WHS and Acceptable Rounds

[duncan mackie]

See handicapping Rule 3.3 on page 38 of the USGA 2020 Handicap Manual
https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/Handicap/Rules-of-Handicapping_USGA_Final.pdf

Thank you - you don't know how many USGA WHS docs (and video) I went through looking for that!
It also helps me understand that the USGA remain focused on volume of scores whilst the CONGU unions still focus on quality of scores. Time will tell if anything fundamental changes in that regard.

 

[Imurg]

Not sure how often this might happen but...
In a scenario where the handicap I use from the white tees is, say, 10 but my yellow tee handicap is, say, 9..
Do you foresee an increase in the number of incorrect handicaps being used..
At the moment we just have one number.
From next year we could have 2 - that has to increase the chances of pulling the wrong number from the table/chart.

 

[rulefan]

Not sure how often this might happen but...
In a scenario where the handicap I use from the white tees is, say, 10 but my yellow tee handicap is, say, 9..
Do you foresee an increase in the number of incorrect handicaps being used..
At the moment we just have one number.
From next year we could have 2 - that has to increase the chances of pulling the wrong number from the table/chart.

Very unlikely. When you sign in for a comp or for a 'supplementary' the club system (Handicap Master, ClubV1 etc) will show you your Course Handicap automatically. If your club wishes to invest a bit of cash, it will also print your card with the correct handicap and tees shown.

 

[Imurg]

Very unlikely. When you sign in for a comp or for a 'supplementary' the club system (Handicap Master, ClubV1 etc) will show you your Course Handicap automatically. If your club wishes to invest a bit of cash, it will also print your card with the correct handicap and tees shown.

Sweet
It was a scenario that popped into the head this morning.

 

[duncan mackie]

Not sure how often this might happen but...
In a scenario where the handicap I use from the white tees is, say, 10 but my yellow tee handicap is, say, 9..
Do you foresee an increase in the number of incorrect handicaps being used..
At the moment we just have one number.
From next year we could have 2 - that has to increase the chances of pulling the wrong number from the table/chart.

It's probably going to be the other way because the system handicap will always be the valid handicap base for play that day. This makes it easier for the systems, the player and the organising committee!

 

[jim8flog]

See handicapping Rule 3.3 on page 38 of the USGA 2020 Handicap Manual
https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/Handicap/Rules-of-Handicapping_USGA_Final.pdf

Must sit down and read through it all sometime soon

It interesting that the Document is headed USGA R&A

does this mean the R&A will be putting pressure on CONGU to accept more of it then what I am hearing.

It would be a pity that 'most likely' will not be accepted as that seems to rule out most swindles and using cards from team comps which where I see most peoples complaints about handicaps.

 

[nickjdavis]

Sorry, but that's just going to confuse. Course Handicap is not the same as Playing Handicap. Your Course Handicap is the number of strokes allocated to you for the particular course you are going to play and is a function of your Handicap Index and the Slope Rating of the course. You then apply a Handicap Allowance for the format you are playing (e.g. 95% for singles stroke play) to your Course Handicap according to the format you are playing. That gives you your Playing Handicap, the number of strokes you will actually get for your game. It might be the same number of strokes as your Course Handicap or it might be different depending on what the percentage is (e.g. it's 100% for singles match play!) and on rounding up or down to the nearest whole number.

My bad...I'd forgotten all about the subsequent calculation to use the Handicap Allowance to calculate Playing Handicap.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

This is just my view of the place of a forum in learning about the WHS. I think we generally need to recognise the limitations - and dangers - of trying to learn something new like the WHS from it. Information from a forum comes to you in bits and pieces, without necessarily making patterns clear or establishing the wider context of a particular item. An answer to a question might be too technical or depend on a degree of knowledge that a reader doesn't have at that stage. The forum isn't a training manual or a seminar. It has no shape, pattern or sequence: questions arise randomly and the answers while dealing with particular points don't necessarily cohere. Anarchy abounds. In due course, the rule book will establish order and sequence; seminars will do that; the detailed information published by the WHS, by national authorities, by areas and clubs will do that, and do it accurately. If you are starting from scratch, you really need do your learning through these other resources but while you are going through that learning process, this forum can be very helpful to you by way of helping you with the difficulty you might be having with the aspect of the system that is bothering you at that moment in the process.

