Official WHS Survey

[IanM]

I remember all the 'how does your handicap travel' threads we used to get on here... haven't seen one of those in a while

we get plenty... although the language is now, "our course rating is too low!!"

 

[RichA]

All the costs to change over to WHS.
It must have cost a fair few Bob.
Even changing a corporate logo these days costs millions.

Having asked a couple of times if it was worth the cost, I thought you might know an actual number.

 

[clubchamp98]

Having asked a couple of times if it was worth the cost, I thought you might know an actual number.

No I don’t ,
I was asking if it’s worth it due to only 1% liking the new system and 1% not liking it.
The other 98% couldn’t care less!

I think putting a number on it would be impossible tbh.

 

[RichA]

No I don’t ,
I was asking if it’s worth it due to only 1% liking the new system and 1% not liking it.
The other 98% couldn’t care less!

I think putting a number on it would be impossible tbh.

You get that I made those numbers up based very roughly on the number of people expressing an opinion on this specific thread on this amateur golfers' forum?
Most of the made up 98% quite possibly like WHS; they just can't be bothered to join in a debate about it.
In terms of cost, doesn't the whole EG membership cost each of us £10.50 per year? About the same as a coffee and bacon roll. And the cost of WHS was absorbed within that. So not that much of a cost.

 

[D-S]

If you costed volunteer and officials time in attending national, regional and county seminars then it is quite high. We have done 14 local seminars and workshops as well as many zoom meetings and a lot of club visits in the past 3 years, clubs have sent out umpteen emails, videos and hosted many information evenings. There has been a huge learning exercise by committees with a lot of reading of original rules and methods as well as the many changes. If has created a lot of new work for County officials and handicap committee members.

I’m not saying that it isn’t worth it in the long run but cost isn’t just money.

 

[RichA]

If you costed volunteer and officials time in attending national, regional and county seminars then it is quite high. We have done 14 local seminars and workshops as well as many zoom meetings and a lot of club visits in the past 3 years, clubs have sent out umpteen emails, videos and hosted many information evenings. There has been a huge learning exercise by committees with a lot of reading of original rules and methods as well as the many changes. If has created a lot of new work for County officials and handicap committee members.

I’m not saying that it isn’t worth it in the long run but cost isn’t just money.

That's fine and I respect anybody who chooses to volunteer, but when you find yourself contemplating the cost of your volunteering it's time to stop. Not criticising - it's why my own relationship with a local sports team ended.
If something isn't sustainable it deserves to be given the chance to fail, rather than have people forcing it to succeed. I don't see that being the case with this system though, personally.

 

[Voyager EMH]

The vast majority of golfers never understood this and treated nett par (36 points) as their play-to-handicap target at all courses.

Many, many years ago (about 50 or so), your handicap was not static and you would receive extra shots at supposedly more difficult courses.

Not my experience at all.
From 1970 to 1990, I rarely saw stableford being played - it was played, but as a novelty. The vast majority thought of their golf score not their stableford points.
For many courses SSS was the same as par, but when it varied from par, most understood this significance.
Stroke index per hole was generally viewed as something for matchplay.
"Getting shots" on particular holes when playing individual strokeplay started to enter people's thinking through the 1990s as stableford gained some increase in popularity.

And I don't recall anything about handicap varying from course to course in the 1970s. It never happened to me or anyone that I knew.

I know you will want to knock holes in my words above, but it is an accurate description of how I have observed people playing golf over the decades.

 

[2blue]

Whether it happened or not in the past using SSS or not...... it should have!!! Getting an adjustment to your playing H/cap is absolutely essential when visiting other courses as none of them offer the same level of difficulty. For me this is the biggest PLUS provided by WHS.
If you only play your Club then it'll mean next to nothing.

 

[rulie]

Whether it happened or not in the past using SSS or not...... it should have!!! Getting an adjustment to your playing H/cap is absolutely essential when visiting other courses as none of them offer the same level of difficulty. For me this is the biggest PLUS provided by WHS.
If you only play your Club then it'll mean next to nothing.

