S
Snelly
Guest
Do you want an area of the bar to sit as well away from the unwashed and an area of the actual bar to get served quicker
Of course and many clubs have these. They are called "Members Bars".
Of course and many clubs have these. They are called "Members Bars".
S
Snelly
Guest
I don't really have a gripe, nor do I feel that strongly about it. Just opining on the subject really. It is not like anything is about to change.....
garyinderry
Ryder Cup Winner
some of you are missing his main point.
Just posting to say I agree with this as a rule of thumb. A shot a hole is enough for anyone and a limit of 18 would stop winning scores of 45+ points - a good thing in my view - and I suspect would also focus the minds of players with higher handicaps and encourage them to improve to a moderate standard of play.
ive seen too many high handicappers that get to a two shot hole and reach for the driver as they see it as a chance to pick up big points. slash the driver OOB and have to reload. I think their course management development is stunted by having these extra shots as they know they have them as a fall back and just lash the ball as far as possible in an attempt to pick up some extra points.
I think with only a shot a hole, you are forced into thinking how best to score at the hole. with two shots, its true, the mind gets lazy.
when I joined my home club, I wasn't breaking 100, I didn't even know what stableford was. the handicap sec gave me a handicap of 18 that I couldn't play to. I practised hard and eventually went up to 19 before getting a cut.
if you can cut out duffs, there is absolutely no need really for more than one shot per hole!
Just posting to say I agree with this as a rule of thumb. A shot a hole is enough for anyone and a limit of 18 would stop winning scores of 45+ points - a good thing in my view - and I suspect would also focus the minds of players with higher handicaps and encourage them to improve to a moderate standard of play.
ive seen too many high handicappers that get to a two shot hole and reach for the driver as they see it as a chance to pick up big points. slash the driver OOB and have to reload. I think their course management development is stunted by having these extra shots as they know they have them as a fall back and just lash the ball as far as possible in an attempt to pick up some extra points.
I think with only a shot a hole, you are forced into thinking how best to score at the hole. with two shots, its true, the mind gets lazy.
when I joined my home club, I wasn't breaking 100, I didn't even know what stableford was. the handicap sec gave me a handicap of 18 that I couldn't play to. I practised hard and eventually went up to 19 before getting a cut.
if you can cut out duffs, there is absolutely no need really for more than one shot per hole!
So instead of a maximum 28 awarded if your first 3 cards are all in excess of 100 you would get a maximum of 20 and thus remove the opportunity of 28 handicappers, or slightly less, from shooting 6 under and winning a medal with 42 points for playing like a 22 handicapper on that day?
I do see that but how many would leave the sport, essential revenue for comps, bar, memberships alike, and wander away as after being awarded a 20 handicap could not play anywhere near it for some time? Surely they would feel ostracised?
Foxholer
Blackballed
That's fine for Scratch competitions.
But it's possible and 'good for the game' to have other types of competitions. The 'best Nett score' is the obvious alternative. However, if a 'best nett' winner, who doesn't also have the best gross score, ever claims to be the best golfer, he is deluding himself!
You are welcome to your opinion, though it differs from mine. However, your assumption as to why Sunningdale apply the handicap limit is wrong imo and, I believe, has been shown to be wrong by other posts. It may have the 'beneficial' side-effect of reducing the possibility of 40+ scores, but not by much imo.
If you checked with Sunningdale and asked the following questions, you might be enlightened by the responses...
'We have a few 23 to 27 handicappers in the group. Is it ok for these guys to play - in spite of your documented limit of 18?'.
'We have a few 23 to 27 handicappers in the group. Is it ok for these guys to play off 18, given your documented limit?'.
Enjoy the day though.
Birchy
Money List Winner
Nobody over 18 has won a comp at my course all season. We have had two 62 winners, 63 and a 64 winner. Handicaps 11, 16, 11, 9 respectively.
Its not the handicaps that people have its how they are managed. Its the people who get a handicap and play a about 3 qualifying comps per year that have dodgy handicaps whether its 6 or 26. To maintain a handicap you should have to play a qualifying comp every 3 weeks minimum imo.
