Handicaps controversial?

[Imurg]

You've got a straight choice here.

1. Keep life the way it is. Accept it. Accept that a high handicapper will have a good day and beat you.

2. Keep ALL comps for low single figure handicappers to play in and watch club numbers dwindle.

If you don't let ordinary club golfers play and win - they just wont play at all. They'll either go to a club that lets them or become a nomad. What's the point in being a member if you can't play in a comp and at least have a chance of winning?

And as for the 18 handicapper level par after 14 holes - come on - how often does this happen?

If low singles want to win then play amongst yourselves - and then whine at the 3 handicapper who has a good day and comes in 4 or 5 under par and beats you all.

I don't play to win(unless I'm playing Fragger!). I play to get my handicap as low as I can. If I win on the way then great - if not I'm looking for a cut.

 

[HawkeyeMS]

You've got a straight choice here.

1. Keep life the way it is. Accept it. Accept that a high handicapper will have a good day and beat you.

2. Keep ALL comps for low single figure handicappers to play in and watch club numbers dwindle.

I'm fairly sure no-one wants to scrap handicaps completely for all the reasons stated on this board.

If you don't let ordinary club golfers play and win - they just wont play at all. They'll either go to a club that lets them or become a nomad. What's the point in being a member if you can't play in a comp and at least have a chance of winning?

Again, I agree with this, everyone should have a chance of winning. But the single figure guys put in a lot a time and effort to get to where they are, they normally make up a small percentage of the entrants in a comp and therefore, with the current handicap system, the law of averages states that someone who doesn't practice and turns up once a month and has a good round will beat them, this just doesn't seem fair, and the handicap system should be fair.

If low singles want to win then play amongst yourselves - and then whine at the 3 handicapper who has a good day and comes in 4 or 5 under par and beats you all.

I'm fairly sure a scratch golfer would be less upset getting beat by a 3 handicapper having a good day than a 20 something.

I don't play to win(unless I'm playing Fragger!). I play to get my handicap as low as I can. If I win on the way then great - if not I'm looking for a cut.

This is exactly why I play, I just appreciate how tough it is to be a low single figure player and how frustrating it must be to be always getting beat by once a month charlie off the wrong hanidcap.

This a a contentious subject and has been a good debate, I'm pretty sure no-one here wants to scrap the handicap system completely, I just think it needs to be reviewed so that better golf is rewarded more often than it currently is. For the life of me I don't know how this will be achieved and I currently accept the way it is, that doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

 

[Leftie]

Have any of you actually looked at the CONGU site??

How many have had a careful look over time at the winners of the comps at your clubs??

There will be times when a high h/capper will win a comp - as there will be with low h/cappers but I think a lot of the winging on this subject is based more on anecdotal evidence and gut feeling rather than a mass of data collected over a long period of time from a vast number of club comps as CONGU have done.

Like the system or not, it's the best we have and no-one here has come up with a better sensible alternative.

Just a thought - if your club ran a scratch medal alongside a h/cap medal, or other comp, how many of you lower h/cappers would opt to play in the scratch?

A link for you all to read.

http://www.congu.com/template1.asp?pid=25

 

[HawkeyeMS]

A link for you all to read.

http://www.congu.com/template1.asp?pid=25

I'd say myth 1 actually backs up most of the debate on this board. Those figures show categorically that it is less likely that you will win a competition if you are in Category 1. Obviously, this relates to the fact that there are less Category 1 players but there is a reason for that, it is hard to be a category 1 player.

What it doesn't show is how many times category 1 players shot level par or better and still didn't win?

The problem with stats is that you can make them show whatever you want them to show.

Myth 2 shows that the average winning score is 5.5 - 5.6 shots below CSS. I still believe that it is harder to shoot 5 below CSS off of 1 than it is off of 20 and you should get greater reward for doing so.

The fact remains that a handicap system, no matter how it is calculated, will be open to controversy. We aren't gonna change that but it's a good debate.

 

[FourPutt]

The current handicap system obviously has its flaws, but I haven't seen an alternative suggested here that doesn't have its own flaws. There have been a number of suggestions that would work, but whether they'd be any better, or even as good as the current system is another matter.

All the low handicappers who say that it is harder for them to shoot 5 under their handicap than it is for a 28 handicapper are completely correct. I don't disagree at all, however, part of the point of being a club is the social element of it and everyone having a shot at the win.

Admittedly, the handicap system slightly favours high handicappers in some formats, particularly ones where a bad hole can be discarded. Most high handicappers are capable of pars and even the occasional birdie, but consistency is the problem. I don't know many high handicappers who wont card a horrendous hole or two most rounds.

Stabeleford and Matchplay where the high handicapper cards a 10 or 12 due to getting in trouble off the tee etc are two examples. The high handicapper can lose the hole or blob and move on and it might not make a massive difference to their competition standing. These formats are definitely quite favourable to the high handicapper.

Strokeplay medals are another matter. If I stand on the 1st tee and stick three balls out of bounds right, and take 7 off the tee, and card a 12, that sticks with me all round. You can probably add another horror hole in per round too. It's less likely that the low handicapper will card 10s or 12s in most rounds.

I don't know about most clubs, but ours operates 3 divisions in medals, where Div 1 is scratch - 10, Div 2 is 10 - 19 and Div 3 is 20 - 28. (or something like that) Which makes it fairer everyone.

And aren't there loads of local, county and national amateur competitions that are off scratch or <10 handicappers only?

Sorry to ramble, but my point is that the handicap system might be flawed, but it's the product of many people over many years trying to make it as even as possible for club golfers to compete against each other on a level playing field. Unfortunately, it's very hard to make a system where someone who shoots 95 one week and 115 the next can be even against someone whose scores only vary between 72 and 80 or so. Without a better option, it's all we've really got!

