Handicap manipulation - how to address

[jim8flog]

So you run the swindle and complained about I’m assuming a friend of sorts, as you sound like you often play together in the same swindle, submitted a letter to the handicap committee you’re on and got the guy cut because you seemingly didn’t like him winning or scoring decent points! Was he regularly winning club comps as that would have brought about the cut naturally surely!

Imo that doesn’t show you in a very good light, it seems a little bitter! Did you have the decency to tell the guy it was you who wrote in about him or was it clandestine bitterness to get him cut.

People in clubs across the country are so petty about handicaps because they’re not winning that’s a general statement not a personal one btw.

How would you have dealt with a clear handicap 'bandit'?

Every person who knew him spoke about his antics which had been going on for decades, e.g. deliberately ruining his card in comps to maintain /increase his handicap.

The WHS finally gave us a clear method of dealing with the problem.

 

[Swango1980]

The only comps he played in were Sats non optional ones so about 8 or so a year (as already said was known to deliberately 'ruin the card'). He had increased his handicap by quite a lot under the WHS.

The 5 shot cut was just a few years ago.

Before you review anybody's handicap at your club, I recommend you come on here first and ask what you should do. It seems clear that there are one or two that know the situation at your club much better than you do, and can give you some brilliant advice.

Even though they go from initially acting like you have gone way too far in one post, and then in the next say you haven't gone far enough

 

[jim8flog]

Did the swindle not look to cut him or put restrictions in

If he was “known”’to ruin the card then sanctions need to be applied to him and more than just a 5 shot cut

We kicked someone out of our swindle who we suspected of having pencil issues

1. 1 swindle put in the rule that you have to submit a GP card to win the kitty. The other has a set shot cut but when a player is winning by as much as 8 points it has little effect.

2. Too hard a thing to prove - how do you prove a player deliberately left a putt short or slice a ball in to the booniees?

3. Never happened in swindles , no card manipulation as he was always trying to win and often the card was being recorded by someone else.

 

[Neilds]

Incredible, isn't it. Some very sensitive people in here.

Moan and moan about bandits and how they've never heard of a handicap secretary chopping a players handicap at review. And as soon as a handicap secretary explains that they have cut somebody's handicap, then they get abuse thrown at them about being off the Xmas Card list, being bitter, not liking the person winning, etc. It almost sounds like the sort of thing BANDITs would say, rather than from those that hate bandits.

It is a perfect example of why many golfers will not go near the Committee. I've recently been asked if I would like to take an active role in that sort of thing, but I'm very much likely to say no for exactly the reason above. I'm sure Jim is a decent chap who does a good job at his club, but you lose either way if you are on the handicap committee. You do nothing, and people complain that there are bandits in the club and the committee are impotent. Or you review and cut the odd handicap, and you are bitter.

I think most of the replies were probably in jest. Also, the post came across (to me anyway) as a bit snidey and underhand - bit like telling tales at school.

 

[Lucifer MorningStar]

How would you have dealt with a clear handicap 'bandit'?

Every person who knew him spoke about his antics which had been going on for decades, e.g. deliberately ruining his card in comps to maintain /increase his handicap.

The WHS finally gave us a clear method of dealing with the problem.

I’d tell them to their face and stop them from playing in the swindle I was I charge of if it’s as bad as you say it is. I certainly wouldn’t backhandedly write a letter to the committee I sit on and dealt with it as in how it comes across in your original post, perhaps you just paraphrased so we don’t get the full picture but how you wrote it seemed very petty in the way it was done.

I’m happy to acknowledge if I’m wrong in that view but can only go off how it was posted.

 

[jim8flog]

I’d tell them to their face and stop them from playing in the swindle I was I charge of if it’s as bad as you say it is. I certainly wouldn’t backhandedly write a letter to the committee I sit on and dealt with it as in how it comes across in tour original post, perhaps you just paraphrased so we don’t get the full picture but how you wrote it seemed very petty in the way it was done.

I’m happy to acknowledge if I’m wrong in that view but can only go off how it was posted.

Talking to the guy about his attitude towards his handicap was like talking to a brick wall.

I doubt that any body would have wanted to have banned him from joining in the groups, although actions were taken in one swindle to stop him from winning the kitty

When you say backhandedly when carrying out the Annual review committees are required to take scores in non club organised comps in to consideration. I was responding to the complaints about him from dozens of players.

What is obvious in life is a lot of people will complain about things but always expect others to do something about it and will not approach te problem themselves.

