Official WHS Survey

[C7usk]

This is also my observation, and is tye flaw in WHS application in a culture of regular competitions of 100+ golfers across the full range of handicaps.

The old method did tend to fix ones handicap on the low side, reducing the probability of good score. WHS enables the index to rise quickly and significantly.

It is indisputable that a handicap can now rise quickly by 3 shots, where previously it was limited to one. And not quite as quickly it can rise by 5 compared to still 1 previously.
For the 20 handicapper, with the variability of scores we know we can have, our handicaps can rise by two or 3 shots in as little as a week or two. Not every time we have a few bad rounds. But there are so many of us, a significant proportion of a given competituon are probably somewhere on the upper range of that cycle. But our form hasnt changed ! For enough, it is not reflecting a deterioration of our golf. We are tye same golfer. And have gained a couple of shots, score well, add in the extra mistaken increase WHS gave us wheather we like it or not, and our 'fair' 41 points is now 44. And we are handicap building bandits.

And yes, the low men cannot compete with the one of my cohort will do that on a given day. The single figure man is both steadier, so less volatile to accumulate those unneeded shots. And more protective of his hc status, so (not all, sure!) less likely to play if not on form, the conditions are bad, or the course is tough or unknown.

This all stems from WHS not being atune to the strong intra club competition culture that is traditional here and still widespread. Reducing the 0.95 to nibble a shot or two from the 15-25 range could repair the damage. Another solution, deviating of course from the goal of a single global WHS, but then that has clearly already failed, would be to bring the soft cap back to 1, and the hard cap to 2 for example.

Our country authorities need to adapt WHS to fit with rollups and Stableford competitions that is our golfing heritage, not the more casual one off matches that is the more American norm, before our competition culture is lost irretrievably.

Defo need to reduce the rapid hcp increases... Would sort a lot of the issues..

 

[C7usk]

Our first couple of comps with our winter card / 80% hcp allowance have been published...
Forgive the cruel finger editing on my phone...
Significant change to the hcp range in the top 10..mostly low cappers..
Total class tho a person who's normally of 17 ( gets only 12 with the winter course card) shoots 4 over scratch to storm to victory... ..
It's hard to keep the mid hcps down.. We will find a way.. Lol...
Won't even get a cut as it's not measured course... Only difference is about 4 or 5 tees are forward the now..
Still though, reducing the 95% to less does make a big difference to the hcp positions on the leaderboard.

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Our first couple of comps with our winter card / 80% hcp allowance have been published...
Forgive the cruel finger editing on my phone...
Significant change to the hcp range in the top 10..mostly low cappers..
Total class tho a person who's normally of 17 ( gets only 12 with the winter course card) shoots 4 over scratch to storm to victory... ..
It's hard to keep the mid hcps down.. We will find a way.. Lol...
Won't even get a cut as it's not measured course... Only difference is about 4 or 5 tees are forward the now..
Still though, reducing the 95% to less does make a big difference to the hcp positions on the leaderboard.

Total irrelevance to WHS.

Care to post your entire seasons results?

 

[C7usk]

Total irrelevance to WHS.

Care to post your entire seasons results?

Sorry, I am confused. Do you want me to post this on some other thread or something?
Why do you want to see MY entire seasons results? I've nothing to hide, I'm just not sure why?

 

[Deleted member 36483]

Sorry, I am confused. Do you want me to post this on some other thread or something?
Why do you want to see MY entire seasons results? I've nothing to hide, I'm just not sure why?

I get your point and it's another instance showing how a high handicapper has a handicap that is way too high. Even with 80% he has won by a country mile.

 

[C7usk]

I get your point and it's another instance showing how a high handicapper has a handicap that is way too high. Even with 80% he has won by a country mile.

Cheers Ian.. .. Thought it was reasonably easy to take some conclusions from the pic.. And I on the main like WHS....but also realise it's flawed in some aspects..
For reference the player has went up 5 shots since start of year..
Still nothing to do with WHS.... Apparently....

 

[Deleted member 36483]

Random I know but...

I just met a fella in a bookshop who was buying a golf book. We got chatting and I asked him what he thought of the WHS. I should say he was in his 70s so I suspected he might not be interested. Quite the opposite. Was very angry that we now had a cheat's charter and said the R&A hadn't a clue. Then went on to tell me the story of how he got his handicap. An identical story to the one I told about judgement being used.

Many of you obviously think my view is in the minority. I think that is probably true if your sample is of golfers prepared to use a forum. Please believe me when I tell you that my experience here in Ireland suggests to me that I am in the majority over here. We like our golf very much and, as a country, we are pretty good at it. Everyone starts at the grassroots level and works up to wherever their talent takes them. It is important that the system ensures that ladder to personal success is maintained.

 

[clubchamp98]

Random I know but...