For those who are coming to the system anew, I suggest you decide to what level you want to take your understanding of it. If you so wish, you will be able to manage your handicap without any technical knowledge and understanding. As already illustrated, you will be able to turn up for a game of golf anywhere (it is a worldwide system after all!) knowing only your Handicap Index and look up a table to find out how many strokes you get for that course - your Course Handicap. You might have to work out what 95% of that is, or 85%, or (the easy one) 100% to get your Playing Handicap. I'm hoping, however, to include that in the table for our club but don't know if there will be enough space. If that does work, you won't even have to do that wee bit of arithmetic. After your game, if you are returning the score for handicapping purposes, you just put in the gross score for each hole. That's it. The next day you can find out if your Handicap Index has changed and continue on your tour of the world's courses, applying your Handicap Index to each.

If you want to know more of how the engine works, may I suggest you take whatever opportunities there are and will be for learning. Information, explanation and support is on its way but bear in mind that as in any educational process, trainers have to be trained, teachers have to be taught and so on. That's been happening and in due course the process should ensure that everyone gets the opportunity to learn to whatever depth they wish.

Well, that's turned into something of an essay but that's what insomnia can do. If it's put you to sleep, I envy you.

What you say is very true and relevant. Nowhere in anything I have seen suggests WHS is simple and I hope that the ISVs developing their applications will make it as transparent as possible.

I think a similar example is the calculation of CSS. We all know it exists and what the impact of the calculation of the CSS on handicap is - but we never try to calculate it. I suspect in very short time we will rely on the computer or our phone to calculate the relevant handicap for where we are playing on the day.

The percentage adjustment to derive the playing handicap seems a step too far. When asked why this had been brought in there was no crisp answer other than comments about "fairness" but my suspicion is it's to rein back the additional strokes given to higher handicaps when the Course Handicap is calculated (but that could be me).

What is very clear is a lot of work is going to be needed at club level regarding communications and the Handicap Committee is going to have its work cut-out to police the new system.

 

[rulie]

What you say is very true and relevant. Nowhere in anything I have seen suggests WHS is simple and I hope that the ISVs developing their applications will make it as transparent as possible.

I think a similar example is the calculation of CSS. We all know it exists and what the impact of the calculation of the CSS on handicap is - but we never try to calculate it. I suspect in very short time we will rely on the computer or our phone to calculate the relevant handicap for where we are playing on the day.

The percentage adjustment to derive the playing handicap seems a step too far. When asked why this had been brought in there was no crisp answer other than comments about "fairness" but my suspicion is it's to rein back the additional strokes given to higher handicaps when the Course Handicap is calculated (but that could be me).

What is very clear is a lot of work is going to be needed at club level regarding communications and the Handicap Committee is going to have its work cut-out to police the new system.

I don't think the new system will need policing - but the application by golfers will definitely need policing!

 

[rulefan]

The percentage adjustment to derive the playing handicap seems a step too far. When asked why this had been brought in there was no crisp answer other than comments about "fairness" but my suspicion is it's to rein back the additional strokes given to higher handicaps when the Course Handicap is calculated (but that could be me).

I assume you mean the 95% for strokeplay (as opposed to the 100% for matchplay).
In the previous versions of the USGA and Golf Australia systems, there was an adjustment made in the handicap index calculation. This was 96% in one and 93% in the other. It was called a 'bonus for excellence'. I must admit I had never really delved into the mathematical justification for it but we in CONGU were never affected by it.
It has now been moved to the handicap allowance for individual strokeplay. It therefore does not have a secondary, hidden effect on the handicap allowance of other formats (eg 4BBB).

