Restricted Handicaps in club major trophies

[clubchamp98]

Just what is the purpose of handicaps? Please explain why 18 is different to 19.

You don’t get a shot in the clubhouse

I think his point is
Nobody should get two shots on any hole and expect to be in the winners circle.

 

[Captain_Black.]

All Seniors board comps at ours have a 28 h/c limit.
Those with a h/c higher than this can still play, but must play off a 28 h/c.

In my opinion this is too high & I would like to see it lowered.

 

[Backsticks]

Any limit below 54 is an injustice.

 

[Captain_Black.]

Any limit below 54 is an injustice.

Not when you hear comments from players after a mediocre round like "ooh good, I'll get another shot just in time for the next comp"
Or you're playing against someone who 2x shots on virtually every hole & he plays like a 10 handicapper.
Sadly, the cheats are spoiling the game.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Not when you hear comments from players after a mediocre round like "ooh good, I'll get another shot just in time for the next comp"
Or you're playing against someone who 2x shots on virtually every hole & he plays like a 10 handicapper.
Sadly, the cheats are spoiling the game.

It very much depends. Unless the player knows the worst differential of his 8; and he knows how to convert his net score against the CR for the course he just played into a differential; then can add up 8 numbers then divide by 8 and knows what CH and the PH a revised HI gives (never mind any PCC adjustment) then he is unlikely to be able to say that on completing his round. With the old system it was easy and he could.

All that aside - if it pleases him then fine. It was a mediocre round and he would have won nothing. He can get on with it.

 

[Backsticks]

Not when you hear comments from players after a mediocre round like "ooh good, I'll get another shot just in time for the next comp"
Or you're playing against someone who 2x shots on virtually every hole & he plays like a 10 handicapper.
Sadly, the cheats are spoiling the game.

Is there a correlation between handical and dishonesty? Its a new one to me.
As a 13hc, comforting to know I am on the honest side of the line.

 

[IanMcC]

If I was to point to one thread here which summed up the hateful negativity of the cobweb ridden look-back-bores that sadly still inhabit my game, it would be this one.
First thing I did when I was put in the M&H chair was abolish comp handicap limits. The authorities have set one, and it is 54. Thankfully we have always had divisions. The initial feedback was vitriolic, but I believe people at my club have come round to seeing sense.
Just finished our season. 26 board comps. 18 to div1 (14 PH or less) and 8 to div2.
I reckon that is not a bad split.

Why would anyone pay a full fee if they were excluded from events?
Have a word with yourselves.

 

[bobmac]

Golf, the only sport where people are rubbish at it, never practice it but still expect to win major prizes.

 

[IanM]

I think it's easy to understand the difference between scratch and handicap events.... that's why on the day of a scratch event, there's a handicap event alongside. That's why no one is excluded.

Don't confuse the pursuit of excellence with exclusion.

If you can only put 11 players on the pitch at once, are the rest "excluded?"

 

[Backsticks]

Golf, the only sport where people are rubbish at it, never practice it but still expect to win major prizes.

And so they should expect to - they understand the principle of handicapped competition.

Its a pity not everyone does...

 

[bobmac]

And so they should expect to

I wouldn't

 

[cliveb]

First thing I did when I was put in the M&H chair was abolish comp handicap limits. The authorities have set one, and it is 54.

This has prompted a thought which never occurred to me before.
Why is there ANY limit?
Why don't we allow handicaps of, say, 100?
Presumably the limit was raised from 28 to 54 so as not to exclude players who aren't good enough to break 120. Why is it then fair to exclude those unable to break 200? The limit seems arbitrary.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

This has prompted a thought which never occurred to me before.
Why is there ANY limit?
Why don't we allow handicaps of, say, 100?
Presumably the limit was raised from 28 to 54 so as not to exclude players who aren't good enough to break 120. Why is it then fair to exclude those unable to break 200? The limit seems arbitrary.

Just because I can scramble up a rocky Lake District hill does not mean I am capable of, or should even think of, trying to climb the north face of the Eiger. Never mind expect to reach the summit.

That I can hit a golf ball does not mean I am capable of getting round an 18 hole course in a manner and timescales
that is consistent with what others doing the same at the same time might expect. That is why our Academy Membership (aimed at new golfers) does not include right to play our full 18…by themselves they are limited to playing our first five holes - holes that are difficult enough to play bogey golf but are relatively clear of major golfing challenges. Plus tee time restrictions enable the academy to play these holes at quiet times…and we ensure that etiquette in respect of ‘calling through’ is fully understood.

 

[sunshine]

I still get amused as to why committees chose 28 as it has no real logic behind it these days.

When it was discussed for one comp at our club I tried to get the comps committee to go for 24 because the stroke index 7 is a relatively easy par 3.

I’ve always assumed the max 28 was based on 72 + 28 = 100. So you are likely going to need to break 100 to win. I know it’s just a number, but ability to shoot under 100 is a good benchmark I think.

 

[clubchamp98]

This has prompted a thought which never occurred to me before.
Why is there ANY limit?
Why don't we allow handicaps of, say, 100?
Presumably the limit was raised from 28 to 54 so as not to exclude players who aren't good enough to break 120. Why is it then fair to exclude those unable to break 200? The limit seems arbitrary.

172 shots would take some time.
Not to mention the toll on your body.
If we had unlimited caps it would cause trouble in golf clubs imo.
Maybe if you need a 100 cap golf is not the sport that suits your skill set, as it would not be enjoyable.

 

[chrisd]

It's getting like school age kids sportsday where everyone should be a winner for just taking part.

Handicaps at the higher end are not generally as accurate as they will be for regular, competitive golfers, who've played for a long time. So to allow, say, a 35 year old fairly new golfer to enter a main club competition off, say a 45 handicap, doesn't, in my opinion, give an equal opportunity for both to return a winning score. I know, when I played tennis, there was no way I'd ever be able to win a club competition until I was much more capable than when I started out.

 

[nickjdavis]

We have no limits. Virtually all of our club comps are open to Men and Women off whether handicap they may happen to hold.

The only exceptions are the Club Championship (men only off scratch), Scratch Salver (men), Handicap Championship (men) (and the corresponding Ladies versions of these events), Midweek Championship (men) and the dedicated singles and pairs knockouts where the entry is obviously defined by the comp name (Mens, Ladies, Mixed).

 

[Crazyface]

This has prompted a thought which never occurred to me before.
Why is there ANY limit?
Why don't we allow handicaps of, say, 100?
Presumably the limit was raised from 28 to 54 so as not to exclude players who aren't good enough to break 120. Why is it then fair to exclude those unable to break 200? The limit seems arbitrary.

Christ nooooooooo. Imagine being behind three h/c like that. You'd be playing in the dark to finish.

 

[Backsticks]

It's getting like school age kids sportsday where everyone should be a winner for just taking part.

Thats not what its like - its about that everyone should be allowed to take part, not be a winner.

 

[cliveb]

Christ nooooooooo. Imagine being behind three h/c like that. You'd be playing in the dark to finish.

Plenty of people would suggest that playing behind three 30 handicappers is just as bad.
I'm not seriously suggesting that 100 handicaps should be allowed.
I'm just questioning why an arbitrary limit of 54 was chosen, if the goal was to make the game inclusive.
(Presumably because it gives 3 shots per hole. Why not 2, or 4? I suspect many on here would like to see the limit set to 1 shot per hole).