I just met a fella in a bookshop who was buying a golf book. We got chatting and I asked him what he thought of the WHS. I should say he was in his 70s so I suspected he might not be interested. Quite the opposite. Was very angry that we now had a cheat's charter and said the R&A hadn't a clue. Then went on to tell me the story of how he got his handicap. An identical story to the one I told about judgement being used.

Many of you obviously think my view is in the minority. I think that is probably true if your sample is of golfers prepared to use a forum. Please believe me when I tell you that my experience here in Ireland suggests to me that I am in the majority over here. We like our golf very much and, as a country, we are pretty good at it. Everyone starts at the grassroots level and works up to wherever their talent takes them. It is important that the system ensures that ladder to personal success is maintained.

It was common years ago here to play a round with the pro and captain or comittiee member just to get permission to apply for membership.
Now if you have the money your in!

The sport has changed a lot over the 40 yrs I have been playing
Not always for the best.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Random I know but...

I just met a fella in a bookshop who was buying a golf book. We got chatting and I asked him what he thought of the WHS. I should say he was in his 70s so I suspected he might not be interested. Quite the opposite. Was very angry that we now had a cheat's charter and said the R&A hadn't a clue. Then went on to tell me the story of how he got his handicap. An identical story to the one I told about judgement being used.

Many of you obviously think my view is in the minority. I think that is probably true if your sample is of golfers prepared to use a forum. Please believe me when I tell you that my experience here in Ireland suggests to me that I am in the majority over here. We like our golf very much and, as a country, we are pretty good at it. Everyone starts at the grassroots level and works up to wherever their talent takes them. It is important that the system ensures that ladder to personal success is maintained.

If you are in the majority then maybe Golf Ireland will buck the trend and reverse the system. After all, you pay towards their existence, you will surely have that power. Get organised, get it changed.

 

[clubchamp98]

If you are in the majority then maybe Golf Ireland will buck the trend and reverse the system. After all, you pay towards their existence, you will surely have that power. Get organised, get it changed.

First step in the collapse of “ World system”

 

[D-S]

If you are in the majority then maybe Golf Ireland will buck the trend and reverse the system. After all, you pay towards their existence, you will surely have that power. Get organised, get it changed.

In a way haven’t they done this already by not accepting, for their inter club competitions, the player’s current ‘proper’ handicap index?
As per an earlier link, they use the players Low Handicap Index and reserve the right to recalculate this downwards if their performance is good in initial rounds.
This is the first crack in WHS that I have seen by a Stakeholder in WHS.

 

[IanM]

This is the first crack in WHS that I have seen by a Stakeholder in WHS.

Haven't some clubs refused entries from iGolf folk and players with too many GP scores in their record?

Up the revolution

 

[Deleted member 36483]

In a way haven’t they done this already by not accepting, for their inter club competitions, the player’s current ‘proper’ handicap index?
As per an earlier link, they use the players Low Handicap Index and reserve the right to recalculate this downwards if their performance is good in initial rounds.
This is the first crack in WHS that I have seen by a Stakeholder in WHS.

Yes. I was talking with someone about this. He said they were conscious of various clubs manipulating their handicaps in order to be competitive in interclub competitions. These competitions are across the spectrum of handicaps and carry kudos. This is because they have been in existence for years. Many players in Ireland who are part of a particular team often will have been involved in that team for years.

WHS made a number of handicaps jump about and disrupted those settled teams. Hard to get people to play in these teams as they are often a commitment and matches are not for the faint hearted.

You can therefore see how some clubs may have decided to manage their players.

The latest attempt is to force everyone to have at least 4 competition rounds in their previous year's golf. I can't see that making any difference. If someone needs to be at least 2.5 to play in a particular team it's not too difficult to keep on the correct side of it.

 

[wjemather]

Yes. I was talking with someone about this. He said they were conscious of various clubs manipulating their handicaps in order to be competitive in interclub competitions. These competitions are across the spectrum of handicaps and carry kudos. This is because they have been in existence for years. Many players in Ireland who are part of a particular team often will have been involved in that team for years.

WHS made a number of handicaps jump about and disrupted those settled teams. Hard to get people to play in these teams as they are often a commitment and matches are not for the faint hearted.

You can therefore see how some clubs may have decided to manage their players.

The latest attempt is to force everyone to have at least 4 competition rounds in their previous year's golf. I can't see that making any difference. If someone needs to be at least 2.5 to play in a particular team it's not too difficult to keep on the correct side of it.

So nothing is being done to remedy the actual problem of (alleged) cheating by golf clubs and/or players?
By not having proper oversight, or well thought out terms of competition, GI seem to be creating more problems for themselves, and a chaotic confusing mess for clubs and players.

 

[D-S]

Haven't some clubs refused entries from iGolf folk and players with too many GP scores in their record?

Up the revolution

With recent experience of iGolf handicap management, I would sadly now really not trust them.

Their oversight appears to be far worse than most handicap committees I have encountered and there are some poor ones out there.

