Pairs Competitions, Full Handicap, 3/4 or the new 90% of the difference?

[Underwood74uk]

I am comp sec and we have been debating the pros and cons of the proposed handicap suggestions.

A lot of long term members were concerned that two mid to high handicappers were going to win our main pairs comp. We play 3/4 difference and if we move to the recommendations then the higher handicappers will have more chance of winning.

As it turned out the pair that won were off 6 and 16 so most people were happy but if we let a 24 handicapper play with a 32 handicapper then there may be troubles ahead.

The changes are designed to help Clubs to attract more new members and anything that helps that is a good thing, what works well at your club. Will new members only join if they can win straight away?:whoo:

 

[Deleted member 15717]

No...but surely the club can impose a handicap limit as a rule of competition to stop this?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

We will move any new comps starting to the new rules next year

Not sure what the outcome will be or how it will change things but will certainly keep an eye on things

 

[t0m]

It all comes down to do they cheat to keep there handicap high or are they genuine. I hate having mine cut why make it easier for the better players

 

[richart]

I am comp sec and we have been debating the pros and cons of the proposed handicap suggestions.

A lot of long term members were concerned that two mid to high handicappers were going to win our main pairs comp. We play 3/4 difference and if we move to the recommendations then the higher handicappers will have more chance of winning.

As it turned out the pair that won were off 6 and 16 so most people were happy but if we let a 24 handicapper play with a 32 handicapper then there may be troubles ahead.

The changes are designed to help Clubs to attract more new members and anything that helps that is a good thing, what works well at your club. Will new members only join if they can win straight away?:whoo:

I know we have a maximum combined handicap for our foursomes competitions, 36 from memory, but not for 4 BBB as far as I know. Perhaps there should be a maximum handicap of 18 for men, as surely no man needs more than one shot a hole. Unless he is playing a plus five golfer of course.

 

[Underwood74uk]

in the first round this year my partner was giving 17 and 19 shots while I think I got 7. We struggled to beat a pair that were 79 and 68 years old female members due to the shots. Combined handicap was 61 and there was 65 year difference in the youngest and oldest player in the 4-ball.

Keen to encourage them to enter as we had record entries this year, I suppose changes will be made to the criteria when a 'freak' result happens.

In the singles a 22 handicapper has beaten someone off 7 and another off 5, should you give general play cuts if they are only doing well in the knockouts?

 

[chrisd]

When the singles games were changed to full handicap a fair % of low handicappers didn't bother to enter the handicap Matchplay and a scratch competition was soon born. I wonder if similar will happen with 4bbb?

 

[Region3]

What is wrong with higher handicaps winning a comp? Surely everyone in theory should have an equal chance.

Why shouldn't you struggle to beat a pair of elderly ladies if everyone's handicaps are a fair reflection of their ability? There shouldn't be a guarantee of winning any match.

In the case of the 22 beating a 5 and a 7, do you know what their rough scores were? A bit unfair to cut the guy if the 2 single figure chaps shot in the 80's.

I may have misunderstood the sentiment behind the posts, and my apologies if I have, but I get fed up of being tarred with the same brush as low hc's that think they have a divine right to beat "lesser" golfers.

 

[Underwood74uk]

I wonder if a max 18 or 24 would help either that or go to 3/4 in singles, plenty of time for committee debate next summer season

 

[Underwood74uk]

What is wrong with higher handicaps winning a comp? Surely everyone in theory should have an equal chance.

Why shouldn't you struggle to beat a pair of elderly ladies if everyone's handicaps are a fair reflection of their ability? There shouldn't be a guarantee of winning any match.

In the case of the 22 beating a 5 and a 7, do you know what their rough scores were? A bit unfair to cut the guy if the 2 single figure chaps shot in the 80's.

I may have misunderstood the sentiment behind the posts, and my apologies if I have, but I get fed up of being tarred with the same brush as low hc's that think they have a divine right to beat "lesser" golfers.

I agree with you, no one has a right to win all the time, 5 and 7 players both played close to level par and lost so were unlucky. The theory says that is you are more consistent then you are more likely to progress. We all know that if you come up against someone and you have a bad day or someone has the round of their life then there is little you can do.

I love seeing new members getting their first win comp, what tends to annoy the members is the people that only stick around if they are winning or don't tend to socialise after the comps and get to know other members. What you hope is that if you have the round of your life then you are in with a chance of winning.

 

[Break90]

It all comes down to do they cheat to keep there handicap high or are they genuine. I hate having mine cut why make it easier for the better players

Interesting.....

 

[Crazyface]

in the first round this year my partner was giving 17 and 19 shots while I think I got 7. We struggled to beat a pair that were 79 and 68 years old female members due to the shots. Combined handicap was 61 and there was 65 year difference in the youngest and oldest player in the 4-ball.

