Official WHS Survey

[PaulMdj]

Where's this humungous assumption coming from? My club has two stablefords through the entire year on a Saturday, and I think one on a Wednesday

England,

 

[Dunesman]

The next possible revision of anything significant within WHS would only come about in 2028.
Even then I do not foresee any major changes. This last time in 2024 (4 years after inception) we had some minor calculation of CHs and the coming in to line with the rest of the world with CR-Par as well as the ‘acceptability’ of a very small % of 4BB scores. There was a debate about the introduction of some of these measures before the inception of WHS, I have heard of little or no possible changes at the next revision.

The next scheduled review may well be 2028, but if there is a problem, waiting would be stupid. People have given WHS 4 years now to settle, giving it the benefit of the doubt, but when an issue is evident, which could easily be rectified, its more a matter of swallowing pride and making the correction.
Also, if I understand the various info form others here, it isnt that any rewrite of WHS is maybe needed anyway - just the removing of a restricted implementation that we inflicted on ourselves.

 

[Dunesman]

This is my hope, that clubs who don't like WHS, go and do their own thing and leave the rest to carry on in peace, because changing it for a few might only cock it up for the majority

The problem is that it applies to all clubs, not just some. Yes, only some players within those clubs - tge 23 index man hasnt felt its effect in any negative way. But unless you dont have any golfer better than 10, then it applies. A fix corrects if for all, not just a minority, and would cock it up for nobody.

 

[PaulMdj]

I can't think of anyone I grew up with who still plays golf and needs more than one shot per hole. Of course we all had a go back then but you have to have some level of skill to enjoy a sport. Some didn't and they gave up.

The manufacturers of course want to make everyone believe anyone can play the game. Just get a fitting and spend money on the latest driver etc. We all know it's rubbish, especially if we have played the game for more than 5 years. It's not easy and most people can't do it well.

Manufacturers don't like long term golfers because we don't spend so much money on equipment. I've been playing for 47 years and only had one brand new set of irons in that time and 4 second hand sets. I've had a few putters and a few different drivers but typically I could have a driver for more than 6 years.

WHS is an attempt to make the game more accessible. Manufacturers are the winners and I don't really mind that however I think many established golfers are losers but that's not so much of a loss to manufacturers.

The game was always accessible, it was Clubs and their protectionist cliques that were the issue.

Why was Max Handicap brought in?

Why did Clubs have Max 18 for comps?

Neither of the above was to help newcomers, it was to protect the long term members.

I’ve been playing Golf just over 40 years, lowest handicap of 9, was alwsys told and still believe the true test of Golf is off scratch.

Now all we hear is the moaning about low handicappers having less chance in handicap comps!

Nobody is forcing you to enter handicap comps!

 

[Dunesman]

Kinda get what you're saying, but two things I don't understand are:
why don't larger clubs have regular separate comps for lower handicaps, if there is demand;
why do lower handicaps even want to enter the twice weekly Stableford comps, believing that they will be fleeced by improvers or handicap cheats?
I guess I'm coming back to my suggestion of pre-defined divisional competition again.

The point is that much of the history of club comps here was structured on no categories. It worked. Board comps and historic trophies worked fine enough. It is perfectly legitimate to reject such a crude, and in many cases, simply impractical, fix that are categories. WHS was sold as progress. That in a significant aspect that is important to many, that there was a retrograde element to it, was not flagged in advance and is being ignored, is not acceptable.

 

[IanMac]

The game was always accessible, it was Clubs and their protectionist cliques that were the issue.

Why was Max Handicap brought in?

Why did Clubs have Max 18 for comps?

Neither of the above was to help newcomers, it was to protect the long term members.

I’ve been playing Golf just over 40 years, lowest handicap of 9, was alwsys told and still believe the true test of Golf is off scratch.

Now all we hear is the moaning about low handicappers having less chance in handicap comps!

Nobody is forcing you to enter handicap comps!

