Official WHS Survey

[D-S]

Weren’t Golf Ireland going to be supposedly trialling matchplay being acceptable for handicaps in the early days of WHS? I believe, despite what this is what we were told, that no such trial was ever done and reference to it was quietly removed.

Maybe just using Low Handicap Index and a possible additional reduction is another trial and might be proposed to the rest of CONGU?

 

[Deleted member 15717]

You certainly shouldn't beaten by a score that is unachievable by yourself.

Good luck developing any system that can do this!

 

[Deleted member 36483]

Weren’t Golf Ireland going to be supposedly trialling matchplay being acceptable for handicaps in the early days of WHS? I believe, despite what this is what we were told, that no such trial was ever done and reference to it was quietly removed.

Maybe just using Low Handicap Index and a possible additional reduction is another trial and might be proposed to the rest of CONGU?

I never heard about that trial.

The low index from previous year is of limited use. Plenty still abusing that. The idea that everyone is putting in meaningful cards.on.a regular basis is pie in the sky.

Handicaps should never be allowed to jump up unless there's a physiological change to the person due to an accident or old age.

 

[Deleted member 36483]

Good luck developing any system that can do this!

Why not quote the sentence following that one?

 

[Backache]

No, it means it was outdated and made obsolete by advances in technology, data analysis, etc.
It was a relic from a pre-internet world when everything had to be done locally; a simple system designed to be administered manually without the aid of technology (except perhaps a calculator).

And so as is so frequent with the laws of unintended consequence we got to the delightful modern system which facilitates choosing what scores to enter to pick a handicap that suits you.
But it's wonderful modern international and pays various associates to provide software which no one is to understand to facilitate it all.
Meanwhile the club golfer is the mushroom kept in the dark and fed unmentionables.

 

[Deleted member 36483]

No, it means it was outdated and made obsolete by advances in technology, data analysis, etc.
It was a relic from a pre-internet world when everything had to be done locally; a simple system designed to be administered manually without the aid of technology (except perhaps a calculator).

You constantly defend what many see as the indefensible. I'm wondering if you have a vested interest in WHS and the technology frenzy around it. Do you?

 

[rulefan]

Weren’t Golf Ireland going to be supposedly trialling matchplay being acceptable for handicaps in the early days of WHS? I believe, despite what this is what we were told, that no such trial was ever done and reference to it was quietly removed.

They were but it was dropped.

 

[Deleted member 15717]

Why not quote the sentence following that one?

What? The stamping feet about if you play well, you should get a prize? Nah. I’m good.

 

[Deleted member 36483]

I’m good.

Unlikely, especially when your only like is wjemather.

 

[Deleted member 15717]

Helluva response. A good, well-reasoned argument.

 

[Voyager EMH]

I've finished me popcorn. A bit unsatisfying.

But this is getting good now, so I've opened a big bag of pork scratchings.

 

[Golfloveruk]

You constantly defend what many see as the indefensible. I'm wondering if you have a vested interest in WHS and the technology frenzy around it. Do you?

Many? A few grumpy old men who don’t like change does not equate to many. Most of the negative points are posted as though they are facts, when they are just the opinions of a minority.

The only person I play with who actively doesn’t like WHS is the father in law. But he still complains about having to wear a seatbelt and drink driving laws.

Most people just accept it’s in place and crack on with enjoying their golf.
Personally, I think it’s much better than the previous system.

It’s really not worth the rise in blood pressure it’s giving some of you.

 

[Deleted member 36483]

Many? A few grumpy old men who don’t like change does not equate to many. Most of the negative points are posted as though they are facts, when they are just the opinions of a minority.

The only person I play with who actively doesn’t like WHS is the father in law. But he still complains about having to wear a seatbelt and drink driving laws.

Most people just accept it’s in place and crack on with enjoying their golf.
Personally, I think it’s much better than the previous system.

It’s really not worth the rise in blood pressure it’s giving some of you.

Will be interesting to see how the survey turns out. Hopefully we'll get that soon.

 

[AussieKB]

Will be interesting to see how the survey turns out. Hopefully we'll get that soon.

It will be cherry picked, so don't hold your breath.

 

[ExRabbit]

I would guess that at least 90% of the members of my club would rather go back to the old system - many of them had only a small interest in the system, but they knew about the 0.1 if they had a bad round, or the ( 0.4 - 0.1)*x if they had a good round.

 

[AussieKB]

Old fellow at my club had 47 points today off a 24 handicap, am sure he loves this system.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Many? A few grumpy old men who don’t like change does not equate to many. Most of the negative points are posted as though they are facts, when they are just the opinions of a minority.

The only person I play with who actively doesn’t like WHS is the father in law. But he still complains about having to wear a seatbelt and drink driving laws.

Most people just accept it’s in place and crack on with enjoying their golf.
Personally, I think it’s much better than the previous system.

It’s really not worth the rise in blood pressure it’s giving some of you.

Not my experience at all. The only ones I ever hear with a good word are those who talk about GP scores and how you can post a score anytime (which as discussed greatly above is a major negative) , but that's the result of technology which could have been applied to UHS, it's not something that could only happen under WHS

 

[woofers]

The average of the best 8 from 20 is a huge improvement over the old UHS system and is a better measure of ability. I think that is the underlying idea of WHS.
Where it goes wrong is :
1. The frequency that General Play scores are allowed, and
2. The ease of bypassing the Rules of Handicapping by the use of the EG App.
Technology that allows a player to enter a score without pre-registering, without any checks on attestation and doesn’t require prompt submission, really isn’t fit for purpose.
England Golf aren’t interested in geo location for attestation and trot out the “plenty of reports for handicap committees” to track down offenders.

 

[Deleted member 36483]

It will be cherry picked, so don't hold your breath.

Yes, that's likely. Although I'm slightly hopeful given we have a new guy in charge at the R&A and he appears to be a decent golfer. I don't think the system, as it stands, will be tolerated by the clubs here in Ireland for very much longer. As already mentioned Golf Ireland are constantly trying to mitigate against it ruining our interclub competitions and that's a constantly evolving situation which will eventually spill out into the clubs themselves. Another example is that I know of a long established winter society where that committee has decided to depart from WHS this year. If you want to design something to break something that has worked for years then WHS is your template.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

The average of the best 8 from 20 is a huge improvement over the old UHS system and is a better measure of ability. I think that is the underlying idea of WHS.
Where it goes wrong is :

But it's not, it's too short a period to possibly have your handicap rise by 5 shots, it's an absolute joke

We all have periods where the barn door is an impossible target, and your low index is a far better attestation of your ability, especially under the 8 of 20 scoring.

The rate of rising and the percentage allowance for playing handicap* both needs adjusted

*Really PH shouldn't exist, if the formula worked properly the CH would be the PH, the need for a percentage cut to "play" is a tacit admission that the sums are all wrong in the first place