Official WHS Survey

[clubchamp98]

High handicap people in OZ have started a petition to OZ Golf to change our 93% to EG 95% as they perceive it is unfair to limit their scores to below 40 stableford points, can see this going all the way to the High Court, and if that Judge is a 20 plus handicap he might even grant 100%

That will be interesting!
If they give in to higher allowances knowing it is an advantage to higher handicappers what is that saying about getting better at the game.?

Imho competition golf has been compromised for lower players .
Finishing 3 rd and 4 th just dosnt cut it.!
Most only play in them because the sheet is full and if they don’t play they don’t get a tee time.

Imo that’s a waste of court time.

 

[rulie]

You are correct. However, (in GB&I) if scores are acceptable for handicapping, it is certain that the allowances in Appx C must be used. The software is simply enforcing the mandate.

Suppose me and my mates are playing and I'm going to have a GP score for handicapping, are we required to use the allowances in our friendly game?

 

[wjemather]

Suppose me and my mates are playing and I'm going to have a GP score for handicapping, are we required to use the allowances in our friendly game?

No, you wouldn't have to use WHS at all (other than for referencing nett double bogeys for your GP score if you were to not complete any holes). Only affiliated organisations are bound by the rules & guidance.

 

[Voyager EMH]

That would be one option. However, scores from all rounds in organised comps must be submitted for handicapping, so they'd then have to manually re-enter all scores for WHS.

As I said earlier, there is no way of circumventing the rules on allowances without creating additional work, or breaking futher rules.

No need to re-enter, merely enter.

The scores will be recorded for handicapping purposes in the normal way.
The cardboard cards will looked at and prizes awarded according to the terms of the comp.

I must make this very clear again, before I get told, so very unnecessarily, the way things should be done. I don't like or advocate this sort of thing being done.
But I do know that stuff like this goes on.
And some folk really enjoy playing comps the way that they want to do it rather than the way they should do it.

 

[Swango1980]

No need to re-enter, merely enter.

The scores will be recorded for handicapping purposes in the normal way.
The cardboard cards will looked at and prizes awarded according to the terms of the comp.

I must make this very clear again, before I get told, so very unnecessarily, the way things should be done. I don't like or advocate this sort of thing being done.
But I do know that stuff like this goes on.
And some folk really enjoy playing comps the way that they want to do it rather than the way they should do it.

Well, that seems like extra work to me? Rather than simply looking at the leaderboard generated by the computer to determine the prize winners, somebody then has to go and manually check the physical cards (assuming the club still use physical cards) and manually adjust scores if applicable.

After that, do they publish their actual manipulated leaderboard, so that members can actually see their placings? Or do they publish the one generated by the computer, even though it could be misleading as it doesn't show the correct placings based on the Clubs process of working out handicaps?

 

[Voyager EMH]

Well, that seems like extra work to me? Rather than simply looking at the leaderboard generated by the computer to determine the prize winners, somebody then has to go and manually check the physical cards (assuming the club still use physical cards) and manually adjust scores if applicable.

After that, do they publish their actual manipulated leaderboard, so that members can actually see their placings? Or do they publish the one generated by the computer, even though it could be misleading as it doesn't show the correct placings based on the Clubs process of working out handicaps?

We can only speculate, can't we?

The "extra work" is entering the scores electronically.
The looking at cards is what has been done for very many years.

 

[Backache]

With the reduction of entrants to our comps since the WHS was introduced the amount of extra work would tend to be low If it engendered more entrants the extra work would be worth it.

 

[AussieKB]

Out here in the Colonies the card over rides the electronic score if there is a difference in scores, I am becoming a dinosaur as I refuse to score using my phone, no one knows my score till I have finished and entered it manually.

 

[Swango1980]

We can only speculate, can't we?

The "extra work" is entering the scores electronically.
The looking at cards is what has been done for very many years.

Entering scores electronically reduced the workload we had to do for many years.

Looking at the cards and doing everything manually increases the workload, like we did in the "good old days". That isn't speculation, that's just how things have changed.

I could travel to London by horse, because that was the method of transport for many years. But, it seems like a lot of effort compared to just using the train.

 

[wjemather]

No need to re-enter, merely enter.

The scores will be recorded for handicapping purposes in the normal way.
The cardboard cards will looked at and prizes awarded according to the terms of the comp.

You are talking about running the comp through the software properly and producing comp results manually, which is another option. But that doesn't come without the additional work of calculating unauthorised Playing Handicaps and applying them to produce results* - a committee responsibility, so totals on cards cannot be simply taken as calculated by the player - it's where software reduces workload the most. Of course, since the committee are breaking the rules already, you'll probably want to justify them abdicating a few more of their responsibilities.

*Edit to add: and in the event of ties you also have to work out the countback scores to determine placings.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Entering scores electronically reduced the workload we had to do for many years.

Looking at the cards and doing everything manually increases the workload, like we did in the "good old days". That isn't speculation, that's just how things have changed.

I could travel to London by horse, because that was the method of transport for many years. But, it seems like a lot of effort compared to just using the train.

Add up the time that is spent by 120 people entering their scores into the screen in the lobby. How much work is that?
All that used to be done by one or two volunteers. The overall workload has not changed by very much.

Oh here we go again. I will have to explain that I do not wish for a return to those days. I do not advocate or agree to clubs running comps with incorrect handicap allowances.

If my club were to run a comp over the next few months with 100% for individual strokeplay (non handicap qualifying due to course length and conditions) there would be no complaints.
This is what the vast majority (possibly 100% majority) are doing week after week during the winter in their sub-groups, so the club would be complying with the majority wishes.
I would not take part, because I don't agree with it. Neither would I seek a battle of wills against my own club. It is not worth the effort. I could face ostracization.
As for facing flak from county authorities - I think they will deal with that if and when it comes - and will most likely not come.

