new handicap after 20 rounds incorrect

[wjemather]

I was

Do you think this is the way the system is intended to work, or is there a flaw in the system?

The low Index of 6.1 was simply because of the one great score of 76. Furthermore, as that 76 was early on, the differential of 7.1 was reduced by an extra shot (it was the 4th score, so at the time the Index is only based on the best score minus 1 shot). Had the order of the scores simply been changed, and the 76 was shot during the 5th round or after, then the low index would be 7.1 and not 6.1.

I thought that the Low Index could only be set AFTER 20 scores were submitted, and based on the Index only from that point, when it was based on the average of 8 differentials? I haven't gone back into the manual to double check, but it seems incredible that a Low Index is effectively based on ONE very good score in 20. Whereas if many scores had been submitted before that sequence of 20 scores, then the Players Low Index would likely be much higher than 6.1, unless they were genuinely much better in the previous scores, to be consistent enough to earn an Index of 6.1

Just looked at the manual. It says the Low Index is established once a player has 20 acceptable scores. To me, that would indicate the low Index should only be established once those 20 scores are in, and be the average of the best 8. If 6.1 is the Low Index, then the Low Index has effectively been set after 4 acceptable scores?

I would have thought it makes most sense for the LHI to be set as the HI after entry of the 20th score and updated from there, but (as with a few other things) that isn't clear in the manual. The software implementation is consistent with the manual - the software developers wouldn't even consider the implications of the methodology used (not really their job) as they just take what they're given.

 

[rulefan]

Just looked at the manual. It says the Low Index is established once a player has 20 acceptable scores. To me, that would indicate the low Index should only be established once those 20 scores are in, and be the average of the best 8. If 6.1 is the Low Index, then the Low Index has effectively been set after 4 acceptable scores?

Are there no scores prior to those shown on the page we can see?

 

[Swango1980]

you could be right, this might be a scenario that wasn't programmed adequately to deal with in the system/database

I'd follow wjemathers advice, and contact your handicap committee. That Low Index is far too low.

Is this a known glitch in any of the ISVs (to anyone that knows)?

 

[Swango1980]

Are there no scores prior to those shown on the page we can see?

There won't be. You can tell by the Index's given. There are none next to the first 3 scores, the first index subtracts 2 from the best score, the second subtracts 1. Therefore, this shows the first 3 scores were the 1st on record.

 

[jim8flog]

Just looked at the manual. It says the Low Index is established once a player has 20 acceptable scores. To me, that would indicate the low Index should only be established once those 20 scores are in, and be the average of the best 8. If 6.1 is the Low Index, then the Low Index has effectively been set after 4 acceptable scores?

Page 61

Where there are fewer than 20 Score Differentials in a player’s scoring record at
the time an exceptional score is submitted, the reduction is applied by adjusting
all of the Score Differentials recorded in the player's scoring record, which
includes the exceptional score.

 

[Swango1980]

Page 61

Where there are fewer than 20 Score Differentials in a player’s scoring record at
the time an exceptional score is submitted, the reduction is applied by adjusting
all of the Score Differentials recorded in the player's scoring record, which
includes the exceptional score.

We are talking about Low Index though, rather than Exceptional Scores

 

[Swango1980]

I would have thought it makes most sense for the LHI to be set as the HI after entry of the 20th score and updated from there, but (as with a few other things) that isn't clear in the manual. The software implementation is consistent with the manual - the software developers wouldn't even consider the implications of the methodology used (not really their job) as they just take what they're given.

One simple reason to see where the logic is ridiculous, in terms of how the ISV has applied the Low Index

After 19 scores, the player's Index was 13.6. They then submitted a 20th score, differential 17.3. At which point their Index plummeted to 11.1

 

[gridoutblack]

Are there no scores prior to those shown on the page we can see?

no, thats the only 20 scores. I have been waiting to complete my first 20 rounds to see the fist official handicap.

 

[wjemather]

One simple reason to see where the logic is ridiculous, in terms of how the ISV has applied the Low Index

After 19 scores, the player's Index was 13.6. They then submitted a 20th score, differential 17.3. At which point their Index plummeted to 11.1

The software is compliant with the letter of rules 5.7 and 5.8; so assuming the developers were given no further information, it functions exactly how I would expect it to.

If the software were to take the HI after 20 scores as the initial LHI, it would be adding something that is not in the rules.

 

[Swango1980]

The software is compliant with the letter of rules 5.7 and 5.8; so assuming the developers were given no further information, it functions exactly how I would expect it to.

If the software were to take the HI after 20 scores as the initial LHI, it would be adding something that is not in the rules.

I agree with your comment that it is probably not clear in the manual.

I'm simply saying that the most apparent interpretation of how it should work, is how we both believe makes most sense, that the Low Index = The Index after 20 scores (when 20 scores have been submitted). My Post #27 was simply highlighting another way the software implementation can be interpreted as "ridiculous", along with my earlier comments regarding the Low Index being based on one single early good score.