 

[jim8flog]

I’d tell them to their face and stop them from playing in the swindle I was I charge of if it’s as bad as you say it is. I certainly wouldn’t backhandedly write a letter to the committee I sit on and dealt with it as in how it comes across in your original post, perhaps you just paraphrased so we don’t get the full picture but how you wrote it seemed very petty in the way it was done.

I’m happy to acknowledge if I’m wrong in that view but can only go off how it was posted.

Just to add the committee will only review a handicap if the complaint is put in writing.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

1. 1 swindle put in the rule that you have to submit a GP card to win the kitty. The other has a set shot cut but when a player is winning by as much as 8 points it has little effect.

2. Too hard a thing to prove - how do you prove a player deliberately left a putt short or slice a ball in to the booniees?

3. Never happened in swindles , no card manipulation as he was always trying to win and often the card was being recorded by someone else.

Seems like more can be done with this player as opposed to just a HC cut - especially if it’s still going on

 

[Lucifer MorningStar]

Talking to the guy about his attitude towards his handicap was like talking to a brick wall.

I doubt that any body would have wanted to have banned him from joining in the groups, although actions were taken in one swindle to stop him from winning the kitty

When you say backhandedly when carrying out the Annual review committees are required to take scores in non club organised comps in to consideration. I was responding to the complaints about him from dozens of players.

What is obvious in life is a lot of people will complain about things but always expect others to do something about it and will not approach te problem themselves.

If he is spoken to and ignores you. Then logical sense is stop him joining the swindles it’s a simple quick win and he would soon get the msg. If one has already stopped him winning the kitty then again his scores become irrelevant to that swindle.

I did say back handedly yes but your initial post never mentioned him being subject to annual review, but review based on you writing to the committee those are very different things to describe. Hence imo it came across as another poster has said a little snide!

As for others will always wait for someone else to do something. That’s just life and you’ll often find people complain and do nothing because deep down they’re not as bothered as they make out, which looking at your point of nobody wanting to ban him from playing suggests exactly that.

I take your last point about must be done in writing that’s fair enough under club policy, but it’s just my opinion that if you’re having to write to a committee about someone you regularly play with then you could just choose not to play with them and be open with them about what you plan to do. I won’t drag this on any further as in my opinion we won’t meet an impasse. You did what you thought you needed/had to do that’s your choice I’d have just chosen another way.

There’s different routes for different people

 

[clubchamp98]

Knocking the handicap sec out of the matchplay was a common one!

Or just knocking him out

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

That is something that should not be done and was in the CONGU manual at least 15 years ago when I first joined the committee.

Why not? Two of my mates won a pairs comp last year and have had their HI cut - implemented through a -1 adjustment to each of their last 20 rounds.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

When WHS came in our rollups aka swindles were asked to require participants cards to be submitted. Our biggest one (60+ regularly playing) met all the criteria required and it agreed - though it lost participants and is now usually about 40-45. The Saturday one I play in didn’t quite meet all criteria but agreed that one week in four participants would submit their cards.

I get a feeling(just a feeling) that time has meant that a good number of folks are now more comfortable submitting a card from a ‘social/friendly’ round than at first…with more understanding of the impact (or lack of impact) of single cards and how our HIs fluctuate.

 

[Swango1980]

Why not? Two of my mates won a pairs comp last year and have had their HI cut 1.0

Winning a knockout competition doesn't automatically mean your handicap is too high. There needs to be more evidence than that.

And in pairs especially, even if there was a handicap that was too high, whose? Both? If I was a very low handicapper determined to get a lower handicap, but not good enough, then it would seem all I'd need to do is find a golfer that has a handicap way too high, try and win a knockout comp, and get a 1.0 shot decrease to my handicap

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Why not? Two of my mates won a pairs comp last year and have had their HI cut - implemented through a -1 adjustment to each of their last 20 rounds.

I suspect that was via WHS and then reaching what was required for it being a qualifying

They can’t just be given a cut for winning it

 

[D-S]

Automatic cuts for winning knockouts etc. were banned under UHS and are still in WHS. Both systems required a higher standard of evidence.

 

[jim8flog]

Before you review anybody's handicap at your club, I recommend you come on here first and ask what you should do. It seems clear that there are one or two that know the situation at your club much better than you do, and can give you some brilliant advice.

Even though they go from initially acting like you have gone way too far in one post, and then in the next say you haven't gone far enough

Are these comments meant for somebody else?


I had been on the handicap committee for nearly 10 years before we did that.

Not sure what you mean by the second para if that is aimed at me.

 

[jim8flog]

Why not? Two of my mates won a pairs comp last year and have had their HI cut - implemented through a -1 adjustment to each of their last 20 rounds.

It was specifically listed in the CONGU manual as a 'thou shalt not'.