WHS doesn't work

[MiurasFan]

The What Handicap System when introduced to OZ, a survey was done and single figure golfers went down a shot on average, teen's went out 1 shot and 20 and above went out 3-4 shots.

First event I played under this new system, it was a Vet's at another course, my handicap did not change but players from my club were getting 1-2 shots extra, did not need to be Einstein to work out single figure golfers were getting screwed.

In the first 12 months not a single figure player won an event, hence all the high handicappers love the system, still see scores in the high 40's on a regular basis.

Unless comps are run in Divisions, that is to be expected - as it would have been in the Congu system. Not sure about the previous Aus system as I have no knowledge of how it worked. It only takes a small improvement for high-cappers to improve markedly, whereas it takes a considerable improvement for (very) low cappers to do so.

I'd also like to know how the conversion was performed. If previous comp rounds were reassessed as per WHS, then I'm not surprised that handicaps went up. Had they been converted to HIs by backward calculation from handicap, then I'm certain they'd have reduced - as most courses are rated higher than 113.

Divisions are simply the obvious way to run comps where the field consists of mixed handicaps!

 

[rulefan]

In the first 12 months not a single figure player won an event, hence all the high handicappers love the system, still see scores in the high 40's on a regular basis.

The real test is not about an individual player but about the proportion of players from a particular handicap range winning in proportion to their representation in the field.
I don't know how golf is faring in Oz but the boom here is resulting in a lot of new players coming in to the game with high handicaps. Therefor the number and proportion of high cappers in a competition field is increasing.

 

[clubchamp98]

It was higher handicap golfers that were (by design) being screwed previously.

Two wrongs making it wrong !
low men may have had an advantage in the past .
but making it much more skewed to high cappers delibaretly is just as wrong.
its supossed to be even for everyone? Isn’t it.?

 

[Backsticks]

What Handicap System does not encourage people to get lessons to improve, it just gives you more handicap, all the way to 54 for NOW, how long before people want more ?

It is not a goal of a handicap system to encourage people to improve. Thats like criticising it for doing northing to reduce global carbon emissions.

 

[clubchamp98]

Unless comps are run in Divisions, that is to be expected - as it would have been in the Congu system. Not sure about the previous Aus system as I have no knowledge of how it worked. It only takes a small improvement for high-cappers to improve markedly, whereas it takes a considerable improvement for (very) low cappers to do so.

I'd also like to know how the conversion was performed. If previous comp rounds were reassessed as per WHS, then I'm not surprised that handicaps went up. Had they been converted to HIs by backward calculation from handicap, then I'm certain they'd have reduced - as most courses are rated higher than 113.

Divisions are simply the obvious way to run comps where the field consists of mixed handicaps!

But there is only one winner in a comp?
what the alternative is (divisions) separate comps in set handicap limits.
so in effect four/ five comps on the day.

 

[Backsticks]

Do the majority of people who play golf care about PCC? Or even that much about the nuances of a handicap system?

Like with most things it’s just a vocal minority making noise about the changes.

True. Most golfers neither know nor care about it.

 

[Swango1980]

Do the majority of people who play golf care about PCC? Or even that much about the nuances of a handicap system?

Like with most things it’s just a vocal minority making noise about the changes.

I doubt it. Even if the system had fundamental flaws we could all agree on, I doubt most golfers would actually be aware of them, and therefore wouldn't care a jot. When I was handicap secretary, I could have randomly given any new golfer an arbitrary handicap (make it semi realistic to their ability, rather than giving a 28 handicapper a value of scratch, for example), and nearly all golfers would have just accepted it. Wouldn't have had a clue on the process, and wouldn't have cared.

However, just because the majority of golfers do not care about it, it is not the same as saying it is correct or shouldn't be challenged. Most golfers could have a fundamentally flawed handicap, but just simply never care about it as they are oblivious.

people that come onto these forums generally have more interest on the details of such things, and therefore can have much more in depth conversations and debates on the matter. If we did the same at our own club, we may be in the corner of the clubhouse speaking to ourselves on the matter.

 

[MiurasFan]

Two wrongs making it wrong !
low men may have had an advantage in the past .
but making it much more skewed to high cappers delibaretly is just as wrong.
its supossed to be even for everyone? Isn’t it.?

Individually (as in matchplay) perhaps; but overall, the statistics preclude that happening! It may get boring to keep hearing, but Divisions are the only way mixed level strokeplay comps should be run!

 

[clubchamp98]

Individually (as in matchplay) perhaps; but overall, the statistics preclude that happening! It my get boring to keep hearing, but Divisions are the only way mixed level strokeplay comps should be run!

