WHS doesn't work

[Voyager EMH]

If they are his best 8, why?

I've got 4 scores in May and June that are garbage. He may not have known this, but there's some truth in his assertion.

 

[IanM]

I've completely forgotten what this "cr-par" argument is about and what's happening. Nothing has come out from my club about any changes. Anyone care to forward me the comms they've had?

@clubchamp98 has got it right in my view. "How far behind was I?" is my first thought, swiftly followed by how does it impact my HI?

If you want to consider your performance in another way, that's your prerogative. It doesn't make the other bloke wrong

 

[Swango1980]

Thank you for pointing out the reality that I am fully aware of already.
I continue to hold the view that CR-Par is an addition to the system that is unnecessary.
It is a fact that I hold this view.
There is no right view and no wrong view with regard to CR-Par. There are different views.
I merely have a view that is different from many other people.
If you find this irritating, then you will have to live with being irritated by the fact that someone can have a view that is different from your view, even if yours is a majority view.

It would be a very boring forum indeed if 99% of posts were people agreeing with each others views.
I like the fact that different views on subjects and topics exist.

Not irritating you have the view, but maybe slightly irritating you continually write the same thing over and over again. I think everyone knows your opinion by now, so if you are not trying to prove a point of truth, why bother repeating yourself?

 

[Voyager EMH]

Not irritating you have the view, but maybe slightly irritating you continually write the same thing over and over again. I think everyone knows your opinion by now, so if you are not trying to prove a point of truth, why bother repeating yourself?

Because you continue to ask me questions that require me to explain myself.

 

[IanM]

Because you continue to ask me questions that require me to explain myself.

What do you mean by that?

 

[Swango1980]

Because you continue to ask me questions that require me to explain myself.

Incorrect. I replied to clubchamp, and predictably you jumped in and responded to my comment to him. I then replied to you, since you felt the need to join in.

I'm polite like that

 

[Captain_Black.]

But if the wrinklies play every day in winter, their handicaps soon become appropriate for the winter conditions. And return, even faster, in Spring to Spring conditions.

You would think so, wouldn't you.
Unfortunately the reality is somewhat different, with the average winning score a good 10 to 12 shot under their current handicap.
Once in a while, maybe, because I accept "every dog has it's day"
But week in week out?
No.

 

[RichA]

Not irritating you have the view, but maybe slightly irritating you continually write the same thing over and over again. I think everyone knows your opinion by now, so if you are not trying to prove a point of truth, why bother repeating yourself?

Ironic. Maybe it amuses him because he knows you can't resist always having the last word.

 

[Swango1980]

Ironic. Maybe it amuses him because he knows you can't resist always having the last word.

I should have the last word, as I'm right

 

[rosecott]

You would think so, wouldn't you.
Unfortunately the reality is somewhat different, with the average winning score a good 10 to 12 shot under their current handicap.
Once in a while, maybe, because I accept "every dog has it's day"
But week in week out?
No.

I don't believe much of what you say but you have reached new heights/depths.

 

[upsidedown]

You would think so, wouldn't you.
Unfortunately the reality is somewhat different, with the average winning score a good 10 to 12 shot under their current handicap.
Once in a while, maybe, because I accept "every dog has it's day"
But week in week out?
No.

That suggests to me that there are even lower winning scores , can you share theses results via HDID or, IG or handicap master please ?

 

[Voyager EMH]

Incorrect. I replied to clubchamp, and predictably you jumped in and responded to my comment to him. I then replied to you, since you felt the need to join in.

I'm polite like that

In your response to clubchamp you made this conjecture,
"Once CR-Par is included, then you probably won't need to worry about such questions being put to you. It might shorten a few of the threads, but not necessarily a bad thing."
I responded to that conjecture.
It matters not to whom you were responding or that you were responding to anyone at all. It is a public forum where views are expressed. Anyone can respond to those views no matter whether they were expressed as a response to someone else or as a new addition to a discussion.
You continually respond to my posts and I reply to your questions and statements addressed directly to me. I attempt to be polite as I do this.
This is a perfectly normal way to behave on a public forum and I take no exception to the nature of your posts.
You have expressed a wish that I will cease to make comments about CR-Par sometime in the future.
This may or may not happen, but if I feel I have something to say about CR-Par, then I will. I see no reason why I should not do so.
I have views on other topics that come up from time to time. You may find that I "repeat myself" on those issues as well. Others may repeat their views. I believe that is acceptable.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Ironic. Maybe it amuses him because he knows you can't resist always having the last word.

