Handicap manipulation - how to address

[PaulMdj]

You only have 3 golfers who are 5 or below?

No, we have 3 off +, the lowest being +4 and if those three entered the gross comp, no one else would bother, they’d enter the Nett comp and have a better chance at the Div prize.

 

[Swango1980]

I'd say pretty much all the lowest handicappers at my club still play in club competitions through most of the year. Sure, they may still moan when higher handicappers win, and they may or may not have a point in specific circumstances. But, they haven't stopped playing club competitions.

However, at this time of year, if the course is forced onto temporary greens, then the low handicappers are obviously hammered and rightly feel hard done by in terms of being able to compete. Two main reasons for that. Firstly, any advantage low handicappers have in the short game is largely diluted when you are playing on frosty / uneven winter greens with bucket holes. Secondly, the course is miles shorter. If the course could be measured, the Slope would be significantly lower and thus higher handicappers would get relatively less shots. But, that can't be done, so we just compete assuming we are on a full course. That is highlighted most on our Stroke Index 5 hole that is a 540 yard Par 5. That becomes a 180 yard par 3, and most low golfers will be giving away a shot (if match play).

The one area where I do see a lot of low handicappers not bother with is the winter 4BBB league. Most of them still play a lot through the winter, but that is a competition they have no desire to play in. They will play in the summer knockouts though, when we are on the full measured course all the time.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

You're absolutely right, I don't know the exact figures.
But if a club has no low golfers, there would be no need for a gross comp.
The more low golfers there are, I believe the more popular a gross comp would be.

Because higher players would complain about paying for a gross prize
And low players would complain about paying towards a nett prize
And at the end of the day, the overall winner would the best nett.

I think everyone knows I mean 5 or less

What if the person who gets the highest gross also has the highest net

So having a small gross prize of say £10 would have all those high handicappers complaining

 

[bobmac]

I'm just repeating myself now (for 14 years apparently) so I'll give it a rest.
At least I tried to answer the question in the OP

 

[PaulMdj]

You're absolutely right, I don't know the exact figures.
But if a club has no low golfers, there would be no need for a gross comp.
The more low golfers there are, I believe the more popular a gross comp would be.

Because higher players would complain about paying for a gross prize
And low players would complain about paying towards a nett prize
And at the end of the day, the overall winner would the best nett.

I think everyone knows I mean 5 or less

So the Club holds a Ind Stoke Comp on a saturday (let’s call it the GM Forum Cup),18 holes, PH 95% of HI.

We get 100 entries, £2.00 comp fee, £1.50 2’s pot.

Winner is best Nett Score, prize fund breakdown:
60% to winnings, 40% Captains Fund.

£120 broke down as follows:

3 Divisions

Winner - £50.00
Other 2 Div winners - £25.00
Best Gross - £20.00

Everybody has paid same entry fee, but I’d argue Div 1 guys have 2 chances of a prize.

If you remove Best Gross that £20 could be split between top 3.

You then suggest we add a Best Gross and ask those wishing to play in it to pay more. How much more? What if less than 10 enter?

 

[D-S]

I wonder if some of posters on here are actually playing at privately owned courses. What I mean is that the members themselves don't own the club. Many of those courses are stepping stones for golfers getting started and are unlikely to have a representative percentage of low handicappers.

Just so you know where my experience comes from - I am a member of a member-owned club. I deal with clubs that are member owned, proprietary both part of a group and private, some with large memberships 2,000 plus, some with 50 and everything in between - some are nearly pure play and play some very restrictive.

 

[Swango1980]

What if the person who gets the highest gross also has the highest net

So having a small gross prize of say £10 would have all those high handicappers complaining

I suspect that person will simply take little break from golf and try and refocus. Maybe just put it down to a bad weekend.

Whereas the person with the lowest gross and lowest nett may find it quite lucrative.

 

[clubchamp98]

Are any of these low guys also anyone of those low guys maintaining a vanity handicap to ensure entry in Opens were they really aren’t good enough?

I have played every comp on a Saturday for the last 15 yrs since I joined my present club .
So my handicap is comp based . No GP cards
As for opens ? It’s a day out now.

Can’t speak for others but I don’t personally know any vanity cap players .

 

[clubchamp98]

Did these comms include explaining low low indexes are indeed now at a disadvantage in competition with higher handicappers, and that that is a good development and benefit of WHS ?

If that had been communicated before WHS I firmly believe it would not have got through in its present form.

 

[PaulMdj]

I have played every comp on a Saturday for the last 15 yrs since I joined my present club .
So my handicap is comp based . No GP cards
As for opens ? It’s a day out now.

Can’t speak for others but I don’t personally know any vanity cap players .

Surely if these “low guys” have started their own sweep and are not playing Comps they aren’t putting cards in and could be seen to be playing off an incorrect handicap? Unless they are putting GP cards in of course.

