*there was a slight bonus for skill. That is no longer so, there is now a bonus for being crap*The 95% is there now.
Last edited:
*there was a slight bonus for skill. That is no longer so, there is now a bonus for being crap*The 95% is there now.
An unkind way of describing the entire purpose of handicapping.*there was a slight bonus for skill. That is no longer so, there is now a bonus for being crap*
I think you miss the point being made. There is a reward for not trying. If you get to hole 8 and you realise you are not going to be in the prizes you might as well stop trying otherwise you will be at a disadvantage when your bad scores are reasonable.An unkind way of describing the entire purpose of handicapping.
As someone said in the past - it rewards mediocrity and at times encourages people to not look to improve*there was a slight bonus for skill. That is no longer so, there is now a bonus for being crap*
You mean "Accurate" right?An unkind way of describing the entire purpose of handicapping.
As per my previous comments, particularly #299 and #347, even your own club's results do not appear to support this opinion.You mean "Accurate" right?
You keep sticking your head in the sand. The purpose of handicapping is to provide a level and equitable playing field. WHS does not, it favours higher handicaps
I think you miss the point being made. There is a reward for not trying. If you get to hole 8 and you realise you are not going to be in the prizes you might as well stop trying otherwise you will be at a disadvantage when your bad scores are reasonable.
You are talking about cheating; not just that, but a practice that was even more prevalent under the old system when it was ok to not return a score at all.I think you miss the point being made. There is a reward for not trying. If you get to hole 8 and you realise you are not going to be in the prizes you might as well stop trying otherwise you will be at a disadvantage when your bad scores are reasonable.
If you want a meritocracy, stick to scratch competitions.As someone said in the past - it rewards mediocrity and at times encourages people to not look to improve
In essence you could regard it as cheating but many do it. I see the head go down and a don't give a damn attitude for the rest of the round, especially amongst higher handicappers, all the time. Is it cheating? Is it more prevalent? I'd say it's hard to call on the first count and it's no different on the second. The problem is that you get a much bigger differential with WHS, hence it now pays to play crap...You are talking about cheating; not just that, but a practice that was even more prevalent under the old system when it was ok to not return a score at all.
Who gets to choose which 3 out of 4 rounds would be submitted and how would the other round be different?They given an ‘as is’ option with the only change being that we have to submit 3 out of 4 rollup rounds for WHS counting thinking we’ll reject it out of hand…which many of our regulars have already done. I am actually OK with it and I suspect many agin it have not fully thought it through. Hence my questions.
No I want a system that’s fair and gives everyone the same opportunity- the WHS doesn’t allow thatIf you want a meritocracy, stick to scratch competitions.
On the contrary; improvers are at an advantage under any handicap system.
I think it is a fair system that gives everyone the same opportunity, if used correctly.No I want a system that’s fair and gives everyone the same opportunity- the WHS doesn’t allow that
Yeah that’s fair - it’s a system that has very much opened itself up to abuse very easilyI think it is a fair system that gives everyone the same opportunity, if used correctly.
Unfortunately it is the users abusing the system that are spoiling it.
100%, they need to wise up to that and try to address it.Yeah that’s fair - it’s a system that has very much opened itself up to abuse very easily
The worst thing for that was the App
No such system is possible, but WHS is the closest we have ever had.No I want a system that’s fair and gives everyone the same opportunity- the WHS doesn’t allow that
No such system is possible, but WHS is the closest we have ever had.
Unfortunately I disagree, I agree about any system being infallible, but it is far more common now and the availability of the App.No such system is possible, but WHS is the closest we have ever had.
No I want a system that’s fair and gives everyone the same opportunity- the WHS doesn’t allow that
So the system is fair now? Make your mind up.I think it is a fair system that gives everyone the same opportunity, if used correctly.
Unfortunately it is the users abusing the system that are spoiling it.
Yeah that’s fair - it’s a system that has very much opened itself up to abuse very easily
The worst thing for that was the App