WHS doesn't work

[wjemather]

Is it such a shock that low handicaps make only a small % of the field but still win now and again.
All that practice to hone their game .
Hours on the putting green.

But someone turns up and smashes the field with his shots. doesn't know where the practice ground is but can knock it round in 10 over off 18/19 cap.
Gets a cut then puts 20 cards in over a few weeks so he can do it again.
Fair system my a….

Q: What has practice time got to do with handicapping?
A: Absolutely nothing.

Anyhow, low handicappers aren't the only ones who do practice, and many higher handicappers practice way more than low handicappers - some of whom don't ever visit the range/practice ground/net other than to hit half a dozen balls before playing just to see how much of their body is/isn't working that day.

 

[clubchamp98]

The better you get, the lower your chances of winning - seems a bit counter intuitive.
Perhaps we should revisit the famous Gary Player quote “the more I practice the unluckier I get”.

That’s basically what is happening.

 

[clubchamp98]

Q: What has practice time got to do with handicapping?
A: Absolutely nothing.

Anyhow, low handicappers aren't the only ones who do practice, and many higher handicappers practice way more than low handicappers - some of whom don't ever visit the range/practice ground/net other than to hit half a dozen balls before playing just to see how much of their body is/isn't working that day.

It shows their attitude towards the game ,they want to be better golfers not just turn up with lots of shots.
But it seems now having a better handicap means nothing to some.
I heard a guy say yesterday “ I need to go up a few shots to give me a chance”
That’s a bad state imo.

 

[Backsticks]

It shows their attitude towards the game ,they want to be better golfers not just turn up with lots of shots.
But it seems now having a better handicap means nothing to some.
I heard a guy say yesterday “ I need to go up a few shots to give me a chance”
That’s a bad state imo.

Having a better handicap is nothing to do with handicapped competition golf and means nothing in that context. Conflating the two seems to be a common misunderstanding in this discussion.

 

[Backsticks]

The better you get, the lower your chances of winning - seems a bit counter intuitive.

Not really. Its handicap golf. Not gross. The betterness is irrelevant.

 

[wjemather]

The better you get, the lower your chances of winning - seems a bit counter intuitive.

The way all handicapping works, improvers will always have the highest chance of winning.

 

[Blob Jacket]

Low lads and bandits aside, is there anybody who thinks WHS is just ‘alright’ and not as polarising as this thread suggests?

It’s got me about right but I use it the same as CONGU, so maybe supplementary scores are the difference when they haven’t been before?

 

[D-S]

The way all handicapping works, improvers will always have the highest chance of winning.

That makes sense, I will rephrase, “The more consistent I get, the lower my chances of winning”.

 

[rulefan]

I don't think UHS deemed their system to be unfair. We were not told one of the goals was to right a wrong because they didn't see a wrong to right.

There is more to it than that. As I have indicated before, the high handicappers have always suffered under CONGU. It was expected that Slope would help rectify this.
All CONGU nations except the EGU (the men's authority prior to the England Golf merger) had their courses rated under the USGA system (ie with slope) but the then incumbent chair of the handicapping dept at the EGU insisted that their new SSS rating be used rather than the USGA rating (Not invented here?). So all GB&I were stuck with SSS. Slope now means that higher cappers get an equalising handicap appropriate to the relative difficulty of the course they are playing. Slope is arguably one of the major drivers for the world to make a step towards consolidation.

I wonder what all these super high scores would be if the player's cap was limited to that of a scratch player.

 

[rulefan]

The better you get, the lower your chances of winning - seems a bit counter intuitive.
.

That's why there are net competitions.
Handicaps are to equalise for the individual. The Powderhall Sprint didn't have all except the back marker starting on the 10 yard line. They were spaced out according to their previous performances. Most runners did not start at the back. Not all winners came from the front. All down to who ran better on the day than their ranking .

 

[clubchamp98]

Practice time is not relevant to handicap allocation.
And the high handicap are cheats, low handicaps hardworking angels, is quite a prejudice.

I will ask again as you seem very selective .
“WHERE DID I SAY THEY ARE CHEATS”
they are using a very poor system by the rules.
They can shoot the lights out, then put 20 cards in in 20 days and be back or even higher than they were.

 

[Backsticks]

Where di I say he was a cheat!

You didnt. I take back that incorrect specification.
You present the common caricature of the higher handicapper repeatedly posting 20 scores in a few weeks, which whether deliberately or through natural variation unchecked by WHS, enables them to score 45 points cyclically though. A golfer capable of shooting 80, putting in 20 cards in three weeks will not have a handicap rising and falling to a large degree. It is probably more stable than the scratch player submitting a card every week or two.

 

[sunshine]

OK you're talking about a very small minority of the population. There is nobody in my club in this situation

Rather a bizarre statement that WHS was designed to help those poor folk with a second home abroad and multiple golf club memberships in several countries. Must have been really tough for them struggling to get by.

 

[clubchamp98]

You didnt. I take back that incorrect specification.
You present the common caricature of the higher handicapper repeatedly posting 20 scores in a few weeks, which whether deliberately or through natural variation unchecked by WHS, enables them to score 45 points cyclically though. A golfer capable of shooting 80, putting in 20 cards in three weeks will not have a handicap rising and falling to a large degree. It is probably more stable than the scratch player submitting a card every week or two.

How do you come to the conclusion that he’s putting in good scores.
I think you just won’t accept the system can be manipulated .
I am not saying they will do it in reality ,but the fact remains that they can and it’s within the rules.
More stable than a scratch player.

 

[clubchamp98]

Rather a bizarre statement that WHS was designed to help those poor folk with a second home abroad and multiple golf club memberships in several countries. Must have been really tough for them struggling to get by.

I don’t think he was .
Not the way I read it anyway.

 

[sunshine]

Some of the ridiculous scores of 50+ points would still be an issue with any system.

Similar to Mod Eisley golf club. The number of bandits is incredible, the clubhouse is a wretched hive of scum and villainy.

 

[AussieKB]

I played with a chap here in West Australia last week (handicap 6) who told me that his son (10 years old ) played in a City Junior event, (they live in the country) and his handicap is 36 at his home club, but because of slope and CSS they gave him a handicap of 56....yes 56 when it was pointed out that the max is 54 the WA Golf Official stated that he was to play off 56.

Hence a ridiculous score was achieved (plus 50 something), they put his card in and made a hasty retreat as they were embarrassed, think I would have too.

 

[Swango1980]

Some of the ridiculous scores of 50+ points would still be an issue with any system.

Similar to Mod Eisley golf club. The number of bandits is incredible, the clubhouse is a wretched hive of scum and villainy.

But less so. It has already been.discussed that high handicappers have got more shots back at most courses. Plus, WHS can more easily be manipulated than before. More shots equals higher scores

 

[Backsticks]

But less so. It has already been.discussed that high handicappers have got more shots back at most courses. Plus, WHS can more easily be manipulated than before. More shots equals higher scores

Not quite so straight forward. The high hcs are only getting shots due to whs and slope that they should have had in the past but were deprived of. So its more a case of their 37 points being made 40. Not, they used to get 45, now they get 50.

 

[Swango1980]

Not quite so straight forward. The high hcs are only getting shots due to whs and slope that they should have had in the past but were deprived of. So its more a case of their 37 points being made 40. Not, they used to get 45, now they get 50.

It is as simple though, it is all relative to the scores that were shot before.

As players, particularly high handicaps, get more shots than before WHS, then scores are inflated. So, scores of 48, 49 points before become 50+.

I was simply responding to the fact that scores of 50+ points would be seen more than pre WHS.