• Thanks to each and every one of you for being part of the Golf Monthly community! We hope you have a joyous holiday season!

PCC to be reviewed

jim8flog

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
16,200
Location
Yeovil
Visit site
A small number of people are still likely to beat their handicap on any given day, if you've done that on a horror of a day, that should be noted in your handicap adjustment with a suitable upward movement of PCC, but it's not, now nearly every day is the same.

yes but do the maths

Say without PCC it was 2 better than your worst score from the 8 = a change of 0.25 in a players index
Say with a 2 change in from the PCC that would make an additional 0.25 change

Is 0.25 really going to make that much difference? Maybe no change to some and maybe one shot to some.
 

Backsticks

Assistant Pro
Banned
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
3,852
Visit site
yes but do the maths

Say without PCC it was 2 better than your worst score from the 8 = a change of 0.25 in a players index
Say with a 2 change in from the PCC that would make an additional 0.25 change

Is 0.25 really going to make that much difference? Maybe no change to some and maybe one shot to some.

I guess for those for whom it is one of their 8, that 0.25 would move a quarter of the field by 1 shot immediately, and maybe have an effect on others after subsequent rounds.
The probability of it being one of the 8 should be 8/20.

So overall, a PCC of 2 would likely move 5% of golfers handicaps by a shot ?
 
D

Deleted member 30522

Guest
When and where did they say that? It certainly wasn't in the Golf Business article I linked to.
That is absolutely an admission of guilt from a body who never does anything wrong
 

jim8flog

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 20, 2017
Messages
16,200
Location
Yeovil
Visit site
I guess for those for whom it is one of their 8, that 0.25 would move a quarter of the field by 1 shot immediately,

I do not know what the range it as you place but at ours the range is around x.6 to x.7 for Course Handicaps to move by a full shot so a change of .25 is hardly likely to produce a change of one shot for many here.

Also on such a day I would expect there to be very few to get a change anyway as it is likely that not many would play better than their handicap.
 

Foxholer

Blackballed
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
24,160
Visit site
Further up the page Foxy, they're now looking to review it following so many complaints this year
Unless you can point me to somewhere where they actually 'admit' there IS a problem, I'd call 'Twaddle' on that post!
Reviewing something is not an admission of a problem, simply a 'We'll look into' as we can see there's a concern!
 

Foxholer

Blackballed
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
24,160
Visit site
I do not know what the range it as you place but at ours the range is around x.6 to x.7 for Course Handicaps to move by a full shot so a change of .25 is hardly likely to produce a change of one shot for many here.
....
It's simple arithmetic. A .25 increase/decrease in HI would likely cause 25% to increase/decrease Playing Handicap (actually slightly more/less as most courses Slope is greater than 113).
...Also on such a day I would expect there to be very few to get a change anyway as it is likely that not many would play better than their handicap.
Doesn't really matter. Playing better than their handicap is irrelecant under WHS (though wasn't under Congu UHS). As long as it knocks a poorer score out of their 'best 8'. Oh and that 'poorer score' might be more than 1 poorer than the new one - so the effect on average score (therefore HI) would be greater!
 

rosecott

Money List Winner
Joined
May 12, 2011
Messages
7,779
Location
Notts
Visit site
Thats 8% where it hasn't been zero.

I wonder how the same period and qualifiers pre WHS would look on the old system ?

I'm tied up for a few days but will have a go on Thursday at digging out a comparable period from a couple of years ago
 

rulefan

Tour Winner
Joined
Feb 21, 2013
Messages
15,432
Visit site
That is absolutely an admission of guilt
So “That’s one of the calculations that is being looked at ...” means "we know it it is wrong"

A real Lewis Carroll classic

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’ :rolleyes:
 

IanM

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
13,451
Location
Monmouthshire, UK via Guildford!
www.newportgolfclub.org.uk
I'm tied up for a few days but will have a go on Thursday at digging out a comparable period from a couple of years ago

Would be a really interesting comparison.

I suspect (from what I've seen at my club and chatter on here) there's a school of thought that thinks there's less "adjustment" under the new system. That's my perception, but I wonder if that's true?

I also wonder if there was a desire to go one way or the other in the design of the new system?
 
D

Deleted member 30522

Guest
Unless you can point me to somewhere where they actually 'admit' there IS a problem, I'd call 'Twaddle' on that post!
Reviewing something is not an admission of a problem, simply a 'We'll look into' as we can see there's a concern!
I think you discount the arrogance of Scottish Golf. Their early season response to complaints was to fob everyone off with an arrogant "it's meant to be less sensitive than CSS, it's working fine".

Those comments are absolutely an admission it's not working
 

IanM

Journeyman Pro
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
13,451
Location
Monmouthshire, UK via Guildford!
www.newportgolfclub.org.uk
So “That’s one of the calculations that is being looked at ...” means "we know it it is wrong"

A real Lewis Carroll classic

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’ :rolleyes:

Ok, but if there were "no issues or concerns" why would they be looking at it? They must have had sufficient "enquiries " to prompt an action.

Or are they that bored? :)
 
D

Deleted member 30522

Guest
So “That’s one of the calculations that is being looked at ...” means "we know it it is wrong"

A real Lewis Carroll classic

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.:rolleyes:
I refer you to my post above. Words matter.
 
D

Deleted member 30522

Guest
Ok, but if there were "no issues or concerns" why would they be looking at it? They must have had sufficient "enquiries " to prompt an action.

Or are they that bored? :)
Shhhhhh, don't use critical thought on this forum
 

Foxholer

Blackballed
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
24,160
Visit site
I think you discount the arrogance of Scottish Golf. Their early season response to complaints was to fob everyone off with an arrogant "it's meant to be less sensitive than CSS, it's working fine".

Those comments are absolutely an admission it's not working
In your opinion!
And what you call 'their arrogant fob off' is exactly correct - as per the document I posted a link to some time bank. Now, WHY that's the case, I'm not certain and am happy for Scottish Golf to review.
 
D

Deleted member 30522

Guest
In your opinion!
And what you call 'their arrogant fob off' is exactly correct - as per the document I posted a link to some time bank. Now, WHY that's the case, I'm not certain and am happy for Scottish Golf to review.
Yes it's my opinion, that's why I said it. Whereas you're saying they're reviewing it for no reason.
 
Top