Official WHS Survey

[Golfloveruk]

I'm trying to explain why WHS needs looking at. My examples are over simple but nevertheless I think they highlight the trend that creates artificially high handicaps for inconsistent players. Net double bogey needs looking at for WHS to be credible amongst a group of golfers that I would belong to. I accept that other groups of golfers don't see, or care for, the problems but we really could do with a system that doesn't polarised views.

We didn't have this polarised split before WHS.

There is only a split because some people simply won’t accept the change. If someone is regularly shooting 21 over, they are likely a 21 handicap! and inconsistent. Their HI could well be much lower than it needs to be if they are regularly getting more than net doubles.

The old system had faults, but as it had been in use for a time, everyone just got on with it. Same will happen with WHS once people stop comparing it to the old system.

And handicaps have never, and will never be equitable. There are far to many variables involved for there to be a level playing field!!

 

[IanMac]

There is only a split because some people simply won’t accept the change. If someone is regularly shooting 21 over, they are likely a 21 handicap! and inconsistent. Their HI could well be much lower than it needs to be if they are regularly getting more than net doubles.

The old system had faults, but as it had been in use for a time, everyone just got on with it. Same will happen with WHS once people stop comparing it to the old system.

And handicaps have never, and will never be equitable. There are far to many variables involved for there to be a level playing field!!

The new system can, and I think will be, adjusted to create a fairer competitive environment. This thread was created around the recent survey. Hopefully that survey will move it forward in a direction that brings us all back together sooner, rather than later.

 

[doublebogey7]

18 handicapper gets a shot at those dinged holes. So 3 X 3 = 9

Sorry I didn't see where you mentioned you were talkiing about an 18 handicapper. NDB effects a scratch players handicap in the same way so I still fail to see your point.

The new system can, and I think will be, adjusted to create a fairer competitive environment. This thread was created around the recent survey. Hopefully that survey will move it forward in a direction that brings us all back together sooner, rather than later.

I doubt whether there will be any major changes to WHS following this survey as I suspect most players around the world who are used to a very similar system are content. I relaticely small but vocal number of players complaining on a forum is not in my experience is not representative of the wider golfing public. In any case any change will certainly will not involve net bouble bogey given that it was a key feature of UHS, as much as may wish to deny that to be the case.

 

[IanMac]

Sorry I didn't see where you mentioned you were talkiing about an 18 handicapper. NDB effects a scratch players handicap in the same way so I still fail to see your point.

I doubt whether there will be any major changes to WHS following this survey as I suspect most players around the world who are used to a very similar system are content. I relaticely small but vocal number of players complaining on a forum is not in my experience is not representative of the wider golfing public. In any case any change will certainly will not involve net bouble bogey given that it was a key feature of UHS, as much as may wish to deny that to be the case.

Maybe you saw an earlier message from me linking to a Golf Ireland site explaining how they are having to adapt the system to manage interclub competitions. It's far from a relatively small number of players who aren't happy with the current system. Hence the survey I would think.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

Yes. Both the Ian and Buddha chap are using very very specific examples to prove a rule.

There will always be edge cases. But one’s own experience does not mean it’s the same across the board. Which I think these two fellows assume.

Specific cases? What the hell? I've provided an entire seasons results to back up how out of whack whs is, have you even looked at that? Where's this very specific example?

 

[Banchory Buddha]

I doubt whether there will be any major changes to WHS following this survey as I suspect most players around the world who are used to a very similar system are content. I relaticely small but vocal number of players complaining on a forum is not in my experience is not representative of the wider golfing public. In any case any change will certainly will not involve net bouble bogey given that it was a key feature of UHS, as much as may wish to deny that to be the case.

My experience is the opposite of yours, it's universally detested, especially but not exclusively by lower handicaps

Do you really think there'll be no change? You don't find it astonishing that the R&A and USGA have taken the absolutely unprecedented step of consulting the public on what we think of their shambles?

That alone speaks huge volumes as I said in post 1. Remember they insisted there was nothing wrong with PCC, they've since changed it twice.


They know it's knackered, they just don't know how knackered

 

[RichA]

My experience is the opposite of yours, it's universally detested, especially but not exclusively by lower handicaps

Do you really think there'll be no change? You don't find it astonishing that the R&A and USGA have taken the absolutely unprecedented step of consulting the public on what we think of their shambles?

That alone speaks huge volumes as I said in post 1. Remember they insisted there was nothing wrong with PCC, they've since changed it twice.


They know it's knackered, they just don't know how knackered

Pretty much every organisation on the planet conducts regular surveys of its customers or members. Mostly, the existence of a survey means absolutely nothing; it's just somebody's job.

I occasionally scan and post on this thread and feel like most contributors disagree with you, but they don't bother hanging around because you can't entertain a sensible conversation.

Why don't you do a poll to see if WHS really is universally disliked, as you suggest?

 

[Banchory Buddha]

Pretty much every organisation on the planet conducts regular surveys of its customers or members. Mostly, the existence of a survey means absolutely nothing; it's just somebody's job.

I occasionally scan and post on this thread and feel like most contributors disagree with you, but they don't bother hanging around because you can't entertain a sensible conversation.

Why don't you do a poll to see if WHS really is universally disliked, as you suggest?

...but not the golf bodies, ever. This is unprecedented. Thank you for the ad hominem tho

 

[IanMac]

Pretty much every organisation on the planet conducts regular surveys of its customers or members. Mostly, the existence of a survey means absolutely nothing; it's just somebody's job.

