rulefan
Tour Winner
Exactly
Handicap manipulation - how to address
- Thread starter Teebs
- Start date
rulefan
Tour Winner
You have pointed out the problems your club had.
Swango1980
Well-known member
I understand what I wrote. I didn't understand your response.
Neilds
Assistant Pro
Has D-S highlighted anything that says these cards are dodgy - and by dodgy I mean much higher/lower than their usual cards? I know full well that they are dodgy in format, registration, etc but are they actually changing the handicaps in a big way?There will be someone along soon to point out that DS is wrong.
There were lots of bad comittiees under UHS but they still went ahead and installed a system to bypass them using an APP that is so easy to manipulate it’s a joke.
And as DS has shown you have to go looking for them but when you find them a blind eye is shown by lots of them.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
Don’t know.
But why do it if it’s all above board.
Isn’t format and registration, getting someone who hasn’t played with you to atest your score enough to ring alarm bells then.
rulie
Head Pro
Extrapolation from a single situation.
Swango1980
Well-known member
OK. I shall make another conclusion then.
This is ONLY happening at D-S's club, and so is isolated to the members at his club and a few visitors at his club. But, these visitors follow the Rules of Handicapping at all other courses, and all other golfers up and down the UK follow the Rules of Handicapping to the letter.
Yup, that seems just as logical...
Colin L
Tour Winner
In what way is a committee "by-passed" that makes it any easier to manipulate a handicap by putting in false scores than pre-WHS? Attested falsified scores on a bit of card are no different from attested falsified scores submitted through an app. Both simply comprise 18 numbers. A dodgy number is a dodgy number whether going straight into a database or from a bit of paper into the database with no discernible difference between them. Besides, entering handicapping scores, whether competition or supplementary ones, electronically pre-dates WHS. And, it is a great deal easier to scrutinise scores online than on bits of card. "They" did not not create a system in order to by-pass committees; the system no more bypasses them than did its predecessor.There will be someone along soon to point out that DS is wrong.
There were lots of bad comittiees under UHS but they still went ahead and installed a system to bypass them using an APP that is so easy to manipulate it’s a joke.
And as DS has shown you have to go looking for them but when you find them a blind eye is shown by lots of them.
rulie
Head Pro
Somewhere in between those two extremes lies the actual.
Swango1980
Well-known member
Every single Supplementary Score has to go in front of a Committee member before it touched a players handicap under UHS. Under WHS, scores go straight to a players record and impact their handicap without anyone on the Committee reviewing it. I believe that is what he means by by-passed.
Sure, a false score on a piece of card may still get passed a Committee member under UHS. But, at least the system gave a human a chance to see that scores where being submitted, and make a decision at the time that something needs to be reviewed. There were many many times I had to make corrections to scores that were being submitted, often things like the score that someone entered into the computer was completely different to the score they had on the card.
But, the implementation of WHS was clearly done to bypass Committees, it was a requirement because of PCC. Therefore, Committees now need to check scores after they have already impacted a player's handicap. But, with so many scores submitted, I'm sure that is nowhere near feasible. And, with no physical scorecards to cross reference, you have to have full trust that the score entered on the system is correct, and that the person verifying the score has also carefully checked all 18 hole scores of the person they are marking. Given the huge amount of ridiculous errors I identified pre WHS on a relatively small number of Supplementary scores entered per week, when WHS was introduced after a short while I just had to accept that many scores submitted would also be incorrect, and I would just have to stop worrying about it. Just accept WHS for what it is.
Swango1980
Well-known member
OK, we'll not say tens of thousands of scores. We'll say thousands of scores instead. My point remains the same, but a useful intervention nonetheless
rulefan
Tour Winner
But do they?
D-S
Well-known member
But the majority of problems were from members from other clubs. The problems did not stem from poor administration procedures as you said but from player ignorance, laziness and sometimes deviousness. The administration procedures did not create this but one discovered it and my guess that is that it remains undiscovered at many clubs. Perhaps they need to ensure they do not ever have similar issues before casting stones.
Last edited:
D-S
Well-known member
There were a variety of issues as I have said. In terms of visitors and their reasoning behind submitting acceptable scores I do not know. It is up to their own clubs handicapping committees to evaluate and take action. All we have done is to mark the scores as matchplay and leave any action to them as it is not for our club to interevene.
As far as our members, some were complete ignorance others were indeed to manipulate up or down and action and sanctions were imposed.
All this is not just due to people wanting to just falsify their handicap, the reasons are more varied than just that.
As I have said the worst offender was an iGolfer (attested by an iGolfer) and EG were, and I do not say this lightly, rude, dismissive and obstructive in their responses to the club and we had to go to senior levels within EG just to get any proper action. This, by the way, was to all intents and purposes the clearest example of manipulation that we have seen.I have little or no faith in their procedures now.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
The sheer numbers of GP cards means they are not all checked so by pass the comittiee.
That wasn’t the case with supplementary cards.
Sometimes tech just causes unintended problems
Are you saying “every GP card is checked ?”
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
When you say "checked" what do you actually mean?
If it was a SC how can the Committee verify the scores other than by looking at the scores on their playing partner's card - assuming they were putting one in and keeping score....? You have a card with some numbers on it and a signature...what's there to check.?
The "check" then is not really any different to now.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
GP scores go straight on your record unchecked.
If your subtle enough it dosnt raise any flags.
If you get someone who’s not even played with you to attest it who’s checking that?
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
But what is the check?
It's a card verified by whoever you were playing with...
Previously, would you be called to account if you had a poor round with a 9 and 3 8s..?
No..you had a bad day, the committee had a giggle at your misfortune and put the card on the system - or vice versa..you had 5 birdies and 6 bogeys...a "nice one" and the card went on the system
The Committee couldn't verify scores because they weren't out there..they relied on the integrity of the player to hand in a genuine card...just like now.
If you wanted to buck the system back then you could.
The only difference to now is that you can put a card in every day rather than once a week...
A cheat will cheat no matter which system is used..they'll find a way.
wjemather
Well-known member
No different than before WHS.
There was limited actual checking before, and there is limited actual checking now - all of which is either random or targeted.
The only functional change is an administrative one, in that the process no longer requires someone at the club to manually enter scores and click a button in the software to upload them.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
Yes but anything out of the ordinary might have been noticed when done manually.
Now it’s just bypassed unless someone points them out.