 

[Voyager EMH]

You are talking about running the comp through the software properly and producing comp results manually, which is another option. But that doesn't come without the additional work of calculating unauthorised Playing Handicaps and applying them to produce results - a committee responsibility, so totals on cards cannot be simply taken as calculated by the player - it's where software reduces workload the most. Of course, since the committee are breaking the rules already, you'll probably want to justify them abdicating a few more of their responsibilities.

Easy peasy.
Look at the gross score - subtract the comp handicap. A few seconds for each card. And only need to look at the top few cards that the software indicates for allocation of prizes.

Oh yes, I will emphasise again. I am not justifying, advocating, complying, agreeing with - any of this being done. I am very much against this kind of thing.
Neither do I need anyone explaining to me why it should not be done. Please everyone stop doing this - it is completely unnecessary.

 

[Whereditgo]

Add up the time that is spent by 120 people entering their scores into the screen in the lobby. How much work is that?
All that used to be done by one or two volunteers. The overall workload has not changed by very much.

Oh here we go again. I will have to explain that I do not wish for a return to those days. I do not advocate or agree to clubs running comps with incorrect handicap allowances.

If my club were to run a comp over the next few months with 100% for individual strokeplay (non handicap qualifying due to course length and conditions) there would be no complaints.
This is what the vast majority (possibly 100% majority) are doing week after week during the winter in their sub-groups, so the club would be complying with the majority wishes.
I would not take part, because I don't agree with it. Neither would I seek a battle of wills against my own club. It is not worth the effort. I could face ostracization.
As for facing flak from county authorities - I think they will deal with that if and when it comes - and will most likely not come.

I have some colleagues who have that sort of view. The overall workload may not change much, but it does change substantially for those one or two (and in this case usually unpaid) volunteers.

 

[wjemather]

Easy peasy.
Look at the gross score - subtract the comp handicap. A few seconds for each card. And only need to look at the top few cards that the software indicates for allocation of prizes.

Nice try, but the total gross score is also the committee's responsibility.
You are also assuming it's not a Stableford, in which the committee are responsible for calculating the points for each hole and totalling them.

 

[Swango1980]

Add up the time that is spent by 120 people entering their scores into the screen in the lobby. How much work is that?
All that used to be done by one or two volunteers. The overall workload has not changed by very much.

Oh here we go again. I will have to explain that I do not wish for a return to those days. I do not advocate or agree to clubs running comps with incorrect handicap allowances.

If my club were to run a comp over the next few months with 100% for individual strokeplay (non handicap qualifying due to course length and conditions) there would be no complaints.
This is what the vast majority (possibly 100% majority) are doing week after week during the winter in their sub-groups, so the club would be complying with the majority wishes.
I would not take part, because I don't agree with it. Neither would I seek a battle of wills against my own club. It is not worth the effort. I could face ostracization.
As for facing flak from county authorities - I think they will deal with that if and when it comes - and will most likely not come.

Well, if you are happy that 120 people entering their scores on a computer is equivalent to the workload of one or two volunteers entering all the scores, then good for you. I'd love to ask the opinion of the one or two volunteers, see if they agree.

 

[Voyager EMH]

I have some colleagues who have that sort of view. The overall workload may not change much, but it does change substantially for those one or two (and in this case usually unpaid) volunteers.

Yes, I am very glad with the reduction in workload for those with the public spirited ethic. And I think that goes for the vast majority.
I hope my messages are getting through to people here that I am not advocating for certain activities - merely pointing out what does and could happen due to the wishes and desires of a lot of golfers.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Add up the time that is spent by 120 people entering their scores into the screen in the lobby. How much work is that?
All that used to be done by one or two volunteers. The overall workload has not changed by very much.

Oh here we go again. I will have to explain that I do not wish for a return to those days. I do not advocate or agree to clubs running comps with incorrect handicap allowances.

If my club were to run a comp over the next few months with 100% for individual strokeplay (non handicap qualifying due to course length and conditions) there would be no complaints.
This is what the vast majority (possibly 100% majority) are doing week after week during the winter in their sub-groups, so the club would be complying with the majority wishes.
I would not take part, because I don't agree with it. Neither would I seek a battle of wills against my own club. It is not worth the effort. I could face ostracization.
As for facing flak from county authorities - I think they will deal with that if and when it comes - and will most likely not come.

We can only speculate, can't we?

The "extra work" is entering the scores electronically.
The looking at cards is what has been done for very many years.

What extra work have the scores done electronically

Using PSI and have the scores down electronically has reduced the work load significantly

 

[Voyager EMH]

Nice try, but the total gross score is also the committee's responsibility.
You are also assuming it's not a Stableford, in which the committee are responsible for calculating the points for each hole and totalling them.

Please stop doing this - it is tiresome.
I am not "assuming" - I am speculating. You and I making alternative speculations (medal or stableford, committee responsibilities, who does what and why) could go on for a very long time - very tiresome for everyone.

 

[Swango1980]

Pleas stop doing this - it is tiresome.
I am not "assuming" - I am speculating. You and I making alternative speculations (medal or stableford, committee responsibilities, who does what and why) could go on for a very long time - very tiresome for everyone.

I think this post would be more accurate if it was posted towards you, rather than by you, on this matter. In my opinion.

 

[Voyager EMH]

1. What extra work have the scores done electronically ?

2. Using PSI and have the scores down electronically has reduced the work load significantly

1. Members didn't use to have to do it - now they do. (Although most, like me, are very happy to do so)

2. That is what I have said.