Yes I know what your saying about divisions.
But that just fundamentally changes the way we play golf in our clubs.
There can be only one winner!!

so “ I won the Clubchampionship this year”
“well done ! What division”

most are gross but some have handicapped CC.

 

[MiurasFan]

But there is only one winner in a comp?
what the alternative is (divisions) separate comps in set handicap limits.
so in effect four/ five comps on the day.

Yep, but so what! Actually A comp for each of four or five groups.

 

[wjemather]

Two wrongs making it wrong !
low men may have had an advantage in the past .
but making it much more skewed to high cappers delibaretly is just as wrong.
its supossed to be even for everyone? Isn’t it.?

This hasn't happened. No group of players are significantly favoured by WHS, although there is some evidence that very low handicappers may be at a marginal disadvantage (we're talking small fractions of a stroke) in larger fields (but as stated earlier, this is due to CONGU's mandatory allowances, not WHS as a system which recommends adjustments based on field size).

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Unless comps are run in Divisions, that is to be expected - as it would have been in the Congu system. Not sure about the previous Aus system as I have no knowledge of how it worked. It only takes a small improvement for high-cappers to improve markedly, whereas it takes a considerable improvement for (very) low cappers to do so.

I'd also like to know how the conversion was performed. If previous comp rounds were reassessed as per WHS, then I'm not surprised that handicaps went up. Had they been converted to HIs by backward calculation from handicap, then I'm certain they'd have reduced - as most courses are rated higher than 113.

Divisions are simply the obvious way to run comps where the field consists of mixed handicaps!

It wasn't, stats showed that Cat 1 were proportionately more likely to post winning scores, not by a big margin, but the edge was there, now the stats are showing the opposite, and that duffers have more of an edge

 

[Deleted member 30522]

Yep, but so what! Actually A comp for each of four or five groups.

So you want 4 or 5 trophies awarded every weekend? Bonkers, that's what!

 

[MiurasFan]

So you want 4 or 5 trophies awarded every weekend? Bonkers, that's what!

52 Trophies a year is bonkers! Or 25 to 30, given Scottish weather! I find it hard to believe that you have a trophy comp every weekend! Or even that there's a comp every weekend! There are even ways of managing trophies within mixed division comps!

 

[Steve Wilkes]

In a field of 100 golfers with assorted "perfectly accurate" handicaps, ie No sandbaggers, No beginners vastly improving, I know what handicap range my money would be on for the winner, but this doesn't make the handicap system wrong, it's just statistical probability. maybe the only way to make it an even chance is to allocate the winner as the golfer who played the best percentage better than his ability

 

[MiurasFan]

Yes I know what your saying about divisions.
But that just fundamentally changes the way we play golf in our clubs.
There can be only one winner!!

so “ I won the Clubchampionship this year”
“well done ! What division”

most are gross but some have handicapped CC.

Club Championship should be a gross comp. Handicap comp can be held at same time, but either for Divisional Championship(s) or as separate (non CC event). Too many clubs are just lazy thinkers when it comes to competitions!

 

[IanM]

Can I be the majority 



Nah, I don't really know what it is or what its supposed to do & I don't care (ignorance really is bliss)

I just play golf and write the score/s down. If my gross is in the mid-high 80's I'm a happy chappy

If I didn't read this forum, I'd be largely oblivious of most of the issues on this thread.

I also play much of my golf as you describe above

 

[doublebogey7]

It wasn't, stats showed that Cat 1 were proportionately more likely to post winning scores, not by a big margin, but the edge was there, now the stats are showing the opposite, and that duffers have more of an edge

Have you any evidence for that. The authorites who have a very large bank of results in we which to gather the statsistics say that's not the case.

 

[doublebogey7]

In a field of 100 golfers with assorted "perfectly accurate" handicaps, ie No sandbaggers, No beginners vastly improving, I know what handicap range my money would be on for the winner, but this doesn't make the handicap system wrong, it's just statistical probability. maybe the only way to make it an even chance is to allocate the winner as the golfer who played the best percentage better than his ability

That of courrse would require a whole new handicapping system for people to moan about.

 

[Swango1980]

In a field of 100 golfers with assorted "perfectly accurate" handicaps, ie No sandbaggers, No beginners vastly improving, I know what handicap range my money would be on for the winner, but this doesn't make the handicap system wrong, it's just statistical probability. maybe the only way to make it an even chance is to allocate the winner as the golfer who played the best percentage better than his ability

This is why the WHS manual added in the 95% factor for fields larger than 30 (although it is compulsory for all field sizes in the UK)

However, I get what you are saying. Even with Playing Handicap at 95% of CH, I know what sort of handicap I would expect to win.