WHS and recent comment by Dean Knuth

[rulie]

Golf is, imo, a game of honour and we need to think the best of players. Yes, there are deviants who will manipulate any system for their own benefit and no number of rules or requirements are going to stop them - they will always find a way , but hopefully will be outed. In NA, I enter my scores on my computer at home after the round, what good does having a "marker" do? And, a marker is not a referee, nor should he pretend to be (most times the marker knows less about the Rules than I do). His job is to record my scores, sign my card and report any issues to the Committee - and the majority of our rounds do not involve a "marker" (as defined) or a Committee. The system relies on the integrity of the players.

 

[Swango1980]

Golf is, imo, a game of honour and we need to think the best of players. Yes, there are deviants who will manipulate any system for their own benefit and no number of rules or requirements are going to stop them - they will always find a way , but hopefully will be outed. In NA, I enter my scores on my computer at home after the round, what good does having a "marker" do? And, a marker is not a referee, nor should he pretend to be (most times the marker knows less about the Rules than I do). His job is to record my scores, sign my card and report any issues to the Committee - and the majority of our rounds do not involve a "marker" (as defined) or a Committee. The system relies on the integrity of the players.

It does, and we know a lot of players either don't have that integretary, nor innocently clueless about rules. If it was 100% about integretary and trust, why do the rules ask a card to be signed by a marker at all?

Yes, I know the deviants can get around any system. I'm just saying, submitting cards for solo rounds just seems like you're giving those deviants the easiest methodology for manipulating the system.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

I think it depends on which association specifies "acceptable". I'm in North America and 90% of my handicap acceptable rounds (75 last year) don't have a "marker" as defined.

Maybe language getting in the way here. By marker I mean a person who you are playing with who marks and signs your card (as you would do theirs). Not an independent third party as with the pros.

 

[rulie]

It does, and we know a lot of players either don't have that integretary, nor innocently clueless about rules. If it was 100% about integretary and trust, why do the rules ask a card to be signed by a marker at all?

Yes, I know the deviants can get around any system. I'm just saying, submitting cards for solo rounds just seems like you're giving those deviants the easiest methodology for manipulating the system.

Solo rounds are not acceptable for handicapping purposes in NA.

 

[rulie]

Maybe language getting in the way here. By marker I mean a person who you are playing with who marks and signs your card (as you would do theirs). Not an independent third party as with the pros.

Yes, that is a "marker" as defined in the Rules. However, when we're playing regularly (not in competitions) we do not assign markers for every player. One person will keep all the scores on one card, and nobody is required to sign it. I look at my score, and correct it if the scorekeeper has it wrong) and then enter my score for handicapping on my home computer.
And for the pros, there is no "independent third party"; yes, there is a scorer who walks with the group and enters scores electronically for scoreboard updating, but that is unofficial. The pros act as marker for each other just as we do in competitions. Their scorecard is their official score for the holes and round.