H.I. Adjustments at Annual Review

[Swango1980]

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.


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.

On the first bit, in my 15 years of playing golf (and well over 1000 rounds), I personally never had to self adjust. So, I wouldn't get too hung up on the need to self adjust. However, when others had to, it was very easy to work out. In the grand scheme of things, CONGU was easy, no need to figure out a course handicap, let alone a playing handicap.

On the second bit, we are a long way from disciplining players for not returning a score. It seems like a load have either pre-registered by mistake, or have tried to submit a score via MyEG but their marker is not registered so it never gets verified (and there is no way to tell if they submitted a score at all, or are just awaiting verification). Others have forgotten to enter a score, and we are not willing to discipline forgetful golfers. I doubt any have maliciously failed to submit a score.

 

[wjemather]

On the first bit, in my 15 years of playing golf (and well over 1000 rounds), I personally never had to self adjust. So, I wouldn't get too hung up on the need to self adjust. However, when others had to, it was very easy to work out. In the grand scheme of things, CONGU was easy, no need to figure out a course handicap, let alone a playing handicap.

I used to play Saturday (comp) and Sunday (comp or match) quite often, so had to do these adjustments all the time, and regularly had to account for multiple competition rounds. Yes, it was relatively easy to do, but still incumbent on the player and the cause of many an argument on the first tee.

On the second bit, we are a long way from disciplining players for not returning a score. It seems like a load have either pre-registered by mistake, or have tried to submit a score via MyEG but their marker is not registered so it never gets verified (and there is no way to tell if they submitted a score at all, or are just awaiting verification). Others have forgotten to enter a score, and we are not willing to discipline forgetful golfers. I doubt any have maliciously failed to submit a score.

I was only referring to the physical cards that are returned in a timely fashion but are delayed in being entered on the system for WHS, not the array of unreturned scores.

 

[Swango1980]

I used to play Saturday (comp) and Sunday (comp or match) quite often, so had to do these adjustments all the time, and regularly had to account for multiple competition rounds. Yes, it was relatively easy to do, but still incumbent on the player and the cause of many an argument on the first tee.

Did club not close the Saturday competition regularly?

We had a league game against another club a few years back, played on a Sunday. As the groups started going out, a few of the opposition started discussing that a couple of their players had great rounds in the competition the previous day. The club had not closed the competition, so they all just played off the handicaps that were on the system, and the club closed the comp later on Sunday. This was queried, two of their matches were effectively DQed and we ended up winning the match. Bit awkward.

Would have been so easy for them to self adjust, so not sure why they didn't (in a team of 12, you'd think at least one of them would have pointed this out). No doubt the WHS system seems better in this aspect, as handicaps are adjusted the next day, regardless on whether a comp is closed or not. It just relies on players getting these scores in. For no returns, I think I'd like to see the systems generate automated e-mails to the players when a score is not returned, try and catch them before going to Committee. It is a right pain at the moment tracking these on Club V1 and MyEG, then trying to contact every player

 

[wjemather]

Did club not close the Saturday competition regularly?

We had a league game against another club a few years back, played on a Sunday. As the groups started going out, a few of the opposition started discussing that a couple of their players had great rounds in the competition the previous day. The club had not closed the competition, so they all just played off the handicaps that were on the system, and the club closed the comp later on Sunday. This was queried, two of their matches were effectively DQed and we ended up winning the match. Bit awkward.

Would have been so easy for them to self adjust, so not sure why they didn't (in a team of 12, you'd think at least one of them would have pointed this out). No doubt the WHS system seems better in this aspect, as handicaps are adjusted the next day, regardless on whether a comp is closed or not. It just relies on players getting these scores in. For no returns, I think I'd like to see the systems generate automated e-mails to the players when a score is not returned, try and catch them before going to Committee. It is a right pain at the moment tracking these on Club V1 and MyEG, then trying to contact every player

Our previous sec would routinely not process the weekend comps until Mondays (when he was next at the club, after playing very early Saturdays); and sometimes even later in the week. Now, under WHS, that wouldn't matter for handicapping because the scores get processed regardless of the status of any competition (assuming they are entered in the system).

Automated emails would be nice! I send them out via ClubV1, so it's all templated and saves a bit of time, but it's still a chore. Thankfully we haven't had that many issues, with just a handful of unreturned scores outstanding and only one repeat offender (although I think they've got the hang of it now). It would also be good if the systems provided better reporting to eliminate the need to cross-reference everything.