rulefan
Tour Winner
The problem is that people don't like change. Specifically that of emphasis from potential to current demonstrated ability.
WHS doesn't work
- Thread starter Captain_Black.
- Start date
They also keep referring to the UHS as if any difference is a fault. Stop using UHS as a reference point ! Take the WHS for what it is. Its a better system.
I have come around to the view that hcs should be restricted to a max of 28 though. If you cant play to that, then play on certainly. But take playing to it as an entry requirement test to be able to hold a hc and compete with other hcs.
IanM
Journeyman Pro
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
- Messages
- 12,449
- Location
- Monmouthshire, UK via Guildford!
When I said "needs careful managing " I was referring to the "transition" ..... not a handicap!
wjemather
Well-known member
Why roll-back decades of progress on inclusivity when all you really want is your competitions to have a handicap limit; or better still, divisions?
Maybe try thinking about groups of people who will never be able to play to a handicap of 28 before seeking to exclude them, and even discourage them from playing altogether.
Voyager EMH
Slipper Wearing Plucker of Pheasants
I am thinking about those groups, which is why I am warming to the idea of excluding them from handicaps. They can continue to play golf, or maybe have a Learners Permit rating, indicating their level. But keeping intact the handicap range that does seem to be able to compete within itself. 24 even. If there was a structure above that for learners/improvers, 24 might be better even than 28. Inclusivity is nice, and a modern cultural trend, but it has to work. I think WHS has been a great move, but think the timing in recent years with breaking the 28 ceiling has been unfortunate, and I think the real culprit for some of the issues some clubs and some players perceptions are having, with WHS taking the flack.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
Current form means nothing if you have scores in your counting 8 from months ago.
Its no more current than the old system unless you put lots of cards in.!
BiMGuy
LIV Bot, (But Not As Big As Mel) ?
I did presume that is what you meantWhen I said "needs careful managing " I was referring to the "transition" ..... not a handicap!
.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
just reading some of this thread would disprove that statement!
wjemather
Well-known member
You don't seem to be considering "groups of people who will never be able to play to a handicap of 28".
As I said, handicap limits and divisions are the solutions to your perceived problem, not telling players they aren't good enough to have a handicap (and never will be).
BiMGuy
LIV Bot, (But Not As Big As Mel) ?
Like I said. It’s not difficult if people bother to learn. Which they could do instead of the time the spend complaining.
Captain_Black.
Well-known member
We are fortunate that our sport has a system whereby different abilities can play & compete together, unlike the vast majority of other sports.
But.
There has to be a limit, there is no doubt that in the quest for so called 'inclusivity" England Golf has pushed the envelope too much.
I remember when I first learnt the game, my first handicap was 26, I couldn't play to it or anywhere near it, but I worked on my game, learned course management & slowly improved.
My point is, "inclusivity" can only work within a certain window.
Even 28 was stretching it probably too far, but quite clearly 54 is utterly ridiculous, it is damaging the integrity of the game & making a mockery of competitive golf.
IanM
Journeyman Pro
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
- Messages
- 12,449
- Location
- Monmouthshire, UK via Guildford!
Inclusivity is a funny thing. I could join the local rugby club next week.... can't see me getting a game anytime soon though.
BiMGuy
LIV Bot, (But Not As Big As Mel) ?
Comps should be a max of 1 shot per hole. If that’s not enough then work on getting better until it is.
I think so. A realistic hc system's integrity depends on some level of consistency even within the inconsistency of golf scores. Lower hcs have always been more consistent than high ones. It seemed to work up to 24, and while 28 was around for a long while, the limited difference of upper 20s and the limited number of players in that range probably meant their was little impact. 54 is effectively no limit - truly if you are above 54 you are not play golf as we speak of it. And 28-54 range I will guess has a variability incompatible with the ones below that. To call both handicaps, is a bit misleading, as they are not really comparable.
A compromise might be that a stipulation of a track record of 20+ cards is required to 'unlock' handicaps above 24 ?
I dont think there was any issue even with hcs up to 28. It is since that roof was lifted things seem to have gone off the rails somewhat.
wjemather
Well-known member
Perhaps consider that almost half of all golfers (with handicaps) have a course handicap above 18 on most courses.
BiMGuy
LIV Bot, (But Not As Big As Mel) ?
Captain_Black.
Well-known member
Perhaps?
Personally I thought the UK average was around the 16 to 18 mark?
Anyway.
There is a big difference between 18 / 28 & 54
There is an acceptable window whereby people of different abilities & different handicaps can reasonably compete on a level (ish) playing field.
Push that window too far & you end up with where I believe we are now.
Exacerbated by a somewhat flawed handicap system.
D-S
Well-known member
In England men’s average HI is 17, women’s is 27.2.
