Handicap manipulation - how to address

[D-S]

In nearly all golf cultures, there will be questions arising about vanity handicaps and elevated handicaps and how to deal with either/both. Pointing fingers at other cultures' practices is easy and may result in complacency in one's own practices.

I’m not criticising other countries handicappers cultures, they might exactly suit the way golf is played and clubs are run in that region.
However that doesb’t mean that transposing one country’s/region’s handicap culture will suit the golfing environment in another country/region. For example having a competition only handicap would be an absolute disaster in the US as a majority of golfers won’t play comps every week or every month, so their system by definition needs to be different.
This also means that a system that works excellently there won’t necessarily work well here and shouldn’t naturally be used here.

 

[rulie]

In our WHS, the system does not know or differentiate between "comp" and "other" scores - they are all the same.

 

[Magcargo]

In terms of vanity handicaps, and they are infinitely more common than sandbaggers in my experience, what are the real downsides to them other than access to exclusive comps/clubs, which no doubt they flat on their faces in?

 

[D-S]

In our WHS, the system does not know or differentiate between "comp" and "other" scores - they are all the same.

As I said, different strokes for different folks. You wouldn’t, unfortunately be eligible for prizes at many UK clubs then (although at some you would be able to participate). Also you would not be eligible to play in any England Golf Championship events.
Nevertheless I am sure your way of working is absolutely fine for the vast majority if not all golfers over there.

 

[rulie]

As I said, different strokes for different folks. You wouldn’t, unfortunately be eligible for prizes at many UK clubs then (although at some you would be able to participate). Also you would not be eligible to play in any England Golf Championship events.
Nevertheless I am sure your way of working is absolutely fine for the vast majority if not all golfers over there.

I guess that it's a good thing that I only play at home or north of your border!

 

[D-S]

I guess that it's a good thing that I only play at home or north of your border!

You’re welcome to have a game any time at my club if you ever venture South, but don’t forget to pre-register your score!

 

[AussieKB]

So someone on a 54 hole handicap, wipes every hole, WHS gives him nett double bogey......his score is then 45 points.

Why would he try to score a triple bogey for 2 points per hole ?

That seems fair, your Comp winner.

 

[clubchamp98]

In terms of vanity handicaps, and they are infinitely more common than sandbaggers in my experience, what are the real downsides to them other than access to exclusive comps/clubs, which no doubt they flat on their faces in?

They stop more deserving lower golfers having access to the elite comps ! ( Balloted out)

So skill with a pencil overrides golf skill.

 

[Steve Wilkes]

So someone on a 54 hole handicap, wipes every hole, WHS gives him nett double bogey......his score is then 45 points.

Why would he try to score a triple bogey for 2 points per hole ?

That seems fair, your Comp winner.

Have I got this wrong. but would a net double bogey give them 0 points

 

[D-S]

So someone on a 54 hole handicap, wipes every hole, WHS gives him nett double bogey......his score is then 45 points.

Why would he try to score a triple bogey for 2 points per hole ?

That seems fair, your Comp winner.

If he ‘blobs’ every score he would receive zero points and is then extremely unlikely to win the comp, unless everyone is DQd.

I think you may have missed the word nett in ‘nett double bogey’.

 

[Swango1980]

If he ‘blobs’ every score he would receive zero points and is then extremely unlikely to win the comp, unless everyone is DQd.

I think you may have missed the word nett in ‘nett double bogey’.

Which is funny, because he missed the word "nett" despite typing it himself.

Must have been the excitement in the amazing point that was about to be made

 

[wjemather]

As I said, different strokes for different folks. You wouldn’t, unfortunately be eligible for prizes at many UK clubs then (although at some you would be able to participate). Also you would not be eligible to play in any England Golf Championship events.
Nevertheless I am sure your way of working is absolutely fine for the vast majority if not all golfers over there.

There are also many clubs that don't have ridiculous terms of competition that don't achieve anything useful.
And EG certainly do not exclude anyone on this basis.

 

[rulie]

You’re welcome to have a game any time at my club if you ever venture South, but don’t forget to pre-register your score!

Appreciate that offer, and also that we can have a congenial discussion on the topic.

 

[Colin L]

So someone on a 54 hole handicap, wipes every hole, WHS gives him nett double bogey......his score is then 45 points.

Why would he try to score a triple bogey for 2 points per hole ?

That seems fair, your Comp winner.

There must be a strange way of counting Stableford points in Australia. How does a player who has been unable to secure even one nett bogey in his round get any points, never mind 45 ? I think you must be misunderstanding something.

 

[doublebogey7]

But we still adopted this system here .

It’s sadly nailed on MLS will be adopted here eventually!

I'll wager it isn't, in my lifetime anyway, as there's too much opposition the thoughts of those on here are pretty reflective of those in area associations and at EG. I'll continue to argue in favour though as there are clear advantages and scores would not be random as people on here seem to think.

 

[doublebogey7]

Just to show MLS and its difficulties in reality that I have seen, I thought I’d show a typical scenario to show its randomness - admittedly I have picked distances that highlight the point but they are not untypical. Variations of this will and do happen on almost every hole not necessarily to all players but to some. These variations are cumulative over rounds.

