Handicap manipulation - how to address

[rulie]

Rubbish

That added nothing to the discussion!!

 

[Thintowin]

That added nothing to the discussion!!

You could see it that way I guess but I don't. Trying to make out that WHS hasn't caused the manipulation situation we now see is, quite frankly, talking rubbish.

 

[Backache]

Skimming through this thread for the first time, one thing jumps out. As has been previously noted, those slating the WHS system are actually complaining about the behaviour of people, broadly speaking of dishonest players and under-active club committees, not about the handicapping system as such. Was there no moaning about folk manipulating handicaps previously? Was the term bandit first used in golfing circles in 2020? Did we never sit in the bar griping about known groups who travelled around regularly picking up prizes at fairly lucrative Tex Scrambles? Were there no annual handicap reviews, no peer reviews?

Having carried out an intensive analysis of handicapping in my own club pre-WHS, I can say with confidence that were was a huge systemic weakness in the UHS resulting in a substantial proportion of our players being seriously under handicapped, some of whose net differentials were up in the high teens. That was because the UHS system was hopelessly slow in responding to a decline in playing ability which was, of course, endemic in an ageing population and because in the CONGU annual recommendations for the annual review you would find the committee being recommended to increase with caution the handicap of one of those players recording double figure net differentials by one stroke. Imagine telling a member the we know they are returning scores 15 stokes above their handicap and we are going to rectify that by giving them a stroke which will help them return scores 14 above their handicap. Believe me, at worst it was that bad.

I ask those of you who are denigrating the WHS system to detail any systemic weakness in the WHS of that magnitude and to explain what aspects of the system (not the behaviour of people) you see as seriously flawed. And to answer one question: what is the difference between the previous supplementary scores and general play scores that has suddenly made it possible for the unscrupulous to manipulate their handicaps?.

A couple of things I would point out .
One is that an artificially low handicap is generally only penal to the individual not to the integrity of the competition.
2) Is that the WHS is enabling of cheating behaviour. It's a pretty well established fact that if a system is easier to cheat more cheating will be done. Honesty and integrity is not always absolute.

 

[clubchamp98]

A couple of things I would point out .
One is that an artificially low handicap is generally only penal to the individual not to the integrity of the competition.
2) Is that the WHS is enabling of cheating behaviour. It's a pretty well established fact that if a system is easier to cheat more cheating will be done. Honesty and integrity is not always absolute.

Exactly .
The app has caused the problem imo.
Under UHS putting in GP cards was rare now it’s positively encouraged this makes your HI go up much quicker.
So if you win a comp or put in a very good score anything you lose can be got back much quicker than under the old system.

There’s no system that suits all but this one is so easy to put a card in from the car park you don’t even need to play.

 

[Crazyface]

Exactly .
The app has caused the problem imo.
Under UHS putting in GP cards was rare now it’s positively encouraged this makes your HI go up much quicker.
So if you win a comp or put in a very good score anything you lose can be got back much quicker than under the old system.

There’s no system that suits all but this one is so easy to put a card in from the car park you don’t even need to play.

But you need someone to "attest" (hate this word), the score you put in. So they are complicit (like this word) in your actions.
I like WHS, and the idea of it, but every round, played with a partner or group, should be recorded. But how can WHS make sure this happens. They can't. I think, that the last system was the best, with one alteration. When someone put a round in that won anything, they should be put down to that handicap.

 

[Colin L]

Rubbish

What part of an entirely factual statement is rubbish?

And what about an answer to the question I put to the detractors: what difference is there between the supplementary score system of the UHS and the general play score of the WHS that creates a greater opportunity for cheating?

 

[Colin L]

Exactly .
The app has caused the problem imo.
Under UHS putting in GP cards was rare now it’s positively encouraged this makes your HI go up much quicker.
So if you win a comp or put in a very good score anything you lose can be got back much quicker than under the old system.

There’s no system that suits all but this one is so easy to put a card in from the car park you don’t even need to play.

I think all you are saying is that the WHS system is much quicker to react and hence your handicap, if honestly managed, is a more accurate reflection of your current playing ability. It would be hard to argue that that is not a good thing.

As to the ease of putting a score in from the car park, that still needs someone else to be complicit in the fraud and isn't different from writing out a fictitious score on a physical card, getting your mate to sign it and dropping it off in a box in the mode of transmission of the score. Both equally open to cheating.

Edited

 

[Crow]

What part of an entirely factual statement is rubbish?

And what about an answer to the question I put to the detractors: what difference is there between the supplementary score system of the UHS and the general play score of the WHS that creates a greater opportunity for cheating?

I think people might be confusing the effect of general play card inputting via Apps with the the simultaneous introduction of WHS.

The use of Apps has eased GP card input to a massive degree and makes it far easier for questionable cards to be submitted.

I'm sure Apps would have appeared even if UHS was still in operation and WHS didn't exist, so "manipulation" would still be easy.

 

[clubchamp98]

I think all you are saying is that the WHS system is much quicker to react and hence your handicap, if honestly managed, is a more accurate reflection of your current playing ability. It would be hard to argue that that is not a good thing.

As to the ease of putting a score in from the card park, that still needs someone else to be complicit in the fraud and differs from writing out a fictitious score on a physical card, getting your mate to sign it and dropping it off in a box in the mode of transmission of the score. Both equally open to cheating.

I agree with your first sentence.

But the fact you can do it on the app imho has led to players cheating the system.
Anything anonymous and people think they won’t get caught.
By anonymous I mean just in cyberspace and with so many cards going in unlikely to be spotted!


I can’t ever remember stories of people abusing the Supplementary cards .
Or maybe it was just not reported as much as now as you had to be at the club to put the card in the box.
But golfers cheat,, yes they do so do their mates.
This app just makes the job easier for them.

