Handicap manipulation - how to address

[wjemather]

Given you are clearly involved with WHS do you think you can maintain an objective viewpoint of its level of success? Secondly, would you be personally affected should it be reversed? Thirdly, can you help to fix it?

My only involvement is as a club & county volunteer, and a former (not too long ago, and still very close to) plus-handicap golfer.

 

[doublebogey7]

Yes they used data from the results submitted into EG for Hc purposes which was single comps , it’s the same when they changed the HC allowances for 4BBB to 90%

Algorithms using singles data

You know that or are you merely speculating.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

You know that or are you merely speculating.

It’s what they stated in calls pre WHS implementation

 

[rulefan]

There are other solutions.

Such as?

 

[Thintowin]

All this data analysis. All of these so-called statistical experts. Consequently the best they could come up with was mean average of best 8 from last 20.

They call it a form-based formula to cover up the inadequacy.

How much money was ploughed into this?

 

[jim8flog]

If someone plays off 5 at 63 will he still be capable of playing off 5 at 73? (asking for a 'friend').

Definitely not this one.
That is not referring to the friend

Did not even make it to 70 before losing the single figure handicap.

 

[PaulMdj]

Definitely not this one.
That is not referring to the friend

Did not even make it to 70 before losing the single figure handicap.

Just remember though, your still, apparently, capable of being off single figures.

 

[jim8flog]

Just remember though, your still, apparently, capable of being off single figures.

Yep for 9 holes . Sadly lately it is either of the 2 nines not both of them (that is even if I make it to a full 9 on the back 9).

 

[Thintowin]

Such as?

The most obvious one is the tried and tested UHS algorithm.

There are various tweaks that could have been done to move it more towards being fairer, if that's actually needed, on higher handicaps. I guess the increment upwards could have been the issue there so either make the buffer zone wider at lower categories or increase the increment for higher ones.

Taking the current WHS as a starting point I could suggest any number of improvements to the basic mean of 8 calculation that is so obviously too simplistic.

 

[Colin L]

The most obvious one is the tried and tested UHS algorithm.

There are various tweaks that could have been done to move it more towards being fairer, if that's actually needed, on higher handicaps. I guess the increment upwards could have been the issue there so either make the buffer zone wider at lower categories or increase the increment for higher ones.

Taking the current WHS as a starting point I could suggest any number of improvements to the basic mean of 8 calculation that is so obviously too simplistic.

Perhaps you could kindly take the trouble to explain what may not be so obvious to others. Otherwise, what with people being people, folk might think that you can't.

 

[rulefan]

Taking the current WHS as a starting point I could suggest any number of improvements to the basic mean of 8 calculation that is so obviously too simplistic.

Can you describe what some of these improvements might be.

 

[Thintowin]

Perhaps you could kindly take the trouble to explain what may not be so obvious to others. Otherwise, what with people being people, folk might think that you can't.

I have done so before.

Here's a simple example.

Take two players.

Player A practises a lot and regularly shoots low 80s and his 8 cards are from 78 and 82. Player B is actually a better ball striker but doesn't practise. He plays once a fortnight and his 8 cards are between 75 and 90.

Let's say CR is 73 for example.

Player A is off 7ish and is likely to have a best score of 38 points.

Player B is off 10ish but can get 43 points when his talent turns up.

 

[wjemather]

I have done so before.

Here's a simple example.

Take two players.

Player A practises a lot and regularly shoots low 80s and his 8 cards are from 78 and 82. Player B is actually a better ball striker but doesn't practise. He plays once a fortnight and his 8 cards are between 75 and 90.

Let's say CR is 73 for example.

Player A is off 7ish and is likely to have a best score of 38 points.

Player B is off 10ish but can get 43 points when his talent turns up.

Both are equally likely to get ~36 points, and head-to-head Player A will probably win more often.

So, how many strokes do you want to take off Player B? Or, in other words, how big an advantage do you want to give Player A?

 

[Neilds]

I have done so before.

Here's a simple example.

Take two players.

Player A practises a lot and regularly shoots low 80s and his 8 cards are from 78 and 82. Player B is actually a better ball striker but doesn't practise. He plays once a fortnight and his 8 cards are between 75 and 90.

Let's say CR is 73 for example.

Player A is off 7ish and is likely to have a best score of 38 points.

Player B is off 10ish but can get 43 points when his talent turns up.

So, sometimes player A wins, and sometimes Player B wins - so what?

 

[D-S]

I have done so before.

Here's a simple example.

Take two players.

Player A practises a lot and regularly shoots low 80s and his 8 cards are from 78 and 82. Player B is actually a better ball striker but doesn't practise. He plays once a fortnight and his 8 cards are between 75 and 90.

Let's say CR is 73 for example.

Player A is off 7ish and is likely to have a best score of 38 points.

Player B is off 10ish but can get 43 points when his talent turns up.

And your point is?

 

[GreiginFife]

Show me a system that is fool proof and I’ll show you human avarice pull it apart.

 

[nickjdavis]

I have done so before.

Here's a simple example.

Take two players.

Player A practises a lot and regularly shoots low 80s and his 8 cards are from 78 and 82. Player B is actually a better ball striker but doesn't practise. He plays once a fortnight and his 8 cards are between 75 and 90.

Let's say CR is 73 for example.

Player A is off 7ish and is likely to have a best score of 38 points.

Player B is off 10ish but can get 43 points when his talent turns up.

Unfortunately this is highly unlikely unless his scoring record was not fully developed. What you are effectively saying is that this so called 10 handicapper has 8 cards between 75 and 90....and a further 12 that are all higher than 90. Such players will be an absolute rarity....so rare in fact that they would be shot, stuffed, mounted, and put in a museum.

 

[doublebogey7]

Both are equally likely to get ~36 points, and head-to-head Player A will probably win more often.

So, how many strokes do you want to take off Player B? Or, in other words, how big an advantage do you want to give Player A?

Exactly this, whatever handicap system you come up with, there will have to be a trade off between likely best score and average score across the handicap ranges.

 

[Thintowin]

I knew giving a bone on here was a bad idea but I did it anyway. My example is simplified to make a point. I would hope a few can see that if others simply want to pour scorn on it.

You might hope that 8 from 20 is fair but it's not when golfers habits are not the same.

 

[nickjdavis]

Unfortunately this is highly unlikely unless his scoring record was not fully developed. What you are effectively saying is that this so called 10 handicapper has 8 cards between 75 and 90....and a further 12 that are all higher than 90. Such players will be an absolute rarity....so rare in fact that they would be shot, stuffed, mounted, and put in a museum.

Here is an example of the best 8 differentials scored by 34 players at my club...all players play regularly in comps and have fully developed records with 20 scores at least in 2024...none of them have more than 2 GP scores in their best 8 9and those that do will be players at the upper end of the handicap index range).

As can be seen, none of them have best 8's where the worst scores vary wildly and their worst score is significantly higher than their index. These players were not hand picked to prove a point, they were random selections, at roughly even spaced handicap indexes, of players who I know play regularly and have a high number of comp cards in their record. The whole point of taking 8 from 20 is that it removes the vast majority of statistical outliers (like a 10 handicapper having a 90 as part of their best 8 scores).

The biggest differentials between the worst of the 8 scores and the Handicap index is 4.1 (for JB, the 34.4 index player) and 3.8 (for AB, the 24.4 player).