Handicap alteration.

[jim8flog]

So with WHS, it would seem that it values consistency over volatile scores as the old 0.1 system favoured.

Until you reach the 20 scores your handicap doesn't really say much about your standard is what I'm gauging from the above.

You need to have 15 scores* in your record before it starts to really show a fairly representative idea of your ability, plus there are certain features that do not kick in until you have a full record of 20.

*15-16 scores is the average of the best 5.

 

[rulefan]

So with WHS, it would seem that it values consistency over volatile scores as the old 0.1 system favoured.

Until you reach the 20 scores your handicap doesn't really say much about your standard is what I'm gauging from the above.

Would you offer a fair opinion of a player's true standard of play after less than a dozen rounds or so?

 

[Ssshank]

Would you offer a fair opinion of a player's true standard of play after less than a dozen rounds or so?

If their scores were closely grouped I probably would.

 

[rulefan]

If their scores were closely grouped I probably would.

Once the player gets to about 20 then the system settles down. Until then IMO it protects the field from the potentially volatile scores of new players.

 

[Swango1980]

If their scores were closely grouped I probably would.

My handicap is single figures. I could easily have 3 consecutive scores, at any point, that could be, say 85, 84, 87. Simply taking those 3 scores says nothing about my ability, I could have shot a few scores a week or so before that could have been low to mid 70's.

So, when a player hand in an initial 3 scores, without any previous playing history, it is impossible to reasonably give them a handicap that demonstrates their ability with any sort of accuracy. Under WHS, just like the old Congu, it only takes the best score to work out the initial index. In WHS, once it works out the score differential of best score, 2 shots are subtracted to get Index. This is reasonable, as it errs on the side of caution to try and protect the rest of the field this player may be competing against (to some extent). As more scores are submitted, the handicap becomes more refined.

On your original question, it seems highly unusual your score has been manually manipulated. This would only seem reasonable to me if your handicap secretary has reason to believe the WHS calculation was simply incorrect due to all the bugs flying around. However, if he is going above and beyond the workings of the system, to make a subjective decision on your ability, I would suggest that is completely against the spirit of WHS and he could find himself in hot water if anyone decided to make an official complaint. You may be OK with it, but if you narrowly won your next competition, would the guy that came second accept the decision of your handicap secretary (PS, that statement is not me saying you are wanting or justifying it, it is more in reference to someone making an official complaint)?