rulefan
Tour Winner
So what is 'form'?
Handicap manipulation - how to address
- Thread starter Teebs
- Start date
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
Temporary
Not sure what you call 20 HI. I have been 18-20 HI even under the old system for at least 10 years. My form has been unchanged in those 10 years.
10 variance is within the norm for no change in form. Pros can score 65 one day and 75 the next. But their form hasnt changed between one day and the next. WHS is trying to chase normal score variations day to day which it cannot do. I score 90 today. Fine, a reasonably good day for me. I score 100 tomorrow. Not uncommon either. But my form, golfing skill, need for number of handicap shot if playing a competition has NOT changed. I just had a bad day. But am the same golfer. It might be the 90 again the next day. The odds havent changed.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
Maybe we need a Class handicap system!Temporary
wjemather
Well-known member
Where did you get this nonsense from?
Slab
Occasional Tour Caddy
I guess rulefan will make his own reply but as a comment;
Not sure I follow. Why would a “bad day” have any effect on how many shots you get? Unless & until the frequency of your bad days begin to outweigh your good days (i.e something i'd happily describe as a change in your form) wouldn't your shots remain pretty static, with little or no change
Certainly not enough change to mean WHS is unfit for purpose/broken etc etc
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
That's the saying...Maybe we need a Class handicap system!
Form is how you're playing now and in the last few rounds
Class is how you play over a length of time..
A few months ago my HI was 5.8...I'd been within 0.7 either way for the previous few months
Then came a period of about 3 months where my ability took a holiday and I was constantly mid 80s.....HI went to 8.9
Couldn't do a thing right..
Then, slowly, things improved and within 6 weeks I was back to 5.8.....
My "class" is between 5.5 and 6.5 - been hovering around the for a couple of years now..
My "form" during those 3 months was reflected by the increase in HI.......
Giving me 7 shots when the best I could realistically score was double that - I wouldn't have bothered entering comps.
But, because the HI gave me extra it was worth entering even though I didn't win anything - even when the HI started to fall
rulefan
Tour Winner
Why do you equate your best scores with your 'form'?
With a HI of 20 and commonly scoring 10 worse, suggests your 'form' is not 20. If you can't hit 20ish regularly it can't be 'form'. Hitting 20 is simply 'your best'. The UHS ratchet did just that.
Slab
Occasional Tour Caddy
About a month ago I posted :
New mail just now says we're to revert to original method of submitting GP cards, effective today
New mail just now says we're to revert to original method of submitting GP cards, effective today
The Squirrel
Well-known member
Even 10 shots actually seems like not much variance at all. Interesting that it’s perceived as high. If Rory can go 79-65 on consecutive days at The Open then the rest of us (who are all hackers in comparison so MUCH less consistent) might reasonably be expected to have a lot greater variation than that.
Is part of the perceived problem that some golfers think that players should not deviate all that far from their declared handicap and don’t expect variation? A deviation of 10 shots in either direction from a handicap would be entirely normal and unremarkable in modest level amateur golf (in fact you’d expect it and more within a large field) yet seems to be perceived as a unicorn or automatically suspicious event in some of the discussions here…
I dont.
My form is numberless. Although I think we are better avoiding debates on the precise definition of 'form', especially when it seems unable to divorce itself, due to their use in quite a trite, cliched and ultimately meaningless saying, from the word class.
Suffice to say, I refer to my standard of golf. It doesnt change. Nor has it for years. i.e. my skill at the game, my range of scores, and the number of shots I need to fairly play in club competitions.
Handicaps need some form closed loop correction according to scores submitted. Plus or minus a shot governed by both numbers of scores, and time, for no change in performance seems tolerable and probably as good as we can get.
