Roll Up Group Handicaps

[D-S]

But the Golf Secretaries play in a yearly event, thought they would care about the Handicap System....
but obviously dont.....better ask your Sec/GM if they play in it and what they think.

Then notify England Golf that they don't give a toss for WHS.

Do you know that the players did not enter their scores via the App as they could/should have done?

This would have been the only way they could have done it as it was not a club or County competition. Their organisation is not set up to enter scores onto players’ records, irrespective of how often or regularly it is played.

 

[AussieKB]

Yes I know that most did not enter their scores.....was amazing for me to sit at the dinner and discuss what they thought of WHS,
but they stay quiet....as it is only a lose position to them.

Funny that that Golf Sec/Managers play their own comp without WHS requirements.

Please ask YOUR SEC/GM if they play in this, and report back what they think,
we are talking about some top courses here......not little ones, but the same should apply.

 

[D-S]

On

But the Golf Secretaries play in a yearly event, thought they would care about the Handicap System....
but obviously dont.....better ask your Sec/GM if they play in it and what they think.

Then notify England Golf that they don't give a toss for WHS.

On a similar note, I am involved in the Golf Club Manager’s Association golf events and if they play a singles strokeplay event it is qualifying, although most of their regional golf events are matchplay. They are an affiliated association so they, using their ISV, request from the course permission to run a qualifying event.
As I play in quite a few events, I do learn of their views of WHS.
So Golf Club Managers/Secretaries do care about the Handicap System and act accordingly.

 

[rosecott]

Yes I know that most did not enter their scores.....was amazing for me to sit at the dinner and discuss what they thought of WHS,
but they stay quiet....as it is only a lose position to them.

Funny that that Golf Sec/Managers play their own comp without WHS requirements.

Please ask YOUR SEC/GM if they play in this, and report back what they think,
we are talking about some top courses here......not little ones, but the same should apply.

I was a member of GCMA (formerly called the Association of Golf Club Secretaries) for 20 years. Competitions organised by the Association were always QRs.

 

[wjemather]

But the Golf Secretaries play in a yearly event, thought they would care about the Handicap System....
but obviously dont.....better ask your Sec/GM if they play in it and what they think.

Then notify England Golf that they don't give a toss for WHS.

Club secretaries and managers rarely have any handicapping responsibility (beyond membership management), so there's no reason why it would concern them more than any other golfer.

It is the responsibility of the individual club handicap committees to educate their players (including club staff if they are golfers) and ensure they are returning such scores. It's not something that should ever reach EG.

Yes I know that most did not enter their scores.....was amazing for me to sit at the dinner and discuss what they thought of WHS,
but they stay quiet....as it is only a lose position to them.

Funny that that Golf Sec/Managers play their own comp without WHS requirements.

Please ask YOUR SEC/GM if they play in this, and report back what they think,
we are talking about some top courses here......not little ones, but the same should apply.

I'd imagine very few people want to listen to someone moaning about WHS for an hour over dinner, regardless of their views. And as above, handicapping is very rarely part of their job, so their knowledge of the subject is likely to be minimal.

Let me try this another way - this isn't a golf secretary/managers competition; it's a competition for subscribers to The Golf Club Secretary newsletter, which claims to have 600+ subscribers, which makes it a minority publication (there are around 1800 golf clubs affiliated to EG, and dozens more that are not).

 

[Dunesman]

Club secretaries and managers rarely have any handicapping responsibility (beyond membership management), so there's no reason why it would concern them more than any other golfer.

It is the responsibility of the individual club handicap committees to educate their players (including club staff if they are golfers) and ensure they are returning such scores. It's not something that should ever reach EG.

Most handicap committees are likely either not aware of it, or those that are, taking a sensible and expedient, best just leave it, like bizarre gardening accidents, approach. I think we will continue free of any such education, let alone pushing to adapt to a system the very golfers in question never petitioned for.
Despite going through the motions and sticking to the official line in the type of EG meetings described earlier, I am sure they are aware that while in theory they are the law, in practice, they are powerless. And clubs will continue to manage these affairs in the manner to which they have been accustomed with no real change or disturbance to the average golfer.

 

[Dunesman]

Scraped from a US forum discussing the accuracy of their handicaps, a few points open the eyes, and show the future here when we implement the full force of WHS :
- I had thought gimmes were more a technicality, and not holing the 6 incher or 1fter. But inside 3ft seems the norm, and 4ft or 5ft pushing it, but done.
- flipping the ball out of a divot for free seems the done thing
- replay a topped shot
- applying the penalties for stroke and distance is over pernickety

So more than just breakfast balls and mulligans.

