WHS doesn't work

[Backsticks]

Driving distance versus handicap data possibly would indicate where the line should be drawn between meaningful handicaps, and ones that indicate a true lack of ability to play the game.
Driving distance/clubhead speed correlate very well with handicap up to something like 18 or 20. Above that not so bad either, though with a little more variance. I have never seen data for 28-54. But I would guess the correlation is lost - I doubt the 42 handicapper can only hit the ball 120yrds at their limit. If the distance handicap correlation breaks down, that would indicate that those handicaps are not really handicaps in the sense that those in the 'stable zone' are.

 

[D-S]

Is there a published logic for 54 being the limit for both golf genders. Why not 45 or 72?

If there is a 10 shot difference between average handicap between both golf genders why should the upper limit be the same?

 

[Swango1980]

So, 54 is too high. 18 is the limit for some, others were happy enough with 28.

They are all arbitrary numbers. 18 is far too low, in that I know loads or regular competiti9n golfers could never get anywhere near that. And I don't play Seniors golf, where I am sure it gets more difficult with loss of distance, and aches and pains.

28 is a bit random. Why was 28 ever picked in 1st place? However, I knew a few people who couldn't quite play to 28, stuck on 28.0 for years.

54 is mega high (especially as this could be a course handicap well over 60). Never played with anyone, even very poor club golfers, who are anywhere near that.

54 seems like a crazy jump. 36 would have been less of a culture shock, 2 shots per hole has some logic to it (albeit all slope dependent now). 54 could maybe have been an increased limit for under 18's.

Not going to change now anyway I suppose. Just waiting for the day a player off 54.0 Index shoots a gross score in 70's on a typical 18 hole course.

 

[Captain_Black.]

There must be a formula where it's possible to draw the line at a level which is fair to all & levels the playing field, I'd also advocate a reduction in the 95% singles allowance

England Golf have badly messed up, the current situation will only get worse if the situation continues & will ultimately result in a complete breakdown in the integrity & trust of all amateur club competitions & opens.

 

[rulefan]

There must be a formula where it's possible to draw the line at a level which is fair to all & levels the playing field, I'd also advocate a reduction in the 95% singles allowance

England Golf have badly messed up, the current situation will only get worse if the situation continues & will ultimately result in a complete breakdown in the integrity & trust of all amateur club competitions & opens.

I would have thought that around the world there are many people starting to play golf where 56 is an appropriate starting level.

PS: EG didn't invent the WHS.

 

[Captain_Black.]

I would have thought that around the world there are many people starting to play golf where 56 is an appropriate starting level.

PS: EG didn't invent the WHS.

Why?
I started at 28.
Why should it be any different now?
28 is more than enough for a beginner

I know WG didn't invent WHS, but they have implemented a flawed H/C system on the back of a ridiculously inflated H/C allowance

 

[wjemather]

Perhaps?
Personally I thought the UK average was around the 16 to 18 mark?
Anyway.
There is a big difference between 18 / 28 & 54
There is an acceptable window whereby people of different abilities & different handicaps can reasonably compete on a level (ish) playing field.
Push that window too far & you end up with where I believe we are now.
Exacerbated by a somewhat flawed handicap system.

This really shouldn't need spelling out, but I was responding to a comment about limiting to one stroke per hole (i.e. 18) and pointing out that such a move would exclude about half of all golfers with handicaps (since the average Slope is ~125, a 17 index translates to a >18 course handicap on most courses).

As to the rest of your post, there are fundamental limitations of ALL handicap systems (inconsistent golfers playing inconsistent courses in inconsistent conditions with inconsistent equipment) that can never be overcome, but WHS is by far the most equitable system we have ever had.

And to repeat... divisions, divisions, divisions.

 

[Aussie Swinger]

here in Australia we have grades, A grade is plus handicaps to 10, B grade 10-20, C grade 21 to 54. Works pretty well, except for my mate who is off +4, shot 2 rounds of 65 (-5 under) in comps on Friday and Saturday and had not won a comp dime inception of the WHS. It works for 99% of people. No one system will ever be fair for all…I prefer grades to ‘divisions’ only because it reminds me of standing on a parade ground for hours on end when I was in the Navy…

 

[IanM]

It's an interesting discussion... at what point does a handicap enable competition between mixed abilities, or it is just being at a comical level for folk "very much learning???" (Or awful)

My wife's buddy currently has a course handicap of 56! She's turned in some mad scores off that over the winter!!

 

[Captain_Black.]

This really shouldn't need spelling out, but I was responding to a comment about limiting to one stroke per hole (i.e. 18) and pointing out that such a move would exclude about half of all golfers with handicaps (since the average Slope is ~125, a 17 index translates to a >18 course handicap on most courses).

As to the rest of your post, there are fundamental limitations of ALL handicap systems (inconsistent golfers playing inconsistent courses in inconsistent conditions with inconsistent equipment) that can never be overcome, but WHS is by far the most equitable system we have ever had.

And to repeat... divisions, divisions, divisions.

My club is initiating divisions this season in the face of mounting unrest at the crazy scores being recorded, but divisions don't address the issue of an outright winner of a Board comp or an open unless a H/C restriction is imposed for that particular event.
Divisions are also a sticking plaster to mask an obviously flawed handicap system.
If the handicap system worked properly, there would be no need for divisions or H/C restrictions

 

[JonnyGutteridge]

Not sure this is exactly the right thread but…

We have 75 members that have a handicap of <5.0.
In our stableford yesterday, there 75 entrants. Only 5 of the entrants were <5.0 handicap golfers - none of them did particularly well.