I occasionally scan and post on this thread and feel like most contributors disagree with you, but they don't bother hanging around because you can't entertain a sensible conversation.

Why don't you do a poll to see if WHS really is universally disliked, as you suggest?

A poll of forum posters is not going to prove diddly squat. Pinch of salt either way. Most of the Golf Monthly forum users seem to be more interested in posting about football.

What's useful on here is to make a point and have it debated. Unfortunately there are many who want to take the debate off the point.

Some think WHS is good and some don't, great.

I hope I've done my best to explain why I think it's not good and offer some explanation as to where the issues lie. I appreciate a counter argument if it contains some reasoning that educates me and helps me to see another angle.

 

[RichA]

A poll of forum posters is not going to prove diddly squat. Pinch of salt either way. Most of the Golf Monthly forum users seem to be more interested in posting about football.

What's useful on here is to make a point and have it debated. Unfortunately there are many who want to take the debate off the point.

Some think WHS is good and some don't, great.

I hope I've done my best to explain why I think it's not good and offer some explanation as to where the issues lie. I appreciate a counter argument if it contains some reasoning that educates me and helps me to see another angle.

Prove anything - no, of course not.
But it would probably mean more objectively than half a dozen people repeatedly saying they're right and all other opinions are wrong.

 

[IanMac]

Prove anything - no, of course not.
But it would probably mean more objectively than half a dozen people repeatedly saying they're right and all other opinions are wrong.

Tell me why you think the WHS provides a better handicap system for golfers in the UK than the previous system. Please mention, in your answer, how it supports selecting the elite amateurs for open scratch competitions, handling handicap sections that determine eligibility for inter club competitions as well as the run of the mill club trophy competition. I'm all ears.

 

[RichA]

Tell me why you think the WHS provides a better handicap system for golfers in the UK than the previous system. Please mention, in your answer, how it supports selecting the elite amateurs for open scratch competitions, handling handicap sections that determine eligibility for inter club competitions as well as the run of the mill club trophy competition. I'm all ears.

Good grief no. I don't care enough; I just play recreational golf with my friends, all of whom seem to like WHS. I quite like it and find most of the arguments against it to be a bit self-serving.
I can't compare it to the previous system anyway because the first 30 years of my golfing life didn't involve club membership or a handicap.

 

[IanMac]

Good grief no. I don't care enough; I just play recreational golf with my friends, all of whom seem to like WHS. I quite like it and find most of the arguments against it to be a bit self-serving.
I can't compare it to the previous system anyway because the first 30 years of my golfing life didn't involve club membership or a handicap.

You've answered my question perfectly, thank you

 

[RichA]

You've answered my question perfectly, thank you

Why don't you answer it yourself?

 

[IanMac]

Why don't you answer it yourself?

You just said you don't care. You're like a lot of forum posters, no idea what's going on but hey ho you're getting attention. Good luck with your golf anyway.

 

[Golfloveruk]

You just said you don't care. You're like a lot of forum posters, no idea what's going on but hey ho you're getting attention. Good luck with your golf anyway.

And you think your experience is universal when it’s clearly not.

 

[IanMac]

And you think your experience is universal when it’s clearly not.

Explain that statement please. What is universal experience? I do realise that not everyone has had exactly the same golf experience as is obviously the case between RichA and myself.

I'm just not sure how that is relevant. We are, I hope, debating whether WHS is fit for purpose and my view is that it is not. Obviously that is based on my experience. I've been playing club golf for 47 years. I've played scratch opens. I've played, and continue to play, inter club competitions and I obviously play trophy competitions. My experience suggests to me that WHS is having a detrimental effect on these competitive aspects of golf. I've tried to give the reasons for that and now I'm getting pushback from various posters. Please explain your experience and how you think WHS has affected it, good or bad.

In other words, try and change my mind.

 

[RichA]

You just said you don't care. You're like a lot of forum posters, no idea what's going on but hey ho you're getting attention. Good luck with your golf anyway.

I said that I don't care enough - to try to answer the specifics of your loaded and condescending question. I did not say that I don't care.
I'm not young. I'm middle-aged and a little over a year from retirement (early-ish). But I'm not a reactionary.
The authorities are clearly attempting to make golf more relevant and aspects of it more accessible for a generation very different to mine. That generation is the future; mine and presumably yours are the past.
Whatever your experience might be, I never heard any criticism of WHS in my 4 years of membership at my old club and I've heard none in the 2 months I've been at my current, much bigger club.

Part of your question asked about selection of elite amateurs. If elite amateurs are being selected for anything based on their performance in handicap golf competitions then I would suggest they aren't that elite.

 

[IanM]

There's lots of folk disagreeing in this thread who are all speaking the truth. Their truth, from their own perspective.

There's lots of golf going on. From the top amateurs, to the three rounds a year occasionals, AND every derivative in between. That's worth remembering.

I'm pleased there was a survey. I hope the findings are honesty communicated.

What is done with the output will be very interesting. A tough challenge because of the wide range of stakeholder requirements.

I'm glad it's not me trying to sort it out.

 

[IanMac]

There's lots of folk disagreeing in this thread who are all speaking the truth. Their truth, from their own perspective.

There's lots of golf going on. From the top amateurs, to the three rounds a year occasionals, AND every derivative in between. That's worth remembering.

I'm pleased there was a survey. I hope the findings are honesty communicated.

What is done with the output will be very interesting. A tough challenge because of the wide range of stakeholder requirements.

I'm glad it's not me trying to sort it out.

Agreed. Was there a problem before WHS? Did we have these different views on the handicap system?