 

[Deleted member 36483]

So nothing is being done to remedy the actual problem of (alleged) cheating by golf clubs and/or players?
By not having proper oversight, or well thought out terms of competition, GI seem to be creating more problems for themselves, and a chaotic confusing mess for clubs and players.

Cheating. It's now become very subtle and widespread.

Is it cheating to know that you will be cut if you have a par at the last so you deliberately take too much club and hit it into the heavy rough over the green? The answer is yes but how can anyone detect or prove that?

Is it cheating to choose the tees, in a multiple tee competition, where you can't reach some of the fairways and so you are going to have a few dings? The answer is yes but we all have a choice now.

Hardly a GI creation. WHS to blame.

 

[wjemather]

With recent experience of iGolf handicap management, I would sadly now really not trust them.

Their oversight appears to be far worse than most handicap committees I have encountered and there are some poor ones out there.

All queries I have raised with them have been dealt with quickly and accurately.

 

[D-S]

All queries I have raised with them have been dealt with quickly and accurately.

A local club had an iGolfer submit a score on their course via the EG App. It was ‘played’ on a day with a full tee sheet (most of which was a members comp). The iGolfer was not on the tee sheet nor was any green fee paid.
The club advised iGolf of all the details, said they had marked the score as matchplay and asked them to contact the player. The attester was also an IGolfer, not on the tee sheet or having paid a green fee. They have advised that

Whilst we appreciate that the lack of green fee will be frustrating to you as a club, it doesn't automatically mean this round didn't take place. We would require further supporting evidence to suggest there was no possibility of this round taking place, before we can make contact with an iGolfer.

In addition they asked the club not to mark such questionable scores as matchplay.

The club has asked what further evidence they require, over a week later no reply.

Not being on the tee sheet and not paying a green fee seems fairly strong evidence to me.

They have also been asked to examine the players record. His first ever round was in the 60’s at a local shortish course, his second a low 70’s - his third was the score in question a gross 70 (below the course rating). An unusual first three rounds for handicap I would guess. Again no response from iGolf. The County and Region are now chasing them, so far to no avail.

 

[wjemather]

A local club had an iGolfer submit a score on their course via the EG App. It was ‘played’ on a day with a full tee sheet (most of which was a members comp). The iGolfer was not on the tee sheet nor was any green fee paid.
The club advised iGolf of all the details, said they had marked the score as matchplay and asked them to contact the player. The attester was also an IGolfer, not on the tee sheet or having paid a green fee. They have advised that

Whilst we appreciate that the lack of green fee will be frustrating to you as a club, it doesn't automatically mean this round didn't take place. We would require further supporting evidence to suggest there was no possibility of this round taking place, before we can make contact with an iGolfer.

In addition they asked the club not to mark such questionable scores as matchplay.

The club has asked what further evidence they require, over a week later no reply.

Not being on the tee sheet and not paying a green fee seems fairly strong evidence to me.

They have also been asked to examine the players record. His first ever round was a gross 63 at a local shortish course, his second a gross 72 at a prestigious midlands track - his third was the score in question a gross 70 (1.6 below the course rating). An unusual first three rounds for handicap I would guess. Again no response from iGolf. The County and Region are now chasing them, so far to no avail.

I've received a similar message from them, and after providing further details as requested (i.e. how we prevent unauthorised walk-ons and marshal the course), they very quickly contacted the player and removed the score in question - the round was actually played, just not on that day.

I've also been involved with similar scenarios at another club in the county, which have been similarly dealt with.

For various reasons, many clubs don't record the (real) names of all visitors; e.g. unnamed visitors in group/society bookings, or booked in under a nickname/pseudonym - so tee sheets and green fee registers are not always (or even often) definitive. Some clubs have no effective way of preventing people just playing without paying.

I've seen a few similar rounds for initial handicap, mostly from ex-pros. I wouldn't expect to be advised of any other committees actions regarding their members.

 

[D-S]

I've received a similar message from them, and after providing further details as requested (i.e. how we prevent unauthorised walk-ons and marshal the course), they very quickly contacted the player and removed the score in question - the round was actually played, just not on that day.

I've also been involved with similar scenarios at another club in the county, which have been similarly dealt with.

For various reasons, many clubs don't record the (real) names of all visitors; e.g. unnamed visitors in group/society bookings, or booked in under a nickname/pseudonym - so tee sheets and green fee registers are not always (or even often) definitive. Some clubs have no effective way of preventing people just playing without paying.

I've seen a few similar rounds for initial handicap, mostly from ex-pros. I wouldn't expect to be advised of any other committees actions regarding their members.

They have been asked as to what further information they require, they have not responded.

They haven’t been asked to give any specific information about their examination of the players record or their action, a simple acknowledgment would have sufficed - none received.

Their reaction to such a situation is the worst (and most patronising) received from any other ‘club’ and many other clubs have been advised of such situations and have responded promptly and courteously.

Basically their response has been, we don’t believe you but not saying, so far, why.