WHS doesn't work

[AussieKB]

Anyone going to mention what the max handicap was when they started ??????

 

[Deleted member 15717]

Anyone going to mention what the max handicap was when they started ??????

28 for me. And that’s what I got. And I couldn’t play to it….until I could and beyond and very quickly won a lot and got cut accordingly.

you seem to have a massive chip on your shoulder about anyone over a 18 handicap being able to be let on the hallowed grounds of a golf course. It’s tedious.

if you don’t like it, stop playing handicap competitions and just play scratch stuff to see how you compare to ‘proper’ golfers.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

Yes I would to .
but I would think and would hope you think the same ,we do have courses that suit our eye .
this imo is generally because it suits our general shot shape.

a fader ,long hitter at mine would run out of fairway on a few holes and might have to hit less club.
but a drawer of the ball just bombs it down the apex of the corner.
so just an observation .

genuine question do course raters take shot shape into their calculations?

No - really about distance to landing areas for scratch and boyey golfers (men and women).

 

[IJames]

We had a 47 handicapper win today, that really gladdens my heart not, I know we all have to start some where, but to be given this many shots is a joke in my opinion.

An argument for divisions! The 47-capper should be congratulated for their (relative) performance!

 

[Captain_Black.]

Anyone going to mention what the max handicap was when they started ??????

28 was the max when I started.
My 1st h/c was 26
I couldn't play anywhere near it, but unlike today's thinking of acceptance, I worked hard & practiced until it started to come down.
That's the way it should be.

Now, all incentive to get better has gone, some have the reverse mentality of purposely gaining shots to make it easier.
Golf isn't supposed to be easy.
Your not supposed to shoot your h/c every time you play (or 8 - 10 shots below it, as I've regularly seen)

But, I suppose in today's weird world where some have trouble knowing what gender they are & all the other crazy stuff that's going on, I shouldn't really be surprised.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Anyone going to mention what the max handicap was when they started ??????

I seem to remember that it was 24 for men in 1969/70
When Dr Stableford came up with his points scoring system it was 21.
So he came up with the 7/8 allowance, because he said that getting more than one shot on a hole would be ungentlemanly.

 

[Backsticks]

I seem to remember that it was 24 for men in 1969/70
When Dr Stableford came up with his points scoring system it was 21.
So he came up with the 7/8 allowance, because he said that getting more than one shot on a hole would be ungentlemanly.

Man, was he wrong about that.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Man, was he wrong about that.

He couldn't be wrong. It didn't exist before. He invented it. It was what it was. No wrong and no right. It didn't exist and then it did. It was what he said it was. He "owned" it.

It changed later.

 

[Backsticks]

28 was the max when I started.
My 1st h/c was 26
I couldn't play anywhere near it, but unlike today's thinking of acceptance, I worked hard & practiced until it started to come down.
That's the way it should be.

Now, all incentive to get better has gone, some have the reverse mentality of purposely gaining shots to make it easier.
Golf isn't supposed to be easy.
Your not supposed to shoot your h/c every time you play (or 8 - 10 shots below it, as I've regularly seen)

But, I suppose in today's weird world where some have trouble knowing what gender they are & all the other crazy stuff that's going on, I shouldn't really be surprised.

The incentive to get better is unchanged and nothing to do with handicapping.
One chooses to try to improve simply to play better golf. Not to win handicap golf.
Handicapping is to allow all skill levels to compete on an equal footing on a given day. An improving golfer is almost an anomaly or rupture in a handicap competition.

 

[Backsticks]

He couldn't be wrong. It didn't exist before. He invented it. It was what it was. No wrong and no right. It didn't exist and then it did. It was what he said it was.

Wrong that more than a shot was ungentlemanly. That was just groundless and arbitrary whim or prejudice on his part.
Just saying something does not make it so.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Wrong that more than a shot was ungentlemanly. That was just groundless and arbitrary whim or prejudice on his part.
Just saying something does not make it so.

Then everything is wrong.
Everything will change.

 

[D-S]

How about your prize money is the pot divided by your handicap? If someone off 40 wins then he gets a 40th of the pot then the balance goes to the next player (divided by his handicap), and the balance to the next player and so on. You would have to have 1 handicappers or better having a handicap of 1 and therefore getting the whole pot.
No worries with high handicappers getting 1st place, just more money for the rest.
Great incentive to get better.

 

[sweaty sock]

How about your prize money is the pot divided by your handicap? If someone off 40 wins then he gets a 40th of the pot then the balance goes to the next player (divided by his handicap), and the balance to the next player and so on. You would have to have 1 handicappers or better having a handicap of 1 and therefore getting the whole pot.
No worries with high handicappers getting 1st place, just more money for the rest.
Great incentive to get better.

I wish i was a fly on the wall at the commitee meeting when this was suggested!!

Also can i be off 0.1 in this system. I love it

 

[Backsticks]

How about your prize money is the pot divided by your handicap? If someone off 40 wins then he gets a 40th of the pot then the balance goes to the next player (divided by his handicap), and the balance to the next player and so on. You would have to have 1 handicappers or better having a handicap of 1 and therefore getting the whole pot.
No worries with high handicappers getting 1st place, just more money for the rest.
Great incentive to get better.

Again, an incentive to get better has nothing to do with handicapping.
And handicapping is to equalise not discriminate.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Dividing by zero is a tricky one to do.
I don't think D-S wanted to be taken too seriously on this one.

 

[Backsticks]

And do plus handicaps have to pay into, rather than take from, any of the prize pot if they place ?

 

[Backsticks]

How about your prize money is the pot divided by your handicap? If someone off 40 wins then he gets a 40th of the pot then the balance goes to the next player (divided by his handicap), and the balance to the next player and so on. You would have to have 1 handicappers or better having a handicap of 1 and therefore getting the whole pot.
No worries with high handicappers getting 1st place, just more money for the rest.
Great incentive to get better.

'Getting better' is closer to cheating in handicap golf competition. It is stealing an advantage while playing off an unrepresentative handicap unless one is putting in general play cards to keep it up to date. This is the big case for submitting all, not just competition, cards.

 

[RichA]

'Getting better' is closer to cheating in handicap golf competition. It is stealing an advantage while playing off an unrepresentative handicap unless one is putting in general play cards to keep it up to date. This is the big case for submitting all, not just competition, cards.

One size doesn't fit all. When I play non-comp rounds, I play for fun - not to grind out my best score. All hero shots are attempted and frequently fail. My GP rounds would push my HI up so on the rare occasions I entered a comp I'd grind out a safe round and probably go well below my HI. I'd have more sleeves of Srixon Distance balls (the stock price at ours) than I have room for in my garage.
This is the big case for submitting only competition rounds.
As with all aspects of golf, the handicapping system relies on the honesty and integrity of individuals.

 

[D-S]

This is of course tongue in cheek but note I did say that 1 or better would have to be considered to be off 1 as dividing by less than one would of course be stupid.
I shouldn’t have said an incentive to get better, it would be an incentive to get lower.

 

[sweaty sock]

My experience, for honest, ambitious people who want to improve, you get a handicap, improve and as Wabinez and Captain Black mention you win on your way down.

I cant begrudge anyone that.

I can begrudge the perennial 18 handicapper who wins twice a year, always off 18. Whether they mean it or not, they are gaming the system...