WHS doesn't work

[wjemather]

That’s accusing them of cheating.
basically saying the cards you have put in are not genuine.
The system is flawed as it lets this happen to easily.

You accused this hypothetical player of running up their handicap, and immediately sought to absolve them of blame by saying the system allows them to - it doesn't.

By signing up for a handicap, every player agrees to abide by the rules and meet their responsibilities under them.

Blaming the system instead of individuals when things like this happen and/or go unchecked is a cop-out. If players are persistently and steadfastly unwilling to abide by a few basic rules of handicapping, they should not have a handicap; it's that simple. If handicap committee members are avoiding educating their players, afraid of potentially having a minor conflict with that rare individual who thinks rules do not apply to them, or are there to be worked around or broken, then they have volunteered for the wrong role. (County and national unions are also there to help committees fulfil their roles.)

 

[2blue]

Yes we are agreeing. UHS had the same problem, which I always felt drove handicap padding to some degree. Many people didnt know that their average score should be 3,4,5 worse than their hc. But communication of that message never succeeded in 40 years of that system. People still thought they should be around net par or 36pts typically.

I think there is merit in a two speed system. Or competition handicap, and non competition valid handicap as was.

Those not submitting cards or few, still have a handicap to compete with their buddies, but are ring fenced to some degree from the more legitimate hcs competing for club comps or opens. I dont mind how padded someones handicap is, if they are insulated somewhat from using it to compete against the wider world. I think it would be easier than mass education.

To be honest,,,,,, if these folk can't be bothered to maintain an appropriate H/cap then why should a H/cap organization ie. EG have to give them one so they can play with their buddies? It's also up to Clubs to have Competition requirements in place that prevent them from profiting from a false H/cap.
The biggest loss to our Club was that of being able to have 'Winter H/caps'

 

[rulefan]

Ideally, you'd have separate indices for each format. But, I doubt many clubs do that, as not overly practical.

Prior to WHS, Australia had compulsory separate indices for strokeplay and matchplay.. I believe strokeplay was based on relative difficulty but match play was based primarily on the position in the playing sequence. eg SI must not be hole 1 or 18. Essentially the same as the CONGU matchplay recommendation but the actual values were mandatory for all clubs

 

[D-S]

A lot of clubs in Wales have two sets of SIs, as I recall Pennard had separate cards and Porthcawl had both on one - played havoc with some in our group who either picked up the wrong card or picked the wrong column.

 

[woofers]

Appendix E to The Rules of Handicapping gives guidance to Committees on Stroke Index Allocation.

On the England Golf WHS platform there is a report entitled Hole Statistics that shows for each set of registered tees, the Average Score, Difference to Par, Present SI and Empirical SI.
Interesting report, ours showed that the Present and Empirical SI's were closely aligned.

 

[tobybarker]

Have I missed any discussion as the portability of ones index to different courses? I think a lot of people think that if they go to a "more difficult course" then they'll get extra shots. The shots someone gets is based purely on the slope, which is not a measure of courses' relative difficulty.

 

[rulefan]

Have I missed any discussion as the portability of ones index to different courses? I think a lot of people think that if they go to a "more difficult course" then they'll get extra shots. The shots someone gets is based purely on the slope, which is not a measure of courses' relative difficulty.

However, the Score Differential, which is used to calculate the (resultant) Handicap Index, takes both Course Rating and Slope into account

 

[tobybarker]

However, the Score Differential, which is used to calculate the (resultant) Handicap Index, takes both Course Rating and Slope into account

Its "too late" then! I think players assume if they go to Gleneagles they're going to receive a few extra shots... The system is PERCEIVED to be one that does this.

 

[clubchamp98]

You accused this hypothetical player of running up their handicap, and immediately sought to absolve them of blame by saying the system allows them to - it doesn't.

By signing up for a handicap, every player agrees to abide by the rules and meet their responsibilities under them.

Blaming the system instead of individuals when things like this happen and/or go unchecked is a cop-out. If players are persistently and steadfastly unwilling to abide by a few basic rules of handicapping, they should not have a handicap; it's that simple. If handicap committee members are avoiding educating their players, afraid of potentially having a minor conflict with that rare individual who thinks rules do not apply to them, or are there to be worked around or broken, then they have volunteered for the wrong role. (County and national unions are also there to help committees fulfil their roles.)

Yes it does.
it quite clearly does you just can’t / won’t see it.
I havnt absolved anyone of anything, I pointed out it’s easy to manipulate WHS.

See post 886 this is a REAL golfer not a hypothetical one !
We were discussing what he has done, have you read the thread.?
there are lots like him abusing a system that’s just a bandits charter.

