WGH Low Handicap Index On Transition

[Mozza14]

The WGH system has the feature of Hard and Soft Caps to contain the increase in a player's Handicap Index during the previous 365 days.

How will this baseline figure be established on Transition?

Will it look at all Acceptable Scores going back to 1/1/18 or will the transition just take the last 20 scores and set this baseline figure on transition?

I think I may have read that the baseline is only set once the golfer has the full 20 scores in their record.

Will the baseline figure be visible to the golfer?

Would appreciate some detailed advice. Thanks.

 

[rulefan]

As I understand it, the Low Index is set a) as soon as the player has 20 scores b) it takes the score 365 days back from the latest returned score
The transition software takes each score in turn and processes them in date order as if they were being returned manually.
So when 20 scores have been processed the LI is set.
If there isn't a score 365 days back the LI is set at the current HI (ie that of the score being processed).
As more scores are processed by the transition software, it searches for 365 days back from the date of that score. If there still isn't one the LI is reset to the lower of this score and the previous LI.

But my understanding may be deficient.

 

[Mozza14]

Thank you. I think that answers my question. You are saying All Scores from 1/1/18 populate the database not just the last 20. This means for regular comp players a LI would have been created some time ago.

So I have 34 scores from 1/1/18 and the 20th score was created on 5/10/19. That would be my starting LI. (3.4 in my case). Due to COVID my next score was created on 6/6/20 (changing my HI to 3.6) I got back to 3.4 on 22/6/20 but since then the demise started due to injury and generally being crap. As of today the 34th score gives me an HI of 5.6 with a LI of 3.4 (22/6/20). So starting to move toward soft cap territory.

Figures not official just my own calculations.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

Thank you. I think that answers my question. You are saying All Scores from 1/1/18 populate the database not just the last 20. This means for regular comp players a LI would have been created some time ago.

So I have 34 scores from 1/1/18 and the 20th score was created on 5/10/19. That would be my starting LI. (3.4 in my case). Due to COVID my next score was created on 6/6/20 (changing my HI to 3.6) I got back to 3.4 on 22/6/20 but since then the demise started due to injury and generally being crap. As of today the 34th score gives me an HI of 5.6 with a LI of 3.4 (22/6/20). So starting to move toward soft cap territory.

Figures not official just my own calculations.

I think the 1/1/18 date isn't relevant for you as you have competed so many qualifying rounds. The last 20 from 1/11/20 will populate your playing record and be used as the basis for the handicap calculation.

 

[rulefan]

I think the 1/1/18 date isn't relevant for you as you have competed so many qualifying rounds. The last 20 from 1/11/20 will populate your playing record and be used as the basis for the handicap calculation.

It surely will depend on the date of the most recent score.

5.7 Low Handicap Index

 

[Swango1980]

I think the 1/1/18 date isn't relevant for you as you have competed so many qualifying rounds. The last 20 from 1/11/20 will populate your playing record and be used as the basis for the handicap calculation.

It was my understanding that ALL scores from Jan 2018 will be processed, even if a player has submitted 50 scores.

So, once the first 20 scores from Jan 2018 have been entered, it can effectively set the Hard/Soft Cap low limit. Then, each additional score is processed in turn, but there'll always be the Low Limit being monitored (and updated) as you go. So, a player that has submitted 50 scores, the Handicap Index will be based on their last 20, but the caveat to that is the earlier scores would have still been used to set the Low Limit. So, their Index could be smaller than purely ONLY taking the last 20, if the Low Limit Cap came into play.

This would seem like the best way to do it. Might as well calculate the initial Handicap Index values using as much of the full system as possible, rather than part of the system, and then adding the Soft/Hard Cap limit from 2nd November only.

 

[rulefan]

It was my understanding that ALL scores from Jan 2018 will be processed, even if a player has submitted 50 scores.

