WHS doesn't work

D-S said:
I am sure if the early WHS presentations/introductions had said that ”we don’t believe the right balance of handicaps have been winning competition under the system that we have championed for the past many years, so we are introducing a system that will give higher handicappers 2,3 or 4 more shots in singles, team, matchplay and strokeplay competitions so they will win more competitions“ there might have been more kickback.
I fully understand the rationale behind slope calculation but was certainly not told ‘that is what Slope is for’. If average slope ratings for UK courses was in the 110-115 area then this would not have been an issue but when they turned out to be 125-130 this represents a significant increase in shots obviously for higher handicappers.
I simply don’t seem to remember this being highlighted in the various resources given to clubs before transition.
Click to expand...
Fair point. I never remember there being many complaints that higher handicappers didn't win enough competitions. Seriously, does anyone remember hearing this. The old system had been about for a long time, yet I never remember CONGU saying the system was less than perfect as it favoured low handicappers. If this was seriously a flaw, then it should have been at the forefront of WHS publicity, as you say. It said relative difficulty from course to course would be taken into account, but it stayed away from saying it will ultimately, at most courses, give higher handicappers a bit more help than before.

Potential concern is that, I don't feel higher handicappers had really ever been put off playing golf (especially once max handicap.increased pre WHS) because they felt the system let them down. Just reading various posts, and talk amongst some at clubs (especially my old club with many very high handicappers), many low handicappers seem less interested in playing competitive golf. At my old club, the captain at the time was not happy with it (with many scores close to 50 points), to the point he has now quit golf and taking up other things. He was a keen golfer pre WHS.
 
Backsticks said:
It supports my stance, so I think we are agreeing - solid proof there - WHS is much fairer than UHS.
Click to expand...
It doesn't support your stance, it supports mine, that higher handicaps are wining more than they "should", so one unfair system has been replaced by another unfair system, except now if you're bad at golf you're more likely to win, than if you're a better golfer
 
Banchory Buddha said:
It doesn't support your stance, it supports mine, that higher handicaps are wining more than they "should", so one unfair system has been replaced by another unfair system, except now if you're bad at golf you're more likely to win, than if you're a better golfer
Click to expand...
Yes it’s a classic case of (two wrongs making a wrong) but some people think that’s ok.
If low men had an advantage in the past just level it up .
It wasn’t their fault we don’t make the rules.
Giving high cappers an advantage goes against handicapping principles surley.
 
I heard at the practice range this morning that a fella just picked up a 52 point stableford win playing off 25 handicap. At the very least he'll be on everyone's radar now
 
Slab said:
I heard at the practice range this morning that a fella just picked up a 52 point stableford win playing off 25 handicap. At the very least he'll be on everyone's radar now
Click to expand...
Someone will be along soon to tell you these scores are a “ myth”

One of the problems with scores like this is if he puts 20 cards in over the winter he can get rid of that score on his record ,ready and able to do it again at the start of the season.
 
D-S said:
I fully understand the rationale behind slope calculation but was certainly not told ‘that is what Slope is for’. If average slope ratings for UK courses was in the 110-115 area then this would not have been an issue but when they turned out to be 125-130 this represents a significant increase in shots obviously for higher handicappers.
.
Click to expand...

I don't believe this is correct, as slope is used to determine a players handicap index, as well as how many strokes he might get on any given course.

If the slope of courses was closer to 113, then players differentials, which make up their best 8 from 20 scores, would be naturally higher, which means their indexes would be higher in the first place.

Within one course...the slope used to calculate the shots due, is therefore cancelled out by the effect of the slope determining a players handicap index in the first place.
 
Slab said:
I’m playing in an annual individual Open comp tomorrow, last year it was won with mid 40’s points by a fella off 24’ish handicap. This year, same comp is medal scoring :sneaky:
Click to expand...
52 points though .
Even with a couple of bad holes he would probably win a medal with a score like that.
He can’t have had any blobs I would assume.
 
Banchory Buddha said:
Further up the page from HDID, not surprised you missed it as it contradicts your stance.


https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/data-reveals-world-handicap-system-is-levelling-playing-field
Click to expand...

That very first chart pretty much mimics the scoring data that I provided earlier on!!! Maybe the chnages in the HDID report are a little bit more extreme than what I saw at my own club but the general trend is pretty much the same....low handicappers not scoring quite so well and high handicappers scoring better.

Maybe it is not the slope that is the issue (assuming that there is an issue)....maybe it's the 95% singles allowance....maybe 90% would balance things up better.
 
Banchory Buddha said:
Further up the page from HDID, not surprised you missed it as it contradicts your stance.


https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/data-reveals-world-handicap-system-is-levelling-playing-field
Click to expand...
One thing the data does not show is the variance around the mean. If it is higher for high handicappers than for low ones they will win a disproportionate number of events.
That will also finish poorly more often but as there is not really any opprobrium for poor finishes and rewards for good ones it would be unfair to those with low variance.
 
clubchamp98 said:
Someone will be along soon to tell you these scores are a “ myth”.
Click to expand...

Is that a dig at me, just because I said it isn't happening at my club? I never suggested that what you said was not true. I have no reason to doubt you. If you say that every month you're seeing 50+ points then I believe you, why wouldn't I?
 
Last edited:
Does anyone have an example of a course where the slope is rated around 113 off the whites/back tees? I'm curious what such a course looks like

(113 rating is the neutral Slope Rating, or a course with a 'standard' playing difficulty)
 
Slab said:
Does anyone have an example of a course where the slope is rated around 113 off the whites/back tees? I'm curious what such a course looks like

(113 rating is the neutral Slope Rating, or a course with a 'standard' playing difficulty)
Click to expand...

17F1D271-8AE7-43CB-8764-A34A8B5BD901.png
 
clubchamp98 said:
Someone will be along soon to tell you these scores are a “ myth”

One of the problems with scores like this is if he puts 20 cards in over the winter he can get rid of that score on his record ,ready and able to do it again at the start of the season.
Click to expand...

That is exactly what is happening.
Under the old system it would take lots more bad scores to increase a h/c.
Now h/c's can be manipulated in quite a short space of time.
 
Slab said:
Does anyone have an example of a course where the slope is rated around 113 off the whites/back tees? I'm curious what such a course looks like

(113 rating is the neutral Slope Rating, or a course with a 'standard' playing difficulty)
Click to expand...
Insch GC is 113 for the white tees
1665138732377.png
 
Slab said:
Does anyone have an example of a course where the slope is rated around 113 off the whites/back tees? I'm curious what such a course looks like

(113 rating is the neutral Slope Rating, or a course with a 'standard' playing difficulty)
Click to expand...
My course is 115 off the whites now so it's pretty close.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

niwintz
ClubV1 Competition across 3 days
Replies
8
Views
2K
Deleted member 30522
D
N
What Would You Change About the WHS?
8 9 10
Replies
183
Views
15K
Deleted member 36483
D
I
Pairs Knockout Final this weekend
Replies
5
Views
1K
HomerJSimpson
HomerJSimpson
N
54 Handicappers - Scourge or Scarcity ?
5 6 7
Replies
137
Views
23K
2blue
2blue
I
2 tee Stableford Comp under WHS
Replies
8
Views
2K
IanMcC
I
Top