This is of course ignoring the fact that in matchplay players are playing to match or better their opponent’s score not trying achieve the best total score for themselves on that hole

A&B are playing C&D in 4BB matchplay. It’s a par 3 only player A gets a shot. (The players are not carrying a tape measure.)
Player A hits it to 8ft.
Player B hits into greenside bunker.
Player C hits it onto the green 25 ft away.
Player D misses the green about 10 yards off.

Player D plays first, needs to hole it as Player A has 2 putts from 8 ft for a net 2, chips it 20 ish feet past.
Player B is next, partner has an odds on 2 but has a go anyway gets it out to 20 ish feet.
Player C is next needs to hole it as well, misses and goes 5-6 feet past.

They decide Player B is furthest away, he says to his partner “to speed things up just lag your putt first”. Player A does so, gets the net 2 wins the hole, they all walk to the next.

What should they all put down?

According to MLS.
Player A should put down a 3 as his putt was conceded and is 5ft or less away.

Player B is 20 ish feet away. He could put down 4, 5 or 6 depending on judgement of if his putt is more or less than 20 feet away and the difficulty of the shot and the ability of the golfer.

Player C is 5 ish feet away, he could put down 3 or 4 dependent on if his putt is 5 or less feet away or slightly more than that.

Player D is 20 ish feet away. He could put down 4, 5 or 6 depending on judgement of if his putt is more or less than 20 feet away and the difficulty of the shot and the ability of the golfer.

In reality, that I have seen, players just say ‘put me down for a x”, this is coloured by their own agenda or vanity or how much they can be bothered. Any way cumulatively it leads to some pretty random scores and handicaps.

Whatevewr they put amongsdt those choices will be more accurate than simply giving them all potentially 1.5 points as the current system for BB strokeplay does. In any case as I say this will only happen once or twice a round so has very little effect, less than 0.1 on a players handicap. On that I am afraid we are just going to have to agfree to disagree.

 

[doublebogey7]

I'm a bit puzzled here.

I've played many Pairs and Teams of 4 events, where one player has not scored in a hole, often not even putting or chipping in the hole, because their team mate(s) are simply in a much better position. If my partner is on the green in regulation, with a shot, then it will usually mean it is unlikely my score will count, espcially if my drive was less than ideal, or I missed the green in two. Even more so if I'm not on a shot. I could still probably grind out a point or two (or even a birdie), but depending on what my partner(s) do, it can often become almost irrelevant. I've frequently in the past tried to calculate what individual scores would be in such team events, out of curiousity. Occasionally I can get a good estimate. But many times, I realise I can't really get a good idea of a genuine score for at least one person. Some golfers will try and stay in the hole as long as possible, even if their score will very unlikely count, so easier for them. Other golfers will essentially give up as soon as they realise that they can, at best, only tie with their partner(s) - even if that is for 2 or 3 points. Sometimes they may only finish, or get close to finishing, about 4 or 5 holes.

Personally, I'd like Team of 4 events and Better Ball events to score for handicap, as long as all players are asked to finish out as tho it was a singles stableford handicap. Of course, some will not agree due to pace of play. Furthermore, if anybody wanted to manipulate handicap upwards, then as soon as they know their score won't count in the team event, they could lazily complete the hole, taking a few shots worse than they would had they been trying. So, a better system might be to have an official log within WHS, that records all Team event scores, positions, etc so that when it comes to handicap review, every handicap sec will get an easy to read report that shows who has played in such events, and what their success rate is compared to the expected range. So, if Joe Bloggs has barely ever played a club qualifier and few know who he is, but a report comes in to say Joe Bloggs has played in 20 Team events over the year, won 6 of them, come in the Top 5 15 times, etc. then the handicap sec can immediately see that Joe Bloggs might need a chop.

That is simply not my expereince, in any group I have ever played in a player will not pick up until they cannot under any circumstances contribute to the hole. So either their partner has holed out (or in match play their opponent) or they are not able to score a point.

I agree on your second paragraph that, having access to that information would be an improvement, but and its a big but, my worry with all these committee inspired handicap alrerations is that far to much effort is put into reducing people handicap and not enough in increasing. As I have said in other points, I think there is a bigger problem with vanity handicaps than there is with players sandbagging.

 

[doublebogey7]

So handicap records already include "assigned" or estimated hole scores. And the assumption is that nobody picks up when they could have still made less than a net double bogey? Is that a valid assumption for everyone and for every round?

Not for every round, but in my expereince it only happens when players are having a poor round anyway, so the score will very unlikley be one of their best 8 rounds.

 

[Neilds]

Don't we already have a version of MLS? How else do they work out 18 hole scores from shorter rounds?

 

[doublebogey7]

The net double bogey limit can make an approximate score in good rounds as well as bad rounds. However all the other scores in that round are 'correct' i.e. every ball was holed out and the strokes tallied.

With MLS you would still have the net double bogey approximation but you would also have other extra 'approximated' scores, in 4BB matchplay this could be as many as 7, 8, 9 or more dependent on how well your partner and your opponents plays as well as how generous gimmes are.

Similarly if that is happening that many times ina round then their score is very unlikley to be one of their top 8 scores so will have no or very very little effect on their handicap. Yet if they have scored well on their other holes in thew current system, they will likely to allocated 1.5 points for each of those holes and may well suffer a cut, which seems entirely ridiculousd to me.