It was always accessible in Ireland. That's maybe why we had, and still have, so many good golfers in proportion to population. It's also perhaps why it's so obvious that WHS isn't working. I would bet a lot of money that you couldn't find a club in Ireland where you could announce your love of WHS and still get served at the bar.

 

[Slab]

The problem is that it applies to all clubs, not just some. Yes, only some players within those clubs - tge 23 index man hasnt felt its effect in any negative way. But unless you dont have any golfer better than 10, then it applies. A fix corrects if for all, not just a minority, and would cock it up for nobody.

Isn't it a much bigger group than you suggest that're feeling the effect (it's just some vocal single figures suggesting otherwise)

If there's clubs with a tiny amount of players coming in with unattainable points, due to an unchecked handicap, then it's unattainable whether you're a 5 handicapper or a 25 handicapper

Everyone else loses out, not just the low handicappers.

It's just the low players who are all 'woe is me', it's an injustice etc
But the 16 & 26 handicapper pay the same subs and same comp fee

 

[PaulMdj]

It was always accessible in Ireland. That's maybe why we had, and still have, so many good golfers in proportion to population. It's also perhaps why it's so obvious that WHS isn't working. I would bet a lot of money that you couldn't find a club in Ireland where you could announce your love of WHS and still get served at the bar.

How was it accessible to the 15yr Old lad off 6? He was either too young or not good enough or in fact both?

Do you not wonder why the issues with WHS seem to be with the old school established Clubs?

 

[D-S]

Given that the average male handicap in England is 17 and female 27.2 is there much incentive for authorities to change things in favour of a small, albeit vocal, minority?
Players with an index of 9.9 and below are slightly less than a quarter our club and this includes quite a few who would never compete in handicap competitions.

 

[IanMac]

How was it accessible to the 15yr Old lad off 6? He was either too young or not good enough or in fact both?

Do you not wonder why the issues with WHS seem to be with the old school established Clubs?

You're talking about playing in adult, full member, competitions in my club I assume? There is a junior competition every week in school holidays, sometimes more than one per week.

If a junior was either 15 years old or cat 2 there were a few adult competitions he could enter.

If he was cat 1 he could enter most adult competitions.

Over 18 he was a student member and could enter most competitions.

I was cat 2 by 14 and cat 1 by 16 but rarely played in adult competitions as our junior section was well supported and we still talk about the trophies that have our names engraved. I never got to win the one I really wanted but that's life.

 

[Steve Wilkes]

The problem is that it applies to all clubs, not just some. Yes, only some players within those clubs - tge 23 index man hasnt felt its effect in any negative way. But unless you dont have any golfer better than 10, then it applies. A fix corrects if for all, not just a minority, and would cock it up for nobody.

This is the assumption a Fix would fix it for all. What if their assumption of a fix is best 1 from 6 or PCC kicks in with just 1 GP Round played that day or something even more ridiculous
I'm all for slight tweaks here and there, but not sure they are going to get that information from this survey.

 

[IanMac]

This is the assumption a Fix would fix it for all. What if their assumption of a fix is best 1 from 6 or PCC kicks in with just 1 GP Round played that day or something even more ridiculous
I'm all for slight tweaks here and there, but not sure they are going to get that information from this survey.

The irony is that the fix is needed for something that replaced something that wasn't broken in the first place.

 

[Dunesman]

This is the assumption a Fix would fix it for all. What if their assumption of a fix is best 1 from 6 or PCC kicks in with just 1 GP Round played that day or something even more ridiculous
I'm all for slight tweaks here and there, but not sure they are going to get that information from this survey.

Why so negative ? Maybe the fix isnt so radical. Just a tweak of the fixed values in the same fundamental formula. Like soft cap applies from 1 shot increase. Or 0.87 factor for singles competition.
I doubt, and hope, they arent going to determine any corrections from a survey ! They are the ones with all the data, so they should be devising it themselves. To be fair, the survey isnt asking that. Maybe its an attempt to assess, or be seen to, gauge the level of disatisfaction before making changes they are planning anyway. To be seen to have listenened, and not just compounding their error of blowing up one system and implementing a new one when zero golfers were asking for it in the first place.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

I'm not just talking about "majors". Most regular roll-ups and swindles are played to Stableford points.