Er... hope that makes sense!

 

[HawkeyeMS]

makes perfect sense

I think overall we're agreeing, it isn't perfect, but it's the best we have.

I guess the biggest problem we have is that any system is statiscally going to favour the highest representation of players and I don't suppose there is anything we are ever going to do about that

 

[muttleee]

the handicap system should be fair.

Unfortunately even the game of golf itself isn't fair!

 

[Dodger]

All I will add to the thread is that no grown man should be allowed more than a shot a hole.

 

[19th]

I always wonder at the mindset of our best player when he stands on the first tee knowing he has to hit circa seven under par to record a net CSS score and he does it with a smile on his face!!

I would, however, rather be him than me playing off 14, as my golfing ability is what matters and not the handicap I am lumbered with. It is, by the way, just that - a bloody handicap that proves to everyone that I play sh*t golf.

Reading through this thread it would seem that the lower the handicap the less enjoyment some appear to get, playing golf.

So to all you good golfers, go and enjoy OUR game, thanking God that you have the health, strength, co-ordination and finance that allowed you to be an above average golfer.

Also reflect that maybe the only system that will work to accommodate you is to have a guy with each game - or a computerised return after each hole, amending the handicaps to reflect how each player is performing on the day. That could also take the pleasure away from the low handicapper as the 1 handicap on the first tee becomes 7 when you walk into the clubhouse!

Super debate, lots of thought provoking material.

 

[jammydodger]

All I will add to the thread is that no grown man should be allowed more than a shot a hole.

wise words Dodger

 

[muttleee]

Fascinating link there, Leftie. I particularly liked the bit about The Herald nominating a 'Bandit of the Week' based on their weekly golf returns!

 

[Screwback]

All I will add to the thread is that no grown man should be allowed more than a shot a hole.

I think if the par is 72 and it takes you more than 90 shots to go round they shouldnt really be playing in a comp.

 

[haplesshacker]

It's not for me say this really, but I think it's worth commenting on.

Considering some of the broad brush stroke assumptions, and at times a 'them and us' debate. I'm really impressed that it hasn't degenerated into the mud slinging match that some threads occasionally turn into.

It's been an interesting thread to follow, and a pleasent one at that.

(no doubt someone will tell me where to go now!!)

 

[Smiffy]

All I will add to the thread is that no grown man should be allowed more than a shot a hole.

And Homer?

 

[haplesshacker]

There. I jinx'd it!!

 

[19th]

You do realise that you are now stating that all players with returns in excess of 90 should not be in any comps.

I wonder if any players in your club exceed this figure and if so what percentage.

I also wonder if your club can therefore run, in profit, without the fees and spending power of this section of players, assuming they exist at your club.

We have a wonderful mix of handicaps which reflect the abilities of the members, at my club. Some players were low single players but now seniors and are still enjoying the game playing off a handicap to reflect their current ability.

Under your scheme they would be banished to another club once their playing ability was creating an 90+ return.

Another thread was related to encouraging juniors into the game to save our clubs from the drop off in their memberships, well with juniors having to ease thenselves into an 18 handicap, using your 18 handicap rule, they would need to be put out to learn the game elsewhere and then be invited into your, for excellent players only, club.

I have a senior pal who plays off 22 but I don't think was ever 18, plays in every comp, records every score, enjoys the golf and the company but will never now be an 18 handicap golfer. He runs, however, the sweepers during the week, taking cash into the club when it would be normally empty. His table at the functions normally number 22 of us and we, I would suggest, are the most profitable to the club on the night.

He, I feel sure, will be replicated within most clubs, they do all that for the club but you would ban them from comps because they are not sub 18 handicapper!!

Shame on you!!

 

[Leftie]

I think if the par is 72 and it takes you more than 90 shots to go round they shouldnt really be playing in a comp.

Quite right too. Ban the lot of them. Don't want the buqqers spoiling my fun and chance to win a comp now and again. That right belongs to the low h/cappers who never usually stand a chance of being in contention.

Hang on a min. How did they get a handicap in the first place and how did they get so low without having a good position in comps now and again?


Bah. Humbug

 

[Spinn77]

I've never liked the idea of the count back - to my mind, if its a tie then the lowest gross should win. If every hole matters then it doesnt matter if you 'hang on' over the last thre or four holes. You must have played the earlier holes really well.

I like Tigers post about an overall comp and sections which are tighter than Div 1 and Div 2, its a good idea.

Earlier i mentioned all rounds counting. I meant all rounds other than if your playing two or three balls into greens - thats called practising, not playing a round properly. I do think if you walk the course on your own, playing to the rules the score should go in.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I think if the par is 72 and it takes you more than 90 shots to go round they shouldnt really be playing in a comp.

I presume this was posted in jest. If they introduced that at your club I bet it would out of business within a year. The vast majority that enter our monthly medal and stableford, and honours board to be fair, do so in the knowledge that they'll never win. However they enjoy the competition, playing with members they might not otherwise play with and defending their handicap. A lot of your older guys play off 16-25 and why should they be penalised if they can't play to 18. I might as well jack it in as I'm more than capable of doing that.

 

[Screwback]

Your right homer it was said in jest but it seemed to provoke quite a bit of reaction.

rightly so.

There are some many good points made on this thread and i am in no way biased about low handicappers being the better players we all have to start somewhere and we all have the right to win comps. IMO high handicappers and it has to be said hold a wee wee bit of jealousy over lower handicappers(good thing).

I personallty would play with anyone of any ability at any time in any comp. It would not bother me if they won but it would be a bit frustrating if i have shot the sticks out and was beat on the better back nine or by a player who beat me by 1 after shooting in the 90s.

But that is golf.