Handicap manipulation - how to address

Surely we have to wait until the WHS has settled
It will never settle. It's a nonsense of a system. Even the outgoing Slumbers admits it is not right but he's more concerned about your handicap being representative when you pop to France for a round. Load of ....
 
Below 10, golfers have a decreasing reduction in their win chances the better they get. Above 15, they have an increasing chance of winning. The balance point seems about 14, although I am sure the maths behing WHS can define this with precision but I have not seen one published.
Be honest, you just plucked some numbers out of thin air without any substantial data to back them up.
 
15 is about average for men.
It might be average but there is a massive gap in ability between a scratch golfer and a 15 hcp. There is much less of a difference in ability comparing a 15 and 30 handicap player. That’s my opinion anyway. The handicap system is not a linear scale.
 
It will never settle. It's a nonsense of a system. Even the outgoing Slumbers admits it is not right but he's more concerned about your handicap being representative when you pop to France for a round. Load of ....
With only subtle differences, you've said the same thing about a dozen times now. Not once have you given any reasoning or identified anything specific that others can discuss.

And I suggest you listen to what Martin Slumbers actually said (or read a transcript), because you haven't accurately reflected his words here.
 
What Martin Slumbers has actually said:

"If I looked at pre-WHS in the UK, using our CONGU system, the average number of cards submitted was three a year per golfer. It was extremely difficult to go up or down in that system, so the handicap really wasn’t a reflection of your playing ability. But more importantly, this is a global game, not a local game, and it always seemed nonsensical that you don’t have a handicap in France which is equivalent to a handicap in Australia.

We are three years into the new WHS. We invited 40 of our most significant golfing affiliates to St Andrews last week and 37 turned up. They had a very good and extensive discussion around real feedback, not anecdotal feedback, from around the world. I am sure – and I know – that will lead to ways in which we can improve it."




"I know there are some concerns in GB&I with the adequacy of General Play scores, but I’m a huge advocate of General Play scores," said Slumbers. "I think there should be more being put in."

"I’ve had a number of discussions with organisations in GB&I who have reservations about them and I disagree. A lot of the reservations are around a small number of individuals who are putting in scores either too low or too high, and we should be trying to address that rather than impacting everybody.

"I think getting more scores into our handicap records on a consistent basis would make the WHS stronger. I think it’s about culture. If you look at Australia – the average number of scores put in is 50 a year. They play at least once a week. We need time for our culture to evolve to a point where we are doing similar."

 
What Martin Slumbers has actually said:

"If I looked at pre-WHS in the UK, using our CONGU system, the average number of cards submitted was three a year per golfer. It was extremely difficult to go up or down in that system, so the handicap really wasn’t a reflection of your playing ability. But more importantly, this is a global game, not a local game, and it always seemed nonsensical that you don’t have a handicap in France which is equivalent to a handicap in Australia.

We are three years into the new WHS. We invited 40 of our most significant golfing affiliates to St Andrews last week and 37 turned up. They had a very good and extensive discussion around real feedback, not anecdotal feedback, from around the world. I am sure – and I know – that will lead to ways in which we can improve it."




"I know there are some concerns in GB&I with the adequacy of General Play scores, but I’m a huge advocate of General Play scores," said Slumbers. "I think there should be more being put in."

"I’ve had a number of discussions with organisations in GB&I who have reservations about them and I disagree. A lot of the reservations are around a small number of individuals who are putting in scores either too low or too high, and we should be trying to address that rather than impacting everybody.

"I think getting more scores into our handicap records on a consistent basis would make the WHS stronger. I think it’s about culture. If you look at Australia – the average number of scores put in is 50 a year. They play at least once a week. We need time for our culture to evolve to a point where we are doing similar."

Probably most relevant to this thread (about manipulation): "A lot of the reservations are around a small number of individuals who are putting in scores either too low or too high, and we should be trying to address that rather than impacting everybody."
 
Average cards was 3 a year? Seriously? I have never submitted less than 30 cards in a year going back to about 2000.

Was Slumbers just looking at the likes of Muirfield?
Given how many players did not engage with handicapping and competitions at all (many still don't), an average of 3 a year sounds about right.
 
Can someone wake Slumbers up please.......in OZ we play all year round because we have the weather for it.....so 50 cards a year is nothing, I average 150 cards a year and I'm not an oddity, and I have never met anyone who has put in a GP card in OZ.
 
Probably most relevant to this thread (about manipulation): "A lot of the reservations are around a small number of individuals who are putting in scores either too low or too high, and we should be trying to address that rather than impacting everybody."
Given they have been using this system in other countries for a long time why Havnt they addressed this before and come up with an answer to the manipulation problem ?

They have had the time to think of a solution
Or is it only in GB &I there’s a problem.?
 
Top