This may shed some light.
http://www.popeofslope.com/magazine/bonus_for_excellence.html
or not
http://www.ongolfhandicaps.com/2013/01/the-usgas-bonus-for-excellence-ruse.html

NB the historical error in the former, pointed out in the latter.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

I don't think the new system will need policing - but the application by golfers will definitely need policing!

It was made pretty clear that the hard and soft cap, penalty scores and updating scores for the players who return partially completed cards will all need to be policed by the handicap committee in addition to the normal handicap reviews.

 

[rulie]

It was made pretty clear that the hard and soft cap, penalty scores and updating scores for the players who return partially completed cards will all need to be policed by the handicap committee in addition to the normal handicap reviews.

I'm under the impression that the hard and soft caps will be handled within the software.

 

[rulefan]

I'm under the impression that the hard and soft caps will be handled within the software.

Yes, there is no manual intervention.

The soft cap is triggered when .........
The hard cap triggers ..........

 

[rulefan]

It was made pretty clear that the hard and soft cap, penalty scores and updating scores for the players who return partially completed cards will all need to be policed by the handicap committee in addition to the normal handicap reviews.

What is different to now re the last two items?

 

[BubbaP]

On a side note, well done to rulefan and Colin L for repeated use of Authorised & authorised. ??

England Golf - shame on you. ???‍

 

[mikejohnchapman]

What is different to now re the last two items?

Must have misunderstood.

I thought the computer advised on such matters but the responsibility was with the authorised person in the club. Pretty sure our team don't just change handicaps in the annual review without going through the suggestions from the computer and using their knowledge and judgement.

If there is a no return currently I thought that the exact handicap was increased by 0.1 by the computer. In WHS I thought from the presentation that the handicap committee had to act if a card was not return to establish a score to go into the playing record - be it a penalty or default score.

But hey-ho as long as the computer will sort it out then what can possibly go wrong!

 

[rulefan]

Must have misunderstood.

I thought the computer advised on such matters but the responsibility was with the authorised person in the club. Pretty sure our team don't just change handicaps in the annual review without going through the suggestions from the computer and using their knowledge and judgement.

If there is a no return currently I thought that the exact handicap was increased by 0.1 by the computer. In WHS I thought from the presentation that the handicap committee had to act if a card was not return to establish a score to go into the playing record - be it a penalty or default score.

But hey-ho as long as the computer will sort it out then what can possibly go wrong!

Sorry, I miscounted. I meant
penalty scores and updating scores for the players who return partially completed cards

I'm not sure how penalty scores could be treated any differently. How would you know if a player had not included them in his score?
Incomplete cards are primarily a competition concern. You may be right re handicapping but it really should be a very rare occurrence if you have a robust and well publicised disciplinary procedure in place.

I suspect an annual review will be a very different beast to now.

 

[cliveb]

Sorry, but that's just going to confuse. Course Handicap is not the same as Playing Handicap. Your Course Handicap is the number of strokes allocated to you for the particular course you are going to play and is a function of your Handicap Index and the Slope Rating of the course. You then apply a Handicap Allowance for the format you are playing (e.g. 95% for singles stroke play) to your Course Handicap according to the format you are playing. That gives you your Playing Handicap, the number of strokes you will actually get for your game. It might be the same number of strokes as your Course Handicap or it might be different depending on what the percentage is (e.g. it's 100% for singles match play!) and on rounding up or down to the nearest whole number.

Can you just confirm (or refute!) that the playing handicap is only used for the purposes of deciding the results of a competition, and that any adjustments to handicap index are calculated from the course handicap?

 

[rulefan]

Can you just confirm (or refute!) that the playing handicap is only used for the purposes of deciding the results of a competition, and that any adjustments to handicap index are calculated from the course handicap?

Confirmed

 

[duncan mackie]

It was called a 'bonus for excellence'. I must admit I had never really delved into the mathematical justification for it but we in CONGU were never affected by it.
.

I understood that it was mirrored in the CONGU system over time by the use of the variable buffer zones and reduction amounts ie low handicaps were stronger handicaps.

Anyway, all behind us now.