Playing to or below your handicap

[Slab]

Our max shots used to be 28 to enter a comp now it’s 32 full handicap.
This new system has created players that know how to get the ball around a golf course but with more shots than they used to have.
It’s a poor state off affairs imo that the low players can only win if the weather is bad and this stops the bandits from taking the course apart with their 45+ points.
Lowest gross/ 2s ,divisions etc are a smoke screen imho ,we all enter the main comp and that’s the one you are trying to win
Winning scores of 14 under par are a joke and have only served to alienate players from comps.
The number playing in comps at mine has definitely dropped and I hear “ just giving my £3.50 away “ so they play social golf behind the comp and just put their cards in for h/ cap.

Yeah every comp here used to be capped at 24/36 handicap maximum for M/F for years until whs came along. That’s mostly all changed now (& there's good and bad in that)

That’s why I think its so important for the clubs to be aware/proactive when setting up their comps/formats/divisions, bearing in mind the ability/composite of the field
If a club wants to keep hundreds of members catered for I don’t think they can just say ‘it’s the 2nd Sunday of the month so its stableford/lowest gross/pairs betterball etc etc and this is the comp rules/divisions etc (copy/pasted for last 10 years) Volunteers or not, they need to ‘know their audience’

 

[clubchamp98]

Yeah every comp here used to be capped at 24/36 handicap maximum for M/F for years until whs came along. That’s mostly all changed now (& there's good and bad in that)

That’s why I think its so important for the clubs to be aware/proactive when setting up their comps/formats/divisions, bearing in mind the ability/composite of the field
If a club wants to keep hundreds of members catered for I don’t think they can just say ‘it’s the 2nd Sunday of the month so its stableford/lowest gross/pairs betterball etc etc and this is the comp rules/divisions etc (copy/pasted for last 10 years) Volunteers or not, they need to ‘know their audience’

Unfortunately keeping everyone happy from scratch to 32 cap must be tough.
It’s hard to see how any club can do that.
First world problem tbh.
But part of your green fees is that you can have a moan about it.

 

[Springveldt]

I was a bit confused as to what way to vote as the Title is "to or below handicap" while the poll is "expect to play to your handicap". I see it's been clarified that I should be voting as the title.

In that case I would expect to play to or below (mostly below) handicap around 80% of the time, it's pretty rare I actually score better than my handicap. My index is 5.6, course rating is 71.1, playing handicap of 7 yet I only have 6 scores of 78 or better in my last 24 rounds.

 

[Canfordhacker]

I'm with Voyager on this. 8 rounds out of 20 for your average, so 4 will probably be under handicap. I have 100 rounds under WHS, and, surprise surprise, 20 of them are under handicap.

 

[bobmac]

The reality is that under previous systems, low handicappers were (deliberately and by design) favoured, so their probability of winning was significantly higher than the rest of the field (high handicappers had to post exceptional scores in order to compete with merely good scores from low handicappers). Now, with WHS, their probability of winning is not significantly different from everyone else (good scores are comparable).

Probably the most noticeable (perceived) problem is that exceptional scores from higher handicappers are now unattainable for low handicappers (whereas only extremely exceptional scores were unattainable previously). Divisions reduce this possibility while also increasing the probability of winning by simply reducing the number of competitors, so the perception of this new equity being a problem is also reduced.

Also, due to their ability (and consistency), low handicappers have a far greater probability of other winning prizes; e.g. gross, 2s, spot prizes, etc., so any sympathy is really not warranted.

I don't know where to start with all that so I'm not going to even try.

 

[Rlburnside]

Our max shots used to be 28 to enter a comp now it’s 32 full handicap.
This new system has created players that know how to get the ball around a golf course but with more shots than they used to have.
It’s a poor state off affairs imo that the low players can only win if the weather is bad and this stops the bandits from taking the course apart with their 45+ points.
Lowest gross/ 2s ,divisions etc are a smoke screen imho ,we all enter the main comp and that’s the one you are trying to win
Winning scores of 14 under par are a joke and have only served to alienate players from comps.
The number playing in comps at mine has definitely dropped and I hear “ just giving my £3.50 away “ so they play social golf behind the comp and just put their cards in for h/ cap.

I really can’t understand why some clubs don’t have divisions for competitions, I agree it’s unfair for a high handicapper to beat a low capper who’s had a very good round , I also think monthly medals should be divisions, I remember beating a guy off 4 in a medal and after looking at his card and seeing what a great round he had it didn’t seem right to me.

As for the o/p question probably about 3/4 times a year for me

 

[Backsticks]

I don't know where to start with all that so I'm not going to even try.

Yes, It sums up the situation very well. Low hcs have lost the advantage that they had over high hc in the UHS. Most of them dont know it favoured them. Now that the ground has been levelled, they arent happy. Incorrectly so. It probably needs a better information effort from the authorities to explain the error of their greivance.
wemather puts it well though for a start.

 

[Backsticks]

, I agree it’s unfair for a high handicapper to beat a low capper who’s had a very good round

Why ? Its a handicapped competition. Why shouldnt a high handicapper win ?

