WHS - current GM article

[Swango1980]

Another week, another low handicapper winning a comp at mine. Chap off 2 going round in level par. 147 entrants

Where do I sign up to say it’s unfair on mid handicap choppers like me?

147 entrants, and the best score was effectively 38 points? No idea what your CR is, but that seems highly unusual that none of the other 146 entrants did better than that.

 

[wjemather]

It is a bit weird that golf seems to be the only sport that bends over backwards to make it possible for seriously untalented participants to have a chance of winning. I can't fathom why that is. How can clubs do anything about it while remaining affiliated to EG?

Talent, or lack of it, is irrelevant in handicap competition - that's the purpose of handicapping. Golf is far from the only sport with handicapping that enables participants of all abilities to compete against each other with a fair chance of winning. Snooker, tennis, horse racing, athletics, squash, bowling, cycling, polo, etc., etc. all have handicapping.

The unions have guidance for clubs on applying handicap limits and divisions in comps.

 

[Backsticks]

Talent, or lack of it, is irrelevant in handicap competition - that's the purpose of handicapping. Golf is far from the only sport with handicapping that enables participants of all abilities to compete against each other with a fair chance of winning. Snooker, tennis, horse racing, athletics, squash, bowling, cycling, polo, etc., etc. all have handicapping.

The unions have guidance for clubs on applying handicap limits and divisions in comps.

Do the unions, and WHS globally, state specifically what handicap ranges are equal and so competition between them is fair, and at what limits does the equality for all of WHS break down ?

 

[LincolnShep]

IMHO WHS is actually a pretty good way to track your current form, certainly better than UHS was. The thrust of this thread seems to be that people are concerned that handicaps are being manipulated. Perhaps the way WHS works makes it easier to manipulate one's HI. But let's be realistic - any handicapping system that isn't rigourously enforced by official observers accompanying players on all counting rounds will be vulnerable to manipulation. But of course that's not feasible. So some players will choose to manipulate it. Therefore "fair competition" in handicapped events is pretty much unachievable.
I'm not a good golfer (currently 14.9) and I treat this game as me against the course. I use HI as a moderately objective way to measure my own progress (or lack thereof). I don't care what others' HI is. When I enter comps, getting in the prizes is not the goal (although I'll admit it's a nice bonus). And when someone comes in with a ridiculous score, the inevitable chorus of "bandit" around the clubhouse is just good natured banter. Nobody is genuinely outraged - not at my club, anyway.
If serious golfers want fair competition, just enter scratch events.

Agree, 100%, with bells on!

Handicap sport is not designed to find out who's the best. Anyone who is bothered by being beaten by a player who is not as good as they are should stop playing a handicap sport. Just challenge your mates, without handicaps, see how many of them want to play on that basis. If the answer is 'not many', then you'll realise that handicaps lead to participation, and we all benefit from increased participation.

Nobody on earth has ever created a perfect handicap system. Some people are weak, and some people are fallible; fortunately, most are not. The weak people will try to manipulate the system, no matter what system is created. This one might be more easy to manipulate than the old one because it's more reactive. That reactiveness is also a huge benefit to all the honest golfers (the vast majority I believe) because it gives a truer picture.

It's just golf. Hit the ball, go find it, hit it again.

 

[The Fader]

No handicapping system can truly achieve a totally level playing field.

Within that constraint here is what I would do:

Remove the plethora of "board" events that require a single winner from the whole field. Nearly every clubhouse I have ever
been in has so many boards there must be at least a couple every month. This volume devalues them. I would have just 4 - call them The Majors if you like. See what I did there?

Scratch Club Championship
Nett Club Championship
Scratch Matchplay
Nett Matchplay

Play all other regular singles Stableford and medal competitions on a divisional basis:

0 - 9
10 - 18
19 - 27
28+

Pay out the top 3 in each division plus the best overall gross.

From all these weekly divisional competitions develop an order of merit for each division and award season end trophies
to the top 3 of 4 repurposing the now defunct board trophies.

Team and pairs events are clearly more difficult to play in divisions - so in my world they are what they should be - played as fun. And the result falls as it falls!

This makes winning a major really mean something, gives the low guys something to play for every week, rewards the best players on the day in each class and rewards consistency over the whole season.

Its not perfect, won't please everyone but having read 17 pages here and numerous other threads - currently hardly anyone seems happy!!

 

[wjemather]

Do the unions, and WHS globally, state specifically what handicap ranges are equal and so competition between them is fair, and at what limits does the equality for all of WHS break down ?

"Handicap allowances are designed to provide equity for players of all levels of ability in each format of play, over both 9 holes and 18 holes."