 

[Captain_Black.]

Here's an alternative scenario:
A golfer has a purple patch where he scores well, and following this he gets cut 2 shots at annual review.
He says that he's lost his form, he's back to playing his usual standard and his current handicap - based on his ACTUAL SCORES - is a fair reflection. He believes the extra cut is unfair, but this is rejected.
Peeved, he then enters every comp and plays at his normal standard, and he's now off 21.
Like most 21 handicappers, on a good day he's capable of shooting 14 over, but he can't control those days when it all clicks.

I don't see the problem here. If he regains his form and starts shooting 14 over again his handicap will tumble quickly.

Sure, that is an alternative scenario.
Unfortunately, that is a work of fiction.
I know this guy, I've played golf with him.
I know exactly what he's done & what his true ability is.

Sadly, knowing & proving are poles apart, so doing anything about it is difficult.
One thing I would definitely advocate is a reduction of the 95% H/C allowance (singles)
As this would reduce the advantage of the high handicappers.

 

[clubchamp98]

Sure, that is an alternative scenario.
Unfortunately, that is a work of fiction.
I know this guy, I've played golf with him.
I know exactly what he's done & what his true ability is.

Sadly, knowing & proving are poles apart, so doing anything about it is difficult.
One thing I would definitely advocate is a reduction of the 95% H/C allowance (singles)
As this would reduce the advantage of the high handicappers.

They won’t change anything until they admit the system is flawed and they won’t do that.
Its only flawed at elite level apparently.

 

[Imurg]

One thing that irritates me with WHS is when someone shoots nett 4 under par, nett 3 under Course Rating, their score diff is 3 1/2 shots below their Index yet they get cut 0.2 of a shot which makes no difference whatsoever to the number of shots they get....
I understand how it all works but it just doesn't seem right somehow.....

 

[rulefan]

Its "too late" then! I think players assume if they go to Gleneagles they're going to receive a few extra shots... The system is PERCEIVED to be one that does this.

Indeed

 

[wjemather]

One thing that irritates me with WHS is when someone shoots nett 4 under par, nett 3 under Course Rating, their score diff is 3 1/2 shots below their Index yet they get cut 0.2 of a shot which makes no difference whatsoever to the number of shots they get....
I understand how it all works but it just doesn't seem right somehow.....

That'll be the old UHS system mentality still lingering.

 

[rulefan]

One thing that irritates me with WHS is when someone shoots nett 4 under par, nett 3 under Course Rating, their score diff is 3 1/2 shots below their Index yet they get cut 0.2 of a shot which makes no difference whatsoever to the number of shots they get....
I understand how it all works but it just doesn't seem right somehow.....

Not quite - it depends on what differentials were in his best 8

 

[D-S]

Have I missed any discussion as the portability of ones index to different courses? I think a lot of people think that if they go to a "more difficult course" then they'll get extra shots. The shots someone gets is based purely on the slope, which is not a measure of courses' relative difficulty.

An old issue but CR-Par as part of the CH calculation (which is what the rest of the world use) would immediately solve this.
I am led to believe that EG might be regretting not following the rest of the world on this, however rectifying might be costly.

 

[rulefan]

An old issue but CR-Par as part of the CH calculation (which is what the rest of the world use) would immediately solve this.
I am led to believe that EG might be regretting not following the rest of the world on this, however rectifying might be costly.

One problem is that par can be worked to suit whereas CR can't. A club can set par to be significantly greater or less than the CR.

 

[doublebogey7]

Sure, that is an alternative scenario.
Unfortunately, that is a work of fiction.
I know this guy, I've played golf with him.
I know exactly what he's done & what his true ability is.

Sadly, knowing & proving are poles apart, so doing anything about it is difficult.
One thing I would definitely advocate is a reduction of the 95% H/C allowance (singles)
As this would reduce the advantage of the high handicappers.

Can I ask, have you raised your concerns over this guy with the handicap committee.

 

[D-S]

An old issue but CR-Par as part of the CH calculation which is what the rest of the world use would immediately solve this.

One problem is that par can be worked to suit whereas CR can't. A club can set par to be significantly greater or less than the CR.

Of course, but this is obviously not seen as a big enough issue for the ROW. Interesting that EG might be having a mind change.

 

[Captain_Black.]

Can I ask, have you raised your concerns over this guy with the handicap committee.

Yes.
I've played golf with most of the H/C Committee.
They are fully aware of what's going on, I could say lots more (all factual) about my observations & a bit of history (it's been going on for quite a while) but obviously I have to be careful what I say.