Handicapping rules April 2024

[rulefan]

I don't see why anyone should be confused either.
I merely report that some people are confused by sometimes 95% CH and sometimes 100% CH for individual strokeplay.
Australia does not have this issue. Daily Handicap used in comps and social golf - 93% applied in both.

Australia are the odd ones out.

 

[3offTheTee]

Wow!
Reporting observations of what players actually do.
You might be in for a few snide comments. Be prepared.

I actually played in all 4 Groups so had to be aware of the rules as they applied to me

 

[3offTheTee]

I assume these are all casual play groups, so players can do whatever they agree amongst themselves (or the group organiser mandates). For simplicity and fairness that should just be full Course Handicap with no allowances.

I hope the organiser of group 4 has a mechanism for corresponding increases in handicaps too, otherwise everyone will eventually be a plus handicap!

What you are saying for casual golf is that whatever the format the playing handicap should be the same as the course handicap? For clarification in Casual golf only if we are playing 4BBB stableford (Strokeplay) and a player has a CH 20 he should receive 20 strokes rather than 17?

I know you will be able to point me in the direction of the relevant rule.

Many thanks.

Regarding your 2nd paragraph I do not know as I have only played with them once. My instinct says no. There may however be a time, say 3 months when all handicaps are returned to their course HC. Also not sure what happens if their HI changes.

 

[wjemather]

What you are saying for casual golf is that whatever the format the playing handicap should be the same as the course handicap? For clarification in Casual golf only if we are playing 4BBB stableford (Strokeplay) and a player has a CH 20 he should receive 20 strokes rather than 17?

I know you will be able to point me in the direction of the relevant rule.

Many thanks.

The important thing to note is that only union affiliated organisations are bound by union mandates regarding allowances.
This means that in casual play, individual players and groups are free to agree handicaps and allowances among themselves.

For 4BBB stroke play, 85% is not simple mental arithmetic for many (most), so agreeing 90% may be easier and if everyone's handicaps are fairly similar (as is often the case), Course Handicaps will do just fine.

 

[Alan Clifford]

Rain permitting, I'll play 9 holes tomorrow. To get a miniscule handicap cut (calculated to 'n' decimal places ) I have to beat a differential of 27. Today, that would have been a gross of 49; tomorrow it's 47.

Not complaining; it was a tad barmy to use the 9 you'd just played and then add on a shot to calculate the ficticious holes.

 

[jim8flog]

I have no confusion.
You appear to be confused.

I have observed the confusion of others.

Before WHS players played individual strokeplay with their unchanging handicap in club comps and socially.
Since WHS they sometimes play individual strokeplay with 100% CH and sometimes with 95% CH.
I have observed players who are confused by this.

Why do you continue to deny the existence of my reported observations of others?
Am I the only person in the world who has witnessed players who are confused by the sometimes 100% CH and sometimes 95% CH concept? I would find that hard to believe.

I play in two groups which play for money

one group uses 95% the other does not.

I am not the only one to play in both groups but there are still a couple that do not grasp the 95%

I tried to argue the case for the 95% in the group that does not without success.

 

[jim8flog]

Today
check club website
check the IG app
check the PSI terminal
All fine

 

[Alan Clifford]

Rain permitting, I'll play 9 holes tomorrow. To get a miniscule handicap cut (calculated to 'n' decimal places ) I have to beat a differential of 27. Today, that would have been a gross of 49; tomorrow it's 47.

Not complaining; it was a tad barmy to use the 9 you'd just played and then add on a shot to calculate the ficticious holes.

1 day later: The score differential on England Golf matched what I understand the new, 9 hole algorithm to be Well, at least the rounded to 1 dp version did

 

[Swango1980]

I don't see why anyone should be confused either.
I merely report that some people are confused by sometimes 95% CH and sometimes 100% CH for individual strokeplay.
Australia does not have this issue. Daily Handicap used in comps and social golf - 93% applied in both.

I completely agree.

I understand why 95% is required in singles stroke play, and why it isn't needed in singles match play. And, if I were to give a detailed explanation as to why the mathematics makes it that way, then I've no doubt most people that are keen enough about golf to come on handicap forums, will understand the logic. But, what percentage of golfers do we represent? Closer to 1% than even 10%.