I see no reason why he should not desire the last word or have it.
Sometimes those who are wrong and in a majority have the last word. (Like in a referendum some years ago)

 

[Swango1980]

In your response to clubchamp you made this conjecture,
"Once CR-Par is included, then you probably won't need to worry about such questions being put to you. It might shorten a few of the threads, but not necessarily a bad thing."
I responded to that conjecture.
It matters not to whom you were responding or that you were responding to anyone at all. It is a public forum where views are expressed. Anyone can respond to those views no matter whether they were expressed as a response to someone else or as a new addition to a discussion.
You continually respond to my posts and I reply to your questions and statements addressed directly to me. I attempt to be polite as I do this.
This is a perfectly normal way to behave on a public forum and I take no exception to the nature of your posts.
You have expressed a wish that I will cease to make comments about CR-Par sometime in the future.
This may or may not happen, but if I feel I have something to say about CR-Par, then I will. I see no reason why I should not do so.
I have views on other topics that come up from time to time. You may find that I "repeat myself" on those issues as well. Others may repeat their views. I believe that is acceptable.

I've no issue with your view on CR-Par, just don't see the point why you continually say the same thing?

I 100% appreciate including CR-Par will not provide a benefit or enhancement for every golfer. Clearly, you are one of those guys. For myself, who knows how the system works as it stands, still personally would like to see it added. And, as I've said, there are many out there that I firmly believe will remove much confusion. It us why it is no suprise the authorities seem to be thinking along the same lines.

So, there is no need to reply again, to tell everyone why it will not benefit you as an individual. I think everyone is perfectly fine with that. Whereas if you are wanting to extend that point to say adding CR-Par is a downgrade in general to the handicap system, then own it. And then expect others to discuss it with you who may feel differently.

 

[rulefan]

I do wish the WHS authorities and others would recognise that they have designed a Score Differential handicapping system based on net scores against a course. No more, no less.
Par is now an arbitrary irrelevance.

 

[Swango1980]

I do wish the WHS authorities and others would recognise that they have designed a Score Differential handicapping system based on net scores against a course. No more, no less.
Par is now an arbitrary irrelevance.

Email them to let them know. Better that than letting them all live in ignorance

 

[Voyager EMH]

I've no issue with your view on CR-Par, just don't see the point why you continually say the same thing?

I 100% appreciate including CR-Par will not provide a benefit or enhancement for every golfer. Clearly, you are one of those guys. For myself, who knows how the system works as it stands, still personally would like to see it added. And, as I've said, there are many out there that I firmly believe will remove much confusion. It us why it is no suprise the authorities seem to be thinking along the same lines.

So, there is no need to reply again, to tell everyone why it will not benefit you as an individual. I think everyone is perfectly fine with that. Whereas if you are wanting to extend that point to say adding CR-Par is a downgrade in general to the handicap system, then own it. And then expect others to discuss it with you who may feel differently.

You appear to be repeating yourself here. But that's OK with me.

 

[IanM]

Email them to let them know. Better that than letting them all live in ignorance

I've emailed @rulefan to tell him his last sentence, "Par is now an arbitrary irrelevance" is missing the phrase "when it comes to handicap calculations!"

I can think of several relevances

But if courses report vandalism of tee markers, where someone has spray painted over the Par figures, we know who "Dunnit!!"

 

[Voyager EMH]

I do wish the WHS authorities and others would recognise that they have designed a Score Differential handicapping system based on net scores against a course. No more, no less.
Par is now an arbitrary irrelevance.

Ah, I was under the impression that the WHS Score Differential handicapping system was based on gross scores against the course.
I may have formed a "wrong" view. Or maybe merely a minority view.

I agree with your view on the irrelevance of par in the handicapping process, but it is very important for many, perhaps a majority, who think in terms of stableford points as a measure of how they scored against the course. I may be "wrong" on this as well.

 

[YandaB]

Ah, I was under the impression that the WHS Score Differential handicapping system was based on gross scores against the course.
I may have formed a "wrong" view. Or maybe merely a minority view.

I agree with your view on the irrelevance of par in the handicapping process, but it is very important for many, perhaps a majority, who think in terms of stableford points as a measure of how they scored against the course. I may be "wrong" on this as well.

I think that you will find that the system uses Adjusted Gross Score - what is it adjusted against?