POLL: How do you feel about WHS?

[RichA]

Can't work you out. You put a lot of input into this forum and turns out you're not that bothered. Moving on then ..

He is quite clearly bothered. He just seems to have some sense of perspective.

 

[doublebogey7]

In order to decide on someone's handicap at the start I would take a number of factors into account. Obviously I'd get them to score a few rounds in different conditions with different players I knew. I'd look at the swing and nature of the bad shots. I'd pay particular attention to short game and putting because that is where the most shots are wasted. I'd then make an assessment based on my, and others', experience. I'd give him a handicap that he'd feel proud to win off. A carrot that isn't out of reach. Then, if and when, he does win he doesn't get run out of town.

That's how we used to do it.

That has never been the system in the Uk in the 25 years I've been an active golf club memeber.

In any case how do you ensure consistency in approach within and across golf clubs with such a subjective system.

 

[doublebogey7]

Allow me to give you another example of how the course rating system falls down. My course is a tough track. Tee shots are what makes it difficult. Fairway bunkers are strategically placed and are in play off medal tees for most golfers who are single figures. We also have forward tees, used to be called ladies tees, and championship tees. The CR difference between medal and forward is 3.6. Between medal and championship it is 3.8.

Here's the thing. A scratch player playing off either championship or forward tees has no longer to worry about the bunkers. He either can't reach them or he can easily clear them.

We have choice of tee competitions, which again I'm not keen on, but the low guys, when they do play, never choose to play off medal tees anymore. In fact the medal tees rarely throws up a winner. Sad for the course design...

Is choosing a tee in a multiple tee competition that allows you to avoid most hazards a form of cheating now made possible by this system?

Again how would a course rating saystem work in your world.

 

[doublebogey7]

Says you. What you're saying is that handicap amateur golf doesn't really matter. That would explain why you think WHS is ok.

Why do we all play this ridiculous game? Do you consider it to be anything other than enjoyment. Pretty surer thats why the vast majority of us play.

 

[Deleted member 36483]

That has never been the system in the Uk in the 25 years I've been an active golf club memeber.

In any case how do you ensure consistency in approach within and across golf clubs with such a subjective system.

So when do you allow someone to do their three cards for their initial handicap?

 

[Deleted member 36483]

Why do we all play this ridiculous game? Do you consider it to be anything other than enjoyment. Pretty surer thats why the vast majority of us play.

Enjoyment, of course. What aspect(s) do you enjoy?

I enjoy fair competition.

 

[doublebogey7]

So when do you allow someone to do their three cards for their initial handicap?

At any time provided the course is set for acceptable scores.

 

[Bazz]

I love being able to put a card in whenever I want rather than having to go in the shop and telling the pro. Keeps my handicap up to date and I can hardly make any of the weekend comps. It's perfect for me and my group.

 

[doublebogey7]

Enjoyment, of course. What aspect(s) do you enjoy?

I enjoy fair competition.

In my view the handicapping system while not perfect offers fairer system than any before it. As the stats I have for competetions at my clubs before and after its introduction show very clearly.

As I have said in previous threads on this subject, there does appear to be a small advantage for those in the old Cat 3/4 ranges over the other Cats, but it is way less than it was for Cat 1's under CONGU. I think this should be address but it won't be a game changer as Cat 1's will always complain just as they did under CONGU.

 

[Deleted member 36483]

In my view the handicapping system while not perfect offers fairer system than any before it. As the stats I have for competetions at my clubs before and after its introduction show very clearly.

As I have said in previous threads on this subject, there does appear to be a small advantage for those in the old Cat 3/4 ranges over the other Cats, but it is way less than it was for Cat 1's under CONGU. I think this should be address but it won't be a game changer as Cat 1's will always complain just as they did under CONGU.

Others don't see it that way. I don't believe it's fair and certainly not fairer than the previous system. Otherwise I wouldn't be posting. You'll notice that I don't have any interest in any other forum threads. WHS has motivated me to speak out and make my point.

 

[rulefan]

Others don't see it that way. I don't believe it's fair and certainly not fairer than the previous system. Otherwise I wouldn't be posting. You'll notice that I don't have any interest in any other forum threads. WHS has motivated me to speak out and make my point.

We know you don't like WHS and we know why. Do we really need it repeating or know more?

 

[Morfeen75]

We know you don't like WHS and we know why. Do we really need it repeating or know more?