But WHS, especially if people are putting numerous GP scores, introduces a spurious disturbance, provoking faster and bigger handicap variations. These variations suggest responsiveness, and accurate correction of HI to the golfers current performance level. But golf scores are naturally erratic, and the correction is out of proportion to the deviation. A much more highly damped correction, especially in the upward (UHS recognised this) direction.
rulie
Head Pro
The handicap system that I've played under (for my entire 60 years of play) has required me to enter all scores, so sometimes there have been more than 100 over our 8 month season. Some have been in competitions, the majority not (but majority are being played while competing against other groups - what some may call a roll-up, where best score is important). Handicap changes of a stroke (or two) over the season are just what they are - adjustments that reflect my current play. We don't seem to have the same amount of worry/angst about those changes as others do?
Last edited:
Colin L
Tour Winner
I think I've got it. In a sport where the only meaningful measure of winning is numerical, (see Rules 3.2a and 3.3a) we are to understand that form is the key but is numberless. And the handicap system should be based on self-assessment of form because one player believes his form has not changed in years but advises that we shouldn't try to define what it means.
In the WHS, 12 out of 20 scores are at any one time excluded from the HI calculation; of the 8 out of 20 that are left it is not the lowest that governs the handicap index but the mean of the 8; any one counting score has a weighting of one eighth ; the day in the sun score could trigger an exceptional score response; a potentially overly rapid increase is mitigated by a capping procedure; a handicap index might change by seven or eight 0.1s before. it triggers a 1 stroke difference in handicap.
That doesn't, it seems. do enough smoothing out of anomalies?
Last edited:
Exactly, it doesnt.
I presume the authorities, or even club stats guys with access to the raw data could do it relatively easily, and model the handicap variation for no change in golf performance over a period of 50 or 100 rounds, for both old and new systems.
Take 'model' 0,10,20,30 handicappers. What is their range and distribution of scores. And develop their handicaps accorindingly with both systems.
I wonder what would be the lowest and highest handicap that each player would hit under both systems for exactly the same scores. The interesting points being what is the gap between each player, and, the span of each player under each.
Has the USGA or R&A published such or similar analysis does anyone know ?
Colin L
Tour Winner
You may be missing the point.
I am not arguing that form does not drift up and down for us. But even though form does not remain static, the question is still valid : what is the handicap variation for the base case of no form variation ?
That is a fundamental test of the system. Sure, on top of that, we have the nature of golf, human beings, how often we play or practice, etc.
If the system, with NO form change, is fundamentally unstable or erratic, and thus not refecting that very no change in form, then it is flawed, and stands no chance whatsoever of being meaningful and consistent when we then introduce an over lay of varying form, or gradual improvement as some one take to the game or practices, or declines through age or whatever reason.
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
I think you're taking this whole thing far too seriously.....
Just get out and play for the love of playing...
Just get out and play for the love of playing...
Crow
Crow Person
I dare anyone to read every single post in this thread from start finish.
In fact it could be used as an effective punishment for minor offenders.
In fact it could be used as an effective punishment for minor offenders.
Swinglowandslow
Well-known member
As much as I have enjoyed the one or two occasions that I have won a club’s senior stableford, I must say I play this game without too much care of what my handicap might be.
It seems the fussing and parameter paraphernalia of determining the WHS handicaps, 85 % of this and 90% of that or whatever etc, is a fly in the car nuisance for most of the guys I play amongst. - compared with what it used to be like.
Ok, if you are seriously into high level comps, then maybe … it is required to be as it is now as opposed to the old system, but I play the game for the joy of hitting the ball the best way I can, of trying to equal or beat the par of each hole.
Dunno. ..Is mine a minority view?
It seems the fussing and parameter paraphernalia of determining the WHS handicaps, 85 % of this and 90% of that or whatever etc, is a fly in the car nuisance for most of the guys I play amongst. - compared with what it used to be like.
Ok, if you are seriously into high level comps, then maybe … it is required to be as it is now as opposed to the old system, but I play the game for the joy of hitting the ball the best way I can, of trying to equal or beat the par of each hole.
Dunno. ..Is mine a minority view?
Slab
Occasional Tour Caddy
Does anyone have inside info on the rumoured 'updates' to WHS due in late March early April this year?