'Ball down' - a phrase for rounds played to the rules of golf ('like they do in Scotland') 2 or 3 times a year typically when actually playing a 'tournament'.

Its a brave new world.

EG will probably try to codify these changes though when we adopt them here, so not fully embracing the laisez faire philosophy of full blown WHS where its up to the players themselves to choose what rules they wish to observe or bypass.
If we really were to have a worldHS, why were these methods not introduced here from the off ?

 

[rulie]

Scraped from a US forum discussing the accuracy of their handicaps, a few points open the eyes, and show the future here when we implement the full force of WHS :
- I had thought gimmes were more a technicality, and not holing the 6 incher or 1fter. But inside 3ft seems the norm, and 4ft or 5ft pushing it, but done.
- flipping the ball out of a divot for free seems the done thing
- replay a topped shot
- applying the penalties for stroke and distance is over pernickety

So more than just breakfast balls and mulligans.

'Ball down' - a phrase for rounds played to the rules of golf ('like they do in Scotland') 2 or 3 times a year typically when actually playing a 'tournament'.

Its a brave new world.

EG will probably try to codify these changes though when we adopt them here, so not fully embracing the laisez faire philosophy of full blown WHS where its up to the players themselves to choose what rules they wish to observe or bypass.
If we really were to have a worldHS, why were these methods not introduced here from the off ?

More anecdotal bashing of others, based on forum posts. How useless.

 

[Dunesman]

More anecdotal bashing of others, based on forum posts. How useless.

It is not useless. Very serious points that are the heart of the matter are contained therein.

One. That US handicaps are to a great degree determined by scores submitted in what we now know to be general play, that are not to the rules of golf. But the USGA appears OK with this. It has been their tradition. While the name and some detail changed, the adaptation need from the average US golfer to WHS has been minimal. Almost business as usual. That is why there is no problem there, with average golfers.
(but see pt.3 - the same failure of the goal of WHS is on their side as well).

Two. We adopted the same rules, which imposed a much greater, if we were to fully comply with them, change on how we play golf. But we do have a stronger sense and history, linked to handicaps being for and derived from competition play, of playing to the rules of golf. EG and the other British associations have imposed WHS, without taking this difference into account, and have themselves, this 'rules are the rules, and you must follow them' mindset. Understandably, given they too come from the same stricter culture of handicap regulation as we the golfers. And so we have a conflict with this obey-the-rules-all-the-time attitude and submitting all cards and running rollups by the rules of handicapping and golf. It does not fit without the culture of 3ft gimmes and breakfast balls. There is an inherent contradiction in the system they want us to comply with, and the golf we play. That is why there IS resistance here. EG cannot countenance it, and indeed, I think most typical golfers would be uncomfortable, moving to that loose with the rules culture. But it is the missing bit, that is inherent and makes the submit all cards aspect work in the US. Either we introduce that loose culture, or, we revert to handicaps being determined by competition rounds for competition play. And let rollups and swindles do their own thing instead of trying to whip them into line with the letter of the law.

Three. Whatever it says on the page, that the authorities on both sides of the pond can point to to claim that we now have a unified handicapping system, it is deliberately blind, hypocrisy, and a failure. We do not. Handicaps are as non comparable as they always were. The rules slackness pertains in the US. It does not here. Now neither region is following the rules as written by their association. And in different ways. The R&A/EG/USGA need to look at what is really happening, not what they think should be happening, and they would see the mess they have created.

 

[rulie]

It is not useless. Very serious points that are the heart of the matter are contained therein.

One. That US handicaps are to a great degree determined by scores submitted in what we now know to be general play, that are not to the rules of golf. But the USGA appears OK with this. It has been their tradition. While the name and some detail changed, the adaptation need from the average US golfer to WHS has been minimal. Almost business as usual. That is why there is no problem there, with average golfers.
(but see pt.3 - the same failure of the goal of WHS is on their side as well).

Two. We adopted the same rules, which imposed a much greater, if we were to fully comply with them, change on how we play golf. But we do have a stronger sense and history, linked to handicaps being for and derived from competition play, of playing to the rules of golf. EG and the other British associations have imposed WHS, without taking this difference into account, and have themselves, this 'rules are the rules, and you must follow them' mindset. Understandably, given they too come from the same stricter culture of handicap regulation as we the golfers. And so we have a conflict with this obey-the-rules-all-the-time attitude and submitting all cards and running rollups by the rules of handicapping and golf. It does not fit without the culture of 3ft gimmes and breakfast balls. There is an inherent contradiction in the system they want us to comply with, and the golf we play. That is why there IS resistance here. EG cannot countenance it, and indeed, I think most typical golfers would be uncomfortable, moving to that loose with the rules culture. But it is the missing bit, that is inherent and makes the submit all cards aspect work in the US. Either we introduce that loose culture, or, we revert to handicaps being determined by competition rounds for competition play. And let rollups and swindles do their own thing instead of trying to whip them into line with the letter of the law.