I've seen nothing but confusion from normal club golfers regarding the 95%. The general perception for them is that it is there simply to penalise higher handicap golfers. They don't understand why it is 95% in a competition, and yet if they play socially, the handicap board or the App just tells them to play off full CH. More confusing again when they play in a match play comp, and it is the full CH. I can try and give them the detailed explanation. At best, they will listen and sometimes sort of get it. But usually, the details sort of go over their head, and it just all feels a bit too complicated for them. I guess a lot of people really don't like talking numbers in any detail

I've said before, but Oz got it right. Just bury the singles multiplier in with the Course Handicap. If an 11-30 handicapper gets 1 less shot in a match, a 31-50 handicapper gets 2 less shots and a 51+ handicapper gets 3 less shots, I don't think these higher handicappers will be starting protests? And, they often won't really be losing this many shots anyway, as they'll probably be playing against someone who also is losing a shot or 2. They'd only lose the max number of shots if playing against a player of handicap 10 or less.

 

[wjemather]

I completely agree.

I understand why 95% is required in singles stroke play, and why it isn't needed in singles match play. And, if I were to give a detailed explanation as to why the mathematics makes it that way, then I've no doubt most people that are keen enough about golf to come on handicap forums, will understand the logic. But, what percentage of golfers do we represent? Closer to 1% than even 10%.

I've seen nothing but confusion from normal club golfers regarding the 95%. The general perception for them is that it is there simply to penalise higher handicap golfers. They don't understand why it is 95% in a competition, and yet if they play socially, the handicap board or the App just tells them to play off full CH. More confusing again when they play in a match play comp, and it is the full CH. I can try and give them the detailed explanation. At best, they will listen and sometimes sort of get it. But usually, the details sort of go over their head, and it just all feels a bit too complicated for them. I guess a lot of people really don't like talking numbers in any detail

I've said before, but Oz got it right. Just bury the singles multiplier in with the Course Handicap. If an 11-30 handicapper gets 1 less shot in a match, a 31-50 handicapper gets 2 less shots and a 51+ handicapper gets 3 less shots, I don't think these higher handicappers will be starting protests? And, they often won't really be losing this many shots anyway, as they'll probably be playing against someone who also is losing a shot or 2. They'd only lose the max number of shots if playing against a player of handicap 10 or less.

Bit in bold - this is the problem.
Most people are not confused at all until someone tries explaining everything to them in excessive detail. Just stick to the basics and keep it simple.
The majority are quite happy just to play, put their scores in and let the software deal with everything else - because they don't actually need to know or do anything else.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I completely agree.

I understand why 95% is required in singles stroke play, and why it isn't needed in singles match play. And, if I were to give a detailed explanation as to why the mathematics makes it that way, then I've no doubt most people that are keen enough about golf to come on handicap forums, will understand the logic. But, what percentage of golfers do we represent? Closer to 1% than even 10%.

I've seen nothing but confusion from normal club golfers regarding the 95%. The general perception for them is that it is there simply to penalise higher handicap golfers. They don't understand why it is 95% in a competition, and yet if they play socially, the handicap board or the App just tells them to play off full CH. More confusing again when they play in a match play comp, and it is the full CH. I can try and give them the detailed explanation. At best, they will listen and sometimes sort of get it. But usually, the details sort of go over their head, and it just all feels a bit too complicated for them. I guess a lot of people really don't like talking numbers in any detail

I've said before, but Oz got it right. Just bury the singles multiplier in with the Course Handicap. If an 11-30 handicapper gets 1 less shot in a match, a 31-50 handicapper gets 2 less shots and a 51+ handicapper gets 3 less shots, I don't think these higher handicappers will be starting protests? And, they often won't really be losing this many shots anyway, as they'll probably be playing against someone who also is losing a shot or 2. They'd only lose the max number of shots if playing against a player of handicap 10 or less.

Tbh..I take an interest in these things but have simply always accepted the 95% as something that has good reasoning behind it. But I’m interested to understand why 95% in strokeplay comp.

 

[Swango1980]

Bit in bold - this is the problem.
Most people are not confused at all until someone tries explaining everything to them in excessive detail. Just stick to the basics and keep it simple.
The majority are quite happy just to play, put their scores in and let the software deal with everything else - because they don't actually need to know or do anything else.

I wasn't suggesting giving them a detailed explanation was me getting them to sit down and watch me give a PowerPoint presentation.

You say the majority of people are "happy". I think you are confusing this with the majority of people simply accept it because they can do nothing else. It doesn't mean they are not puzzled by it, and get confused when playing of different handicaps when they are in a comp compared to with their mates. Since WHS, I have definitely heard well over a hundred people voice confusion about elements of WHS, often the 95% issue. And I've clearly not talked to every golfer. Conversely, I've rarely ever heard anyone describe WHS as easier to understand than the previous system. In fact, I've never heard anyone at all say it is easier to understand.