So, once the first 20 scores from Jan 2018 have been entered, it can effectively set the Hard/Soft Cap low limit. Then, each additional score is processed in turn, but there'll always be the Low Limit being monitored (and updated) as you go. So, a player that has submitted 50 scores, the Handicap Index will be based on their last 20, but the caveat to that is the earlier scores would have still been used to set the Low Limit. So, their Index could be smaller than purely ONLY taking the last 20, if the Low Limit Cap came into play.

This would seem like the best way to do it. Might as well calculate the initial Handicap Index values using as much of the full system as possible, rather than part of the system, and then adding the Soft/Hard Cap limit from 2nd November only.

Yes. That's why they going back as far as Jan 2018 rather than just collect the last 20 (or even less).

 

[Swango1980]

Yes. That's why they going back as far as Jan 2018 rather than just collect the last 20 (or even less).

Yes, but I think the confusion is that, some believe that ONLY 20 scores will be considered, full stop. And that the Jan 2018 limit is simply there to stop them going any further back if golfers haven't handed in as many as 20 scores.

For example, my 20th oldest score was played on 23rd July 2020. But, I've played 110 qualifying rounds since Jan 2018. So, when calculating my new Index, some think that my first 90 rounds from Jan 2018 are simply binned / ignored, and then my last 20 are used in isolation. However, (as far as I'm aware), my first 90 rounds will still be used to generate Handicap Index values (that will never be seen), and at least use these to determine the soft/hard low cap values. So, it might be that my Handicap Index will be lower than if I ONLY looked at my last 20 scores. I'm not sure if this will be the case, as I've not worked it out in that detail, but given some very good scores are now outside my last 20, and my recent form has been pretty shocking, I wouldn't be surprised if the soft or hard cap apply in my case

 

[Mozza14]

Yes, but I think the confusion is that, some believe that ONLY 20 scores will be considered, full stop. And that the Jan 2018 limit is simply there to stop them going any further back if golfers haven't handed in as many as 20 scores.

For example, my 20th oldest score was played on 23rd July 2020. But, I've played 110 qualifying rounds since Jan 2018. So, when calculating my new Index, some think that my first 90 rounds from Jan 2018 are simply binned / ignored, and then my last 20 are used in isolation. However, (as far as I'm aware), my first 90 rounds will still be used to generate Handicap Index values (that will never be seen), and at least use these to determine the soft/hard low cap values. So, it might be that my Handicap Index will be lower than if I ONLY looked at my last 20 scores. I'm not sure if this will be the case, as I've not worked it out in that detail, but given some very good scores are now outside my last 20, and my recent form has been pretty shocking, I wouldn't be surprised if the soft or hard cap apply in my case

Your scenario is comparable with mine in terms of a decline from a purple patch back to normality and much much worse. If the transition populates all scores then the purple patch which can be from data up to nearly three years ago, may generate a LI which is a drag on the system of updating to current performance. For most golfers the data will come from the active season and hence there will have been up to six months downtime and possibly eight months with COVID. So Low Indexes from September/October 2019 get effectively regenerated at the first round in 2020, which for me was 6/6/20.

So even with plenty of acceptable scores the 365 day period in practice extends much further back to scoring data. That seems to me to be a weakness in the system.

At the outset, and on transition,I think it would be better to only set this LI on the 2/11/20 looking at the last 20 of the populated database. Going forward I think with the encouragement of more submissions the capping system will work much better.

 

[rulefan]

So even with plenty of acceptable scores the 365 day period in practice extends much further back to scoring data. That seems to me to be a weakness in the system.

I would guess it worked pretty well on the USA and Canada over the years

 

[Swango1980]

I would guess it worked pretty well on the USA and Canada over the years

Did they have a soft and hard cap pre WHS?

 

[Mozza14]

I would guess it worked pretty well on the USA and Canada over the years

The question concerns the transitional data used and the formation of the starting Low Handicap Index in the UK. I agree the LI and capping arrangements may well work well once the system here is up and running. It seems to me that there is a contradiction in that a LI is not created until 20 scores are posted and where you have a golfer who has been active and will continue to be that the first is uncapped and the latter is capped. The latter being the one who probably needs less intervention unless they are are deliberately gaming the system.

