What Would You Change About the WHS?

[Dunesman]

I get some of the reasoning but I can't help but think a good chunk of the dislike is down to change and people, golfers in particular it seems, not liking change. The old system was not great, imo, but people were familiar with it and so put up with its foibles.

As has been said before, the vast majority of club golfers will not care or even be aware that some are this hostile.

The vast majority are unaware exactly because of the flaw itself. The problem doesnt affect the average 18 handicap, either negatively, or to a degree that he appreciates the bias in his favour.
Less than 15% of golfers are single figures. Broadly, they are the unhappy ones. (I didnt check the stats in the poll thread, but maybe approx 15% unhappy with WHS would correlate).
Middle to higher handicaps will not notice the flaw. Lower men, realising not only they, but none of their single handicap colleagues are winning any more, do realise.
In sum, that only a minority are unhappy does not mean the system is OK, if the grievance of that minority is valid. The fundamental grievance itself is that only a minority are being affected negatively, if you see what I mean. A 25HI not having an issue doesnt mean there isnt an issue.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

The vast majority are unaware exactly because of the flaw itself. The problem doesnt affect the average 18 handicap, either negatively, or to a degree that he appreciates the bias in his favour.
Less than 15% of golfers are single figures. Broadly, they are the unhappy ones. (I didnt check the stats in the poll thread, but maybe approx 15% unhappy with WHS would correlate).
Middle to higher handicaps will not notice the flaw. Lower men, realising not only they, but none of their single handicap colleagues are winning any more, do realise.
In sum, that only a minority are unhappy does not mean the system is OK, if the grievance of that minority is valid. The fundamental grievance itself is that only a minority are being affected negatively, if you see what I mean. A 25HI not having an issue doesnt mean there isnt an issue.

Maybe there will always be a percentage who are unhappy? Maybe you can not suit everyone?

Maybe the people in charge weighed up the options and decided that this grievance was less valid than other people's grievance?

I don't know the answer. Perhaps the powers that be will read the survey responses and react to any unhappiness. Equally, there may be insufficient unhappiness in the responses to warrant them doing anything more. The noise on here and in certain clubhouses may be loud but not prolific. We will only find out when they respond to the survey results (which hopefully they do, whichever way you think things should go)

 

[jim8flog]

Bring back competition status (and it must be cards from comps) or as per what happened to Cat1 previously allow GP cards but only those in a restricted time period

Allow most likely score for GP cards.

I like what has already been suggested - set a more realistic time limit for counting scores.

 

[clubchamp98]

Best 5 from 20 over a 12 month period would at least be more form based.
But is a score from 12 months ago current?
I still think it’s a fundamentally flawed system from summer thru winter based on course conditions.

At least 4 should be comp cards.
If you can’t get four cards a year in should you really qualify to compete in any comps inc matchplay.

Only one GP card per week.
That’s 52 cards in a year max.
I would like GP cards scrapped altogether as it dosnt represent a competition handicap.

 

[PaulMdj]

The vast majority are unaware exactly because of the flaw itself. The problem doesnt affect the average 18 handicap, either negatively, or to a degree that he appreciates the bias in his favour.
Less than 15% of golfers are single figures. Broadly, they are the unhappy ones. (I didnt check the stats in the poll thread, but maybe approx 15% unhappy with WHS would correlate).
Middle to higher handicaps will not notice the flaw. Lower men, realising not only they, but none of their single handicap colleagues are winning any more, do realise.
In sum, that only a minority are unhappy does not mean the system is OK, if the grievance of that minority is valid. The fundamental grievance itself is that only a minority are being affected negatively, if you see what I mean. A 25HI not having an issue doesnt mean there isnt an issue.

Sorry, but that’s just not true, I worked hard to get to single figures and just after I did the WHS came in and I was automatically put back to double figures.

Low single figure golfers (old Cat 1)think they are hard done to because others got shots back, some of us are not happy getting those shots either.

Since the WHS has come in and people have moaned, mainly the single figure guys, Clubs have actually listened and are either restricting handicaps to win Comps or moved to Divisions.

Not all 15-28+ Golfers are fiddling the system, many see their handicap going in that direction due to age or health, they dwindle down to 24+ and then get told to enter the Comp and have a chance of the title element they have to remove anywhere between 1 and 12 shots off themselves before teeing off on the 1st because it’s Max 18 for example, and that’s all because of moaning by lower handicap players.

Cat 1’s moaned under the old system and they are moaning under this one.

Yes you are the better players, but Handicap Golf at Club Level means you are up against it.

Easy option, don’t enter Club Handicap Comps you don’t believe you can win.

 

[clubchamp98]

The vast majority are unaware exactly because of the flaw itself. The problem doesnt affect the average 18 handicap, either negatively, or to a degree that he appreciates the bias in his favour.
Less than 15% of golfers are single figures. Broadly, they are the unhappy ones. (I didnt check the stats in the poll thread, but maybe approx 15% unhappy with WHS would correlate).
Middle to higher handicaps will not notice the flaw. Lower men, realising not only they, but none of their single handicap colleagues are winning any more, do realise.
In sum, that only a minority are unhappy does not mean the system is OK, if the grievance of that minority is valid. The fundamental grievance itself is that only a minority are being affected negatively, if you see what I mean. A 25HI not having an issue doesnt mean there isnt an issue.

Exactly.
Why would anyone dream up a system that disadvantages the better players in any sport and then be suprized that they voice their displeasure.

 

[IanM]

I would get a golf minded change management expert out of retirement. Then use him to iron out the implementation anomalies that this has thrown up, even though it would have been less painful and cheaper to do it properly in the first place!

 

[Imurg]

I would get a golf minded change management expert out of retirement. Then use him to iron out the implementation anomalies that this has thrown up, even though it would have been less painful and cheaper to do it properly in the first place!

