So..... What is the best way to work out h/capping???

[JustOne]

For example, last year I had three rounds that were four over gross. I think I should have been cut to 4 but I remained at the 7/8 region.
I don't think the cut should be harsh for a one off wonder round but if someone is regularly (three times) shooting the same score then a bigger cut should occur.

Dave I've read all your posts (and replies) if you shot 4 over in consecutive rounds you would have been cut quite a few shots? (maybe 2 shots in total off your h/cap?) if you did them over the course of a year then they are just your good rounds... which we are all allowed to have and doesn't mean you play off 4.

To play off 4 you should be able to shoot 2 or 3 over, 4 doesn't cut it to play off 4.

I'm not sure why your mate who shot -1 should be cut so much.... unless of course he was doing it 3 times per month... if that were the case his h/cap would also tumble relatively fast.

In regards to putting in cards you mentioned 4,8 and 11 over par, when I joined a club 2yrs ago I put in 3,7 & 9 over and got 5.5h/cap, they couldn't make me lower than 5.5 as it would put me into CAT1 and just because I had 1 round at 3 over doesn't mean I would necessarily repeat it. Had they been 3,4,3 then yes I expect I'd have got CAT1

When you are CAT1 there is a super special greeting we give each other but you'll have to wait until you get there to find out..... .....



.....actually I'm not sure what it is now as it's so feckin' long since I was there...... :angry:

 

[pbrown7582]

there used to be a rule 19 i think it was called , that allowed further cuts to be made at the h\cap sec discretion to a certain limit from one cat to a lower cat. is that rule extant.

yes i believe its been modified and ESR has taken over and with the advent of pre designated supplementary rounds general play bounce cards are not considered for a cut.

 

[ScienceBoy]

I don't think there is much that could be done to change the handicapping system. What does need to change is the amount of competitive rounds required to have been played before a major competition, say 3 or 6 over the past 3 months. This does mean clubs NEED to offer more midweek competitions as well as more weekend competitions in some cases.

 

[rosecott]

Now come on Rosie, you can't leave it like that...

Not a common occurance at all but I bet it's happened somewhere before.........

Funny you should say that but:

Last September, this guy appeared at our normal Friday Seniors asking if there was any chance of a game as he'd only joined the previous day and wanted to put cards in for handicap. He didn't look like a Senior (he wasn't) but we are a very welcoming bunch and non-Seniors can play with us but don't play in the comp. Anyway he posted a gross 83 in pretty wet, squally conditions. He played again the following Tuesday and Friday and posted gross 72 and gross 76. Knowing that this would have to go to the County Union, I sat the guy down and asked him for his story. He's a South African who had been living in UK for 15 years and was settled down with a wife and 2 kids and had never been a member of a UK club. In South Africa he had been a scratch golfer. After a bit of to-ing and fro-ing with the County Union I was authorised to issue an initial handicap of 2. He did slip up to 3 but has scored 39 and 37 points in his last 2 qualifiers.

My point is that, yes, there are freak situations such as that, but they are extremely rare and there's always a story behind the scores.

 

[rosecott]

there used to be a rule 19 i think it was called , that allowed further cuts to be made at the h\cap sec discretion to a certain limit from one cat to a lower cat. is that rule extant.

yes i believe its been modified and ESR has taken over and with the advent of pre designated supplementary rounds general play bounce cards are not considered for a cut.

Rule 19 is now rule 23 and still lives and breathes. Handicap committees (Handicap Secretaries should not be deciding things on their own - there must be a minimum of 3 on the committee) can, and should, still be monitoring the performance of players who might fall just short of ESR action. On another thread, someone gave details of a sequence of 5 qualifiers which comprised 2 buffers, 2 @ -3 and 1 @ -5. These would not trigger ESR but should at least have alerted the committee to consider clause 23 action.

 

[williamalex1]

if in 4bbb comps.played off medal tees ,if both players enter their gross scores and their one best net score on the card .and its signed , why can't their handicap be cut be. on that bases. .game will take longer , but will catch some bandits

 

[JustOne]

if in 4bbb comps.played off medal tees ,if both players enter their gross scores and their one best net score on the card .and its signed , why can't their handicap be cut be. on that bases. .game will take longer , but will catch some bandits

I agree, as long as you can't go UP.

