The First Year of WHS - Positives and Negatives

[Backsticks]

But if you take this argument to it’s logical conclusion then you wouldn’t have any anti cheating measures at all. Why bother with pre registering a GP score? Why bother insisting on a marker for a GP score? If the system is going to have some measures then it’s perfectly legitimate to comment on whether there should be more (or less).

I dont think either assumption there are correct. Pre registering, and a marker, are not there to prevent cheating, but only to be consistent with the conditions of a competition round, which by the rules of golf requires entry and a signed card. The WHS, and UHS as well, are fairly dispassionate mathematical attempts to rate each golfers play, on the evidence of past scores, to equalise all golfers. And both are imperfect at that which is difficult enough. And correctly, they avoid straying into the sphere of honesty policing.

 

[Deleted member 3432]

I wonder if the course has an impact here as well.

At my place you can always put a score together as its not the most punishing course if you're off your game.

Your place is very different, I could imagine if you had a terrible spell or form you could see your handicap increase pretty quickly if you handed cards in regularly. Then it only takes a decent day and you've shot 5 or 6 under your new handicap with relative ease.

This is one thing I have thought about. The summer certainly saw more calmer conditions than we normally have. It was dry and the course was very fiery which definitely helps the short straight hitter of which many of our members are.

The problem is many of this group are 2 comps a week players so a short spell of bad weather conditions gets their handicaps up a few shots and once its good weather the cycle starts again.

Scores were getting less silly at the end of the season as the course softened and played a bit longer 31 points won last weekend (dreadfully day which would have RO under old system but as I didn't play I will never know the pcc) although back to 45 points this midweek.

It would be interesting to see how winning scores compare between courses with low, mid and high slope.

 

[badgergm]

Interested in this.

My take is that anyone shooting 9 or 10 under HC has a duff handicap. Don't see why it should be different for low or high HCs. What makes you think that's OK? Clearly low handicappers shoot more consistent scores so less range between good and bad. Is that it?

So is that another aspect of the form vs ability distinction? Should handicaps be pegged in the middle of a player's scoring range, raising the possibility of very low net scores, or at closer to their lowest scores (their ability)?

it is obvious that the bias towards form rather than ability leads to greater variance in handicap for an individual. In turn that means lower winning scores (higher stableFord). I agree with you that this a bad thing.

There are other scenarios other than form as well. We have had a couple of wins from players with a higher handicapnthan normal due to the players having had a period where minor injury had hampered them to some degree for a while. Handicap had risen more than under the old system.

 

[badgergm]

I dont think either assumption there are correct. Pre registering, and a marker, are not there to prevent cheating, but only to be consistent with the conditions of a competition round, which by the rules of golf requires entry and a signed card. The WHS, and UHS as well, are fairly dispassionate mathematical attempts to rate each golfers play, on the evidence of past scores, to equalise all golfers. And both are imperfect at that which is difficult enough. And correctly, they avoid straying into the sphere of honesty policing.

Of course WHS strays into honesty policing - see Section 7 of the manual.

 

[Backsticks]

Of course WHS strays into honesty policing - see Section 7 of the manual.

What are you referring to ? As far as I know, it has nothing of the sort, and is concerned only compliance with the WHS rules themselves.

 

[badgergm]

What are you referring to ? As far as I know, it has nothing of the sort, and is concerned only compliance with the WHS rules themselves.

Rules of Handicapping, rule 7. Describes various actions of the Committee, including determining whether a player is attempting to manipulate their handicap. When discussing success or otherwise of the WHS it is entirely legitimate to discuss ease of manipulation, rather than limiting to the mathematical algorithms (not all of whoch are even available for scrutiny).

 

[Backsticks]

Where does it mention manipulation ?

 

[badgergm]

Where does it mention manipulation ?

“For the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage”

im not going to continue spoon feeding you here. My view is stated in 192.

 

[rulefan]

This happened did under the old system as well, and no less frequently than it is now. Improving golfers are always going to have the potential to post scores that are beyond the reach of low handicappers - it is why comps should be broken down into divisions (I've been surprised to learn how many clubs do not do this).

Some years ago CONGU pointed out that winners in strokeplay competitions won in direct proportion to the number of entrants in that handicap category. So if 70% of the field are 18 cappers and 1% are scratch, the likelihood of an 18-54 capper winning is greater than a scratch player.

 

[RobertB]

Lots of anecdotal on high scoring winning this year ... I've looked at approx 41 large field (club only) events at our club... 6 won with PH of 10 or less and lowest PH winner 7 in stableford. Average points 43.9 ... highest 47, lowest 41. The 4 medals - two won by single index PH ... against course of 70/71 nets of 61, 62, 63, 64. Nobody on index < 7 won anything as far as I can see - all knockouts won by equivalent Cat3/4s.

We've good % of low index at club - I'm 5.7 but only in top 5% at club but in top 4% on Ireland - across the place lots of comments on social media about need to shoot a level par or better to win Saturday/Wednesday comps.

Would really like to see some historical analysis. If I look at number of instances a single index is placed in top 5 of all these comps over season it is 0.88% ... ~4670 rounds entered vs. 41 places ...seems low ... but would be great to have some reference points ...maybe Year 1 of WHS is an outlier ... surely simple enough analysis for National bodies to do to dismiss perceptions/assumptions or make revisions....

