Swinglowandslow
Well-known member
Sorry , IMO,54 handicap is too much. I blame the bean counters.
New handicap system
- Thread starter Tonythetiger
- Start date
Sorry , IMO,54 handicap is too much. I blame the bean counters.
Tonythetiger
New member
Thanks for your comment. But surely a single figure golfer would have to have a world record round and a 54 handicap wouldn't. So don't sound fair to me on good golfers. Just saying.
jim8flog
Journeyman Pro
One of the tings to remember is that when the 54 handicap first came in it was club handicap and it ws up to each club to decide if male players with handicaps over 28 and ladies over 36 could enter club comps.
The current rules still allow a club to put a limit on handicaps for entry in to a comp.
AliMc
Well-known member
Very well said Mr Sensible ?
Always said the h'cap limit for all gents competitions should be 18 (and if I was king they would be ) !
That is not the case. Your logic is flawed, but maybe the same mistake being made by many low hcs, and leading to their sense of grievance.
Handicap golf is not based on what absolute score one would have to score, but on the probability of playing better than ones handicap. You can conceive of the 54hc scoring 20 shots better than hc, because that isnt an impossible gross score for a golfer to score. But it is a false comparison to then draw a parallel with the scratch golfer and scoring 52 gross being beyond him. Of course it is. But the 20 shots is beyond the 54 hcapper too. It wont happen.
jim8flog
Journeyman Pro
Out of all the guys I play with in regular comps swindles etc ( about 30 players) there are only a very few whose handicaps are 18 or less and in our regular fortnight seniors comps only about a third of the 100 or so players are.
Nothing wrong with higher handicaps as long as comps are played divisions.
rulefan
Tour Winner
Prior to WHS the CONGU limit was 54
True fact. But only for a few years. 2018 maybe ? Prior to that it was 28, so people linking above hcs with whs, while incorrect, is understandable.
rulefan
Tour Winner
Voyager EMH
Slipper Wearing Plucker of Pheasants
When Dr Stableford invented his point scoring system, the maximum handicap for men was 21.
He stipulated a 7/8 allowance so that no gentleman would receive two shots on a hole. That would have been ungentlemanly and rather absurd, in his view.
When I started playing in about 1970 the maximum handicap for men was 24.
Breaking 100 was a big goal. It gave you the incentive that you could improve a bit more and become a "proper golfer" off 24.
I'm not saying that those times were better than now, just different.
A Seniors Championship is off scratch.
A Seniors Cup or Trophy is a handicap medal.
Clubs that get that wrong - well, that's their problem not mine.
He stipulated a 7/8 allowance so that no gentleman would receive two shots on a hole. That would have been ungentlemanly and rather absurd, in his view.
When I started playing in about 1970 the maximum handicap for men was 24.
Breaking 100 was a big goal. It gave you the incentive that you could improve a bit more and become a "proper golfer" off 24.
I'm not saying that those times were better than now, just different.
A Seniors Championship is off scratch.
A Seniors Cup or Trophy is a handicap medal.
Clubs that get that wrong - well, that's their problem not mine.
RRidges
Active member
It's not the handicap system that's at fault...It's daft/lazy committees that don't recognise, or haven't recognised, that 'elite' comps like Club Champs should not be treated like any other comp and played in a single division. They should be played in Divisions, so that the best players in the club play for the premium award/trophy and the rest play for best in their division!
Ideally, there's also a Best Scratch trophy that's awarded to the actual best score on the day!
Oh...And it's definitely not the new handicap system that's at fault - as has already been statd!
Ideally, there's also a Best Scratch trophy that's awarded to the actual best score on the day!
Oh...And it's definitely not the new handicap system that's at fault - as has already been statd!
The best players should get no preferential treatment in handicapped competitions. If it handicapped, either everyone plays for the same prize, or, you have categories of equal prizes. You dont have a half way house of handicapped, but 'superior' handicapped.
A scratch prize also, as long as there are enough players who can contend for one and fund that prize. Not all clubs have 20 or 30 players who can vie for that. If there are only 3 realistically playing for it, then no best scratch prize.
Orikoru
Tour Winner
The two clubs I've been a member at had a gross prize for the main club championship, and also a net prize as well (that has a different title). Seems perfectly simple to me and I'm not sure why every club doesn't do that.
RRidges
Active member
That's fine for normal comps, but Club Champs are different imo. The Handicap element/section/award should be secondary in such comps! If anything, the Handicap prize should be for the 'most improved golfer' - with perhaps a weighting for the Club Champ comp.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Club Championship should always be scratch as the main prize
That’s the only way to find out who is the best golfer
LincolnShep
Head Pro
I agree. The Club Champion should be the best player at the club, not the one who played better than their handicap on the day. And I speak as a 17 hcap who has no chance of being champion; but that's fair, there are plenty of handicap competitions for me to go for, the club championship is special.
Wildboy370
Active member
Why is it high handicappers always get slated when they have that one good day we all have at some point, but scratch golfers never do. Point in question. Monthly stableford win by 43 handicap with only 10 cards in gets slated when wins with 49 points. Same week guy on +2 hits a gross 64 , new course record 8 under and they still clapping him now. The difference being ?.
RRidges
Active member
Neither should be 'slated'! Both should be congratulated, but for different reasons!
nickjdavis
Head Pro
Why is it necessary for there to be enough players to "fund the prize"? In all honesty...who cares what/how much the "prize" is? All that counts is the honour of being able to call yourself "Club Champion". If there are even just three potential contenders....let them fight it out.
If we stopped competing simply because there was a perception that there was no chance of anyone else (or anyone outside of a small select group) winning, then frankly the whole ethos of competitive sport is dead in the water, and momentous events like Greece/Denmark winning the Euros, Foinaven winning the National, the US winning the 1980 Winter Olympic Ice Hockey Gold medal and countless others would never occur.
FourPutt
Head Pro
Neither should be slated. Although fwiw the course record 64 off +2 still gets beat by approx 7 shots in this scenario. I could understand the frustration of shooting 8 under par and still getting beat by 7 shots.
I do think that the overall club champion anywhere should be the best golfer on the day of the competition. i.e. the competition should be a scratch competition. I have no issue with a parallel handicap competition, for which anyone who has a great day under the pressure of it being the club handicap championship should be congratulated.
I do agree with the division split though, as I think it is proportionately harder to card a competitive nett score the lower your handicap. e.g. a great day for a 38 handicap might be shooting 20 over (-18 nett) and a great day for a 9 handicap might be shooting level which would still see them beat by 9 shots. The div system means that it's people of broadly similar ability who compete against each other (though the Div 3 tends to have a disproportionate number of golfers in since it seems to span everything from 16 PH up - not sure if the Div splits are a club matter or are mandated?)
