Whs filling in a comp card

[PJ87]

Can someone post a link for me of what to fill in on a card for handicap in a comp

For example 95% handicap

In black and white so to speak what to write on card

Can't seem to find it

 

[SammmeBee]

Rules of Golf tells you.....

 

[rosecott]

Our cards should have been redesigned for WHS but only have 2 boxes for handicaps, labelled Handicap and strokes received. My players have been instructed to put Course Handicap in the first one and - optionally for their own benefit - Playing Handicap in the second one.

 

[PJ87]

Rules of Golf tells you.....

Could you link the correct ruling screen shot or link as requested?

 

[SammmeBee]

There’s a a nice pic in Rule 3.3b.......

 

[Old Skier]

Could you link the correct ruling screen shot or link as requested?

G2.1b/1 Handicap On The Scorecard
To avoid a DQ under Rule 3.3b (4) of the Rules of Golf the player must put his/her Course Handicap on the scorecard (see Interpretation 3.3b (4)/1 of the Rules of Golf). This is expressed as an integer and represents the number of strokes the player receives for handicap purposes for both Competition scores and General Play returns.
It is the responsibility of the Committee to apply the handicap allowance for any stroke play competition; in practice this will done by the software. Players need to be able to access their Handicap Index and then refer to a relevant look-up table to obtain their Course Handicap for the tees used.
Whilst not mandatory, CONGU® recommend that space for the Handicap Index and Playing Handicap is also on the scorecard.
For multi-tee or mixed-tee competitions the Handicap Allowance may include additional strokes for players who play from the tees with the higher Course Ratings. Players should be aware that under these circumstances any additional strokes they receive could affect when they pick up on a hole in certain formats, for example Stableford or Par/Bogey.
G2.1b/2 Disqualified Scores

https://www.congu.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/WHSDocs/Handicapping-Advice.pdf

 

[PJ87]

G2.1b/1 Handicap On The Scorecard
To avoid a DQ under Rule 3.3b (4) of the Rules of Golf the player must put his/her Course Handicap on the scorecard (see Interpretation 3.3b (4)/1 of the Rules of Golf). This is expressed as an integer and represents the number of strokes the player receives for handicap purposes for both Competition scores and General Play returns.
It is the responsibility of the Committee to apply the handicap allowance for any stroke play competition; in practice this will done by the software. Players need to be able to access their Handicap Index and then refer to a relevant look-up table to obtain their Course Handicap for the tees used.
Whilst not mandatory, CONGU® recommend that space for the Handicap Index and Playing Handicap is also on the scorecard.
For multi-tee or mixed-tee competitions the Handicap Allowance may include additional strokes for players who play from the tees with the higher Course Ratings. Players should be aware that under these circumstances any additional strokes they receive could affect when they pick up on a hole in certain formats, for example Stableford or Par/Bogey.
G2.1b/2 Disqualified Scores

https://www.congu.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/WHSDocs/Handicapping-Advice.pdf

Thank you

 

[nickjdavis]

We had a comp yesterday...

28 players recorded both Index and Course Handicap
9 players recorded Course Handicap only
3 recorded Course and Playing handicaps
1 recorded their Index only
2 recorded Index, Course and Playing handicaps (one actually showed "full working out"!!!)
1 recorded an handicap that was nothing like their real handicap (index, course or playing - put down 12 instead of 21!!!)

Of the 33 players who decided to calculate their nett score, 24 of them used the Course Handicap. Only 9 used the 95% (the 5 who actually noted their PH on the card plus 4 more who i'll give the benefit of the doubt to who's PH was the same as their CH)

It is clear that despite giving clear communication to players it is going to take them some time to get up to speed with the new system!!!

 

[2blue]

We had a comp yesterday...

28 players recorded both Index and Course Handicap
9 players recorded Course Handicap only
3 recorded Course and Playing handicaps
1 recorded their Index only
2 recorded Index, Course and Playing handicaps (one actually showed "full working out"!!!)
1 recorded an handicap that was nothing like their real handicap (index, course or playing - put down 12 instead of 21!!!)

Of the 33 players who decided to calculate their nett score, 24 of them used the Course Handicap. Only 9 used the 95% (the 5 who actually noted their PH on the card plus 4 more who i'll give the benefit of the doubt to who's PH was the same as their CH)

It is clear that despite giving clear communication to players it is going to take them some time to get up to speed with the new system!!!

