H.I. Adjustments at Annual Review

[bunkerblaster]

Seems straightforward, the reset box is already checked and the box above just needs the +2 added. It just para b which is causing the concern, will go for it and see. Thanks for the responses.

 

[rulefan]

Is it possible to change an Index for a player with only 2 or 3 scores?
Out h'cap sec is having some trouble with the adjustment not 'sticking' after WHS has done the overnight work.

 

[Colin L]

Is it possible to change an Index for a player with only 2 or 3 scores?
Out h'cap sec is having some trouble with the adjustment not 'sticking' after WHS has done the overnight work.

I've done it with only 6 scores. A 13 year old who gained a handicap of 43.4 last season on the back of 54 holes and started this season with two adjusted gross scores of 94, knocking 20 strokes off his handicap index. That was ok but by the time he returned his next score he was copping an exceptional score reduction of -8 and his index was unrealistically low.

I have still to find out from his mum what she feeds him on.

 

[rulefan]

The player with 2 scores has an 'invisible' dummy score produced by the WHS at transition. The Low Index is showing as Pending. Is that significant?

 

[wjemather]

Was the old handicapping system so wrong that this is better?

The old system was not wrong as such, but WHS is better in almost every regard, especially in providing equity across the handicap range from/at a variety of golf courses around the world.

And if it's supposed to be a worldwide system and Scotland and England can't get it together, what hope is there for everyone else?

Getting IT systems to integrate with each other has nothing to do with the handicap system itself.

 

[rulefan]

The player with 2 scores has an 'invisible' dummy score produced by the WHS at transition. The Low Index is showing as Pending. Is that significant?

It seems Low Index is the key. Tried overnight but unticked Low Index. New HI is correct this morning.

 

[bobmac]

The old system was not wrong as such, but WHS is better in almost every regard, especially in providing equity across the handicap range from/at a variety of golf courses around the world.

I don't play much golf any more and I haven't had a handicap in 17 years but from what I've read on here, it's certainly not easy to understand. I just hope nobody asks me to explain it, I don't even understand the terminology. When I last played, a soft cap was something you wore on your head.

 

[DickInShorts]

I don't play much golf any more and I haven't had a handicap in 17 years but from what I've read on here, it's certainly not easy to understand. I just hope nobody asks me to explain it, I don't even understand the terminology. When I last played, a soft cap was something you wore on your head.

For what it’s worth I would have found it almost incomprehensible to be able to work out CSS after a competition but can easily (with a few sums that are quite simple) work out my nett differential and can then know almost immediately whether my handicap index will change - and by how much - or not.

 

[Swango1980]

For what it’s worth I would have found it almost incomprehensible to be able to work out CSS after a competition but can easily (with a few sums that are quite simple) work out my nett differential and can then know almost immediately whether my handicap index will change - and by how much - or not.

How do you work out the PCC then???

 

[DickInShorts]

How do you work out the PCC then???

Admittedly I can’t do that !

 

[Colin L]

How do you work out the PCC then???

Why would you want to? And if you wanted to, how would you go about gathering in all the scores of the day on the course and relate them to the players' handicaps??

 

[Swango1980]

Why would you want to? And if you wanted to, how would you go about gathering in all the scores of the day on the course and relate them to the players' handicaps??

That wasn't my point. The comment I was replying to indicated how difficult it was for him to work out CSS, but saying how easy it was for him to work out his score differential and whether it will impact his score differential.

However, if he can't work out PCC then he cannot work out his score differential. Therefore, using the difficulty of working out CSS and comparing it with being able to work out score differential is not a like for like comparison

 

[wjemather]

That wasn't my point. The comment I was replying to indicated how difficult it was for him to work out CSS, but saying how easy it was for him to work out his score differential and whether it will impact his score differential.

However, if he can't work out PCC then he cannot work out his score differential. Therefore, using the difficulty of working out CSS and comparing it with being able to work out score differential is not a like for like comparison

(Assuming the ratings and players handicaps are fairly accurate) it's not very often that PCC will be non-zero - we've only had 4, and just 1 when more than 15 scores have been returned - so it's reasonable to ignore it when doing a quick calculation of what you expect your handicap to be tomorrow.

