My EG app

[sawtooth]

Stroke play competitions are commonly run though software which calculates PHs; match play allowances are commonly calculated manually by players on (or near) the tee.

These two statements are contradictory. If no-one is doing manual calculations, they have no need for the unrounded value of their CH.

Why do you want to confuse (most) people by presenting them with a sea of numbers, and increase the probability of errors when they try to use those numbers?

Not meant to be contradictory, I don't think anyone should be doing calculations of any sort.

What I meant is that we should all be working with unrounded values and therefore PH based on unrounded CH (not rounded) regardless of the golf format. Different system for matchplay and strokeplay really doesn't make any sense.

Ideally, the EG app could show PH values based on unrounded CH. These would match club handicap software values and matchplay would be more equitable.

In other words just provide the calculator tool based on whatever format you choose, we don't need to know the formulae. But standardise on unrounded.

Job done.

 

[D-S]

That's the document I have but couldn't find that table. That's the problem with skimming

So in reality they don't just have one Daily Handicap? Also the Daily Handicap is just the CH and they have 3 values (HI, CH and PH) just like us?

 

[rulefan]

Not quite. The CH is modified by the 0.93 and seemingly the 'handicap allowance is not really used.

The 0.93 was in the original Australian system - often referred to as a 'Bonus for Excellence'

 

[D-S]

Not quite. The CH is modified by the 0.93 and seemingly the 'handicap allowance is not really used.

The 0.93 was in the original Australian system - often referred to as a 'Bonus for Excellence'

So they have a Handicap Index and a CH which is modified by 0.93 (due to something which is pre WHS) and rules saying there are PHs but which they seem not to abide by but theoretically should.

On the face of it (unless I’m missing something) it seems a real mess and managing to make the convoluted (according to some) system that we have actually to be a lot more sensible.

 

[doublebogey7]

Not quite. The CH is modified by the 0.93 and seemingly the 'handicap allowance is not really used.

The 0.93 was in the original Australian system - often referred to as a 'Bonus for Excellence'

If I am reading this right, then a CH in Australia is not comparable to a CH in the UK or anywhere else for that matter. Meaning anyone coming from Australia and playing in UK events will not be competing on an equal footing, given that they like everyone else will recieve a further reduction of 5% when playing ina singles comp over here. This really does seem to take the meaning of World oput of the equation for Australians.

 

[rulefan]

If I am reading this right, then a CH in Australia is not comparable to a CH in the UK or anywhere else for that matter. Meaning anyone coming from Australia and playing in UK events will not be competing on an equal footing, given that they like everyone else will recieve a further reduction of 5% when playing ina singles comp over here. This really does seem to take the meaning of World oput of the equation for Australians.

The CH is dependent on the course being played. So as the Index is universal the CH will be calculated in relation to the location of the course.

 

[D-S]

So their system gives you a HI, then the computer calculates a course dependent course handicap then times this by 0.93 - you then have your Daily Handicap from which the club may or may not calculate a Playing Handicap. Not exactly simplified.
The main difference between that and ours (except for the fact that playing allowances are mandatory for us) is that it advantages lower handicappers as we play matchplay at 100% they play it at 93%, we play individual strokeplay comps at 95% they play them at 93%.
Doesn’t seem better than ours.

 

[rulefan]

So their system gives you a HI, then the computer calculates a course dependent course handicap then times this by 0.93 - you then have your Daily Handicap from which the club may or may not calculate a Playing Handicap. Not exactly simplified.
The main difference between that and ours (except for the fact that playing allowances are mandatory for us) is that it advantages lower handicappers as we play matchplay at 100% they play it at 93%, we play individual strokeplay comps at 95% they play them at 93%.
Doesn’t seem better than ours.

Handicap Allowances are not mandatory. The table in Appendix C is only recommended. National Associations may do as they wish. What individual clubs do is between them and their National Association. Apart from the 0.93, it makes no difference to resultant HIs.

The 0.93 had been historically present in Australia for yonks. The USGA had a similar adjustment (0.96 I think) but I don't know why it was not continued.
But you have seen that the Table shown earlier in the thread is 100% in Australia as opposed to 95% elsewhere. I don't think 0.02 will have much effect.

But it all depends where you are playing for a match result and where you return your score for handicapping purposes. Matchplay is not recognised for handicapping in CONGU.