P.S. I am amazed by stories on here when golfers get caught cheating on the app to manipulate their caps just how lenient the punishment has been.!

 

[Backache]

The way supplementary cards were used locally was on a very occasional basis when you couldn't put in enough competition rounds.
Personally I don't use GP cards but for some it is the norm.

 

[Imurg]

If used honestly WHS is fine.
But when you (and a mate) can upload a score via the app without getting out of the car it can't be a good thing...
Done "properly" it shouldn't be too difficult to gradually increase your index - or decrease it - over a few months....throw in the odd half decent card to offset the poorer ones but still raise the index.
Under UHS it took far longer to go up a similar number of shots.
It's simply too easy to cheat the system and, as I said, done properly even a decent handicap committee is going to struggle to keep up...

 

[Teebs]

OP here

Handicap committee have cut the handicaps of those involved in the original post between 4.5 and 5 shots, effective immediately.

Unfortunately, they'll just require another 8 qualifying cards to get their handicap back up in 2025....

 

[Swango1980]

Skimming through this thread for the first time, one thing jumps out. As has been previously noted, those slating the WHS system are actually complaining about the behaviour of people, broadly speaking of dishonest players and under-active club committees, not about the handicapping system as such. Was there no moaning about folk manipulating handicaps previously? Was the term bandit first used in golfing circles in 2020? Did we never sit in the bar griping about known groups who travelled around regularly picking up prizes at fairly lucrative Tex Scrambles? Were there no annual handicap reviews, no peer reviews?

Having carried out an intensive analysis of handicapping in my own club pre-WHS, I can say with confidence that were was a huge systemic weakness in the UHS resulting in a substantial proportion of our players being seriously under handicapped, some of whose net differentials were up in the high teens. That was because the UHS system was hopelessly slow in responding to a decline in playing ability which was, of course, endemic in an ageing population and because in the CONGU annual recommendations for the annual review you would find the committee being recommended to increase with caution the handicap of one of those players recording double figure net differentials by one stroke. Imagine telling a member the we know they are returning scores 15 stokes above their handicap and we are going to rectify that by giving them a stroke which will help them return scores 14 above their handicap. Believe me, at worst it was that bad.

I ask those of you who are denigrating the WHS system to detail any systemic weakness in the WHS of that magnitude and to explain what aspects of the system (not the behaviour of people) you see as seriously flawed. And to answer one question: what is the difference between the previous supplementary scores and general play scores that has suddenly made it possible for the unscrupulous to manipulate their handicaps?.

Did your club not conduct the Continuous Review under UHS? Did you only conduct an Annual Review?

If a substantial proportion of your Club were under handicapped with UHS, I'd suggest the blame lies with your handicap committee

 

[rosecott]

OP here

Handicap committee have cut the handicaps of those involved in the original post between 4.5 and 5 shots, effective immediately.

Unfortunately, they'll just require another 8 qualifying cards to get their handicap back up in 2025....

Not so. Their Low Index will be reset, leading to a Soft Cap and the Hard Cap would be on the horizon.

 

[wjemather]

OP here

Handicap committee have cut the handicaps of those involved in the original post between 4.5 and 5 shots, effective immediately.

Unfortunately, they'll just require another 8 qualifying cards to get their handicap back up in 2025....

It's unlikely that applying reductions is the only action being taken.

 

[rulie]

It's unlikely that applying reductions is the only action being taken.

Freeze the hdcps at the new value for a year or so?

 

[clubchamp98]

OP here

Handicap committee have cut the handicaps of those involved in the original post between 4.5 and 5 shots, effective immediately.

Unfortunately, they'll just require another 8 qualifying cards to get their handicap back up in 2025....

For me that is the problem in a nutshell.

Cheating is bad.
But to get four golfers to collude together is shocking.
The punishment needs to be harsher, banned from comps for 12 months second offence banned for life.

 

[DickInShorts]

It’s not as easy to increase your handicap substantially as some on here think!
I speak from experience of an increasing handicap - due to age not desire .

Once you hit your soft cap - 3 shots above the low index in the previous 12 months you only go up by half the previous amount so you tend to then lag behind on increases. Trying to get back within the soft cap is not easy - unless you start playing much better - as it (in my case) continued to increase over the previous 12 months.

There has to be a lot of fiddling involved by these cheats on a fairly long term basis so I agree much tougher sanctions need to be employed.

I also agree that it might have made things easier to manipulate with the introduction of apps ( but not WHS) and clubs might also consider that those who win prizes - physical or as in Scotland vouchers - should be reminded of the laws of fraud and deception before being kicked out of their club - with all other local clubs advised unofficially

 

[Imurg]

It’s not as easy to increase your handicap substantially as some on here think!
I speak from experience of an increasing handicap - due to age not desire .

Once you hit your soft cap - 3 shots above the low index in the previous 12 months you only go up by half the previous amount so you tend to then lag behind on increases. Trying to get back within the soft cap is not easy - unless you start playing much better - as it (in my case) continued to increase over the previous 12 months.

Playing totally by the rules my index varied between 5.1 and 8.9 this year.....
Off our White tees it equates to a 5 shot difference on the course...at that level that's a massive difference
If I'd have been inclined to I could have put more poor scores in and got the index to 10.1.....13 shots on the course - a difference of 7 from my low index CH.
If that's not substantial I don't know what is....
Relatively easy to do and pretty hard to prove it's anything other than a loss of form..

 

[wjemather]

Freeze the hdcps at the new value for a year or so?

Freezing the HI is certainly an option, but education is essential - just the knowledge that they are being closely monitored is going to have an effect on future behaviour. There are other things the committee might consider, such as placing restrictions or limits on GP scores if they are being abused, and when there is a group, they might want to ban them from certifying each others scores and/or split them up in competitions.