WHS doesn't work

[Swango1980]

Is the C handicap avaliable in WHS ?
it might have to be included so people know where they stand.

No. I believe the idea was to remove this from handicapping, and put the responsibility of competition entry on the people running those

 

[D-S]

It's much easier to manage member expectations/disgruntlement in a closed club comp than visitor expectations/disgruntlement in an open.

I have only written about internal club competitions not Opens.

 

[clubchamp98]

No. I believe the idea was to remove this from handicapping, and put the responsibility of competition entry on the people running those

So I think a lot of people will fall foul of this if clubs implement it..

I know lots of our members don’t read club update emails.
Going to learn the hard way.

 

[D-S]

There might be a difference in comp v GP rounds for elite amateur (surely a contradiction) events.
But no one can seriously tell me there is a material difference between a GP round and a weekly stableford or even monthly medal?

In both cases it is about likely manipulation.

 

[clubchamp98]

I have only written about internal club competitions not Opens.

It would be unusual for clubs to have different qualifications for opens and internal comps.

 

[wjemather]

I would think that needs explanation before you book a tee at an open.
Travelling and a day in the sun score will be no good if you can’t win.!

imo it’s not great to win a comp because the golfer who beat you was eliminated for this.
Just not golf as I see it. Or any other sport!
This will cause more harm than good.

Indeed; I meant as final confirmation (to ensure all are aware), as an addition to usual measures of publishing ToC clearly on the entry platform and sending with confirmation of entry (both of which, it's impossible to force entrants to read them).

 

[clubchamp98]

Interesting subject .
will pick up later I am off for a curry.

 

[D-S]

It would be unusual for clubs to have different qualifications for opens and internal comps.

Not at all, very often this is the case. Many clubs have different entry criteria for different levels of competitions within their own clubs, e.g. Fun competitions - monthly Stablefords etc. - Board comps.

 

[Captain_Black.]

Interesting to note.
I have just had details of our 1st Senior away match of the season, the club in question has instilled a max 28 H/C for the match.

That is a 1st, I've never know that happen before, especially seeing as it's essentially a friendly match, with no league tables or anything.
Sounds like they don't agree with EG increasing the H/C to 54 either?
Maybe a trend to continue?

 

[nickjdavis]

How can a club possibly say “ your not eligible to win”
if your cap is set by the criteria and can’t change.
Trouble imo if they do that.

but it does put the onus on players to read the COC.

I think during my last stint as Captain I had to tell 3 players after the event that they were ineligible to win the comp that they had just won due to the club rules that were in place....basically that a player could not win their first 2 comps after their handicap was initially allocated. This was something that all players who joined the club were told on joining...but was often something they forgot.

None of them gave one jot and were simply delighted to have shot the score they had and happy with the forthcoming handicap cut.

On one occasion we did have one obnoxious moron stomp around the bar, verbally laying in to a couple of committee members in front of (unbeknownst to him) the club owner, shouting about how we had taken his £3 entry fee under false pretences and he was going to sue. Even the guys son walked out of the bar on to the terrace in sheer embarrassment at his dads antics. The bloke apologised shortly thereafter and within a week had left the club by "mutual consent".

 

[clubchamp98]

I think during my last stint as Captain I had to tell 3 players after the event that they were ineligible to win the comp that they had just won due to the club rules that were in place....basically that a player could not win their first 2 comps after their handicap was initially allocated. This was something that all players who joined the club were told on joining...but was often something they forgot.

None of them gave one jot and were simply delighted to have shot the score they had and happy with the forthcoming handicap cut.

On one occasion we did have one obnoxious moron stomp around the bar, verbally laying in to a couple of committee members in front of (unbeknownst to him) the club owner, shouting about how we had taken his £3 entry fee under false pretences and he was going to sue. Even the guys son walked out of the bar on to the terrace in sheer embarrassment at his dads antics. The bloke apologised shortly thereafter and within a week had left the club by "mutual consent".

Yes you never know how someone is going to take the bad news!

 

[Alan Clifford]

Interesting to note.
I have just had details of our 1st Senior away match of the season, the club in question has instilled a max 28 H/C for the match.

That is a 1st, I've never know that happen before, especially seeing as it's essentially a friendly match, with no league tables or anything.
Sounds like they don't agree with EG increasing the H/C to 54 either?
Maybe a trend to continue?

Having up to 54 is really good if you are not very good. It allows you to have a handicap and try to improve. But having a limit for competitions is good as well. But why 28?