The 96% “bonus for excellence” multiplier prior to 1/1/2020​

Why are handicap differentials multiplied by .96, or 96%? This is what it said in the USGA Handicap Manual:

Bonus for Excellence is the incentive for players to improve their golf games that is built into the USGA Handicap System. It is the term used to describe the small percentage below perfect equity that is used to calculate a Handicap Index (96 percent). As a Handicap Index improves (gets lower), the player has a slightly better chance of placing high or winning a handicap event.

In another article entitled, How well should you play, at the USGA website, the remark is made that, "your golf club or association then will multiply by a 96-percent 'bonus for excellence' factor that slightly favors the lower-handicapped player." So the 96% is an incentive to improve your handicap and a "slight" advantage to lower handicapped players in a handicapped competition. In one of the other mentions of "bonus for excellence" on the USGA site, it is stated that a "limberback" lower handicapper will have a "very slight" advantage over a series of matches with a weekend warrior. That would mean that most non-professional golfers could play against an internationally known golfer with only a slight edge going to the pro. That's what the USGA Handicap System does...

 

[VVega]

I think it’s a confusing to say the least. I found out today that IG app calculated my CH one shot less than EG/tables and our score entry terminals. Meaning anyone entering and scoring via IG app will have potentially a shot difference in their CH compared if they enter via the terminal. How is that possible?

 

[Dazza Downunder]

According to @AussieKB, these allowances are ignored by most (all) clubs, meaning players just use their Daily Handicap in all/most formats.

I have a very different perspective. If Aussie KB said that, it's careless misrepresentation at best. Uncorroborated bluster and hyperbole at worst.

I found this on the Australian system.

https://assets.ctfassets.net/3urhge...8dd467d4facacf4a0bd119150/00046428-source.pdf
It contains this table.

The thing that strikes me most in the table is that 4BBB handicap matchplay is rarely played in competition in Australia. In 46 years of playing golf (and I travel a fair bit) I have played it once and that was when I visited England last year. I won't say it is never played (never say never) - but maybe it is something like a tenth of one percent or a hundredth of one percent of all rounds played in Australia. Probably less than that. Maybe a few clubs play it as their format for annual inter-club challenges or something like that. But it's very uncommon.

The main formats (say 95% of all rounds) played in Australia are individual strokeplay (incl stableford and par) and individual matchplay. 4BBB is commonly, but not exclusively, combined with a singles stableford competition. For these, the full individual Daily Handicap (your equivalent is PH) is used.

So a suggestion that individual clubs do their own thing and ignore allowance requirements is just wrong. Principally because there is no additional allowance adjustment to be made. It is simply 100%. In fact, the idea of an adjustment is unheard of. The number spat out by the computer or the lookup tables just 'is'.

So in reality they don't just have one Daily Handicap? Also the Daily Handicap is just the CH and they have 3 values (HI, CH and PH) just like us?

We have a GA (your equivalent of HI) from which our Daily Handicap (your equivalent of PH) is calculated. There is no interim CH step. The Daily Handicap will vary with tees and slope and course rating - but the computer or lookup tables works all that out.

The Daily Handicap calculation is as described in #15. We could calculate an equivalent CH but we don't and it would seem redundant to do so. It is just not a term or concept in our system.

So they have a Handicap Index and a CH

There is no CH in Australia.

On the face of it (unless I’m missing something) it seems a real mess and managing to make the convoluted (according to some) system that we have actually to be a lot more sensible.

It seems pretty straightforward to me. We have a GA (HI) and a single calculation tells us what our handicap is for the round we are about to play (our Daily Handicap).

If I am reading this right, then a CH in Australia is not comparable to a CH in the UK or anywhere else for that matter.

There is no CH in Australia. Honestly I have no idea what purpose it serves in your system. It seems just an interim, unnecessary step to get from HI to PH. It could just be done in a single calculation.

So their system gives you a HI, then the computer calculates a course dependent course handicap then times this by 0.93 - you then have your Daily Handicap from which the club may or may not calculate a Playing Handicap. Not exactly simplified.

No. There is no CH. Our Daily Handicap is equivalent to your PH. No further adjustment needed. 100% (which already includes the 0.93 modifier) for individual strokeplay, individual matchplay and 4BBB strokeplay.

Your adjustment is 95% to get to PH. Ours is 93% and is built into the single calculation that gets us from our GA (your HI) to our Daily Handicap (your PH).

we play matchplay at 100% they play it at 93%

I'll leave the statistical analysis to others but I don't understand why a playing/daily handicap should be different for matchplay than it is for strokeplay.



Summary. I just can't relate to the starting premise that in Australia allowances are ignored by most (all) clubs, meaning players just use their Daily Handicap in all/most formats.