Its not the handicaps that people have its how they are managed. Its the people who get a handicap and play a about 3 qualifying comps per year that have dodgy handicaps whether its 6 or 26. To maintain a handicap you should have to play a qualifying comp every 3 weeks minimum imo.
Why would people leave the sport?
I started cos i ejoyed the game nothing to do with thoughts of " oh i'l take up golf, i'll get 28 shots"
I do see where Snelly is coming from, its all to easy to be rubbish and still be able to compete and win stuff.
Slab
Occasional Tour Caddy
It really does seem like its the winning that's the important factor for some low handicappers to offer opinions on high handicaps
That's cool but to dilute the reasoning with thoughts of pace of play, care of the course or 'it'll motivate me more to improve' is not really required but its inaccurate to boot
The thread could then be about revamping comps & their eligibility & not 'your not normal' jibes
That's cool but to dilute the reasoning with thoughts of pace of play, care of the course or 'it'll motivate me more to improve' is not really required but its inaccurate to boot
The thread could then be about revamping comps & their eligibility & not 'your not normal' jibes
Because you still want to be competitive (whilst enjoying yourself) at any level and feel that you are still competing and the current handicap system allows it to be, if you reduce it to 20 that would become unachievable for some whether they are new to the game or seniors on the climb and maybe the frustrations of that could lead to a loss of numbers in the sport.
I saw a Tweet this morning retweeted by Ping golf where a guy is showing his scorecard after getting his new Ping i20's. He shot a nett 55 
There is no way on God's little green planet that new clubs suddenly make him shoot that low. I would have to shoot a scratch 59 to beat him. It's this type of handicap that I personally don't like. You can say he was just on form that day and had luck, well if I was 'on form' or even most of the Pro's on the planet were at their best and had luck that day they would still not shoot a 55
H/cap is there to ensure we all can play against each other on a semi level playing field and once you are past the total duffing stage and can propel the ball forward consistently then a stroke a hole IMO is fair and equitable.
I was giving an opponent 19 shots last week in the singles, short par 4's and especially short par 3's are very tough to win against when they are on the putting surface for zero
There is no way on God's little green planet that new clubs suddenly make him shoot that low. I would have to shoot a scratch 59 to beat him. It's this type of handicap that I personally don't like. You can say he was just on form that day and had luck, well if I was 'on form' or even most of the Pro's on the planet were at their best and had luck that day they would still not shoot a 55
H/cap is there to ensure we all can play against each other on a semi level playing field and once you are past the total duffing stage and can propel the ball forward consistently then a stroke a hole IMO is fair and equitable.
I was giving an opponent 19 shots last week in the singles, short par 4's and especially short par 3's are very tough to win against when they are on the putting surface for zero
Foxholer
Blackballed
That pretty much fits with my experience. 9 is a couple outside my 'most likely best nett candidate' and I've seen a big hitting Wild Willie off 24 have 'straight' day and score 45 points and 42 when he was off 18 - with loads of +0.1s and a couple of other cuts in between.
I don't think they'd leave. But ther'd be less incentive to play in comps. And it would discourage new joiners imo.
Nothing wrong with getting recognition for having a good day - as long as it's genuine. Nett prizes are generally shared around. Gross one have a much smaller group of recipients!
S
Snelly
Guest
My assumption is that they do this to ensure that people don't come along just because it is Sunningdale and they want to play, despite having no golfing ability. They may slow the pace of play down or at extreme levels, damage the course. 18, 20 - doesn't matter I don't think. They just picked the number to stop non-golfers turning up on corporate gigs I would think.
Not that I am saying that everyone would do this...., nor that 18+ = non-golfer.
One Planer
Global Moderator
My take on a thread is this.
Did anybody take up this game to remain a high andicapper?
I think most folk on here once they took up the game made a decison to get better, to improve and to lower their staring handicap.
There are always exceptions however. People who play the game for fun, have no intrest in reductions in handicap and even less intrest in winning club comps.
My opinion is this. If you make the effort to obtain a playing handicap, then you also make the commitment to improve that handicap. That's the name of the game.
Do I think the max handicap of 28 is too high? Yes. Do I agree 18 is too low? No.