I think we'd have had similar if we'd actually seen the cards....... most players seem to think that golf is just about hitting a ball & that someone will take responsibility for everything else despite endless communication efforts to assist with the education process. Eventually, I expect it will come down to "The hard lessons of life"....... eg. DQ's. A bit to go yet.

 

[Swango1980]

We had a comp yesterday...

28 players recorded both Index and Course Handicap
9 players recorded Course Handicap only
3 recorded Course and Playing handicaps
1 recorded their Index only
2 recorded Index, Course and Playing handicaps (one actually showed "full working out"!!!)
1 recorded an handicap that was nothing like their real handicap (index, course or playing - put down 12 instead of 21!!!)

Of the 33 players who decided to calculate their nett score, 24 of them used the Course Handicap. Only 9 used the 95% (the 5 who actually noted their PH on the card plus 4 more who i'll give the benefit of the doubt to who's PH was the same as their CH)

It is clear that despite giving clear communication to players it is going to take them some time to get up to speed with the new system!!!

For the one player that recorded their Index only, what happened:

a) Disqualified for not putting their Course Handicap as required by the rules
b) Not disqualified, but it was "assumed" the Index they wrote down could be considered as their Course Handicap

If (b) was selected, and if their Index would have been lower than Course Handicap, was their handicap in the system reduced until the course handicap matched their Index on the card?

PS. Interesting stats, thanks. So, only 5 actually put the Playing Handicap, which is used for the competition score. The fact 24 of them used the Course Handicap to work out their competition score is an eye opener. Thank goodness for computers.

 

[IanMcC]

During this winter period I would not DQ anyone for not putting their CH on the scorecard. Even last week, we had 2 people put their old CONGU handicap on the card!!
Also, I am encouraging players not to get too concerned with Playing Handicap, just to be aware of what it does. Once we start playing 2 tee comps with handicap allowances it will be even more confusing. We dont even have the new cards yet with the boxes for HI, CH and PH.
Come February time I will send out more info on exactly what is required on the scorecard regarding handicaps (it is only the correct Course Handicap that is required, of course.) Once the summer comes hopefully that will keep the DQs to a minimum.

 

[Deleted member 3432]

During this winter period I would not DQ anyone for not putting their CH on the scorecard. Even last week, we had 2 people put their old CONGU handicap on the card!!
Also, I am encouraging players not to get too concerned with Playing Handicap, just to be aware of what it does. Once we start playing 2 tee comps with handicap allowances it will be even more confusing. We dont even have the new cards yet with the boxes for HI, CH and PH.
Come February time I will send out more info on exactly what is required on the scorecard regarding handicaps (it is only the correct Course Handicap that is required, of course.) Once the summer comes hopefully that will keep the DQs to a minimum.

What on earth is playing handicap?

HI converted to CH gives a whole number. Why this stupidity of 95%, thats what the problem is, a third calculation. Are we playing a texas scramble or someting equally as pointless?

 

[PJ87]

For the one player that recorded their Index only, what happened:

a) Disqualified for not putting their Course Handicap as required by the rules
b) Not disqualified, but it was "assumed" the Index they wrote down could be considered as their Course Handicap

If (b) was selected, and if their Index would have been lower than Course Handicap, was their handicap in the system reduced until the course handicap matched their Index on the card?

PS. Interesting stats, thanks. So, only 5 actually put the Playing Handicap, which is used for the competition score. The fact 24 of them used the Course Handicap to work out their competition score is an eye opener. Thank goodness for computers.

I spoke to the handicap sec and said I plan to put course handicap in the handicap box and playing handicap in strokes received box

He said that's fine so gonna make sure I do that with my group

 

[Swango1980]

What on earth is playing handicap?

HI converted to CH gives a whole number. Why this stupidity of 95%, thats what the problem is, a third calculation. Are we playing a texas scramble or someting equally as pointless?

Without the 95% playing handicap, then lower handicappers would be at a disadvantage in a stroke play (medal / stableford) competition, especially with a large field size. You could argue that why is this not simply embedded in the course handicap calculation (Oz seem to do this, using 93%). The answer would be that this would then disadvantage higher handicappers in match play.

So, not pointless, but certainly more confusing that what we are used to.

 

[PJ87]

Without the 95% playing handicap, then lower handicappers would be at a disadvantage in a stroke play (medal / stableford) competition, especially with a large field size. You could argue that why is this not simply embedded in the course handicap calculation (Oz seem to do this, using 93%). The answer would be that this would then disadvantage higher handicappers in match play.

So, not pointless, but certainly more confusing that what we are used to.