 

[Backsticks]

Having up to 54 is really good if you are not very good. It allows you to have a handicap and try to improve. But having a limit for competitions is good as well. But why 28?

General experience pre 54, that it seemed to work.

 

[rulefan]

General experience pre 54, that it seemed to work.

Seemed? No doubt you mean by 'general' those that were under 29 and had a vested interest to protect.

 

[Backsticks]

Seemed? No doubt you mean by 'general' those that were under 29 and had a vested interest to protect.

No, I mean competitive handicap golf generally worked without the possibility of outrageously good scores that are impossible for half the field to compete with. Handicap golf is based on the premise that everyone starts out with an equal chance against all others in the field. In the max 28 days, it wasnt perfect. But was generally good. There were always cases of handicap manipulators, but that happened right through the range up to 28, and in the main was no more than a shot or two. It gave them the chance of being in the top of the leaderboard mix more often, rather than being able to pull a winning score out of the hat on demand. But the system has broken down with the breaching of the 28 ceiling. The potential best score for a 40hc, even though that 40hc being entirely legitimate according to the system, is just out of scale with the potential best score for those with hcs up to the 20s. So, in a way you are right - sub 28s had a vested interest in protecting a system that worked. Which is entirely reasonable. But that is defending a working system, against a broken system. I would have moved to the position that there should be no general competitions for hcs above 28. Keep the 54 hc range. Just acknowledge the reality that competition involving 28+ does not work, and keave higher hcs as a useful performance measure for those golfers.

 

[D-S]

No, I mean competitive handicap golf generally worked without the possibility of outrageously good score that are impossible for half the field to compete with. Handicap golf is based on the premise that everyone starts out with an equal chance against all others in the field. In the max 28 days, it wasnt perfect. But was generally good. There were always cases of handicap manipulators, but that happened right through the range up to 28, and in the main was no more than a shot or two. It gave them the chance of being in the top of the leaderboard mix more often, rather than being able to pull a winning score out of the hat on demand. But the system has broken down with the breaching of the 28 ceiling. The potential best score for a 40hc, even though that 40hc being entirely legitimate according to the system, is just out of scale with the potential best score for those with hcs up to the 20s. So, in a way you are right - sub 28s had a vested interest in protecting a system that worked. Which is entirely reasonable. But that is defending a working system, against a broken system. I would have moved to the position that there should be no general competitions for hcs above 28. Keep the 54 hc range. Just acknowledge the reality that competition involving 28+ does not work, and keave higher hcs as a useful performance measure for those golfers.

Is that for men and women?

 

[Backsticks]

Is that for men and women?

I am only referring to men. I have no real experience of the womens game or handicaps. At a guess, probably similar applies, with their old limit of 36.

 

[D-S]

I am only referring to men. I have no real experience of the womens game or handicaps. At a guess, probably similar applies, with their old limit of 36.

Juniors?

 

[Steve Wilkes]

WHS is a great system for giving a player his/her true Handicap Index from a range of different difficulty and length courses, but trying to implement those playing handicaps into a big field a golfers to make if fair for all ranges of handicaps won't work, unless you bring in Divisions or Competition rules like limits, or 3/4 of course handicap for example. So it's not "WHS doesn't work", it's Competitions don't work unless you bring in Competition Rules

 

[Backsticks]

WHS is a great system for giving a player his/her true Handicap Index from a range of different difficulty and length courses, but trying to implement those playing handicaps into a big field a golfers to make if fair for all ranges of handicaps won't work, unless you bring in Divisions or Competition rules like limits, or 3/4 of course handicap for example. So it's not "WHS doesn't work", it's Competitions don't work unless you bring in Competition Rules

Partly agree. The point of handicaps though is for players of different abilities to compete with each other. In that sense WHS doesnt work. Any need for categories is effectively saying it doesnt work, categories being a recognition of its very flaw. Which categories doesnt realy fix : it doesnt enable a 10 to compete with a 40, the two handicaps having such different profiles, that a 10 and a 20 do not. Limits as you mention are the same as I am saying - no competitions for above 28. Even for an above 28 category, competition is a bit of an illusion. The level-ish playing field that does exist sub 28, just isnt really there.

I think it has come from a well intended, but misguided in some cases, tendency of our times : inclusivity. Admirable in principle. But it should not try to bend to reality something that is just impractical and does not function, and credibility is lost.