NRs in medal

[jim8flog]

So, yeah, if you've signed in to a comp but not submitted the card it should be a DQ. but as per @Ethan's reply above, we usually record the card as 18 zeroes, which records the card as 'No score recorded' and resulting in a 0.1 automatic increase on the player's handicap.

Looks like you need to change your practices come November 2nd cads that are recorded as a all NRs will not count on a players handicap record and CONGU want hole by hole scores submitted.

G4.1a Information Required For Scoring Record
Rule 4.1a sets out the details that need to be recorded. In terms of requirement (ii) the National Associations in GB&I require scores to be entered as hole-by-hole scores rather than as total scores for the round.

 

[jim8flog]

So I guess this where the inconsistency comes in. I agree with @rulefan that "medal" is not really a playing format.


All of our singles stroke play comps are for Trophies so they normally get listed/called by the name of the Trophy.

 

[jpjeffery]

Looks like you need to change your practices come November 2nd...

Oh we know! We know!

And we're REALLY looking forward to it!*




* Might not be accurate

 

[jpjeffery]

All of our singles stroke play comps are for Trophies so they normally get listed/called by the name of the Trophy.

Same (outside of the monthly medals and BH roll-ups)

 

[SammmeBee]

Persistent NRers should be banned from competitions......

 

[Beedee]

Persistent NRers should be banned from competitions......

Do you mean people who NR by not returning a card? In which case I couldn't agree more.
Or people who NR by returning a card but treating it like a stableford? In which case I couldn't agree less.

 

[Swango1980]

Do you mean people who NR by not returning a card? In which case I couldn't agree more.
Or people who NR by returning a card but treating it like a stableford? In which case I couldn't agree less.

I echo those thoughts. Never critical of a player who picks up on a medal because they are having a nightmare hole, with little incentive to walk back to the tee, or whatever. So long as they continue to play afterwards and submit their scorecard

 

[williamalex1]

Wish I had a pound for every NR I've posted , pick up if you're having a mare, don't waste everybody else's day by posting 10s and 12s.

 

[BubbaP]

There's some interesting nomenclature going on here. Well, interesting to me anyway.

All 12 of our monthly competitions are called medals, whether they're stroke play or stableford, but that doesn't seem to be the case for everyone who has contributed to this thread.

It may make sense if they were all listed as stroke play, whether they were medal or stableford ?‍

 

[jim8flog]

Wish I had a pound for every NR I've posted , pick up if you're having a mare, don't waste everybody else's day by posting 10s and 12s.

This is true bit it does mean that you should not start the next hole and carry on to the best of your ability.

I would like a pound for every time I had to criticise a low single figure for submitting 18 NRs on the computer because they had a couple of bad holes.

 

[jim8flog]

Whilst I'm not a fan, that's entirely their perogative.
If you don't finish the round and NR, that's your round done, what happens after that is nobody's business surely?

Not under WHS. Committees can now post a penalty score for a whole card or add penalty scores to the card.

Worth a read of section 3.2 in the Handicapping manual

 

[williamalex1]

This is true bit it does mean that you should not start the next hole and carry on to the best of your ability.

I would like a pound for every time I had to criticise a low single figure for submitting 18 NRs on the computer because they had a couple of bad holes.

Out of interest, what actual difference would it make in the present system or in the new WHS, if a 20 h/c returns say gross 110 including a few 9s and 10s rather than just NR a few holes.

 

[rulefan]

I think we must be clear about whether we are talking about
1) not returning a card
2) entering NR on every hole after the first few poor holes
3) entering NR (instead of 0) for a couple of bad hols

The potential consequences are different.

 

[rulefan]

Out of interest, what actual difference would it make in the present system or in the new WHS, if a 20 h/c returns say gross 110 including a few 9s and 10s rather than just NR a few holes.

Net double bogey will be assigned to those holes.

This is not necessarily the same as not completing a hole.

 

[williamalex1]

I think we must be clear about whether we are talking about
1) not returning a card
2) entering NR on every hole after the first few poor holes
3) entering NR (instead of 0) for a couple of bad hols

The potential consequences are different.

Cards returned gross 120 net 90 containing say 4 x 10s a few triple bogeys and a few doubles , or card returned with a few NRs . What's the difference, except for saving time

 

[jim8flog]

Out of interest, what actual difference would it make in the present system or in the new WHS, if a 20 h/c returns say gross 110 including a few 9s and 10s rather than just NR a few holes.[/Q

That question is bit like how long is a piece of string.

It really depends on how many NRs and if the NRs are really NSs (not started) and how many holes have actually been completed.

The WHS now sets a minimum of 10 holes for a card to be acceptable for handicap purposes and penalty scores to be added if at least 10 holes are played for the holes not started. Penalty scores being less than nett double bogey.

PS I have not said a player may not out down NR or something to signify a hole not completed. The main points being has a player not started holes having given up or have they NRed every hole when entering scores on the scores input computer.

 

[rulefan]

Cards returned gross 120 net 90 containing say 4 x 10s a few triple bogeys and a few doubles , or card returned with a few NRs . What's the difference, except for saving time

I was saying the potential consequences of situations 1, 2 & 3.

I didn't quote post #58 and wasn't referring to it directly.