 

[Swango1980]

"Handicap allowances are designed to provide equity for players of all levels of ability in each format of play, over both 9 holes and 18 holes."

No need for Divisions then, I suppose?

 

[RichA]

147 entrants, and the best score was effectively 38 points? No idea what your CR is, but that seems highly unusual that none of the other 146 entrants did better than that.

Best score at ours yesterday was 32 points. PCC was 3, which has never happened before as far as I'm aware.

 

[AussieKB]

43 points handicap 23
41 points handicap 21
40 points handicap 15
40 points handicap 17
39 points handicap 13
39 points handicap 8
39 points handicap 11

208 entries.

 

[AussieKB]

then on Wednesday

42 points handicap 27
41 points handicap 17
40 points handicap 16
40 points handicap 28
40 points handicap plus 1 yippee.

 

[RichA]

That doesn't appear to be inequitable, for the top few of a field of over 200 handicap golfers.
Everybody only ever mentions the winning scores, which should be outliers in a field that big.
The make up of the 30-36 point range might say more about whether WHS works.
The sub-30 scores might speak more accurately of the reality of mid and high-handicap golf.

 

[Captain_Black.]

Divisions are maybe OK in a pro-shop comp, but the way I see things going is more board & trophy comps for restricted h/c.
Maybe something like
0 - 10
10 - 20
20 & over

Anyone can still enter, but they must play off the restricted h/c if their h/c is higher.
My club has about 3 of these comps per year & unless the bias towards higher h/c players improves soon (not likely) I can see the introduction of restricted h/c comps becoming more frequent.

 

[sjw]

Depends on how they NR.

If they fail to return a score for no valid reason the get an automatic penalty score which approximates to a close-to handicap score differential and this usually become one of the best 8. Course Handicap - Course Rating I believe.

If they just fail to complete a medal hole but return the card this is given a NDB for score differential calculation.

If they walk in after at least 10 holes the score is made up on net par plus a net bogey for the first hole not played.

Thus it can be manipulative to use the penalty score system and has to be looked at closely by the Handicap Committee.

I read up a bit about this while waiting for someone to approve one of my scores, thinking I might end up with a penalty. It seemed to me in the end that a penalty score might be preferable (in terms of low scores) compared to the score I was waiting for! I figured there must be further actions for penalty scores, otherwise you could just NR on any round significantly over handicap

 

[TheDiablo]

147 entrants, and the best score was effectively 38 points? No idea what your CR is, but that seems highly unusual that none of the other 146 entrants did better than that.

Yes that's correct. (It was actually 40 because we do some mixed tee comps and those off the whites get an additional 2 shots for Comp purposes to cover the difference in CR between White and Yellow tees.)
CR is 0.6 higher than par
*Shrugs*

For more context, 12 of the Top 24 were single figure Course Handicap golfers and another seven are either 10 or 11. Low guys are always right at the top end. Last month equivalent Comp won by a guy off 7.

 

[wjemather]

43 points handicap 23
41 points handicap 21
40 points handicap 15
40 points handicap 17
39 points handicap 13
39 points handicap 8
39 points handicap 11

208 entries.

No high handicappers?

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Yes that's correct. (It was actually 40 because we do some mixed tee comps and those off the whites get an additional 2 shots for Comp purposes to cover the difference in CR between White and Yellow tees.)
CR is 0.6 higher than par
*Shrugs*

I'd have thought that this shows your club has its h/c spot on. At my place, in the summer, 40-41 will win the comp, 130+ entrants. Nothing daft. 38 in winter sounds fine.

 

[rulefan]

43 points handicap 23
41 points handicap 21
40 points handicap 15
40 points handicap 17
39 points handicap 13
39 points handicap 8
39 points handicap 11

208 entries.

What was the proportion of players in say the ranges + to 5, 5 - 15, 16 - 25, 26+ ?

 

[Backsticks]

"Handicap allowances are designed to provide equity for players of all levels of ability in each format of play, over both 9 holes and 18 holes."

So the official word, with the statistics to back it up, is that there is no need for categories. And low men, you have an equal chance of winning as the high men.

 

[wjemather]

So the official word, with the statistics to back it up, is that there is no need for categories. And low men, you have an equal chance of winning as the high men.

"If the player is correctly handicapped, there should be no advantage to holding a high or low handicap index: the course handicap and playing handicap calculations should provide equity for all competitors."

 

[Captain_Black.]

So the official word, with the statistics to back it up, is that there is no need for categories. And low men, you have an equal chance of winning as the high men.

"If the player is correctly handicapped, there should be no advantage to holding a high or low handicap index: the course handicap and playing handicap calculations should provide equity for all competitors."