 

[rulie]

Imo, this thread is hopeless, it's just a gripe session (similar to a Four Yorkshiremen sketch).
The title is "Handicap Manipulation - how to address".
Manipulation is done by people -bandits/cheats/sandbaggers, whatever you want to call them. The handicap system contains procedures and processes to address manipulation. The respective committees (handicap, competition, organizing) and the players participating in the comps need to "man up" and use the processes and procedures to weed out the manipulators. Otherwise, behaviours will not change.

 

[clubchamp98]

Surely if these “low guys” have started their own sweep and are not playing Comps they aren’t putting cards in and could be seen to be playing off an incorrect handicap? Unless they are putting GP cards in of course.

They do put their cards in as GP cards in summer as the comp closes at 4pm they have time.
But winter they have to play in the comp because if they don’t they don’t get a tee time.
They still have a £5 sweep best gross but it costs them £3.50 for the comp and twos as well.
I don’t play with them as it’s very difficult to beat a +3 capper even on his off day he’ll still shoot level par.

 

[doublebogey7]

Then I'd like to know what percentage of members who have served on committee at golf clubs are, or have been, single figures.

Don't know about nationwide, but at my club all our handicap committee play off single figures as do half of our board. Again at county level about half the board are off single figures and all have been memeb ers of golf clubs for over 20 years. I'll wager that is typical of county and national officials, possibly not so at clubs though.

 

[Swango1980]

Imo, this thread is hopeless, it's just a gripe session (similar to a Four Yorkshiremen sketch).
The title is "Handicap Manipulation - how to address".
Manipulation is done by people -bandits/cheats/sandbaggers, whatever you want to call them. The handicap system contains procedures and processes to address manipulation. The respective committees (handicap, competition, organizing) and the players participating in the comps need to "man up" and use the processes and procedures to weed out the manipulators. Otherwise, behaviours will not change.

I don't think that is the ideal solution though, is it? Unless you think most Committees are not manning up?

As people have pointed out, handicap manipulation is often not blatant, that can be easily identified by Committee and dealt with. More often, it is simply many golfers handing in many scores, many inconsistent scores. Most of these are just natural inconsistent scoring, some may be done more intentionally.

Given handicaps can now move upwards much more quickly, I think the main concern is that it is impossible for Committees to identify when this has been done with intent, as opposed to just poor form. Thus, can the system be improved to help Committees identify unusual scoring patterns?

 

[doublebogey7]

Just under 30% of UK male golfers are single figures
So if your club has 400 members and only 3% are Cat I, that still 12 golfers

Where on earth did you get that from. My HI is 9.2% and according to My EG I am in the top 13% of golfers, I very much doubt handicaps from 9.3 to 9.9 make up 17%.

 

[doublebogey7]

Did these comms include explaining low low indexes are indeed now at a disadvantage in competition with higher handicappers, and that that is a good development and benefit of WHS ?

Erm, why would they when that is not the case as has been explained numorous times.

 

[D-S]

Where on earth did you get that from. My HI is 9.2% and according to My EG I am in the top 13% of golfers, I very much doubt handicaps from 9.3 to 9.9 make up 17%.

All the numbers that I have seen is that single figure golfers are between 10am 15% of the UK male golfing population.

 

[rulie]

I don't think that is the ideal solution though, is it? Unless you think most Committees are not manning up?

As people have pointed out, handicap manipulation is often not blatant, that can be easily identified by Committee and dealt with. More often, it is simply many golfers handing in many scores, many inconsistent scores. Most of these are just natural inconsistent scoring, some may be done more intentionally.

Given handicaps can now move upwards much more quickly, I think the main concern is that it is impossible for Committees to identify when this has been done with intent, as opposed to just poor form. Thus, can the system be improved to help Committees identify unusual scoring patterns?

Seems like most of the griping done on this thread is about the scoring done by comp winners. Perhaps the committees should start with checking those players' scoring records on a regular basis. Other participants can also identify "the usual suspects".
Griping on an internet forum solves nothing.

 

[Colin L]

We're into the second half century of this thread. Time for a break and an appropriate song. I hope you remember it from your childhood or have it revived it in parenthood. All together now:

The wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round, round and round.
The wheels on the bus go round and round,
All day long ................................... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[Thintowin]

We're into the second half century of this thread. Time for a break and an appropriate song. I hope you remember it from your childhood or have it revived it in parenthood. All together now:

The wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round, round and round.
The wheels on the bus go round and round,
All day long ................................... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Millennium, isn't that what you meant?

I should learn not to read like quite a few posters on here.

I could be wrong, I've forgotten how to write 1, 1000, 51, 6 and 500 in Roman numerals.

IM LIVID