It didn't happen before in stableford comps, were lower handicaps disadvantaged then? Especially now they can to up faster

 

[Deleted member 3432]

Without the 95% playing handicap, then lower handicappers would be at a disadvantage in a stroke play (medal / stableford) competition, especially with a large field size. You could argue that why is this not simply embedded in the course handicap calculation (Oz seem to do this, using 93%). The answer would be that this would then disadvantage higher handicappers in match play.

So, not pointless, but certainly more confusing that what we are used to.

I agree with this but should this not be built into the course handicap calculation?

The fact that the player is responsible for having the correct CH on their card but it is not their responsibiltiy for the PH that is causing massive confusion.

Just way over complicated for the vast majority of golfers.

Off to make sure I have a calculator in my bag now

 

[Swango1980]

I agree with this but should this not be built into the course handicap calculation?

The fact that the player is responsible for having the correct CH on their card but it is not their responsibiltiy for the PH that is causing massive confusion.

Just way over complicated for the vast majority of golfers.

Off to make sure I have a calculator in my bag now

Completely agree with the confusion aspect, and personally I wish it was all built in. Although, higher handicappers likely to be at more of a disadvantage in match play if it was done that way (which the Australians do not seem bothered with)

 

[Swango1980]

It didn't happen before in stableford comps, were lower handicaps disadvantaged then? Especially now they can to up faster

Previously, the handicap system was completely different. In some aspects, the old system was a lot more unfair in the respect it didn't account for the relative difference between low and high handicappers at all.

I don't have the stats to say how fair or unfair the old system was to low or high handicappers, but I'm sure someone has that information. But, with WHS, the Handicap Index is the average of the best 8 from 20 scores. It is a statistical fact that higher handicappers will have a bigger range of scores in their top 8 than low handicappers, and therefore their best round in 20 will be lower compared to their Index than a low handicappers best round in 20 compared to their Index. So, as a field gets larger, the low handicapper's odds of winning become lower and lower, because the chances of at least 1 higher handicapper shooting their best round in 20 increases.

I'm in full agreement though that WHS is much more complicated than the old system. In the months leading up to this, several supporters of WHS were almost patronising to those that had doubts, continually telling us all it would be simple and the software will do everything for us. Since the 2nd November, and now more and more golfers are using WHS, it is blindingly obvious that many are confused. Multiple threads in here demonstrate this, and I'm sure we have all experienced this at our own club. Most will get used to it, but it will still always be more confusing compared to what we had before. And, as a result, it will always require a more steep learning curve to new golfers. Personally, I'd have liked to see the 95% embedded into the Course handicap calculation

 

[Old Skier]

I agree with this but should this not be built into the course handicap calculation?

The fact that the player is responsible for having the correct CH on their card but it is not their responsibiltiy for the PH that is causing massive confusion.

Just way over complicated for the vast majority of golfers.

Off to make sure I have a calculator in my bag now

Not sure why this is causing the ho har it is, everyone forgot when there was so many comps were players had to play of 3/4 HC because the old guard thought that handicaps were to high. At least 95% isn’t as harsh. I don’t personally agree with it but it’s what it is.

If people are having trouble perhaps a SAMPLE CARD on a couple of notice boards might help along with 95% conversion tables. I went in today to ensure the 40 odd seniors playing had the correct guidance when completing their card, bit of a faph but it will help in the long run and hopefully get knowledge through osmosis.

 

[Deleted member 3432]

Not sure why this is causing the ho har it is, everyone forgot when there was so many comps were players had to play of 3/4 HC because the old guard thought that handicaps were to high. At least 95% isn’t as harsh. I don’t personally agree with it but it’s what it is.

If people are having trouble perhaps a SAMPLE CARD on a couple of notice boards might help along with 95% conversion tables. I went in today to ensure the 40 odd seniors playing had the correct guidance when completing their card, bit of a faph but it will help in the long run and hopefully get knowledge through osmosis.

Would have been better if any of the WHS guff showed some sample cards to make it idiot proof.

England Golf Golfer Education Hub suggests we don't need as players to calculate PH.

"Playing Handicap is a stroke allowance that is implemented in order to maintain the integrity of the WHS when used in competition. The Course Handicap converts to a Playing Handicap for competition purposes and changes depending on the format of play.
Golfers do not need to calculate this (it is generated before their round). Golfers should continue to play in the mindset of their Course Handicap in competition rounds."

Dont forget WHS was designed to:
Attract more players to the game
Make the game more enjoyable
Make handicapping easier to understand
Give golfers a handicap index which is portable from course to course