or you are merely trying to be humorous.

 

[wjemather]

So one day they tell us that our handicaps aren't representative of our ability, unless we put in a card everytime we play. Now they're saying that the handicap isn't representative if we put in loads of general play cards, and that brings our handicaps down?

It's almost as if the WHS system doesn't work hmm

That isn't what is being implied at all - and I would hope most people understand that.

There are simply a small number of unscrupulous players (cheats, if you will) and less than ideally functioning handicap committees that are failing to identify them and/or take appropriate action.

And as I have said, taking away the ability to submit general play scores will not stop unscrupulous players from doctoring their handicaps via relatively cheap club comps (as they always did before WHS).

 

[Deleted member 31467]

The difference between general play and competition rounds is significant. Don't forget this change is aimed at elite amateur events so forget about yellow tees and 95% allowance. Which are you more likely to score better, a bounce game with your mates round your home course or an elite tournament round on a course that's set up with narrow fairways, fast greens and tough pin positions?

 

[IanM]

Some general play rounds never even happened!

 

[Imurg]

That isn't what is being implied at all - and I would hope most people understand that.

There are simply a small number of unscrupulous players (cheats, if you will) and less than ideally functioning handicap committees that are failing to identify them and/or take appropriate action.

And as I have said, taking away the ability to submit general play scores will not stop unscrupulous players from doctoring their handicaps via relatively cheap club comps (as they always did before WHS).

Obviously these "cheats" only have + handicaps.........

 

[D-S]

and how do you allocate the weightings to each measurement? you still have to build a model to translate all of those measurements into an overall rating

The spreadsheet does all the conversion. I assume it is the same series of calculations worldwide and it is extremely comprehensive. As this is a mathematical model, it treats all the information the same, hence the absence of subjectivity at this stage.

 

[fundy]

The spreadsheet does all the conversion. I assume it is the same series of calculations worldwide and it is extremely comprehensive. As this is a mathematical model, it treats all the information the same, hence the absence of subjectivity at this stage.

Just because something is heavily modelled does not ensure the complete removal of subjectivity, reduced for sure, absent highly unlikely, especially in something like this where theres a high level of variables many of which are hard to quantify

 

[D-S]

Just because something is heavily modelled does not ensure the complete removal of subjectivity, reduced for sure, absent highly unlikely, especially in something like this where theres a high level of variables many of which are hard to quantify

Its just a spreadsheet (albeit complicated) not AI.