Three. Whatever it says on the page, that the authorities on both sides of the pond can point to to claim that we now have a unified handicapping system, it is deliberately blind, hypocrisy, and a failure. We do not. Handicaps are as non comparable as they always were. The rules slackness pertains in the US. It does not here. Now neither region is following the rules as written by their association. And in different ways. The R&A/EG/USGA need to look at what is really happening, not what they think should be happening, and they would see the mess they have created.

I would submit that the things you accuse the North American side of - breakfast balls, mulligans, gigantic gimmes, free drops for OOB, lost ball, are not as prevalent as your reports of them. Yes, they no doubt exist, but are a small minority.
You seem to take pleasure in reporting such things, presenting them as commonplace?

 

[Backache]

I would submit that the things you accuse the North American side of - breakfast balls, mulligans, gigantic gimmes, free drops for OOB, lost ball, are not as prevalent as your reports of them. Yes, they no doubt exist, but are a small minority.
You seem to take pleasure in reporting such things, presenting them as commonplace?

I haven't played with enough Americans to know how commonplace they are but with those that I have played many of these practices are common, particularly generous gimmees.
Why shouldn't they be common when I've played with them it's been social golf, when I play socially with friends random drops, generous gimmees and extra balls are common, but we're not submitting scores.

 

[Dunesman]

More anecdotal bashing of others, based on forum posts. How useless.

You are making the same mistake as EG. Anecdotes - stories from real golf - are what the authorities need to listen to. Not taking an ivory tower view (are there ivory towers in Lincolnshire ? There must be), that, no, we have checked the rules, and there is no provision or definition of breakfast balls, therefore they do not happen in golf. Of course there is no official data or rule on such things - but that doesnt mean they arent happening.

 

[wjemather]

The drivel is truly endless.

 

[jim8flog]

I can't find any reference to carefully regulated within the leather gimmes being acceptable in the rules of golf.

As already mentioned it depends on which jurisdiction you play under ( Not used in GB and I)

For handicap purposes only the regulations can be found in Rules of Handicapping Rule 3.3

That treats a gimme as one stroke if you are within 5 foot of the hole.

I suspect therein probably lies the problem with GB and I Authorities - who would give a 5 foot putt?

 

[Slab]

Most handicap committees are likely either not aware of it, or those that are, taking a sensible and expedient, best just leave it, like bizarre gardening accidents, approach. I think we will continue free of any such education, let alone pushing to adapt to a system the very golfers in question never petitioned for.
Despite going through the motions and sticking to the official line in the type of EG meetings described earlier, I am sure they are aware that while in theory they are the law, in practice, they are powerless. And clubs will continue to manage these affairs in the manner to which they have been accustomed with no real change or disturbance to the average golfer.

In which sport do the amateurs petition or dictate the rules they play to

 

[wjemather]

As already mentioned it depends on which jurisdiction you play under ( Not used in GB and I)

For handicap purposes only the regulations can be found in Rules of Handicapping Rule 3.3

That treats a gimme as one stroke if you are within 5 foot of the hole.

I suspect therein probably lies the problem with GB and I Authorities - who would give a 5 foot putt?

This is undoubtedly a common perception but it is not an accurate reflection of what the Most Likely Score mechanism is and does.

 

[jim8flog]

This is undoubtedly a common perception but it is not an accurate reflection of what the Most Likely Score mechanism is and does.

I am capable of reading and understanding what the rules say!! There are times when you have to be so precise and not just accept what is given out as a general idea.

 

[wjemather]

I am capable of reading and understanding what the rules say!! There are times when you have to be so precise and not just accept what is given out as a general idea.

What you wrote plays into and reinforces a common misunderstanding of MLS.

 

[3 jabber]

I haven't played with enough Americans to know how commonplace they are but with those that I have played many of these practices are common, particularly generous gimmees.
Why shouldn't they be common when I've played with them it's been social golf, when I play socially with friends random drops, generous gimmees and extra balls are common, but we're not submitting scores.

I've played quite a lot with Americans, their handicaps aren't worth the paper they are written on. Totally fabricated at 'club' level.

 

[Backache]

In which sport do the amateurs petition or dictate the rules they play to

Well I certainly can't think of a single sport where the authorities are trying to determine how you decide how many goals start when having a kick about with your mates.