 

[nickjdavis]

I re did an analysis of 24 competitions played in 2020 pre November the 2nd 2020 (when WHS kicked off) and 29 competitions played post November 2nd 2020.

I looked at the average scores typically scored by players finishing 1st, 2nd or 3rd.

Medals (nett score pre WHS / post WHS)
1st Place: 62.9 / 62.7
2nd Place: 64.4 / 65.5
3rd Place: 65.1 / 66.3

Stableford (points pre/post)
1st Place: 42.4 / 41.9
2nd Place: 40.7 / 40.5
3rd Place: 39.6 / 39.9

So....on the face of it, as presented above, there has been no discernible difference in scores required to come in the top 3 in a competition as a result of the WHS. However....I know that, fuelled by escape from lockdown, we had a surge in membership in the early summer of 2020 and we had many new members who joined, some of whom took to the game very quickly, played an awful lot, practised an awful lot and actually scored very well and if pressed, I would say that the above pre-WHS averages are maybe half to three quarters of a stroke better than they would have been. Taking this (subjective) "adjustment" into account would indicate that scoring levels under WHS are slightly better.....but certainly not the anecdotal crushing increases that are widely being reported (in many places, not just here) as "fact".

 

[Backsticks]

Thanks, but we really don't need your facts at this stage. I have my pitchfork in hand, and my torch lit, ready for these WHS toting low score shooting golfers I can't beat.

 

[woofers]

On the whole I like the new system and believe it is a fairer representation of current playing ability provided scores are returned regularly.
And the bit I don’t like, is that there is no minimum number of scores to be returned within a specific timeframe to maintain a ‘valid‘ handicap.

 

[rulefan]

And the bit I don’t like, is that there is no minimum number of scores to be returned within a specific timeframe to maintain a ‘valid‘ handicap.

This of course can be done by your club to suit their requirements.

 

[woofers]

This of course can be done by your club to suit their requirements.

Can it? I believe a club could state in the terms of a competition that ‘x’ number of scores should be recorded in order to enter a competition, although I have never seen this requirement featured in say, the open competitions I have played in.
Are you saying that a club can override the WHS and insist that ‘x’ number of scores must be returned annually, for example, in order to maintain a handicap? If so, I’d be interested in how this could be done, and under what rule / authority.
As it stands, it irks me that a handicap can be obtained after 3 rounds and then held for evermore, granted it would be updated from organised competitions, but if the player just turned up to society or team events it wouldn’t change.
I know of players whose handicap converted from CONGU to WHS with scores from 2018 and 2019 who are playing today with valid handicaps, although they wouldn’t be accepted as valid under the old system.

 

[Swango1980]

Can it? I believe a club could state in the terms of a competition that ‘x’ number of scores should be recorded in order to enter a competition, although I have never seen this requirement featured in say, the open competitions I have played in.
Are you saying that a club can override the WHS and insist that ‘x’ number of scores must be returned annually, for example, in order to maintain a handicap? If so, I’d be interested in how this could be done, and under what rule / authority.
As it stands, it irks me that a handicap can be obtained after 3 rounds and then held for evermore, granted it would be updated from organised competitions, but if the player just turned up to society or team events it wouldn’t change.
I know of players whose handicap converted from CONGU to WHS with scores from 2018 and 2019 who are playing today with valid handicaps, although they wouldn’t be accepted as valid under the old system.

No, I think rulefan was simply suggesting the conditions of a competition can be set to say you can only enter if you have x scores on your WHS scoring history in the last year. So, it is separate from WHS, the player will still have an official WHS index.

However, I can't imagine many competitions will do this. Firstly, they'd need to make an active decision to do so. Secondly, I can't imagine it is easy from a practical point of view. They can't just click a setting on the competition settings and players will automatically be flagged if they do not meet this criteria. It would take the comp sec to go through every player and check their WHS Scoring History

 

[rulefan]

No, I think rulefan was simply suggesting the conditions of a competition can be set to say you can only enter if you have x scores on your WHS scoring history in the last year. So, it is separate from WHS, the player will still have an official WHS index.

Correct.
As it happens we have a few competitions where entry is 'limited' to those who have played a minimum no of times. However the limit is on prize winning only. Anyone can enter for handicap purposes. It's only prizes winners that are checked.

 

[woofers]

Thank you both, however as I said “And the bit I don’t like, is that there is no minimum number of scores to be returned within a specific timeframe to maintain a ‘valid‘ handicap.”…….. which is relevant to the WHS Positives and Negatives topic under discussion.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Given last weeks Thursday rollup scores when you had to have 42pts to come in top 10 and as it was a non-Q and there were no R/U H/I adjustments, I didnt bother with it today.

I have not raised issue of this rollup not being a qualifier (on grounds of it being organised and over 60 competitors) as we do not currently have a qualifying course due to ongoing work on three holes.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Can anyone help me this, I'm most confused..
Today I played Moor Allerton, Leeds. It's a course with three 9 hole loops.

Out of the three I played two, off the yellow tees.

Front 9
Name: Lakes
Score: 43
Course Rating: 35.1
Slope Rating: 125

Back 9
Name: High
Score: 41
Course Rating: 35.6
Slope Rating: 132

Total Par: 71
Course Handicap: 16
Gross Score: 84
Adjusted score: 84

Note: Course ratings and Slope ratings are from USPGA site.

On the handicap page on my golf app it lists the differential score as 44.1, and the rating as 35.2, which seems incorrect? How do I work this out?