Potentially changing 4BBB Open Competitions- Any thoughts on alternate system?

[The Fader]

What evidence do you have for that?

whatsoever

None whatsoever but the majority seem to feel higher handicaps suit this sort of competition.

Rightly or wrongly this suggestion alleviates those feelings. Is that a bad thing?

As an aside if the playing field is already level why do a lot of cubs play in divisions in their weekly competitions? This is simply an extension of that.

 

[rulefan]

whatsoever

None whatsoever but the majority seem to feel higher handicaps suit this sort of competition.

Rightly or wrongly this suggestion alleviates those feelings. Is that a bad thing?

As an aside if the playing field is already level why do a lot of cubs play in divisions in their weekly competitions? This is simply an extension of that.

I wonder how many have ever studied, or even glanced at, the published stats on the relationship between numbers of players in handicap range and the incidence of winning.

 

[Swango1980]

I wonder how many have ever studied, or even glanced at, the published stats on the relationship between numbers of players in handicap range and the incidence of winning.

I wonder how often the authorities ignore the perception of regular club golfers, and just use stats to tell them they are wrong.

99% of golfers will never study the research anyway. If a golfer thinks they are hard done by a handicap system, it is unlikely they'll change their mind if stats imply they are wrong

 

[rulefan]

I wonder how often the authorities ignore the perception of regular club golfers, and just use stats to tell them they are wrong.

99% of golfers will never study the research anyway. If a golfer thinks they are hard done by a handicap system, it is unlikely they'll change their mind if stats imply they are wrong

Yes, perception has a lot to answer for.

 

[Swango1980]

Yes, perception has a lot to answer for.

It does, but you wonder why that perception is there? Often there is no smoke without fire.

As soon as people start recommending competitions are split into Handicap Divisions, that immediately rings alarm bells that the handicap system is unfair. Why on earth should competitions be split into divisions if a scratch player has absolutely the same chance as winning as a 40 handicapper?

 

[clubchamp98]

I wonder how often the authorities ignore the perception of regular club golfers, and just use stats to tell them they are wrong.

99% of golfers will never study the research anyway. If a golfer thinks they are hard done by a handicap system, it is unlikely they'll change their mind if stats imply they are wrong

Exactly this my perception of handicaps is what I see at my club every week.
The low cappers have their own sweep now as they have NO chance of beating a low 60s score.
Three 58s have been recorded this year, it’s a tough track and I just can’t comprehend how someone off a genuine handicap can shoot that!

Made easier by the fact you can still put a card in from said sweep.

My honest opinion is the game has changed forever .
I used to tee it up with great expectations of a win.
Now I know I have no chance, but still try my best.

 

[rulefan]

It does, but you wonder why that perception is there? Often there is no smoke without fire.

As soon as people start recommending competitions are split into Handicap Divisions, that immediately rings alarm bells that the handicap system is unfair. Why on earth should competitions be split into divisions if a scratch player has absolutely the same chance as winning as a 40 handicapper?

Is this the same 40 capper every time? How many 40 cappers have won how many comps? How many 40 cappers in your club?

 

[Swango1980]

Is this the same 40 capper every time? How many 40 cappers have won how many comps? How many 40 cappers in your club?

1. Do you think a lower handicapper is less bothered if he is beaten by a different 40 handicapper every week? Not at all, so that question does not make a jot of difference
2. I used 40 handicapper simply as an example. I could have used 20 / 30 / 40 / 50 / etc when comparing to scratch golfers, I was simply talking about Division golf. Since WHS golf came in, plenty of high 20's / 30's handicapper won comps with scores approaching 50 points. Medals were split into Divisions, to protect lower handicappers from these guys. My new club does not let anyone with a handicap over 24 to play (they can play, but 24 is their limit).
3. At my old club there were plenty over 30, and certainly many high 20's. 40 is irrelevant, you can have a young guy come into the game of golf, put in 3 scores, get an Index in the 20's, and you know within a few months they'll be mid teens and even approaching single figures. Plenty of examples of that, pre and post WHS. WHS simply provides a few extra shots to higher handicappers compared to pre WHS.

 

[rulie]

1. Do you think a lower handicapper is less bothered if he is beaten by a different 40 handicapper every week? Not at all, so that question does not make a jot of difference
2. I used 40 handicapper simply as an example. I could have used 20 / 30 / 40 / 50 / etc when comparing to scratch golfers, I was simply talking about Division golf. Since WHS golf came in, plenty of high 20's / 30's handicapper won comps with scores approaching 50 points. Medals were split into Divisions, to protect lower handicappers from these guys. My new club does not let anyone with a handicap over 24 to play (they can play, but 24 is their limit).
3. At my old club there were plenty over 30, and certainly many high 20's. 40 is irrelevant, you can have a young guy come into the game of golf, put in 3 scores, get an Index in the 20's, and you know within a few months they'll be mid teens and even approaching single figures. Plenty of examples of that, pre and post WHS. WHS simply provides a few extra shots to higher handicappers compared to pre WHS.

I'll suggest that WHS provides more realistic views of a player's ability. The previous system, imo, purposely kept many players' handicaps far below their playing ability.

 

[Swango1980]

I'll suggest that WHS provides more realistic views of a player's ability. The previous system, imo, purposely kept many players' handicaps far below their playing ability.