If someone asks "why on earth do we apply 95%", my response isn't "that is just the way it is, it makes it fairer, just accept it and let the software deal with it". That seems to be absolutely no use to anyone who has asked the question. So, I'd simply explain that if 95% wasn't applied, then the chances are increased a higher handicapper will win because their range of top 8 scores will be wider, and in a large field, the chances a higher handicapper will shoot a score up around their best gets higher. And that is a score a low handicapper would struggle to get on their very best day. That is basically about as far as I'd go

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I wasn't suggesting giving them a detailed explanation was me getting them to sit down and watch me give a PowerPoint presentation.

You say the majority of people are "happy". I think you are confusing this with the majority of people simply accept it because they can do nothing else. It doesn't mean they are not puzzled by it, and get confused when playing of different handicaps when they are in a comp compared to with their mates. Since WHS, I have definitely heard well over a hundred people voice confusion about elements of WHS, often the 95% issue. And I've clearly not talked to every golfer. Conversely, I've rarely ever heard anyone describe WHS as easier to understand than the previous system. In fact, I've never heard anyone at all say it is easier to understand.

If someone asks "why on earth do we apply 95%", my response isn't "that is just the way it is, it makes it fairer, just accept it and let the software deal with it". That seems to be absolutely no use to anyone who has asked the question. So, I'd simply explain that if 95% wasn't applied, then the chances are increased a higher handicapper will win because their range of top 8 scores will be wider, and in a large field, the chances a higher handicapper will shoot a score up around their best gets higher. And that is a score a low handicapper would struggle to get on their very best day. That is basically about as far as I'd go

Logical. maybe when the subject is raised I'll suggest that the 95% is the percentage point of 2 standard deviations from the mean of the normal distribution of a player's counting scores (I just made that up)

 

[Swango1980]

Tbh..I take an interest in these things but have simply always accepted the 95% as something that has good reasoning behind it. But I’m interested to understand why 95% in strokeplay comp.

Just imagine if we went even further than this, as described in the manual.

The 95% is recommended for medium sized fields (30-100 players)

However, for smaller fields, WHS says that 100% could be considered. Whereas, if there is a significant proportion of high handicappers, LESS than 95% could be considered. In one sense, at least the UK made 95% mandatory to eliminate even more confusion.

Interestingly, however, WHS suggests lower than 95% might need to be considered where a higher number of high handicaps are playing. My last club was one favoured by beginners and had many high handicappers in comps. Seniors comps will generally have many more high handicappers. If you are a low handicapper playing in these fields, I get your frustration that the handicap system is doing you a disservice. WHS has it in black and white that handicaps probably need to be reduced more when there are more higher handicap players. The wording in the US Manual:

"The recommended handicap allowance for all individual stroke-play formats is set at 95% for medium-sized field net events, which is a field of between 30and 100 players. However, for a field size of fewer than 30 players, a handicap allowance of 100% could be considered. Likewise, if there is a significant percentage of higher handicap players in the field, a lower allowance could be considered (for example, 90% instead of 95%)."

 

[wjemather]

I wasn't suggesting giving them a detailed explanation was me getting them to sit down and watch me give a PowerPoint presentation.

Nor did I.
What followed was a perfect demonstration of explaining things badly, in excessive detail with little clarity.

 

[Swango1980]

Nor did I.
What followed was a perfect demonstration of explaining things badly, in excessive detail with little clarity.

At least all the members at your club suffer no confusion, with someone like you being able to explain things perfectly with zero detail

 

[rulefan]

I understand why 95% is required in singles stroke play,

My understanding is that it is primarily about proportional handicap representation in larger fields.
It was already part of the USGA (96%) and GA (93%) systems (often referred to as a 'bonus for excellence') but EG say that it was 'built in' to the old UHS and not seen.
Can anyone explain just where it was 'hidden'?

 

[Slab]

My understanding is that it is primarily about proportional handicap representation in larger fields.
It was already part of the USGA (96%) and GA (93%) systems (often referred to as a 'bonus for excellence') but EG say that it was 'built in' to the old UHS and not seen.
Can anyone explain just where it was 'hidden'?

Dunno how deep the rabbit hole you mean but as I understand it, it was simply part of the calculation that generated & maintained the UHS Handicap figure

 

[rulefan]

Dunno how deep the rabbit hole you mean but as I understand it, it was simply part of the calculation that generated & maintained the UHS Handicap figure

Yes it was but where was it?

GA built in to the Daily Handicap. The USGA applied it to the Index. Where did CONGU put it?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Just out of curiosity I have checked my individual competition PH using the iG (eaglegolf) calculator, and for my 7.4 off White tees I have a CH of 8 (same as it was) and a 95% PH of 7 What am I missing. How is 7 95% of 8?