Players do use their Daily Handicaps (aka PH) in all/most formats (individual strokeplay, individual matchplay and 4BBB strokeplay) because that is the requirement and the system. The 93% adjustment is already built into the calculation.

As for all the other novelty team formats (and foursomes) in the table, it would be a nonsense to suggest that appropriate adjustments and calculations (based on individual Daily Handicaps) aren't performed to determine team handicaps appropriately. Foursomes is always 50% of the combined team (daily) handicap. None of those novelty formats count for handicap purposes anyway so I don't see any harm if clubs want to deviate from the guidelines when they are running these novelty events.

 

[wjemather]

I think it’s a confusing to say the least. I found out today that IG app calculated my CH one shot less than EG/tables and our score entry terminals. Meaning anyone entering and scoring via IG app will have potentially a shot difference in their CH compared if they enter via the terminal. How is that possible?

Sounds like your app needs updating?

 

[VVega]

Sounds like your app needs updating?

Thanks, indeed this fixed the issue. Won’t be using the app again, don’t need yet another thing to keep maintaining

 

[wjemather]

Thanks, indeed this fixed the issue. Won’t be using the app again, don’t need yet another thing to keep maintaining

You could just enable automatic updates?

 

[Voyager EMH]

In Australia the 93% should be changed to other appropriate % for the chosen format of play.



I've played in several organised comps in the UK where the correct % has not been used. We have roll-ups at our club where 100% is used for individual strokeplay when the field is greater than 30 players. I've played in best 2 from 4 AmAms where 100% was used instead of 85%.

Reports of Auzzies ignoring the correct multiplier are as anecdotal as mine above.

We got it wrong from the start by creating a Course Handicap concept that many focussed on as the replacement of their old handicap.
This in turn created the fallacy of "losing a shot" when calculating the correct handicap for the format of play.

Now we have the further confusion of rounded and unrounded Course Handicap.

"Course Handicap" has been, and continues to be, a source of much consternation in the UK. It could have been avoided. But it wasn't.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

In Australia the 93% should be changed to other appropriate % for the chosen format of play.

View attachment 54212

I've played in several organised comps in the UK where the correct % has not been used. We have roll-ups at our club where 100% is used for individual strokeplay when the field is greater than 30 players. I've played in best 2 from 4 AmAms where 100% was used instead of 85%.

Reports of Auzzies ignoring the correct multiplier are as anecdotal as mine above.

We got it wrong from the start by creating a Course Handicap concept that many focussed on as the replacement of their old handicap.
This in turn created the fallacy of "losing a shot" when calculating the correct handicap for the format of play.

Now we have the further confusion of rounded and unrounded Course Handicap.

"Course Handicap" has been, and continues to be, a source of much consternation in the UK. It could have been avoided. But it wasn't.

Worse, in Scotland the advice from Scottish Golf is that CH is the *only* important number, when it's actually the only one that *isn't* important, they actually state that's the number that should be on your scorecard

 

[rulefan]

Worse, in Scotland the advice from Scottish Golf is that CH is the *only* important number, when it's actually the only one that *isn't* important, they actually state that's the number that should be on your scorecard

Well it is the only one used in handicapping.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Well it is the only one used in handicapping.

It is not used in my case at the moment, because none of my best 8 scores includes a triple bogey or worse on a non-shot-hole or a quadruple bogey or worse on a shot hole.

 

[wjemather]

It is not used in my case at the moment, because none of my best 8 scores includes a triple bogey or worse on a non-shot-hole or a quadruple bogey or worse on a shot hole.

You may not be seeing any effect on your SDs via NDB/Stableford adjustments, but CH is certainly still being used.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Well it is the only one used in handicapping.

When you total your gross score, what do you take off? Yup, it's PH. The *only* one used for results is PH. The *only* number people keep track of for their h'cap is HI. CH is useless

 

[wjemather]

When you total your gross score, what do you take off? Yup, it's PH. The *only* one used for results is PH. The *only* number people keep track of for their h'cap is HI. CH is useless

I don't take anything off - the committee/software does all that. I'm only responsible for the gross hole scores and certifying them.
Since the committee is responsible for applying handicaps, players don't even need to know their Playing Handicap in stroke play competitions. However, they do need to know their Handicap Index but generally only to lookup their Course Handicap, which is always relevant (and obviously not useless) as it is the one used for handicapping - both in and out of competition.

Also, the vast majority of rounds are not played in competitions or matches - so no Playing Handicaps at all, only Course Handicaps.