But the rest of us are, or weekly medals.

Couldn't give a stuff about "swindles", that's just groups of mates flinging a quid in the pot, got nothing to do with this discussion, and you can bet your ass those "swindles" (such a uniquely English thing) have adjusted handicaps for those doing well or poorly.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

England,

It is, yet also not true. My English clubs didn't have weekly stablefords, they were the exception not the rule

 

[RichA]

But the rest of us are, or weekly medals.

Couldn't give a stuff about "swindles", that's just groups of mates flinging a quid in the pot, got nothing to do with this discussion, and you can bet your ass those "swindles" (such a uniquely English thing) have adjusted handicaps for those doing well or poorly.

Aha. I had briefly forgotten that you speak for everybody.

 

[rulefan]

It is, yet also not true. My English clubs didn't have weekly stablefords, they were the exception not the rule

Maybe your experience but not mine. Stablefords outnumbered medals.

 

[PaulMdj]

You're talking about playing in adult, full member, competitions in my club I assume? There is a junior competition every week in school holidays, sometimes more than one per week.

If a junior was either 15 years old or cat 2 there were a few adult competitions he could enter.

If he was cat 1 he could enter most adult competitions.

Over 18 he was a student member and could enter most competitions.

I was cat 2 by 14 and cat 1 by 16 but rarely played in adult competitions as our junior section was well supported and we still talk about the trophies that have our names engraved. I never got to win the one I really wanted but that's life.

If your good enough, your old enough, our Club was exactly the same as yours, Juniors had to have a single figure handicap to enter Men’s/Ladies Comps and still had/have all the Junior Comps as well.

But those days have gone, why should a Junior have to have a Cat 1 or single figure handicap to play, when some of the men/ladies were off 28 & 36 respectively.

For Child Protection reasons we don’t allow a child under 16 to enter Adult comps unless a family member is in the 4 Ball, but after that they are welcome to enter Comps with an active handicap of 18 off the whites.

 

[Steve Wilkes]

Why so negative ? Maybe the fix isnt so radical. Just a tweak of the fixed values in the same fundamental formula. Like soft cap applies from 1 shot increase. Or 0.87 factor for singles competition.
I doubt, and hope, they arent going to determine any corrections from a survey ! They are the ones with all the data, so they should be devising it themselves. To be fair, the survey isnt asking that. Maybe its an attempt to assess, or be seen to, gauge the level of disatisfaction before making changes they are planning anyway. To be seen to have listenened, and not just compounding their error of blowing up one system and implementing a new one when zero golfers were asking for it in the first place.

Sorry if I seem so negative, because I'm not against tweaks and fixes, I was just going extreme to counter the 'I hate WHS rip it up and start again'ers'
I've posted a few times what my fixes would be: Caps and Exceptional Scoring Reductions being tightened up and a loosening on what clubs can do with their competitions rules on playing handicaps etc..

 

[IanMac]

If your good enough, your old enough, our Club was exactly the same as yours, Juniors had to have a single figure handicap to enter Men’s/Ladies Comps and still had/have all the Junior Comps as well.

But those days have gone, why should a Junior have to have a Cat 1 or single figure handicap to play, when some of the men/ladies were off 28 & 36 respectively.

For Child Protection reasons we don’t allow a child under 16 to enter Adult comps unless a family member is in the 4 Ball, but after that they are welcome to enter Comps with an active handicap of 18 off the whites.

Because a junior has the advantage of getting bigger and stronger each year. His handicap hasn't really been established until he has 'filled-out'. Our juniors pay a couple of hundred pounds a year and they are well looked after. There's no need to expose them to the nonsense that is adult golf.