No one yet has actually defined how the issue will be dealt with under the transition. It may well be that the first LI will be formed on 1/11/20 looking back 20 scores. I have written to England Golf asking that question and explaining the argument.

I certainly haven't seen any counter argument of substance.

 

[rulefan]

Did they have a soft and hard cap pre WHS?

I thought they had but seemingly not.

http://www.scga.org/pdfs/Handicap Index Caps.pdf

 

[rulefan]

The question concerns the transitional data used and the formation of the starting Low Handicap Index in the UK. I agree the LI and capping arrangements may well work well once the system here is up and running. It seems to me that there is a contradiction in that a LI is not created until 20 scores are posted and where you have a golfer who has been active and will continue to be that the first is uncapped and the latter is capped. The latter being the one who probably needs less intervention unless they are are deliberately gaming the system.

No one yet has actually defined how the issue will be dealt with under the transition. It may well be that the first LI will be formed on 1/11/20 looking back 20 scores. I have written to England Golf asking that question and explaining the argument.

I certainly haven't seen any counter argument of substance.

Given that the transition takes all scores back to Jan 2018 and processes each one in strict chronological sequence building up a Handicap Index as it goes, I can't see any reason why the establishment of a Low Cap shouldn't be done as if the scores were being processed live. Why would they not do that?

 

[Mozza14]

As explained previously, if the Low Index is being created from data which relates to as early as 1/1/18 and therefore much of it may not be reflective of current performance. Most golfers previously would only have submitted CONGU scores in Competition Play so the winter period and the two months lost to COVID will be empty. This means that forming the LI then carries forward in this last year by up to 8 months. This can mean it was formed by scores created well beyond the 365 day period.

As we go forward players and especially declining golfers will be more inclined to submit scores during this winter period to avoid such a situation.

I also feel at the outset a capping process for a new system should only start at its outset where everyone understands the implications. E.g number of card submissions.

If one of the overall system benefits is to bring golfers in line and up to date with their demonstrated standard then this historic LI setting works counter intuitively to that imho.

It is also a new addition to WHS in the USA so there is no testing of its impact in practice. I think England Golf should be cautious about how it is implemented and only using the last 20 scores seems a better compromise position than going back to far for this aspect. It was my initial understanding that only 12 month data was to be submitted to encourage up to date card submissions. I think COVID, lethargy may have caused a change to that idea.

I think SWANGO’s example and to a lesser extent my own data illustrates the adverse impact even for regular card inputters .

 

[rulefan]

This can mean it was formed by scores created well beyond the 365 day period.

My understanding of Rule 5.7 is that the Low Index can only be older than 365 days in one specific situation. See Rule 5.7 and Interpretations 5.7/1 and 5.7/2.

 

[Mozza14]

My understanding of Rule 5.7 is that the Low Index can only be older than 365 days in one specific situation. See Rule 5.7 and Interpretations 5.7/1 and 5.7/2.

Agreed. The issue and problem I am trying to raise is that the scores forming the last 20 can go back much further than that. In this case possibly back to 1/1/18 which is nearer 3 years than 1. Therefore are they reflective of current performance .

If all the data is used I have a score from June 2018 in the LI (3.4) updated on 4/7/20 as it was still in the last 20 scores. So this will stick with me until 4/7/21 irrespective of the number of cards I submit before July 21.

Over three full years. Do you really feel that is correct?

 

[rulefan]

In such a case the committee can and should adjust it if it is inappropriate.

 

[Mozza14]

In such a case the committee can and should adjust it if it is inappropriate.

Thank you. At least you can see the point. It won't just be me affected so hence why a system solution on transition may be the better route, which should be a simple fix. Even if it was implemented post 2/11/20.

 

[rulefan]

Thank you. At least you can see the point. It won't just be me affected so hence why a system solution on transition may be the better route, which should be a simple fix. Even if it was implemented post 2/11/20.

IMO the problem is determining just which score is used to set the low index.