It means a lot to those players who were "frozen" at handicaps that were too low due to the 0.1 increase limit.

 

[Voyager EMH]

A few decades ago, my course had a SSS of one under par. One of our close neighbours, "The Leicestershire" had Par 68, SSS 71.
This reflected the "difficulty" of those courses, I believe.
I knew, as did most others, that if 4-over par at my course was playing to a 5-handicap, then 8-over par at The Leicestershire was playing to a 5-handicap.
I and many others did not think in stableford terms. We did not think that "we needed more shots" at the more difficult course. That was taken care of in the differences between par and SSS.
We thought about our gross score and our net score. Stableford points came into our thinking only once or twice a year when playing a stableford competition.
This way of thinking was not restricted to low handicappers. It was across the range of all handicappers.

 

[Orikoru]

I remember all the 'how does your handicap travel' threads we used to get on here... haven't seen one of those in a while

My club's teams regularly win against other local clubs as our handicaps travel very well - due to our low course/slope ratings.

 

[RichA]

My club's teams regularly win against other local clubs as our handicaps travel very well - due to our low course/slope ratings.

Same with us. Our team always beats our nearest neighbour, home and away. Due to our prices increasing, loads have moved to that club in the last 6 months. All their handicaps have dropped by a couple of shots.
I'm joining myself, so looking forward to lowering my handicap. I hope.

 

[wjemather]

And I don't recall anything about handicap varying from course to course in the 1970s. It never happened to me or anyone that I knew.

Here is a "corresponding handicap" adjustment table (this one is from 1971) that was part of the handicap system for over 50 years, through into the early 1980s (probably until 1983 when the new system came in); although most people had long since stopped using it by then.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

At least the effort has been made to improve the transportability. Many players go to other countries to play and it is now easier to get an even group to play socially with others (foreigners or natives).

This is the argument the authorities made, in reality what % of people does this ever apply to? There are almost no overseas amatuer events to enter, and a mates away day/week will be made up of pretendy handicaps anyway. there was no need to ruin a perfect6ly good system for rarities like this

 

[Deleted member 30522]

I remember all the 'how does your handicap travel' threads we used to get on here... haven't seen one of those in a while

As course ratings haven't changed, that is exactly the same issue as it always was, and the current discussion on such can be had here https://forums.golfmonthly.com/threads/course-rating.117352/page-7#post-2782879

 

[Deleted member 30522]

That's fine and I respect anybody who chooses to volunteer, but when you find yourself contemplating the cost of your volunteering it's time to stop. Not criticising - it's why my own relationship with a local sports team ended.
If something isn't sustainable it deserves to be given the chance to fail, rather than have people forcing it to succeed. I don't see that being the case with this system though, personally.

Which is exactly what I'm doing next year, my resignation has already gone in, 14 years since I moved back to Aberdeenshire and volunteered every year. TBF it's not just WHS, it's more the shambles of the Scottish Golf App and back end and their head-in-the-sand response to issues, I've had more than enough

 

[Deleted member 30522]

we get plenty... although the language is now, "our course rating is too low!!"

That's the same thing

 

[wjemather]

As course ratings haven't changed, that is exactly the same issue as it always was, and the current discussion on such can be had here https://forums.golfmonthly.com/threads/course-rating.117352/page-7#post-2782879

Since the introduction of Slope in GB&I with WHS, this isn't true.
It also wasn't completely true before 1983.

 

[IanM]

That's the same thing

Was what I meant

 

[Voyager EMH]

Here is a "corresponding handicap" adjustment table (this one is from 1971) that was part of the handicap system for over 50 years, through into the early 1980s (probably until 1983 when the new system came in); although most people had long since stopped using it by then.

View attachment 54745

I played in plenty of junior matches and junior opens in the mid 1970s and no such thing was ever done, as far as I recall.
It was probably far easier and simpler for organisers to ignore such a table. This would also explain why I have no recollection of it.