Backsticks
Assistant Pro
What do you mean here ?
WHS doesn't work
- Thread starter Captain_Black.
- Start date
What do you mean here ?
Swango1980
Well-known member
I think that is a terrible idea. As soon as a player scores a round of their life (and we all have them), then it may take them 40 or 50 rounds to get a handicap that enables them to play to handicap again. That could take years.
I shot a 72 gross 3 years ago, but haven't got close since. I'd probably still be getting 0.1's back to this day, to account for that one round everything went right.
jim8flog
Journeyman Pro
In a comp with a booked start sheet the person checking the scores will be able to see which players went out together and virtually all players record their own score in the markers column.
So it is a simple case of comparing scores in the markers column on one card with another card to see who was the marker and cross checking the gross score between the two cards.
Backsticks
Assistant Pro
Gotcha. Do many really do that though ? I only mark the scores for the person whose card I have. But yes, if people do it, its a useful check, but surely the signed card is the 'master'. When HC Sec, I dont think I once did this kind of cross check.
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
I do it as many markers have got my score wrong in the past.
I cross check the gross scores before I sign it.
But I would not expect an overworked h/cap sec to do it if I can’t even sign my own card.
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
If I'm marking your card and I only mark your score and not mine...how do I check my scores on my card are correct before signing it.....?
If I haven't put them in the Marker's box then I've got nothing to check, against.....
clubchamp98
Journeyman Pro
Exactly.
That’s why there is a “ markers score column”
Backsticks
Assistant Pro
Against your memory? You know what scores you had, and probably the gross and/or stableford total. Its enough to spot an error on your markers card before you sign.
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
And if I didn't want to tot up scores at the turn I've now got to remember all 18 holes?
No problem for me but an awful lot of people can't remember what ball they're using....
You can't rely on memory.
BiMGuy
LIV Bot, (But Not As Big As Mel) ?
Some people struggle to remember how many shots they’ve hit on the hole they’ve just played.
Wabinez
Journeyman Pro
Backsticks
Assistant Pro
Presumably, whe WHS committee looked at a sea of such data. If the above were correct, it looks like 0.85 would be the singles competition factor. Is it known if they chose 0.95 because the quoted data is wrong and WHS has the correct data, or, because WHS decided that they must discriminate against low handicappers, and skew the system so that 30+ hc are given a two shot advantage.
(and lets not confuse it with the 50-points-to-have-a-chance problem. Thats clearly a different issue, and specific to some problem clubs)?
Crazyface
Tour Winner
So higher H/C's are more likely to have great rounds?
Ian_George
Active member
Depends how you define 'great round'!
If 'great' = '8 shots or more under handicap', then Yes.
If great = 'Level Par or better', then No!
That chart demonstrates the reason why handicap competitions should have Divisions!
Last edited:
AussieKB
Well-known member
When I count over 80 then it doesn't matter.
wjemather
Well-known member
I believe the quoted probabilities from Dean Knuth apply to the old USGA system, not WHS, so are likely to be slightly off. Further, over handicap rounds must also be considered when evaluating equity, so these figures cannot be used in isolation.
Additionally, the .95 allowance for individual stroke play is deemed equitable for medium sized fields but inequitable in larger fields when a lower allowance is suggested. It is therefore CONGU's mandate that skews the system against lower handicappers in larger fields.
D-S
Well-known member
Can you define medium and larger fields? Also what is the suggested allowance for 'larger' fields?
wjemather
Well-known member
According to WHS, 30 is medium size. There is no specific suggested allowance, just advice that committees may want to reduce the allowances as field size increases.
Ian_George
Active member
I believe 30 is the boundary point https://www.golfmonthly.com/features/the-game/handicap-allowances-under-whs
FWIW, I seriously doubt applying 95% (1 shot for 11-30; 2 shots 31-50; 3 shots for higher) is actually going to have a noticeable effect on the ratio of 'great day' winners - I believe there'll still be loads of winners in the 31-50 range who have an 'outstanding score' simply because of improvement from practice after initial handicap allocation! Another (or the same) reason for running handicap comps in Divisions!
Swango1980
Well-known member
I never remember reading that in the manual. Just the 30 limit, but nothing above it (maybe it is there, and I missed it)
However, that is marvelous. We can have fields over 100. I wonder if that is a large field. And, system just leaves it up to the comp sec to decide or not decide, with no real logic. I imagine none do this, as they are oblivious to it, or the software does not make it easy? But, are players who play in large fields now likely to be at a disadvantage if they are a lower handicap? Surely not, as they've been slammed every time they have tried to highlight this