Not enough to stop new golfers with high handicaps having the capability of shooting close to 50 points once they get up and running. Not enough to stop clubs feeling it necessary to have handicap Divisions or banning anyone with a handicap over 24, for example.

I agree, WHS allows for quicker increases, and that will benefit some. The Continuous Review that was brought in pre-WHS would have gone a long way to solving that as well, albeit it relied on the Handicap Committee to be pro-active (although perhaps if WHS had not come along, Continuous Review might have evolved, and maybe become a bit more automated in the future)

 

[rulie]

Not enough to stop new golfers with high handicaps having the capability of shooting close to 50 points once they get up and running. Not enough to stop clubs feeling it necessary to have handicap Divisions or banning anyone with a handicap over 24, for example.

I agree, WHS allows for quicker increases, and that will benefit some. The Continuous Review that was brought in pre-WHS would have gone a long way to solving that as well, albeit it relied on the Handicap Committee to be pro-active (although perhaps if WHS had not come along, Continuous Review might have evolved, and maybe become a bit more automated in the future)

Committees will do what they feel they need to; putting an upper limit on handicaps for competitions is legitimate, as are divisions (or flights as we call them).

 

[The Fader]

I wonder how many have ever studied, or even glanced at, the published stats on the relationship between numbers of players in handicap range and the incidence of winning.

A very wise man once said -

Beware of statistics, they are like bricks
You can build houses or just break windows.

 

[rulefan]

1. Do you think a lower handicapper is less bothered if he is beaten by a different 40 handicapper every week? Not at all, so that question does not make a jot of difference
2. I used 40 handicapper simply as an example. I could have used 20 / 30 / 40 / 50 / etc when comparing to scratch golfers, I was simply talking about Division golf. Since WHS golf came in, plenty of high 20's / 30's handicapper won comps with scores approaching 50 points. Medals were split into Divisions, to protect lower handicappers from these guys. My new club does not let anyone with a handicap over 24 to play (they can play, but 24 is their limit).
3. At my old club there were plenty over 30, and certainly many high 20's. 40 is irrelevant, you can have a young guy come into the game of golf, put in 3 scores, get an Index in the 20's, and you know within a few months they'll be mid teens and even approaching single figures. Plenty of examples of that, pre and post WHS.

Isn't this what handicap committees are for?

 

[Swango1980]

Isn't this what handicap committees are for?

The damage is already done if they win a comp by with nearly 50 points. And, it would be unwise for a handicap committee to give the player an additional cut based on one score, or act on the opinion of others. Only unless they start putting in great scores in match play, am/ams, etc, the Committee are normally wise to trust the handicap system will eventually catch up. And, when it finally does, no doubt another high handicapper or 2 will come along, new to the game.

One way would be for the handicap Committee to ignore the handicap the player gets after submitting their 3 cards, and make it lower. Of course, that is definitely not recommended by the authorities

 

[clubchamp98]

The damage is already done if they win a comp by with nearly 50 points. And, it would be unwise for a handicap committee to give the player an additional cut based on one score, or act on the opinion of others. Only unless they start putting in great scores in match play, am/ams, etc, the Committee are normally wise to trust the handicap system will eventually catch up. And, when it finally does, no doubt another high handicapper or 2 will come along, new to the game.

One way would be for the handicap Committee to ignore the handicap the player gets after submitting their 3 cards, and make it lower. Of course, that is definitely not recommended by the authorities

I have always thought it strange you can have a handicap after just three cards.
But it takes the best 8 out of 20 to have a “ proper” one.
Three is not enough imo.
Maybe 8 should be the minimum?

 

[Swango1980]

I have always thought it strange you can have a handicap after just three cards.
But it takes the best 8 out of 20 to have a “ proper” one.
Three is not enough imo.
Maybe 8 should be the minimum?

I don't mind 3, gotta start somewhere, and could take ages to get 8 in.

However, if your best score was to give a person a handicap of, say 30, based on that raw score, stick a reduction of 10 on it, and give them 20. After more scores handed in, just reduce the penalty gradually.

 

[SammmeBee]

Are these alleged ridiculous winning scores from clubs that close the ‘qualifying’ window for winter reasons rather then those that keep winning winning over the winter so they can allow their handicaps to get to a correct level…….

 

[rulefan]

I have always thought it strange you can have a handicap after just three cards.
But it takes the best 8 out of 20 to have a “ proper” one.
Three is not enough imo.
Maybe 8 should be the minimum?

Remember the Index allocated for 3 cards is the best - 2.0.

 

[Swango1980]

Remember the Index allocated for 3 cards is the best - 2.0.

That is basically nothing and pretty much ineffective in protecting the field from rapidly improving new golfers. It is the same reduction whether the player's "raw" index is 5 or 35. And, it falls to 1.0 after an extra card, and disappears after 5th.

 

[clubchamp98]

Are these alleged ridiculous winning scores from clubs that close the ‘qualifying’ window for winter reasons rather then those that keep winning winning over the winter so they can allow their handicaps to get to a correct level…….

Maybe the players just don’t play in winter.
Lots put the clubs away until April.
There not alleged I have seen the result sheets to tell me my level par net was 14 shots behind the winner!