GM Article - Handicap System Ruining Comps for Low Handicaps

[RichA]

Too right its confusing and where to find specific rulings and guidance is a nightmare.

For your info, you always need to look at the EG Guidance on the Rules of Handicapping a mere 50 odd pages after looking at the USGA/R&A document with its over 100 pages.

Anyone with an understanding of basic statistics and probability can see that field size is massively relevant to equity across handicap range in competitions.
How bizarre is it that the owners of the Rules of Golf recognised this and wrote specific guidance to control it, but the national unions make it mandatory for their members to ignore the sensible guidance?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Out of interest I just checked the last medal results

Par 72 course

First place

Net 71 handicap 6

Second place

Net 72 handicap 3

3rd place

Net 72 handicap 6

Infact in the top 10 only two handicappers over 20

The stableford before

42 handicap 14
38 handicap 10
38 handicap 7

The one before that

36 handicap 21
35 handicap 17
34 handicap 16

The 42 points one came after April so handicaps went up for us

I'd say it's a nice spread of results

My place is like this.

 

[nickjdavis]

It's here... https://www.randa.org/en/roh/appendices/appendix-c

View attachment 53251

Cheers....my hard copy of the handicapping manual is old, so doesnt differentiate between medium and large fields or make recommendations depending on the spread of handicaps.

 

[RichA]

Cheers....my hard copy of the handicapping manual is old, so doesnt differentiate between medium and large fields or make recommendations depending on the spread of handicaps.

Please read the replies between what I wrote earlier and now. It turns out England Golf don't allow those R&A recommendations. I meant well but have been firmly put back in my box.

 

[KenL]

New system is bonkers!

I'm 3.6 currently. Off yellows off 3. Off whites off 5.

Of more concern is playing other courses.

Our "lads weekend" was last weekend. We play for a trophy.
Playing Gifford off yellow.
Mate off 7.6 plays of 7.
Me off 3.6 plays off 2.

Something not right!

 

[clubchamp98]

Wow. Are the organisers reducing the handicap allowance, as recommended, or just playing 95% of CH?

95% .
I am not aware of a sliding scale .
But taken to a logical conclusion if small fields use 100% then the larger the field the lower the percentage should be.

 

[RichA]

95% .
I am not aware of a sliding scale .
But taken to a logical conclusion if small fields use 100% then the larger the field the lower the percentage should be.

Again, sorry but I was wrong. It's an R&A handicapping rules recommendation that the national golf unions specifically go against in their own handicapping rules.

 

[PJ87]

It does seem that if PH were 90% all the time a lot of the issues would go away

If your CH was between 1-5 you wouldn't lose a thing
Between 6-15 you lose 1 shot
Between 16-25 you lose 2 shots
Above 26 you start to lose 3 shots

Your cat 1 golfers would be very happy

 

[RichA]

It does seem that if PH were 90% all the time a lot of the issues would go away

If your CH was between 1-5 you wouldn't lose a thing
Between 6-15 you lose 1 shot
Between 16-25 you lose 2 shots
Above 26 you start to lose 3 shots

Your cat 1 golfers would be very happy

No. They'd find something.

 

[Orikoru]

It does seem that if PH were 90% all the time a lot of the issues would go away

If your CH was between 1-5 you wouldn't lose a thing
Between 6-15 you lose 1 shot
Between 16-25 you lose 2 shots
Above 26 you start to lose 3 shots

Your cat 1 golfers would be very happy

But the high handicappers wouldn't be. "What's the point of me being a 30 handicap if I only get 27 shots?” etc

 

[nickjdavis]

Please read the replies between what I wrote earlier and now. It turns out England Golf don't allow those R&A recommendations. I meant well but have been firmly put back in my box.

I've read them... its fine....as long as folks know...

1) that there is a box
2) where the box is
3) how well defined the box walls are

then we are fine, you expanded my knowledge and the rest of the community tempered my application of said knowledge.

You may be in a box, but that isnt necessarily a bad thing.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

But the high handicappers wouldn't be. "What's the point of me being a 30 handicap if I only get 27 shots?” etc

It's a good point to be fair.

 

[Imurg]

It's a good point to be fair.

I have this with CVG every single comp......he loses a shot, I don't....
I've explained it but to no avail....