Keen to encourage them to enter as we had record entries this year, I suppose changes will be made to the criteria when a 'freak' result happens.

In the singles a 22 handicapper has beaten someone off 7 and another off 5, should you give general play cuts if they are only doing well in the knockouts?

YES

That would stop 'em. Also, we've got a +3 player at ours and I'd back him to beat me 99 times out of 100. Birdies and eagles everywhere !!!!! I couldn't live with that !!!

 

[pbrown7582]

in the first round this year my partner was giving 17 and 19 shots while I think I got 7. We struggled to beat a pair that were 79 and 68 years old female members due to the shots. Combined handicap was 61 and there was 65 year difference in the youngest and oldest player in the 4-ball.

Keen to encourage them to enter as we had record entries this year, I suppose changes will be made to the criteria when a 'freak' result happens.

In the singles a 22 handicapper has beaten someone off 7 and another off 5, should you give general play cuts if they are only doing well in the knockouts?

not at all just because you beat a so called better player doesn't mean you handicap needs to be cut.

 

[Slab]

Also worth remembering that it shouldn't need 'the round of their life' for a high handicap golfer to beat a low handicap player who just 'had a bad day'

It should be much closer than that

 

[t0m]

The handicap system is there so that weeker plays can play better players on a more even field I wish I was in single figures but as I can't play that much I improve much slower. Other sports put on the winners like horse racing

 

[TerryA]

There is no choice - it will be 90% for 4BBB.
So, if you have, say, 2 players off 20 v 2 players off 4 is it really fair, under the current rules, for the 20 handicappers to loose 5 shots each and the lower handicappers to lose only 1 shot each?

Whilst the higher handicapper combination may sometimes have a good day, at our club the competitions are invariably won by the lower handicappers. The 90% will level things up a bit.

 

[t0m]

might as well give up playing in comps

 

[Fish]

What is wrong with higher handicaps winning a comp? Surely everyone in theory should have an equal chance.

Why shouldn't you struggle to beat a pair of elderly ladies if everyone's handicaps are a fair reflection of their ability? There shouldn't be a guarantee of winning any match.

In the case of the 22 beating a 5 and a 7, do you know what their rough scores were? A bit unfair to cut the guy if the 2 single figure chaps shot in the 80's.

I may have misunderstood the sentiment behind the posts, and my apologies if I have, but I get fed up of being tarred with the same brush as low hc's that think they have a divine right to beat "lesser" golfers.

:clap:

Well said that man :thup:

I know from being a member of a couple of clubs that the low single steady handicappers look for fast improvers or those that have a couple of blow out holes but come in with a good handful of pars and the odd birdie, they love us high handicappers as partners, were dead popular with the Cat 1's and long may it continue :whoo:

 

[Underwood74uk]

I though the new rules were optional, lots of great points raised on here, you can never keep everyone happy.

As as far as I am concerned the more the comps wins are spread around the better, don't want to lose the low handicappers but they don't have a devine right to win the comps.

We may have to bring in some Division 1 and 2 comps to keep the peace, the new blood must stand a fair chance of winning and the thing we all hate it those that manipulate their handicap for personal gain.

 

[duncan mackie]

I though the new rules were optional, lots of great points raised on here, you can never keep everyone happy.

As as far as I am concerned the more the comps wins are spread around the better, don't want to lose the low handicappers but they don't have a devine right to win the comps.

We may have to bring in some Division 1 and 2 comps to keep the peace, the new blood must stand a fair chance of winning and the thing we all hate it those that manipulate their handicap for personal gain.

The only option relates to introducing cat 5 fir competitions within your club (I'm guessing from your comments that this is unlikely at your club - but this will have a knock on to CSS when those 28.0 players who shouldn't be off 28 are included in the calculation ).

I confidentially predict it will be 100% in 4BB by 2020- CONGU bottled it initially due to the uninformed reactions to the overall system changes.
Lower handicaps still have a huge mate mathematical advantage in most forms of competition (obscene advantage in medal play).
New Zealand went to 100% many years ago and have been carefully monitoring results from clubs to see if the maths works out in practice - it does.
I play a lot of 4bb matches - about 40 a season, and statistically the lower handicaps win most of the time; the sad element is that when they loose it's always a talking point and it's always the opposition playing better than their handicaps (damm bandits. ..) rarely that they weren't on their game or that the others simply gelled better.

Having said all the above I do accept that none of the above can cover new entrants to the game or fast improves (juniors/life event etc) but this is where clubs do have options. Whether you wish to welcome new players or not is entirely up to you - personally I don't support any limits, restrictions etc (and we have juniors playing all events without restriction). I don't think you can talk inclusion on the one hand and then start applying arbitrary restrictions - there no more logic to 18 than 8.