You're too busy playing Golf......

 

[IanM]

You're too busy playing Golf......

Not this weather!

 

[clubchamp98]

I would get a golf minded change management expert out of retirement. Then use him to iron out the implementation anomalies that this has thrown up, even though it would have been less painful and cheaper to do it properly in the first place!

Maybe someone who knows nothing about golf might be better!
He would have no bias either way and just do it fairly if that’s possible.

 

[Steve Wilkes]

1. Get rid of the Scramble Allowances, unless they can do something that is fair (which is unlikely, as there are so many variants of Scramble). Just let clubs sort out the Team Handicap as they see fit, give the Committees the responsibility
2. Once 3 scores are submitted for initial handicap, add bigger reductions the higher the final Score Diff is. Reduce those reductions the more cards the player submits, up until they have 20 on their record. That way, you won't have people submitting 3 cards, playing off about 30 or 40 because their first 3 rounds were rubbish, including their best one, and then winning comps because they improve quickly and we find out they are really a 15-20 handicapper. I find the current system creates bigger issues where you get a lot of beginner golfers, like my last club which is cheap. Winning scores were often ridiculous, as one of the newbies would often go out and shoot high 40's in Stabo. If a player is going to get a big juicy handicap because they are poor, fine. But let them submit 20 scores to fully prove they are that bad.
3. Embed the 95% playing allowance into the final Playing Handicap. So, all you need to do is check handicap against Index, and then that is it. Like the Australians do. If there are any other formats that require further reductions, like 4BBB, then players can do the whole 90% thing like they used to. Means it is less confusing for many golfers in singles play, no longer having to apply 95%, or wondering why 95% is applied, yet they don't apply it when they play socially.
4. From an Admin point of view, not sure as I'm no longer a handicap sec. So, they may already have some good tools at their disposal. But, stats like comparing handicaps if GP scores were just used compared to handicaps if Comp scores were just used would be useful. This might help highlight golfers who are using GP scores to increase handicap, or low handicappers who are doing the opposite?

This is well thought out Swango, and even though I like WHS especially the Handicap Index calculations of regular golfers using Course & Stroke ratings and 8 from 20 , there are some really good auxiliary points here and your point 3 is genius, this would mean everyone has just the one handicap for the course they are playing, just need to add the following point and we've sorted out WHS.
5. Anyone deliberately falsifying their Index to be put up against the wall and shot or has to caddy for his victims for a period of 3 years

 

[IanM]

Maybe someone who knows nothing about golf might be better!
He would have no bias either way and just do it fairly if that’s possible.

Often that's the case. But here they wouldn't know how to challenge the authorities over potential process loopholes and skullduggery!

 

[PaulMdj]

Exactly.
Why would anyone dream up a system that disadvantages the better players in any sport and then be suprized that they voice their displeasure.

Again, me,me,me, lots of players of all handicaps have been disadvantaged.

It’s not just about the “better players” it’s about everyone.

 

[Rlburnside]

For me submitting GP scores is a big benefit of WHS , my club don’t have many single competitions especially at the start of the season, to many Scrambles and double competitions for my liking.

So I wouldn’t like to see a drastic restriction on GP cards one per week would be fine though.

I don’t see why the majority should be penalized for the small minority that manipulate their h/cs.

I think the time frame of 8 scores from 20 is to long, to have a h/c based on scores from over a year ago is wrong. When I had one of the best scores of the season my h/c went up that seems wrong to me.

I like the idea of a h/c traveling to suit what course your playing, another plus.

Simplify h/cs somehow, to have CH-HI and playing handicap hasn’t been popular with the majority of players at my clubs.

 

[HampshireHog]

How about: your handicap is set at January 1st based on the previous 12 months of play (best 8 scores in that previous year) - then you can track improvement or deterioration over the course of a year, but your actual handicap only changes as of the next Jan 1st.

So, let's say I start the year at 18.3 - play really great all year, and in the 'hcp tracking app' I see that as of next year, I'll be a hcp 15.2. But, during the year everything I play is off 18.3. That way, I'm competing to a set level, but only taking my 'profit' at the year's end.

Would that help? I'm still a bit in the dark as to why the WHS is terrible.

If only there was a public forum where it could be discussed

 

[clubchamp98]

Again, me,me,me, lots of players of all handicaps have been disadvantaged.

It’s not just about the “better players” it’s about everyone.

How have high handicappers been disadvantaged?

 

[Arthur Wedge]

1. Remove the ridiculous scramble HC allowances and in fact look at them all

2. Look at all the HC allowances for team events

3. Revisit the number of counting rounds for HI

4. Looks at sorting out the APP and integration with ISVs - the App imo shouldn’t be allowed to be used on home courses

 

[wjemather]

4. Looks at sorting out the APP and integration with ISVs - the App imo shouldn’t be allowed to be used on home courses

We have at least one club in the county that will only allow it's members to submit GP scores via MyEG - they have turned of ISV functionality - as it provides better reporting.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

We have at least one club in the county that will only allow it's members to submit GP scores via MyEG - they have turned of ISV functionality - as it provides better reporting.

What stops members entering GP cards on the EG app when members are playing in team comps

 

[PaulMdj]

How have high handicappers been disadvantaged?

Because Clubs via moaning members have brought in allsorts of rules to stop them entering Comps, ie,

New player gets initial handicap, for example 40, and is then told they can’t enter comps for X, Y, Z, reasons or if they want to they must play off 28, 24, 18 etc.

I understand it’s to stop the bandits etc, but what about the genuine high handicaps.

Old boy has been a member for 30yrs plus, handicap has dwindled and now he has restrictions put on him to enter Comps.

Both can enter for handicap purposes but are restricted from winning Comp unless playing off lower handicap.