From a personal point of view. I would set 20 as the maximum.
Did anybody take up this game to remain a high andicapper?
I think most folk on here once they took up the game made a decison to get better, to improve and to lower their staring handicap.
There are always exceptions however. People who play the game for fun, have no intrest in reductions in handicap and even less intrest in winning club comps.
My opinion is this. If you make the effort to obtain a playing handicap, then you also make the commitment to improve that handicap. That's the name of the game.
Do I think the max handicap of 28 is too high? Yes. Do I agree 18 is too low? No.
From a personal point of view. I would set 20 as the maximum.
HawkeyeMS
Ryder Cup Winner
I have some sympathy with Snelly's view and have said before that the h'cap system exists in part because people like to be rewarded for average golf.
Personally, I was always bought up to believe that you only win if you're good enough. I used to hate losing in any sport but more because I wasn't good enough to win than because I didn't. Losing drives me on to improve and I would certainly not expect to be given any extra help just because I wasn't good enough. When I started playing golf I knew nothing about h'caps, points, SI, CSS, SSS or anything like that, I just used to go out with my mates and try to shoot the lowest score possible. It wasn't until I joined my 1st club in my mid-late twenties that I learned how h'caps and all that other stuff works, my 1st official h'cap was 9 and has never been higher than 11.6. I've never had the benefit of playing club golf off of a high h'cap and to be honest I was a little surprised in my 1st comp that the guy or shot the lowest score didn't win, it seemed a bit odd.
Now I understand the h'cap system, how it works, why it is there but I think it solves a problem but also creates one. It gives everyone the chance to win, which isn't my primary goal but seems to be many other peoples. It has never bothered me who wins or what there h'cap was until a few weeks ago when I will admit to being a little miffed to be beaten into 3rd place in one of our two day board comps by 2 new members who hadn't managed to shoot a round between them lower than 93. I think I had taken 32 shots less over the 2 days than the winner. I wasn't that bothered and understand the system and that these things happen but I was a bit miffed. The problem it creates in my eyes is that it allows people to stop trying to improve but still win stuff which goes against the way I have always thought about competition.
I have nothing against high h'cappers but I do think 18 shots is enough for anyone. I said this a few weeks ago but I think I would be happier if club comps were split into division based on h'cap but that everyone played off of scratch with the divisions. Not sure how it would work or be received but at least that way, the best player on the day wins.
I would personally love to play more scratch comps but the only one we have is the club champs. It wouldn't other me if I didn't win, but would drive me to improve and I would know, that the day I did win, I would have been the best on that day.
Akie
Head Pro
I've no issue with high handicaps as long as they are accurate, I think the issue most people have is people with a handicap of 28 scoring 45 in a stableford and winning the prizes.
Foxholer
Blackballed
Seems to me that there are some inconsistencies or careful wording.
'Beneficial side effects that fit in with my opinions/prejudices' might be another way of putting it!
HawkeyeMS
Ryder Cup Winner
I have heard several people say in the last year that they aren't interested in getting any lower and that they are happy on their h'caps because they know they can be competitive off of it every now and then. They aren't bandits and don't win every week if at all but they know that off their h'cap they can compete without having to improve. This as I said above is the benefit and drawback of the h'cap system all at the same time.
Foxholer
Blackballed
There are many reasons why folk play golf and improving their handicap definitely isn't the main aim of everyone - or possibly even the majority!
There is indeed the ability to 'accept mediocrity', but if all the participants are doing the same...?
The system certainly 'doesn't help' when a good round or 2 means you have to play off a lower value, so find it more difficult to be competitive!
HawkeyeMS
Ryder Cup Winner
1st part - I agree with
2nd part - This is one of the problems, not everyone is doing the same
3rd part - Competing is supposed to be hard, you can't expect to play well and stay on the same h'cap
Foxholer
Blackballed
For many guys, being competitive isn't about competing, rather about not being un-competitive. These are the ones for whom the social side, without being completely out of any match, is more important. I don't believe that approach can be criticised much. - even as being 'managed'. Most I know in that category try hard in competitions but don't practice a lot, so simply accept the results.
