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

[Swango1980]

Whether such rounds count for handicapping is of no relevance. Union affiliated clubs agree to adhere to the rules and guidance given to them.
The guidance provided by the home unions in relation to concerns that low handicappers cannot compete with higher handicappers who are having an exceptional scoring day is to create handicap divisions.
Unjustifiably and unfairly seeking to prevent higher handicappers from competing on a level playing field is not the way forward.

The LUGC put a limit on the index a player cam play off in the handicap league of 17.4. Higher handicappers can play, but must calculate their course and playing handicaps based on an index of 17.4.

Not sure if that is unfair or not on any handicappers who play, or want to play?

Our club has a maximum handicap allowance in most comps of 24 index. I think they've been doing it for years tho. I've played many Opens over the years where all sorts of strange handicap allowances have been applied, that go outside "guidance"

Ultimately, so long as clubs get a good number of entrants in their comps, I imagine they will do as they please, rightly or wrongly. But, unless there is a revolution by high handicappers, I suspect the authorities will simply let them get on with it

 

[BiMGuy]

One simple way is to have both scores entered on the card everytime and then entered into the WHS system and used for handicap purposes, this would stop the stream of bandits getting ridiculous scores week in week out. You would stop overnight these people and have a far fairer result. Played a 4bbb comp In summer top five were all 20 handicap or worse and fifth place had 49 points, winners 52. Me and partner off 9 had 40 points and thought we had played exceptionally well.

Do you enjoy 5 or 6 hour rounds? Because that’s what you would get if both scores had to be recorded. I played in a 4BBB open yesterday that took us 5:10 to get round. It would have been closer to 6 hours if every score was recorded.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Whether such rounds count for handicapping is of no relevance. Union affiliated clubs agree to adhere to the rules and guidance given to them.
The guidance provided by the home unions in relation to concerns that low handicappers cannot compete with higher handicappers who are having an exceptional scoring day is to create handicap divisions.
Unjustifiably and unfairly seeking to prevent higher handicappers from competing on a level playing field is not the way forward.

I'm not suggesting it is the way forward, I'm in cat 3 so I would be amongst those penalised. I'm simply answering the question posed.

You keep referring to the objection as guidance. If it's guidance then that isn't a rule. It might be strongly advised but that is different to a rule. Guidance surely leaves interpretation open to the individual club?

 

[Crazyface]

4BBB could be off a lower % of handicaps. Say 65%.

 

[BiMGuy]

I’d have a limit on a maximum of 1 shot per hole. I wouldn’t limit anybody with a higher index playing, just the maximum number of strokes they received.

It might help to speed up play too.

 

[wjemather]

I'm not suggesting it is the way forward, I'm in cat 3 so I would be amongst those penalised. I'm simply answering the question posed.

You keep referring to the objection as guidance. If it's guidance then that isn't a rule. It might be strongly advised but that is different to a rule. Guidance surely leaves interpretation open to the individual club?

CONGU's document is simply called "Guidance on the WHS rules of handicapping as applied within GB&I". It's purpose is to provide additional information with regards to how WHS is implemented in GB&I. The word "mandatory" does not require interpretation.

 

[wjemather]

The LUGC put a limit on the index a player cam play off in the handicap league of 17.4. Higher handicappers can play, but must calculate their course and playing handicaps based on an index of 17.4.

Not sure if that is unfair or not on any handicappers who play, or want to play?

Our club has a maximum handicap allowance in most comps of 24 index. I think they've been doing it for years tho. I've played many Opens over the years where all sorts of strange handicap allowances have been applied, that go outside "guidance"

Ultimately, so long as clubs get a good number of entrants in their comps, I imagine they will do as they please, rightly or wrongly. But, unless there is a revolution by high handicappers, I suspect the authorities will simply let them get on with it

Of course it's unfair, but as long as it's known to competitors prior to entry, they make their choice whether to enter or not.
Pre WHS, the home unions all provided guidance for setting competition handicap limits; in theirs, Wales Golf went so far as stating in bold "Players should NOT be asked to compete off a handicap lower than that to which they are entitled."

 

[clubchamp98]

It seems that this particular club gets the impression lower handicap players are specifically not entering. Now, I don't know whether this is from the opinion of one low handicapper, or the opinion of several, but something has pushed the committee to do this, rightly or wrongly.

I know a few low cappers that are only playing in the majors at their own clubs because of the stupid scores we see almost every week.
Opens are just a day out now.

 

[rulefan]

The LUGC put a limit on the index a player cam play off in the handicap league of 17.4. Higher handicappers can play, but must calculate their course and playing handicaps based on an index of 17.4.

I can see why they would limit the PH but surely capping the CH cannot be right. Surely these comps are 'qualifiers', is it possible to alter a CH in WHS? Do they alter the CH in the scratch league.

