Handicap manipulation - how to address

[wjemather]

It depends on where the course is located, the prevailing weather type, nature of the ground, hillside, links, parkland .....

...the knowledge of the committee.

 

[Colin L]

Under the old system players declining in ability seems to be the main reason why we needed a change.

Why not just address that problem within the system we had.

We have thrown the baby out with the bath water and just created a cheats charter.
No Committee can sanction anyone whose clever enough to use the system for manipulating their handicap.

Are you forgetting the primary purpose in creating a world handicap system was to crearte a world handicap system? Getting a change from the serious flaws of the 0.1 ratcheting was a useful outcome of that but hardly a driving force for change. The CONGU UHS represented a very small part of a golfing world in which most other countries had systems much closer to the final product than ours. One of the constituent countries of CONGU may be known as "the home of golf" but we play in a small corner of the globe. Are you seriously suggesting that we should have stuck to the old system and been alone in the world?

 

[Swango1980]

But for 365 days a year ????? Don't you suspend handicaps over a period of time in winter ?

Depends on the Club.

To be fair, our course has had day closures recently because of frost and flooding. But, even though we have a course prone to flooding, it is rarely closed. We certainly don't suspect handicaps over the winter. Scores sometimes can't get submitted if we are doing Major works on course, or if we are on too many temp greens due to flooding. But, we installed a new set of forward blue tees for winter golf, with measured Ratings, so that scores can still be submitted all year round as much as possible.

Yes, some clubs do seem to suspend scores being submitted over winter (from what I've heard in here), but it is not exactly recommended under the Rules of Handicapping.

So, perhaps not 365 days a year. But, assuming no major works on the course I'd imagine over 300 days a year is still possible. And from March to October/November, pretty much looking at 7 days a week. So, still plenty of opportunities to get those scores in.

 

[Colin L]

But, as soon as someone loses a match and suggests the opponent's handicap was too high, they are accused of sour grapes (which, of course, may often be true), and that the higher handicapper just had a good day, and the loser didn't

A player's handicap isn't reviewed on the basis of one tie won but on a pattern of winning ties and competitions and taking into account matters like who they were defeating and by how much.

 

[D-S]

But for 365 days a year ????? Don't you suspend handicaps over a period of time in winter ?

Quite a few courses will be 365 days. I would guess players can submit cards over 340 days a year at our course. It’s parkland in Bristol. The only days that you can’t will be after unusually heavy prolonged rain or frost/snow but that’s increasingly rare.
However if our course was rated for winter conditions my guess it would be around 4 shots higher. Due to lack of roll and less carry in colder conditions.

 

[Swango1980]

A player's handicap isn't reviewed on the basis of one tie won but on a pattern of winning ties and competitions and taking into account matters like who they were defeating and by how much.

True. But, if they win one match play competition, I doubt that is grounds enough to give them an extra handicap cut, unless they've battered every opponent? Somebody has to win it after all. If they happen to win 2 match play competitions, it maybe gains more attention, but is it still enough? I reckon they'd have to do well in multiple match play competitions before it is recognized a player's handicap is too high (and if it is 4BBB, often hard to tell which player is doing the damage). That could take several seasons before that pattern is identified. Certainly at the clubs I've been a member of, as we only have a single match play comp each winter and each summer. Also, even bandits don't win the title in every match play tournament, as even if their handicap is 3 or 4 shots too high, we can all still go out and have many days where we shoot much worse than that above our ability.

 

[AussieKB]

True. But, if they win one match play competition, I doubt that is grounds enough to give them an extra handicap cut, unless they've battered every opponent? Somebody has to win it after all. If they happen to win 2 match play competitions, it maybe gains more attention, but is it still enough? I reckon they'd have to do well in multiple match play competitions before it is recognized a player's handicap is too high (and if it is 4BBB, often hard to tell which player is doing the damage). That could take several seasons before that pattern is identified. Certainly at the clubs I've been a member of, as we only have a single match play comp each winter and each summer. Also, even bandits don't win the title in every match play tournament, as even if their handicap is 3 or 4 shots too high, we can all still go out and have many days where we shoot much worse than that above our ability.

Or they meet up with another Bandit

 

[clubchamp98]

Are you forgetting the primary purpose in creating a world handicap system was to crearte a world handicap system? Getting a change from the serious flaws of the 0.1 ratcheting was a useful outcome of that but hardly a driving force for change. The CONGU UHS represented a very small part of a golfing world in which most other countries had systems much closer to the final product than ours. One of the constituent countries of CONGU may be known as "the home of golf" but we play in a small corner of the globe. Are you seriously suggesting that we should have stuck to the old system and been alone in the world?

So we go to a cheats charter just to be like everyone else?
That’s mad.

 

[jim8flog]

But for 365 days a year ????? Don't you suspend handicaps over a period of time in winter ?

It really depends on where you play in the UK and club managers/committees attitude, some of them never even accepted variable SS which was designed to allow for bad weather conditions.