My own personal reasons for playing; I’m not interested in entering a card in February, when it’s blowing 25mph wind and feels like -2 degrees out on the course. It’s just a waste of time.

Spoke to a few mates and they said the same - don’t want to enter cards in winter.

Back in the good old days, it’d have been a “reductions only” and they’d probably have got better than a 7% turnout of <5.0 handicap players.

 

[Steve Wilkes]

My club is initiating divisions this season in the face of mounting unrest at the crazy scores being recorded, but divisions don't address the issue of an outright winner of a Board comp or an open unless a H/C restriction is imposed for that particular event.
Divisions are also a sticking plaster to mask an obviously flawed handicap system.
If the handicap system worked properly, there would be no need for divisions or H/C restrictions

I play every week with a 3 handicap, 30 handicap, 37 handicap and I'm off 5, these handicaps vary by a shot or 2 as every round is WHS adjusted. it works out perfectly has everyone has a Fairly Equal Chance of winning our 4-ball stableford match. WHS is perfect in all these scenarios that are played weekly and is not seen as a flawed system, but will never work in huge fields so it's these competitions that need to have things such as Divisions or other rules, but giving unrealistic handicaps to individual golfers is not the answer

 

[wjemather]

My club is initiating divisions this season in the face of mounting unrest at the crazy scores being recorded, but divisions don't address the issue of an outright winner of a Board comp or an open unless a H/C restriction is imposed for that particular event.
Divisions are also a sticking plaster to mask an obviously flawed handicap system.
If the handicap system worked properly, there would be no need for divisions or H/C restrictions

Seems like your expectations/wants from a handicap system are detached from what is actually possible.

The insurmountable problem for any system is that the likelihood of a super-low nett score increases with field size; this reduces the chances for the lower handicappers (but nowhere near as much as is perceived). It is not possible to offset this slight imbalance without significantly damaging equity for higher handicappers.

In other words, you can either have a system that enables everyone to compete equitably with a reasonably fair chance of winning, or a system that largely prevents super-low nett scores and thereby significantly favours better players - you can't have both.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Comps should be a max of 1 shot per hole. If that’s not enough then work on getting better until it is.

That was pretty much Dr Stableford's thinking when he invented his points scoring system in the late 1800s.
The maximum handicap for men was 21. He applied the 7/8 adjustment so no one would receive more than one shot on a hole, "as that would be ungentlemanly."

When I started playing around 1969/70 my dad was allocated the maximum handicap of 24.
He got down to 20 in two years with Slazenger Ambassador wooden woods and bladed irons for a beginner! He was in his mid 40s, overweight and had rheumatoid arthritis.

I can't remember exactly when the maximum was increased to 28, but at my club, maximum for board comps remained 24. Club rule.
I think that is still the case for board comps at my club. Max playing handicap 24. No divisions.
A need for divisions seems to me to be an acceptance of something "unfair" with the handicap system that needs to be addressed.

We have a board comp and trophy for 10-18 handicappers only. We have two trophy comps (one is a board comp) for 19 and over handicaps only.
We have plenty of other comps with full allowance including a weekday stableford (all genders) every week from April to September.

I'm happy with that state of affairs. Others might not be. Can't please everyone.

 

[HeftyHacker]

Inclusivity is a funny thing. I could join the local rugby club next week.... can't see me getting a game anytime soon though.

You'd be surprised, most rugby clubs are crying out for players

 

[Swango1980]

Why?
I started at 28.
Why should it be any different now?
28 is more than enough for a beginner

I know WG didn't invent WHS, but they have implemented a flawed H/C system on the back of a ridiculously inflated H/C allowance

You started on 28, and you were able to improve from there. You had the capability to do that.

What about those that started on 28, pre WHS, and are now around 30 to 35? They may play every week, several times a week. They may have lessons, but they just don't have the capability of improving much.

I've mentioned it on other threads, but lifting the max from 28 was a God send for many regular golfers at my last club, where I was handicap sec. Suddenly,gold was far more enjoyable for 2 or 3 regulars in main comps as they could get in mix. And it helped a lot of Seniors as well.

It appeared a handicap in 30's was generally more than adequate for most. No one was in 40's or 50's, unless it was a new member and based on a very small number of awful scores.

 

[rulefan]

Of course the 56 54 limit was introduced into the UHS by CONGU and predated WHS by some years.

Edit: - Typo

 

[Backsticks]

No new member should ever get 40 or 50, even if thats their level at that point. The risk of a quick improvement is too high. Max initial 24 or 28. Let them drift out over time if they really cant play to it. You should have a track record that proves you need 36 no less than you need one to play to 6.

 

[Backsticks]

Of course the 56 limit was introduced into the UHS by CONGU and predated WHS by some years.

Indeed. But close enough in time to have people conflate the two events. And so fault WHS.

 

[IanM]

Of course the 56 limit was introduced into the UHS by CONGU and predated WHS by some years.

How many? Genuine question, why don't I ever remember seeing a handicap above 28/36 until WHS ?

Did clubs not implement the higher limits?