Who made you Judge and Jury?

 

[Steve Wilkes]

Allow me to give you another example of how the course rating system falls down. My course is a tough track. Tee shots are what makes it difficult. Fairway bunkers are strategically placed and are in play off medal tees for most golfers who are single figures. We also have forward tees, used to be called ladies tees, and championship tees. The CR difference between medal and forward is 3.6. Between medal and championship it is 3.8.

Here's the thing. A scratch player playing off either championship or forward tees has no longer to worry about the bunkers. He either can't reach them or he can easily clear them.

We have choice of tee competitions, which again I'm not keen on, but the low guys, when they do play, never choose to play off medal tees anymore. In fact the medal tees rarely throws up a winner. Sad for the course design...

Is choosing a tee in a multiple tee competition that allows you to avoid most hazards a form of cheating now made possible by this system?

Sorry this is not the system , this is your course allowing a multiple tee competition that you don't think they should

 

[wjemather]

Others don't see it that way. I don't believe it's fair and certainly not fairer than the previous system. Otherwise I wouldn't be posting. You'll notice that I don't have any interest in any other forum threads. WHS has motivated me to speak out and make my point.

I suppose it comes down to what you consider "fair".
The old system unquestionably favoured cat 1 and cat 2 players. If you consider that fair, then it's likely you consider removing that advantage to be unfair.

We had the same outcry from lower handicappers every time the allowances were changed under the old CONGU system (⅞ → Full in singles Stableford, ¾ → Full in singles match play, ⅜ → ½ in foursomes match play, ¾ → 90% in fourball, etc.) and when they became mandatory. And uproar for all corners when that system (which was an adaptation of the Australian system of the time) was first introduced in 1983, but it still lasted nearly 40 years. The rest of Europe was so unhappy with CONGU that they formed the EGA and adapted the system, incorporating the USGA's Course and Slope Rating System.

 

[Deleted member 36483]

At any time provided the course is set for acceptable scores.

So you don't make any judgement on how prepared the player might be? What if he hasn't played a round of golf in 6!years

I suppose it comes down to what you consider "fair".
The old system unquestionably favoured cat 1 and cat 2 players. If you consider that fair, then it's likely you consider removing that advantage to be unfair.

We had the same outcry from lower handicappers every time the allowances were changed under the old CONGU system (⅞ → Full in singles Stableford, ¾ → Full in singles match play, ⅜ → ½ in foursomes match play, ¾ → 90% in fourball, etc.) and when they became mandatory. And uproar for all corners when that system (which was an adaptation of the Australian system of the time) was first introduced in 1983, but it still lasted nearly 40 years. The rest of Europe was so unhappy with CONGU that they formed the EGA and adapted the system, incorporating the USGA's Course and Slope Rating System.

It really didn't give any advantage to anyone other than someone who worked hard at their game. It didn't matter what their handicap was, if they could play to it they were in with a chance.

 

[rulefan]

Who made you Judge and Jury?

Me. Everyone else seems to have appointed themselves.
But in this case I simply asked a question I didn't make a judgement.

 

[rulefan]

It really didn't give any advantage to anyone other than someone who worked hard at their game. It didn't matter what their handicap was, if they could play to it they were in with a chance.

Only in proportion to the %age of other players in the comp with similar handicaps and work ethic.
Perhaps you are suggesting higher cappers don't work as hard as low cappers.

 

[rosecott]

In order to decide on someone's handicap at the start I would take a number of factors into account. Obviously I'd get them to score a few rounds in different conditions with different players I knew. I'd look at the swing and nature of the bad shots. I'd pay particular attention to short game and putting because that is where the most shots are wasted. I'd then make an assessment based on my, and others', experience. I'd give him a handicap that he'd feel proud to win off. A carrot that isn't out of reach. Then, if and when, he does win he doesn't get run out of town.

That's how we used to do it.

And you would make yourself available to do all this for all new members?

 

[Deleted member 36483]

And you would make yourself available to do all this for all new members?

Interesting question. Most new members already have a handicap but we don't have a huge influx of new members as there's a long wait to get in.

 

[Dunesman]

And you would make yourself available to do all this for all new members?

It sounds quite onerous. But does highlight that even the old system had different versions in different countries. This method IanMac describes is for Ireland I think, and quite different to the procedure in England for example, before WHS, and did not give scope for considerations such subjective judgements on their putting.