 

[clubchamp98]

Yes, It sums up the situation very well. Low hcs have lost the advantage that they had over high hc in the UHS. Most of them dont know it favoured them. Now that the ground has been levelled, they arent happy. Incorrectly so. It probably needs a better information effort from the authorities to explain the error of their greivance.
wemather puts it well though for a start.

Imo it’s two wrongs still making a wrong.
It was wrong that low caps had an advantage under the old system.
It’s wrong under WHS that it’s gone to far the other way.

Anybody who can shoot 50pts has a handicap that is wrong by a long way.
I would not say the ground has been levelled when we see silly scores like that a lot.

 

[KenL]

Why did low cappers previously have an advantage?

 

[clubchamp98]

Why did low cappers previously have an advantage?

I guess they never lost any shots under the 90/95% rule in comps.
But think it was only anyone 5 cap or under.
Once you got to losing .6 you lost a shot.

Plus a max cap of 28.

 

[KenL]

I guess they never lost any shots under the 90/95% rule in comps.
But think it was only anyone 5 cap or under.
Once you got to losing .6 you lost a shot.

The 95% thing came in with whs did it not?
Matchplay singles was full hcp difference too.

 

[wjemather]

Why did low cappers previously have an advantage?

The general philosophy adopted was that better players should have an advantage. The various systems had their own mechanisms for achieving this goal.

For example, under CONGU, initial handicaps were reduced (x 1.13/1.237) and reductions were ratcheted according to category (bigger reductions for higher handicaps) with corresponding buffers for increases but with the same increase (0.1); under EGA reductions and increases were similarly ratcheted and buffered; under USGA, there was a built in 'bonus of excellence' that reduced all handicaps by a fixed percentage (originally 85%!) such that it had a bigger effect on higher handicaps.

CONGU also didn't account for Slope which, on an average course, meant that lows were favoured even more, with scratch golfers being favoured by a factor of about 113/125.

 

[clubchamp98]

The 95% thing came in with whs did it not?
Matchplay singles was full hcp difference too.

I do remember the days before full difference in matchplay many moons ago.
As far as I can remember 90% was the norm for most individual comps .
But like the offside rule in football things have changed so much the layman dosnt know all the rules now.
Unless you study them carefully.
The percentages / allowances have always been there and still are .
But I do remember low cappers winning by one or two shots but have never heard of a low cap shooting 14 under for 50pts to win by 7/8 shots.
That’s the difference for me.!

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Yes, It sums up the situation very well. Low hcs have lost the advantage that they had over high hc in the UHS. Most of them dont know it favoured them. Now that the ground has been levelled, they arent happy. Incorrectly so. It probably needs a better information effort from the authorities to explain the error of their greivance.
wemather puts it well though for a start.

Sorry I’m confused but when did low handicappers have the advantage ?

I can’t recall many low handicappers dominating the club handicap comps - it was mainly mid to high handicappers

and I certainly haven’t seen any “levelling”out because of WHS - if anything it’s not even more unbalanced towards the higher handicaps

 

[clubchamp98]

The general philosophy adopted was that better players should have an advantage. The various systems had their own mechanisms for achieving this goal.

For example, under CONGU, initial handicaps were reduced (x 1.13/1.237) and reductions were ratcheted according to category (bigger reductions for higher handicaps) with corresponding buffers for increases but with the same increase (0.1); under EGA reductions and increases were similarly ratcheted and buffered; under USGA, there was a built in 'bonus of excellence' that reduced all handicaps by a fixed percentage (originally 85%!) such that it had a bigger effect on higher handicaps.

CONGU also didn't account for Slope which, on an average course, meant that lows were favoured even more, with scratch golfers being favoured by a factor of about 113/125.

So it rewarded anyone putting time and effort into their game and getting their handicap down.
I don’t see that as a bad thing?
In fact I see that as a reward for hard work.

 

[theoneandonly]

Sorry I’m confused but when did low handicappers have the advantage ?

I can’t recall many low handicappers dominating the club handicap comps - it was mainly mid to high handicappers

and I certainly haven’t seen any “levelling”out because of WHS - if anything it’s not even more unbalanced towards the higher handicaps

Because we're the better golfers no? Using handicaps to level the field will always be tricky.

 

[wjemather]

So it rewarded anyone putting time and effort into their game and getting their handicap down.
I don’t see that as a bad thing?
In fact I see that as a reward for hard work.

There's a fairly common but false assumption that better players work harder on their game than higher handicappers.

 

[wjemather]

Sorry I’m confused but when did low handicappers have the advantage ?

I don't recall many low handicappers dominating the club handicap comps - it was mainly mid to high handicappers

Really? All but 2 of the last 15 winners of our handicap knockout were single figure golfers (and that includes last year, held under WHS); higher handicappers usually represent the majority of entries.

 

[KenL]

Really? All but 2 of the last 15 winners of our handicap knockout were single figure golfers (and that includes last year, held under WHS); higher handicappers usually represent the majority of entries.

It takes consistency to win through matchplay over many rounds. Perhaps higher handicappers don't have that.