D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
I know how it feels In my first two matches in HC comp i gave 21 and 22 shots to my oppos and it was a great time. They were both a joy to play a round with and i had to work hard to beat both.
what would you like to see changed about the handicap system in the UK
- Thread starter patricks148
- Start date
I know how it feels In my first two matches in HC comp i gave 21 and 22 shots to my oppos and it was a great time. They were both a joy to play a round with and i had to work hard to beat both.
rosecott
Money List Winner
On initial allocation, clubs are required to take into account all previous playing and handicap history.
FairwayDodger
Money List Winner
It's not snobbery, I'll happily play a bounce game with anyone and give them any encouragement they need but when I am giving that many shots in a match I just can't get "up" for it so end up treating it just like a social game. I go through the motions but just can't bring myself to care about the outcome.
rosecott
Money List Winner
Then you need to challenge this. All affiliated clubs are required to have a system for the submission of Supplementaries and must act upon Supplementary cards which have been submitted. They cannot opt out.
FairwayDodger
Money List Winner
Yeah, and this is why I'm struggling to explain it. I'm not saying the people I've played these matches weren't a joy to play with, I'm not saying I didn't enjoy their company, being on a golf course, playing golf because I love those things. But I'm also very competitive and enjoy competitive matches, these aren't competitive - they're fake.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
The ones i played with were very competitive and certainly nothing "fake" about them at all. Cant understand why you call them "fake"
FairwayDodger
Money List Winner
I know you can't, it's a nebulous concept and you always jump on it whenever I state that I don't enjoy these matches. I'm not saying you shouldn't enjoy them so would hope you might just accept that I don't.
I also don't like peas.
Low handicappers are used to losing to high handicappers because there's more of them. Its never bothered me, irrespective of how well they've played - its only golf.
I'd like to suggest something a little different. That a player must put 10 cards a (rolling) year to qualify to play in Opens. That way there's an incentive for players to play in qualifiers. That said, you'll never stop those players who actively 'manage' their handicaps artificially high.
Most golf clubs do at least 3 Q's a month, with some doing more than 6, including mid week Medals. The argument of not being able to to play in x many a year is just lazy. If someone wants to play in Opens, they'll find time to meet the requirements, and if they can't... tough, play bounce games and friendlies only.
I'd like to suggest something a little different. That a player must put 10 cards a (rolling) year to qualify to play in Opens. That way there's an incentive for players to play in qualifiers. That said, you'll never stop those players who actively 'manage' their handicaps artificially high.
Most golf clubs do at least 3 Q's a month, with some doing more than 6, including mid week Medals. The argument of not being able to to play in x many a year is just lazy. If someone wants to play in Opens, they'll find time to meet the requirements, and if they can't... tough, play bounce games and friendlies only.
CheltenhamHacker
Journeyman Pro
I imagine because it's very much "contrived" competition.
I play casual Match play against my step dad, who is off significantly less than me. He gives me a load of shots, but i don't feel proud of winning, nor he if he wins. I imagine if I played Tiger Woods, and he gave me 2 shots a hole, I wouldn't feel overly amazed if I won.
The handicap system is brilliant, but once two people get so far apart it's more than 18 shots, I do feel it is contrived, and "fake"
Alex1975
Tour Winner
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Then i would suggest dont play in them - thats all that can be suggested really. Golf is about enjoyment and fun. Only play in the scratch comps i guess will be your only KO to play.
FairwayDodger
Money List Winner
Hmmm, arguably, but I don't think that necessarily follows. Not saying I don't enjoy handicap matchplay per se, just that at a certain difference it can become too contrived for my liking.
Crow
Crow Person
Re contrived numbers of shots given, surely the whole point of the handicap system is to allow players of differing ability to play a competitive match?
If the difference in ability is small then the number of shots given will be small but if there’s a bit of a gulf in ability, which will often happen if you’re a low handicapper, then the number of shots given must reflect that and so will be many. I don't see it as contrived, it's just the way it has to be for the handicap system to work.
Theoretically you’ll have to play just as well to beat the opponent with a similar handicap as that with a much higher handicap, which again is the whole idea.
The only solution I can see to your dilemma is to play KO matches in Divisions, but I’ve not heard of this at any club, and at my club the number of entrants to the KO comps isn’t high enough to support it.