 

[jim8flog]

Thanks for enlightening me. So what exactly is the point of the R&A Rules of Handicapping that I'm led to through the England Golf app if England Golf choose to ignore bits of it?
And are there any other rules in the Rules of Golf that are different for club golf?

It has always been the same even under the UHS parts of it only applied to England for example.

PS Although they are USGA R&A Rules of Handicapping.

They are the rules of Handicapping for whatever region you are in as adopted by them

Authorized Association
An entity that is authorized, in accordance with the structure set out by the United
States Golf Association (USGA) and R&A Rules Limited (The R&A), to implement
and administer the Rules of Handicapping within its jurisdiction and to carry out
the responsibilities as delegated to it by the authority through which it is
authorized. Such an entity must be a Multi-National, National or Regional
Association, Federation or Union unless otherwise approved by the USGA and The
R&A where no such entity exists.

There are quite a few things that are used in USGA regions that are not used in R&A regions e.g. most likely score

 

[Orikoru]

I have this with CVG every single comp......he loses a shot, I don't....
I've explained it but to no avail....

When I played Royston with @PJ87 we had it the other way round. His 24.5 gave him 25 shots and my 14.7 gave me 14 shots. Confused heck out of me.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

But the high handicappers wouldn't be. "What's the point of me being a 30 handicap if I only get 27 shots?” etc

Ah, but then there'd be handicap sections so all would be good remember?

 

[harpo_72]

This has got viral on YouTube as well with the Average golfer complaining he is off 1 index and a few others stating the system doesn’t work.
I dunno if it’s that big an issue, eventually you peak as a golfer and then you either need to devote more time to improve or you maintain or degrade.
I just see these guys have peaked not got the time or skill to move to the next level.. the HI and winning of competitions is just a side effect of their situation.
Remember every dog has his day in the sun and that’s why the high handicapper wins the stableford.. but if she/he wins the medal then they are aspiring to be lower and you should pat them on the back and say well done keep it up .. then they can join you on the astral plane of never winning..
Irrespective of the handicap system this has always happened and always will..
The only way to win more is practice harder because there is always someone better.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

This has got viral on YouTube as well with the Average golfer complaining he is off 1 index and a few others stating the system doesn’t work.
I dunno if it’s that big an issue, eventually you peak as a golfer and then you either need to devote more time to improve or you maintain or degrade.
I just see these guys have peaked not got the time or skill to move to the next level.. the HI and winning of competitions is just a side effect of their situation.
Remember every dog has his day in the sun and that’s why the high handicapper wins the stableford.. but if she/he wins the medal then they are aspiring to be lower and you should pat them on the back and say well done keep it up .. then they can join you on the astral plane of never winning..
Irrespective of the handicap system this has always happened and always will..
The only way to win more is practice harder because there is always someone better.

You're joking right? The rest of what you say is irrelevant here, the stats are showing a bias towards poorer golfers winning at a higher ratio than better golfers. People play for the fun of competition, but part of that fun is not feeling robbed, increasingly there's a feeling that mid to low single figure golfers are being robbed.

 

[harpo_72]

You're joking right? The rest of what you say is irrelevant here, the stats are showing a bias towards poorer golfers winning at a higher ratio than better golfers. People play for the fun of competition, but part of that fun is not feeling robbed, increasingly there's a feeling that mid to low single figure golfers are being robbed.

That’s not the handicap systems failure it can be resolved by the entry requirements..
If you’re so worried about it as a high handicapper have dedicated competitions for high handicappers.

I felt robbed the other week when I came 4 th overall got a payout lower than the lowest gross who was nowhere.com , div 1 was p5 and div 3 winner was p17 … but in the end that’s just how it is, next time I will try harder and I will keep trying.. these are the criteria and requirements that need to be met.

 

[dazzler]

We had this exact same sentiment at my club, where the membership were consistenyl moaning about 25 handicappers winning with a Nett 60.

Until I crunched the numbers for them and pointed out that the old Cat 1 golfers made up just 6% of our membership, yet won 13% of all handicap competitions. Actually the best performing handicap category.

Our membership has 70% of people in the 12.5 to 28.4 range. So it should be more likely that someone from that group wins the comps on a weekend. They actually underperformed in terms of wins.