 

[jim8flog]

I don't play much golf any more and I haven't had a handicap in 17 years but from what I've read on here, it's certainly not easy to understand. I just hope nobody asks me to explain it, I don't even understand the terminology. When I last played, a soft cap was something you wore on your head.

For what it’s worth I would have found it almost incomprehensible to be able to work out CSS after a competition but can easily (with a few sums that are quite simple) work out my nett differential and can then know almost immediately whether my handicap index will change - and by how much - or not.

How do you work out the PCC then???

At the end of the day all you ahve to do is is wake up in the morning and check your handicap index.

Far better than having to wait several days for the sec to do the admin including chasing up missing cards to get teh result published. PLus the need to know how to work out the calculations for your self if you needed to self adjust (that is even you knew you had to do it).

The system is really easy for the average player who does not get involved in 'how does it work'.

'As as easy HCP' is now our main Poster
Check you Handicap Index, work out your Course handicap from the chart and work out you Playing handicap from the chart. Even this last part does not have to be done in stroke play.

 

[Swango1980]

(Assuming the ratings and players handicaps are fairly accurate) it's not very often that PCC will be non-zero - we've only had 4, and just 1 when more than 15 scores have been returned - so it's reasonable to ignore it when doing a quick calculation of what you expect your handicap to be tomorrow.

Again, I'm aware of this (although it has causes confusion that CSS changes a lot more than PCC seems to do, but I guess that is a different argument).

Again, the comment I was replying to, the OP may have found it difficult to work out CSS, but it could be done. It is impossible for anyone to work out PCC. If PCC is ignored, yes it is possible to work out what the impact on your index may be (could require a calculator, depending on what score you are losing and your level of maths). However, if CSS was ignored, it would be even easier to work out the impact on your old handicap. So, regardless of how easy it is for someone to work out what impact a score would have on their Index, I struggle to see how they would find this easier than working out the impact a score may have on their old handicap. So much so, in fact, that WHS now has no requirement for a player to self adjust if the handicap has not yet been updated on the system.

 

[wjemather]

Again, I'm aware of this (although it has causes confusion that CSS changes a lot more than PCC seems to do, but I guess that is a different argument).

Again, the comment I was replying to, the OP may have found it difficult to work out CSS, but it could be done. It is impossible for anyone to work out PCC. If PCC is ignored, yes it is possible to work out what the impact on your index may be (could require a calculator, depending on what score you are losing and your level of maths). However, if CSS was ignored, it would be even easier to work out the impact on your old handicap. So, regardless of how easy it is for someone to work out what impact a score would have on their Index, I struggle to see how they would find this easier than working out the impact a score may have on their old handicap. So much so, in fact, that WHS now has no requirement for a player to self adjust if the handicap has not yet been updated on the system.

I'd say removal of the requirement to self-adjust has little to do with the complexities of the arithmetic; it is simply a logical evolution due to computerisation and the requirement for scores to be submitted to the system promptly for a daily overnight update, as opposed to commonly having a delay of several days (or more) before scores were processed previously. I also suspect many, if not most, golfers were unaware of requirement to self-adjust under UHS.

 

[Swango1980]

I'd say removal of the requirement to self-adjust has little to do with the complexities of the arithmetic; it is simply a logical evolution due to computerisation and the requirement for scores to be submitted to the system promptly for a daily overnight update, as opposed to commonly having a delay of several days (or more) before scores were processed previously. I also suspect many, if not most, golfers were unaware of requirement to self-adjust under UHS.

I'd have to disagree to some extent.

Regardless of whether golfers knew they had to previously self adjust or not previously, they still had to do it. And, it was very easy to do, either for them, or at least someone else to do for them (such as a Committee member). To self adjust, all they needed to know was their handicap and their latest score, and it was a very simple sum to do in ones head.