Or what about starting the match a number of holes down according to handicap difference and then playing off scratch??
If the difference in ability is small then the number of shots given will be small but if there’s a bit of a gulf in ability, which will often happen if you’re a low handicapper, then the number of shots given must reflect that and so will be many. I don't see it as contrived, it's just the way it has to be for the handicap system to work.
Theoretically you’ll have to play just as well to beat the opponent with a similar handicap as that with a much higher handicap, which again is the whole idea.
The only solution I can see to your dilemma is to play KO matches in Divisions, but I’ve not heard of this at any club, and at my club the number of entrants to the KO comps isn’t high enough to support it.
Or what about starting the match a number of holes down according to handicap difference and then playing off scratch??
Last edited:
Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
He loved golf but quit playing because he was not competitive..........that makes no sense whatsoever.
A nice idea but what about one of Fairway Dodgers games against another lady thats of 36?
31 down with 18 to play
sev112
Tour Winner
I think you can have as high a maximum as you want
But you have to start at 18 and work your way up (or down)
But you have to start at 18 and work your way up (or down)
Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
When I played of a low handicap [3 or less] I cannot recall any matchplay competition when I lost to anyone playing off 18 or more.
I even won one game giving 17 shots when I was 6 down after 7.
A low handicap player should always have the edge unless the high handicapper is playing of a 'contrived' handicap.
I even won one game giving 17 shots when I was 6 down after 7.
A low handicap player should always have the edge unless the high handicapper is playing of a 'contrived' handicap.
duncan mackie
Money List Winner
indeed - about 13% of the differential
I understand FD's viewpoint when things move to the extreme; it's not the differential but the absolutes that often go with someone playing off 36 (I've played with someone off 27 who simply couldn't clear 90 yds of gorse - knew they couldn't and wouldn't try) and despite the overall match being as good as it could be uit was certainly not enjoyable competition.
but, such situations are extremely rare and the inclusive nature of handicapping far outweighs them over time :thup:
Crow
Crow Person
A nice idea but what about one of Fairway Dodgers games against another lady thats of 36?
31 down with 18 to play
A clever type at the R&A would have to study results over time to calculate what difference in handicap equates to how many holes down you'd start.
1 shot difference might equal 1 hole
5 might equal 3 holes
10 might equal 5 holes
etc.
Ethan
Money List Winner
Haven't read all of this, but got some of the flavour.
There is a problem with handicapping. The problem is that golfers are too unreliable for a foolproof system to be put in place. It is a bit like that Yes Minister episode where the official said that the NHS would work perfectly if it wasn't for those pesky patients.
Handicapping is simply a way of interpreting data, the data being golf scores. Unfortunately players scores vary wildly, and worse still, some players of a given ability are more variable than others of the same ability, lets call that consistency. So you want a system which can deal with variability and inconsistency for players of differing abilities, including those whose games are stable, and those whose games are rapidly improving. Nobel Prize for maths, I think.
The handicap system can't work based on average score, because the variability from average is too great for players with less ability or greater inconsistency, so the inflection/balance point of the system has to veer towards the better end of the score range. This is balanced by the cut for a good score being larger than the return for a bad score.
Making people put in 6 rather than 3 cards shouldn't really make much of a difference, and any small difference it makes will self correct quickly.
It ain't perfect, but it probably works pretty well.
There is a problem with handicapping. The problem is that golfers are too unreliable for a foolproof system to be put in place. It is a bit like that Yes Minister episode where the official said that the NHS would work perfectly if it wasn't for those pesky patients.
Handicapping is simply a way of interpreting data, the data being golf scores. Unfortunately players scores vary wildly, and worse still, some players of a given ability are more variable than others of the same ability, lets call that consistency. So you want a system which can deal with variability and inconsistency for players of differing abilities, including those whose games are stable, and those whose games are rapidly improving. Nobel Prize for maths, I think.
The handicap system can't work based on average score, because the variability from average is too great for players with less ability or greater inconsistency, so the inflection/balance point of the system has to veer towards the better end of the score range. This is balanced by the cut for a good score being larger than the return for a bad score.
Making people put in 6 rather than 3 cards shouldn't really make much of a difference, and any small difference it makes will self correct quickly.
It ain't perfect, but it probably works pretty well.