The question would be, would the Manual need to be reworded to make it more clear. Or, would the authors of the Manual be able to defend the current wording? The exact text is "A Low Index is established once a player has at least 20 acceptable scores in their scoring record." In the OP's case, it is true that the software has no Low Index impacting any scores until the 20th was submitted. Therefore, it can definitely be argued that the software meets that interpretation. However, once the 20th score was entered, the Low Index calculation was set to the players Index after 4 rounds. Therefore, could the WHS authors argue that the software is effectively going back in time, and establishing a Low Index after 4 rounds?

PS- Does ALL handicapping software do this?

 

[nickjdavis]

PS- Does ALL handicapping software do this?

I don't believe that it is an ISV issue as the ISV's are not responsible for management/calculation of handicaps. This would surely be a bug in the DotGolf system?

 

[Swango1980]

I don't believe that it is an ISV issue as the ISV's are not responsible for management/calculation of handicaps. This would surely be a bug in the DotGolf system?

Yeah, I think you are correct. I'd imagine you'd need to compare the way different handicap global regions handle it, rather than focusing on ISVs. Do Scotland use a different system?

 

[nickjdavis]

Yeah, I think you are correct. I'd imagine you'd need to compare the way different handicap global regions handle it, rather than focusing on ISVs. Do Scotland use a different system?

I believe they do and seemingly, based on what some of our brethren from north of the border say, it is less than an ideal implementation....I may have read somewhere that they will be dumping their system and using the Dotgolf system in the near future...unless that was some sort of elaborate April Fool or a display of Scottish humour.

 

[Swango1980]

Has anyone else seen this? played 20 rounds, my best 8 combined = 112.6. which if you divide by 8 = 14.07. but my handicap index is 11.1. Why would that be? everyone elses that I see the best 8 added together and divided by 8 works out exact. any ideas?

Going back to the OP. Not only do I believe you should definitely raise this with your handicap secretary (the low index is way too low, and you could be stuck on 11.1 (Hard Cap) for a long time, dependent on when you shot that 76, but I think you should encourage them to submit your example to the authorities. It might be something that has never really been highlighted before to them, and therefore might not be recognised as an issue. I'd like to think if they did know about it, they'd look to update the software, although I'm not sure how quick a process this actually is.

 

[jim8flog]

We are talking about Low Index though, rather than Exceptional Scores

I may have slightly mis read what you are saying. You are correct in tha6t a low index would not be set until 20 scores are on the record but that would be the lowest score in the 20 once that number has been reached.

However given that there is also a recent 11.5 in the scores I would not be in hurry to reset myself. I would view the player as a newly handicapped player who shows potential and wait until there are several more scores on the record.

 

[Swango1980]

I may have slightly mis read what you are saying. You are correct in tha6t a low index would not be set until 20 scores are on the record but that would be the lowest score in the 20 once that number has been reached.

However given that there is also a recent 11.5 in the scores I would not be in hurry to reset myself. I would view the player as a newly handicapped player who shows potential and wait until there are several more scores on the record.

Indeed. But, are we saying new golfers (with 20 scores) still need to be treated differently that other golfers (and bear in mind the flak I got from the "experts" when suggesting that there should be additional limitations of variable levels on new golfers pre-20 scores)?

For most of us, our current Index is simply the average of our best 8 differentials. Therefore, we are likely to have 2-4 scores in that 20 that are better than our current Index.

In the OPs case, their Low Index is at a value that they have never played to, not even after a full 20 rounds (their best differential is 7.1, yet their Low Index is 6.1). Yes, they have shot an 11.5, yet that is still worse than the upper hard cap limit of 11.1. Some might say that, after submitting 20 scores, the player has already submitted enough scores to determine a fair and comparable handicap to other players. In their case, however, it has been significantly reduced. The question to Committee would then be, if they feel the current number is appropriate as they are a new golfer (even though this number is highly likely a bug in the system), how long must the player be disadvantaged by this? Even if they submit another decent score, their Index will still likely be higher than it ought to be, yet would the Committee be justified in leaving the "false" handicap in place? No idea when the differential of 7.1 was shot, but it could potentially be in the last few months if the player submits a lot of scores. Therefore, they could have this limitation in place for many months, well into next summer.

 

[wjemather]

Going back to the OP. Not only do I believe you should definitely raise this with your handicap secretary (the low index is way too low, and you could be stuck on 11.1 (Hard Cap) for a long time, dependent on when you shot that 76, but I think you should encourage them to submit your example to the authorities. It might be something that has never really been highlighted before to them, and therefore might not be recognised as an issue. I'd like to think if they did know about it, they'd look to update the software, although I'm not sure how quick a process this actually is.

I raised it with EG way back at implementation (in 2020), and a few more times since then.
However, I assume any change or clarification would need to come from The R&A/USGA's WHS team.

 

[Alan Clifford]

Just looked at the manual. It says the Low Index is established once a player has 20 acceptable scores. To me, that would indicate the low Index should only be established once those 20 scores are in, and be the average of the best 8. If 6.1 is the Low Index, then the Low Index has effectively been set after 4 acceptable scores?

I too thought that the first low handicap index was the one when after you had put in the twentieth score.