 

[rulie]

I can see why they would limit the PH but surely capping the CH cannot be right. Surely these comps are 'qualifiers', is it possible to alter a CH in WHS? Do they alter the CH in the scratch league.

I'm missing something. If a round is a qualifier, the round's score is entered into WHS. What difference does a CH or PH make to the score that is made and entered?

 

[rulefan]

I'm missing something. If a round is a qualifier, the round's score is entered into WHS. What difference does a CH or PH make to the score that is made and entered?

Yes. My question is really about how they alter the CH, if in fact they do. Or is the PF simply altered for the competition result?

 

[Swango1980]

I can see why they would limit the PH but surely capping the CH cannot be right. Surely these comps are 'qualifiers', is it possible to alter a CH in WHS? Do they alter the CH in the scratch league.

The league is fourball betterball matchplay. Teams of 12, so 6 groups in each club v club match. Index upper limit is 17.4. Last time I played, we had a chap whose real.index was low 20's, so he lost several shots in his match.

P.S. despite the upper limit, I personally have never heard any complaints from anyone.

 

[Swango1980]

Of course it's unfair, but as long as it's known to competitors prior to entry, they make their choice whether to enter or not.
Pre WHS, the home unions all provided guidance for setting competition handicap limits; in theirs, Wales Golf went so far as stating in bold "Players should NOT be asked to compete off a handicap lower than that to which they are entitled."

Maybe Wales Golf have taken WHS too literally then? Or, maybe higher handicappers in Wales are more sensitive than the rest of the UK?

As you said, if competitors know there are additional restrictions, yet competition fields are still healthy, then that is still positive.

 

[salfordlad]

As others note, this is more about event management than handicapping. Alternative approaches include: playing fewer four balls and doing what is common in individual events - split the competition into handicap groupings

 

[wjemather]

Maybe Wales Golf have taken WHS too literally then? Or, maybe higher handicappers in Wales are more sensitive than the rest of the UK?

As you said, if competitors know there are additional restrictions, yet competition fields are still healthy, then that is still positive.

WHS has nothing to do with it. As clearly stated, this guidance was issued pre-WHS.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Most recent 4BBB at my place was won with 47pts and 36 pairs had 40pts or more (the field was 52 pairs). 3 pairs scored 47pts. Of the six players…one was Cat 1; two were Cat 2, and three were Cat 3. Winning pair was a Cat 2 plus a Cat 3.

The comp was off our front tees with one of our par 4s effectively playing as a par 3 (due to work). I’m thinking that this scoring and the player categories is just what I’d have expected. No change required.

That said. Speaking with our golf manager during the week, the club is going to make a big push to get most members handicap record up to at least 20 rounds within the year or so before start of next competition year. If a player can’t then h/cap sec is going to look at existing record and any scores in non-qualifying rounds over winter to consider adjustments that might be required.

 

[Swango1980]

WHS has nothing to do with it. As clearly stated, this guidance was issued pre-WHS.

I simply stated WHS as that is our current system. More definitively, I guess I could have said Wales Golf have taked the national handicap guidance too literally.

My main point was competition organisers will set up comps as they see fit. That may have handicap limits, reduced handicap proportions, etc.

Once a player has a handicap under WHS, they have a handicap. No need to hand in a minimum number of rounds per year to keep it a "competition" handicap. However, competition organisers can freely add conditions in a competition to ban entry if a player has not got a defined number of scores on their history over the last year. Not "discriminatory" against higher handicaps, but "discriminatory" against golfers with few rounds. The handicap system officially gives that player a handicap, yet the handicap authority (England Golf anyway) make it perfectly acceptable for completion secretaries to stop those golfers entering / winning competitions.

Specifically, under WHS, it would be interesting to know if more and more competition organisers feel the need to put restrictions on competitions compared to pre WHS. I think it is likely, simply because higher handicaps are generally getting relatively more shots now than pre WHS.

 

[The Fader]

May mean spreading prize money more thinly (no bad thing anyway to deter the "pothunters"!) but perhaps have divisions based on combined handicaps?

For example

Div 1 - Max combined index 16
Div 2 - Max combined index 32
Div 3 - The rest....

Gives lower handicaps a more even playing field without excluding anyone

 

[NearHull]

May mean spreading prize money more thinly (no bad thing anyway to deter the "pothunters"!) but perhaps have divisions based on combined handicaps?

For example

Div 1 - Max combined index 16
Div 2 - Max combined index 32
Div 3 - The rest....

Gives lower handicaps a more even playing field without excluding anyone

I like that idea a lot. I may try to introduce that in one of our Opens next year. Can anyone see any downside to it?

 

[rulefan]

Gives lower handicaps a more even playing field without excluding anyone

What evidence do you have for that?