WHS doesn't work

[rulefan]

I am not suprized nobody will go on comittiees nowadays.

Hopefully those people will be told where to go if they complain about supposed 'cheats' and are not prepared to volunteer.

 

[clubchamp98]

Hopefully those people will be told where to go if they complain about suipposed 'cheats' and are not prepared to volunteer.

I was on the Greens comittee at my last club.
The abuse some comittiee members got was terrible .
I said I would not do it again.

 

[LizAig]

Too easy to manipulate on GP rounds, at least putting in a lot of competition rounds is a slight cost to the individual (also the temptation to play well and therefore win a prize), comp scores are also perhaps more visible to Peer review..[/QUOTE]

The WHS platform competition scores v general scores report can make interesting reading sometimes!!

 

[ExRabbit]

When you say Swango's posts are too long, you really mean they are too long for you. There is no standard against which posts can be measured.

I think it's strange to criticise someone for sharing their experience and contributing to the discussion. As long as a post is on topic and not offensive what difference does the length make? We're not curing cancer here so it doesn't matter if you choose to skip a post because it's too long for you.

I guess that the thing is, if I am less interested in the topic at hand, I do choose to skip his posts at times purely because of their length.

I'll read the long posts only if I am really interested.

So I might miss some good stuff, and that might be the same for others.

 

[rosecott]

there was a chap at my last club who played off 8 or 9 about 3 or 4 years ago. He took a bit of time away (still playing, just not a member) as he was busy with university. He rejoined last year, and was asked to submit 3 cards for handicap. He got an Index of 20.0.

I have a member who has just re-joined having left the club 9 years ago and not joined another club since then. During the process of setting him up on WHS, I was prompted to consider possible matches, one of which matched with his CDH from 9 years ago and asked if I wanted this to merge with his new record. I accepted this and he was awarded his new Handicap Index of 17.0 which was his UHS handicap from 9 years ago - no need for submission of 3 cards.

So WHS has a lot of historical data if Handicap Committees do the simple searches which WHS offers.
.

 

[Imurg]

I have a member who has just re-joined having left the club 9 years ago and not joined another club since then. During the process of setting him up on WHS, I was prompted to consider possible matches, one of which matched with his CDH from 9 years ago and asked if I wanted this to merge with his new record. I accepted this and he was awarded his new Handicap Index of 17.0 which was his UHS handicap from 9 years ago - no need for submission of 3 cards.

So WHS has a lot of historical data if Handicap Committees do the simple searches which WHS offers.
.

Not disputing the process at all but does that sound fair?
Has he been playing in those 9 years..?
If he has he could be substantially better than 17 and if he hasn't he could be substantially worse...
How far back would they allocate in this manner..?

 

[John Evans 9]

Not disputing the process at all but does that sound fair?
Has he been playing in those 9 years..?
If he has he could be substantially better than 17 and if he hasn't he could be substantially worse...
How far back would they allocate in this manner..?

The WHS system was simply used to find the old data. It was the HC who decided to allocate the “old” handicap. Seems obviously wrong and unfair to the returning player.
A lot can happen in a few years. I had to stop playing for three years when I was 4 handicap. When I returned I was given 25 handicap which I struggled to play to. There are many reasons why returning players should not be re-allocated 9 year old handicaps.

 

[Imurg]

This sort of thing never gets old..
We have a new Green tee...somewhere in between the yellows and the reds..
If I play 18 off the Greens I get 6 shots..
If I play each 9 as a 9 hole card I get 1 and 2 shots..
I want to know where my 3 shots have gone

 

[doublebogey7]

Not disputing the process at all but does that sound fair?
Has he been playing in those 9 years..?
If he has he could be substantially better than 17 and if he hasn't he could be substantially worse...
How far back would they allocate in this manner..?

I would contend that the process is a good one as it allows a player to start competing immediately without having to submitt scores. It is then for the HC to carry out a review just as they should with any new member.

 

[John Evans 9]

I would contend that the process is a good one as it allows a player to start competing immediately without having to submitt scores. It is then for the HC to carry out a review just as they should with any new member.

But the player could competing with a false handicap. I’d treat him/her as a new member and have them submit 3 cards before giving them a handicap.

 

[doublebogey7]

But the player could competing with a false handicap. I’d treat him/her as a new member and have them submit 3 cards before giving them a handicap.

They could but it would be very unlikely to be too high and it would be their choice to play in competition rather than submit general play scores. Please remember also that WHS is way more be active than our previous system.

What gap in membership would you apply this to, would you assess their new handicap on just those three scores or would you take into account past ability in any way.

 

[Swango1980]

I have a member who has just re-joined having left the club 9 years ago and not joined another club since then. During the process of setting him up on WHS, I was prompted to consider possible matches, one of which matched with his CDH from 9 years ago and asked if I wanted this to merge with his new record. I accepted this and he was awarded his new Handicap Index of 17.0 which was his UHS handicap from 9 years ago - no need for submission of 3 cards.

So WHS has a lot of historical data if Handicap Committees do the simple searches which WHS offers.
.