Where I play in the South West of England we run comps all year round and do not have an inactive season.

 

[Swango1980]

Are you forgetting the primary purpose in creating a world handicap system was to crearte a world handicap system? Getting a change from the serious flaws of the 0.1 ratcheting was a useful outcome of that but hardly a driving force for change. The CONGU UHS represented a very small part of a golfing world in which most other countries had systems much closer to the final product than ours. One of the constituent countries of CONGU may be known as "the home of golf" but we play in a small corner of the globe. Are you seriously suggesting that we should have stuck to the old system and been alone in the world?

On that point alone, would it really matter? We had done things our way for many years before WHS. Did this cause you serious disadvantages? Were you aware of many GB&I golfers complaining, and giving up the game because of it? Was the UK missing out on major economic trade deals and suffering from a major depression because we did things differently?

From my perspective at the time, I could not have cared less what any other country in the world did. I enjoyed golf, and I didn't see any major flaws with handicapping that WHS has solved. The Continuous Review was a relatively new addition, and added another flag, this time to try and encourage handicap committees to increase handicaps of golfers who they believe really are rapidly declining in ability. It gave the Committee the chance to really look deeper into those golfers scoring, and with some knowledge on the golfers themselves, make a measured decision either way. That was an approach I quite liked.

For me, the only benefit WHS has over the previous system is the use of Slope. This is because it is fair to say higher handicappers don't deserve to get a set amount of shots on low handicappers regardless of the course they play. Some courses they may need more, other courses they should get less. But, I think there is nothing else in WHS that I think is an improvement. And, if the main reason to move to WHS was simply because everyone else in the world is, I'm not convinced that is a great reason at all.

 

[Colin L]

So we go to a cheats charter just to be like everyone else?
That’s mad.

Your question belongs to the "have you stopped beating your wife yet" category and I'm not quite daft enough (yet) to answer it.

 

[rulefan]

Getting a change from the serious flaws of the 0.1 ratcheting was a useful outcome of that but hardly a driving force for change.

But I would suggest Slope was.

 

[rulefan]

So we go to a cheats charter just to be like everyone else?
That’s mad.

I would suggest that the number of US players visiting Ireland and Scotland generate a fair income to those members of CONGU.

 

[D-S]

I would suggest that the number of US players visiting Ireland and Scotland generate a fair income to those members of CONGU.

But if the courses have a Slope and CR they could still out rounds in for handicap under their system, irrespective of what system the locals were playing under. It also didn’t stop them coming and playing pre WHS even when the courses were unrated.

 

[clubchamp98]

I would suggest that the number of US players visiting Ireland and Scotland generate a fair income to those members of CONGU.

So we adopted WHS for economic reasons.???

That’s a new one .

 

[rulefan]

But if the courses have a Slope and CR they could still out rounds in for handicap under their system, irrespective of what system the locals were playing under. It also didn’t stop them coming and playing pre WHS even when the courses were unrated.

All of the courses were in fact rated for CR and BR. But they couldn't play in any competitions.

 

[rulefan]

So we adopted WHS for economic reasons.???

That’s a new one .

Don't be silly.

But what real evidence (other than anecdotal) do you have for suggesting it is a "cheats charter" ?

 

[Colin L]

So we adopted WHS for economic reasons.???

That’s a new one .

Twisting what has been said is certainly not a new one.

We were talking about "useful outcomes" not the reasons for developing the WHS.

Anyway, who is the "we" you're referring to? All of the CONGU countries or just England?

 

[Dunesman]

Under the old system players declining in ability seems to be the main reason why we needed a change.

Why not just address that problem within the system we had.

We have thrown the baby out with the bath water and just created a cheats charter.
No Committee can sanction anyone whose clever enough to use the system for manipulating their handicap.

Declining ability was not mentioned at all to my knowledge. The headline reason was portability. (as we all know, you couldnt go into a clubhouse bar without hearing someone whine about how bust the handicap system was because they couldnt compare their handical to someone in the US. So many golfers quit thr game over the years for that very reason. Sigh...).


Even if it were a reason, for all the talk of WHS just needing vigilant committees to scrutinise GP cards and police cheats, all that would have been needed was an annual review to detect and manually correct those whose form was declining. With the implementation of a handicap review algorithm to flag such players to the committee to consider the appropriate correction. Oh wait....

 

[Dunesman]

Are you forgetting the primary purpose in creating a world handicap system was to crearte a world handicap system? Getting a change from the serious flaws of the 0.1 ratcheting was a useful outcome of that but hardly a driving force for change. The CONGU UHS represented a very small part of a golfing world in which most other countries had systems much closer to the final product than ours. One of the constituent countries of CONGU may be known as "the home of golf" but we play in a small corner of the globe. Are you seriously suggesting that we should have stuck to the old system and been alone in the world?

At the moment, it is hard to make a case for the new system being an improvement. A case is being made that it is a deterioration.