With WHS, to self adjust, a player would need to know their 20 (well, 21) latest scores (more specifically, score differentials). They'd need to calculate their latest score differential, which would at minimum require a calculator. They'd then need to determine whether this replaces any of their top 8, and also what the impact would be of their 20th oldest round becoming their 21st. This is all very possible to do for any of us that understand the system, but we'd still need access to a lot of that historical information before we start working it out. To request golfers self adjust under WHS would be crazy, when the claim is that WHS is supposed to be a simple system to use. Therefore, they removed that requirement to avoid the problem.

Of course, to remove this requirement really puts the onus on players to get their scores in promptly. But, if a player plays a second round in the day after shooting a great round in the morning, this simply cannot be accounted for under WHS effectively. Furthermore, we still have many players who submit general play scores using physical cards, as they still cannot use their phones (or forget to do so), so their handicap does not get updated for days after their round. In meantime, they could play in a competition of the wrong handicap (well, technically now the right handicap, just an outdated handicap).

 

[wjemather]

I'd have to disagree to some extent.

Regardless of whether golfers knew they had to previously self adjust or not previously, they still had to do it. And, it was very easy to do, either for them, or at least someone else to do for them (such as a Committee member). To self adjust, all they needed to know was their handicap and their latest score, and it was a very simple sum to do in ones head.

With WHS, to self adjust, a player would need to know their 20 (well, 21) latest scores (more specifically, score differentials). They'd need to calculate their latest score differential, which would at minimum require a calculator. They'd then need to determine whether this replaces any of their top 8, and also what the impact would be of their 20th oldest round becoming their 21st. This is all very possible to do for any of us that understand the system, but we'd still need access to a lot of that historical information before we start working it out. To request golfers self adjust under WHS would be crazy, when the claim is that WHS is supposed to be a simple system to use. Therefore, they removed that requirement to avoid the problem.

Of course, to remove this requirement really puts the onus on players to get their scores in promptly. But, if a player plays a second round in the day after shooting a great round in the morning, this simply cannot be accounted for under WHS effectively. Furthermore, we still have many players who submit general play scores using physical cards, as they still cannot use their phones (or forget to do so), so their handicap does not get updated for days after their round. In meantime, they could play in a competition of the wrong handicap (well, technically now the right handicap, just an outdated handicap).

Your handicap committee needs to find a way of getting their scores entered on the same day, as they are not meeting their responsibilities under WHS - potentially adversely affecting PCC calculations, which in turn affects everyone else playing the course that day.

As you say, WHS is a system that is almost as simple as can be the golfer - look up handicap index, look up course handicap, play golf, return score; same again tomorrow.

 

[Swango1980]

Your handicap committee needs to find a way of getting their scores entered on the same day, as they are not meeting their responsibilities under WHS - potentially adversely affecting PCC calculations, which in turn affects everyone else playing the course that day.

As you say, WHS is a system that is almost as simple as can be the golfer - look up handicap index, look up course handicap, play golf, return score; same again tomorrow.

CONGU was easier though, look up handicap, go play golf.

Players can submit scores via App (HDID or MyEG) of PSI. We have sent out e-mails and there are notices on the noticeboard. However, there is little we can do for technophobes of forgetful members. We'll send personal e-mails, but it doesn't help much. The tech presents it's own problems. In last 6 weeks, we've had 18 players pre-registering minutes before score entry (scores deleted when this was discovered), and around 30 no returns from general play rounds

 

[wjemather]

CONGU was easier though, look up handicap, go play golf.

But it wasn't really that simple; it was more like: look up handicap; work out what adjustments are needed for scores that haven't been entered; round the result to the nearest whole number; then play golf.

Players can submit scores via App (HDID or MyEG) of PSI. We have sent out e-mails and there are notices on the noticeboard. However, there is little we can do for technophobes of forgetful members. We'll send personal e-mails, but it doesn't help much. The tech presents it's own problems. In last 6 weeks, we've had 18 players pre-registering minutes before score entry (scores deleted when this was discovered), and around 30 no returns from general play rounds

What you can do depends on who is deemed not to be meeting their responsibilities - the player or the committee - and your club rules. If the committee accept physical cards without psi/app score entry, they are assuming the responsibility to ensure they are entered on the system each day. If the committee require entry on the system (PSI/mobile app), then the player is subject to disciplinary sanctions.