Presumably once he submits his 1st 3 cards, his Index will simply be based on those anyway? That is what happened during transition to WHS, if players had no scores since Jan 2018. Be interesting what would be done if the player went from a 17.0 index, submitted 3rd card and it became 25.0. Does the Committee reduce it, or accept the player may be worse than he was 9 years ago?

 

[Voyager EMH]

This sort of thing never gets old..
We have a new Green tee...somewhere in between the yellows and the reds..
If I play 18 off the Greens I get 6 shots..
If I play each 9 as a 9 hole card I get 1 and 2 shots..
I want to know where my 3 shots have gone
View attachment 46771

I think you know where they have gone.
They disappeared in the CR-Par that is used to calculate your 9-hole handicap.
You get them back when the Score Differential for a 9-hole score is calculated.
But the "getting of shots" is for many players an attempt to find some equivalence to the old system of handicapping.
This is another reason why I suggest to players that the "old thinking" of "I get x shots" needs to change when you are considering your play against the course.
I'm not trying to lecture you Mr Imurg, merely expressing my view for other readers to consider or dismiss as they may choose.

 

[D-S]

I think you know where they have gone.
They disappeared in the CR-Par that is used to calculate your 9-hole handicap.
You get them back when the Score Differential for a 9-hole score is calculated.
But the "getting of shots" is for many players an attempt to find some equivalence to the old system of handicapping.
This is another reason why I suggest to players that the "old thinking" of "I get x shots" needs to change when you are considering your play against the course.
I'm not trying to lecture you Mr Imurg, merely expressing my view for other readers to consider or dismiss as they may choose.

To bang an oft repeated drum, it would be a lot simpler if CR-Par was used to calculate 18 hole handicaps as well as 9 hole handicaps just as everywhere on the world does outside CONGU. Then we wouldn’t have this sort of confusion or everyone comparing nett performance against par instead of CR.

 

[Voyager EMH]

To bang an oft repeated drum, it would be a lot simpler if CR-Par was used to calculate 18 hole handicaps as well as 9 hole handicaps just as everywhere on the world does outside CONGU. Then we wouldn’t have this sort of confusion or everyone comparing nett performance against par instead of CR.

It would have caused less confusion initially and in the short term.
It confused me initially.
But I set my mind to adapting to the new system and allowing my old conceptions to change.
By not involving CR-Par, I think the new system is purer and makes more sense, now that I feel close to being fully adjusted to it in my thinking.
Introducing CR-Par would be a backward step for me. In about another 4 years, I think the majority might feel the same.
Meanwhile, I accept that I'm in a minority with regard to my perception of "I get x shots" when considering my score against the course.

 

[D-S]

It would have caused less confusion initially and in the short term.
It confused me initially.
But I set my mind to adapting to the new system and allowing my old conceptions to change.
By not involving CR-Par, I think the new system is purer and makes more sense, now that I feel close to being fully adjusted to it in my thinking.
Introducing CR-Par would be a backward step for me. In about another 4 years, I think the majority might feel the same.
Meanwhile, I accept that I'm in a minority with regard to my perception of "I get x shots" when considering my score against the course.

My understanding is that EG may well now think they should have followed the rest of the world and introduced CR-Par and would actually want to if possible but the question is when. Sadly almost everyone measures performance on here and in the bar against par (all the talk of bandits scoring x points or being x over par) so much cleaner to know what their performance against CR was if it was baked into the result already.

 

[Voyager EMH]

My understanding is that EG may well now think they should have followed the rest of the world and introduced CR-Par and would actually want to if possible but the question is when. Sadly almost everyone measures performance on here and in the bar against par (all the talk of bandits scoring x points or being x over par) so much cleaner to know what their performance against CR was if it was baked into the result already.

Exactly my experience at my club. This forum gives me the opportunity to express my view. I can not have that conversation with any group at my club, because no one I meet there is willing to entertain the notion of changing their perceptions any time soon.
I remember the same type of thing occurred with decimalisation of the currency. Many of us continued to convert 37p or 78p back to shillings and pence in order to be clearer in our minds about how much money we were spending. Gradually we stopped doing this. The amount of years (and it was years) that this "gradually" took varied from person to person.
For a while, prices were labelled in both systems during the change-over.
But we did not go back to labelling everything with the "old" system while continuing to use the new system in order to pander to a majority view.
We all got used to the new system, thought in the new system, forgot the old system. Took several years though.

 

[Swango1980]

My understanding is that EG may well now think they should have followed the rest of the world and introduced CR-Par and would actually want to if possible but the question is when. Sadly almost everyone measures performance on here and in the bar against par (all the talk of bandits scoring x points or being x over par) so much cleaner to know what their performance against CR was if it was baked into the result already.

Couldn't agree more. Perhaps golf purists love comparing score to CR, and evaluating their score differentials. But, 99% of other golfers compare to course par.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Couldn't agree more. Perhaps golf purists love comparing score to CR, and evaluating their score differentials. But, 99% of other golfers compare to course par.

I believe your 99% could be an under-estimate at the moment.

 

[nickjdavis]

I'm attending a WHS workshop run by EG (at a local club) in a few weeks time...got no details about the content or subject matter....anyone else attended one recently (I'm assuming it is part of a "roadshow" travelling round the country) or have any insight as to the potential subject matter?