Banchory Buddha
Well-known member
10 shots under is a 2 shot reduction, 7 is 1. I'm off out so won't look for it again, but pretty sure it's further up the page?I'm afraid I can't find it in the book. Can you please say which clause it is in?
10 shots under is a 2 shot reduction, 7 is 1. I'm off out so won't look for it again, but pretty sure it's further up the page?I'm afraid I can't find it in the book. Can you please say which clause it is in?
Pedro, so that's what's happened right? Why are you appealing?I did find this while looking at whs
World Handicap System (WHS) –
Exceptional Score Reductions
(Rule 5.9)
On occasions golfers can perform much better than their handicap would suggest. WHS has a safeguard built into the system known as an ‘Exceptional Score Reduction’.
Any exceptional score reduction is applied automatically by the system, as an additional adjustment and can be from general play and/or competition scores.
An automatic adjustment is triggered when a score differential is at least 7.0 – 9.9 strokes better than the player’s Handicap Index at the time the round was played. A -1.0 reduction would be applied to each of the most 20 recent scores in the handicap record.
A -2.0 reduction is applied when a score differential of 10 or greater has been calculated, with any -2.0 reductions being applied to all of the most recent 20 scores in the handicap record.
* Note – Multiple exceptional score reductions can be applied should the golfer have more than one score differential of 7.0 or greater. This would be shown as a cumulative value in the handicap record.
I think that explains it so I have appealed the handicap with the committee and am awaiting a response
Because it it’s automatically applied why was I deducted a further 2 shots manually ?Pedro, so that's what's happened right? Why are you appealing?
No, it isn't. Without looking it up again, I think the automatic reduction was 1.0 (CR is a few strokes under par, so the differential is between 7 and 10 better than CR); a further 2.0 reduction was then manually applied. A 2.0 increase that was applied earlier in the year complicates matters.Pedro, so that's what's happened right? Why are you appealing?
It's only a 1.0 automatic ESR - the true score differential is 2.1 (-0.9 + 3.0), so 9.3 better than handicap (11.4 - 2.1); the additional manual adjustment is then 2.0 (as was advised by the handicap sec.).To my mind his score differential on the 26th should have got him a 2 shot ESR....maybe the H'cap sec has then decided to add another 1 shot ESR reduction on his own accord?
Thanks Nick, now we can see what's actually happenedPeter has given me permission to post the following snapshot of his WHS record apologies for it being a bit small but I thought it best to include his scores to which the 2 shot upwards adjustment was applied.View attachment 39056
Presumably that's all the scores on his record at that time?1) why only 17 adjustments of plus two were made on 20th June
Presumably that's all the scores on his record at that time?
It's only a 1.0 automatic ESR - the true score differential is 2.1 (-0.9 + 3.0), so 9.3 better than handicap (11.4 - 2.1); the additional manual adjustment is then 2.0 (as was advised by the handicap sec.).