wjemather
Well-known member
No - having a very large field makes handicap divisions/flights/grades sensible regardless of the handicap system in use.
- Status
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
Only flawed to single figures.
If you’re a middle handicapper you will like it.
Saying it’s worked the way it should just proves it’s biased. ( as previously admitted)
No new system should be biased to anyone that’s not a handicap system in my opinion.
No wonder players are looking for a few shots back to compete.
So play the system.
Thintowin
Active member
That penny is dropping more and more. It's what the system demands.
bobmac
Major Champion
If you can't beat them.......
doublebogey7
Head Pro
As has been demonstrated on here the UHS was extemely biased at every level to the low handicapper. WHS has redressed that balance, admittedly rsullting in low handicappers finding it harder to win trophies but still being more than adequatly rewarded when it comes down to share of the prize pot. Call that bias if you like I call it trying to get a balance. Now I have said on here before that it has gone marginally too far and ought to be tweaked a little, but we certainly sahould not be going back to how it was under UHS.
Thintowin
Active member
UHS encouraged golfers to both improve and try to stay at that level by learning about the game and themselves in order to achieve consistency. It was a fulfilling journey for many who took it.
With WHS we have more fun apparently.
rulefan
Tour Winner
Just how does a very experienced, aging player improve on the handicap they had when they were 35 years younger?
20 rounds a year.
UHS. 2 strokes
WHS. Old rounds removed new round now contribute.
Last edited:
WorldHandicapSystem
Active member
There is no need for anyone handicap system at all to encourage golfers to want to improve. You either have that in you, or you don’t.
I actually feel quite sorry for people who attach so much importance to an arbitrary number. Even more so those whose golfing and personal fulfilment or mental wellbeing is attached to winning what are ultimately meaningless golf competitions. Something over which you have no control.
rulefan
Tour Winner
And it is only a game after all.
rulie
Head Pro
Winning is within the top 10.
Dunesman
Active member
We never had them pre WHS. I am sure some clubs did, and that there is a case to be made for them. But they have undeniable negative aspects also.
We only went categories after 2 years of WHS due to the uncompetitiveness of single figure men who were very unhappy to find that WHS was a retrograde step for their chances. This was not flagged or communicated in advance. WHS was sold to everyone as an unalloyed good. So no surprise that they feel cheated.
So M&H introduced categories for comps where possible. But its a bad fix for a variety of reasons :
- there are now 4 'winners' each of those weeks. From a grouo of 30-40 players. Big whoop. Not a winner from 140 or so.
- not introduced for monthly medals. 4 monthly medal winners would be a nonsense. So low men, who traditionally prized these comps are either disadvantaged or they dont compete anymore. Thats a shame.
- categories for board comps, trophies, and matchplays simply cannot be done. This caused the most dissatisfaction, as they are viewed as the club's majors. So the handicap restricion and 0.9 factors are brought in to try to fix those. But problematic also as the now exclude higher players, and is going outside the letter of the law with EG. But overall considered the best of a bad situation until authorities resolve things somehow, properly.
Even supporters/defenders of WHS must acknowledge WHS has provoked this issue (amongst others, but just taking the viability of 100+ field competitions that is a core of our golfing scene here for the moment). They may consider the benefits outweigh the cost. But they cannot say this issue, very important to many ordinary English golfers, has been messed up by the EG implementation of WHS (under the WHS umbrella, given that it has so many flavours anyway, there maybe is a better version).
D-S
Well-known member
In an ideal world you wouldn’t have divisions, I fully agree.
However neither UHS nor WHS are perfect. We had divisions for monthly medals under UHS (as did most clubs around here) introduced because of the sort of complaints people are making here. We also have a gross prize due to complaints from an even smaller section.
Women’s golf has had divisions for many competitions (Silver and Bronze) for a long time pre WHS.
I cannot conceive of a system that would make a 36 and 5 handicapper compete on a fair and equal basis due to the disparity in their scoring patterns.
WHS has a few faults but I believe it is an improvement over what we had before, it could, and no doubt will, be tweaked in the next revision in 3 or so years, my hope that it will be to make it more compatible with golf as it is played here not to make it more universal/US like. However I do not believe any changes are going to be seismic and will certainly not make all golfers happy (as we all know this is fundamentally impossible).
However neither UHS nor WHS are perfect. We had divisions for monthly medals under UHS (as did most clubs around here) introduced because of the sort of complaints people are making here. We also have a gross prize due to complaints from an even smaller section.
Women’s golf has had divisions for many competitions (Silver and Bronze) for a long time pre WHS.
I cannot conceive of a system that would make a 36 and 5 handicapper compete on a fair and equal basis due to the disparity in their scoring patterns.
WHS has a few faults but I believe it is an improvement over what we had before, it could, and no doubt will, be tweaked in the next revision in 3 or so years, my hope that it will be to make it more compatible with golf as it is played here not to make it more universal/US like. However I do not believe any changes are going to be seismic and will certainly not make all golfers happy (as we all know this is fundamentally impossible).
Dunesman
Active member
It doesnt affect the average golfer, and is not at all part of the dissatisfaction, but I do think that the turmoil in the transition looks even further needlessly self inflicted, if we take the fundamental motivation for WHS as being one handicap system to rule them all.
This is clearly an unadulterated failure. There are as many, if not more, regional handicap syatem variation. Claiming they are all WHS because WHS allows for local variation is patent nonsense. One system would be one system. USA, the big region we were to align with is still playing a different laisez faire attitude to scores submitted for index calculation, and their handicaps have retained their traditional differential with ours. This is a failure. Every claim from officers here that WHS is a success do to more sumitted cards and igolf membership, highlights this failure as a pathetic attempt to raise new metrics to claim success.
This is clearly an unadulterated failure. There are as many, if not more, regional handicap syatem variation. Claiming they are all WHS because WHS allows for local variation is patent nonsense. One system would be one system. USA, the big region we were to align with is still playing a different laisez faire attitude to scores submitted for index calculation, and their handicaps have retained their traditional differential with ours. This is a failure. Every claim from officers here that WHS is a success do to more sumitted cards and igolf membership, highlights this failure as a pathetic attempt to raise new metrics to claim success.
rulefan
Tour Winner
Where is your evidence for this? But does it really matter? UK players very rarely compete in US net competitions with US players.
Thintowin
Active member
It matters as much as unifying the handicap system, not at all!
doublebogey7
Head Pro
Your first paragraph describes a very small proportion of golfers. For the vast majority is is merely to spend time with their mates and have fun.
Thintowin
Active member
No need for a decent handicap system for that group. You're saying that they'd have been happy whatever. I assume none of that group are bothered enough to be making an argument either way, why would they?
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
I agree we don’t want any advantage just a level playing field.
Said it many times “ why put a system in that disadvantages one section of players”?
A delibaretly flawed system to boot
Can any system do that I’m not sure.
But this at the moment isn’t working for the low guys at my place and others judging by how long we have been having this discussion.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
Why a WHS then if that’s the case?
Thintowin
Active member
I think there could be a group with a chip on their shoulder? Can't explain why anyone would be happy with a system that isn't generally acceptable across the range of handicaps.
- Status