 

[bobmac]

Hold the bus a minute...........
Are you telling me that if someone has a handicap that is 'generous' shall we say or someone 'wants' to be cut on general play the h/sec now has to put it to a committee before he can act? And why a minimum of three?
Talk about red tape gone mad

 

[duncan mackie]

Funny you should say that but:

Last September, this guy appeared at our normal Friday Seniors asking if there was any chance of a game as he'd only joined the previous day and wanted to put cards in for handicap. He didn't look like a Senior (he wasn't) but we are a very welcoming bunch and non-Seniors can play with us but don't play in the comp. Anyway he posted a gross 83 in pretty wet, squally conditions. He played again the following Tuesday and Friday and posted gross 72 and gross 76. Knowing that this would have to go to the County Union, I sat the guy down and asked him for his story. He's a South African who had been living in UK for 15 years and was settled down with a wife and 2 kids and had never been a member of a UK club. In South Africa he had been a scratch golfer. After a bit of to-ing and fro-ing with the County Union I was authorised to issue an initial handicap of 2. He did slip up to 3 but has scored 39 and 37 points in his last 2 qualifiers.

My point is that, yes, there are freak situations such as that, but they are extremely rare and there's always a story behind the scores.

the other one that seems to happen is the ex pro regaining amateur status...as you say there's normally a story in there somewhere!

I think people miss the key words in many of your posts - 'automatically' in this situation, 'alert to consider' in the other situation.

The CONGU is at pains to point out that the biggest challenge it sees is the uniform application of the necessarily subjective aspects of the system; which to a degree is why we have the AR reports with recomendations and now the ESR (except Scotland!). This doesn't relieve the handicap committee of it's wider responsibilities but reduces some of the workload in certain areas which should enable them to focus their energy on others. Most are specifically documented - early performance of new handicap allocations, fast improvers such as juniors, non-qualifying performances within the club in the absence of good Q performance records (lots). The one that many do not put any effort into, partially because it's difficult and partially because it doesn't create a problem within 'their' club, is the non-qualifying performances outside the club - as highlighted in the previous thread that triggered this one.

On the other side of the equation are those who would rather die than have their handicap increased from 27 to 28!

Right now it's probably as good (fair and balanced) as it's ever been IMO, with 2 areas that can, and should, be improved.

1. The retention of a players handicap record history when they leave a club, such that it's available when they rejoin there, or elsewhere. An 8 handicapper who take 5 years away from the game and returns the first 3 rounds he plays on returning is going to be a 10/11 very fast, and maybe lower depending on age and circumstances. However his first 3 cards could (and frequently do) indicate 17. Even though he may (should) advise that he was an 8 it's a hard one to take into account without sight of detailed records.
2. All players should be required to report details of all and every win in any open or other event run by a club and played to a NQ basis as singles or any form of pairs. Whilst this leaves the responsibility on the players it's an unreasonable overhead on the organisers - and would be a start. I'm not suggesting knee jerk responses from handicap sec's but the more information they have the better chance they will be able to make the right decisions over time.

 

[williamalex1]

i'm afraid there's a lot of sphincter police about

 

[bladeplayer]

In any game that is self regulating regarding rules there will be cheating & minding the handicap in golfs case ..


Personalities will create problems wherever you go , if the handicap secratery had full control & takes a dislike to someone, in some cases they could be vindictive .. not nice but its true , there are cliques in every club , if the handicap sec was part of this & his/her mates take a dislike to some one start slobbering , what do you thing would happen ..

There is not much wrong with the system & if members play fair & honest golf you will soon find your proper level & as a result proper handicap , the problem is the people who dont play honest golf ..

 

[bobmac]

1.

An 8 handicapper who take 5 years away from the game and returns the first 3 rounds he plays on returning is going to be a 10/11 very fast, and maybe lower depending on age and circumstances. However his first 3 cards could (and frequently do) indicate 17. Even though he may (should) advise that he was an 8 ....

I'd like to see that changed to 'must advise'

it's a hard one to take into account without sight of detailed records

And why insist on detailed records as proof, cant the golfer be trusted he is telling the truth?

2.

All players should be required to report details of all and every win in any open

Again, I'd like to see that changed to 'must' report details or any win