WHS - Has it made it easier for Handicap “manipulation”

[Orikoru]

Of course it has. With the EG app you can submit a score - any score - and get your mate to sign it off. Nobody checks. You can basically engineer whatever handicap you want if you were that way inclined.

You can argue that it was possible before with supplementary cards or whatever, but you'd need more brass on you to do it in person. With the app it's practically anonymous.

 

[Crow]

When WHS was first introduced I feared it might cause a drop off in club competition entries and at worst case we'd end up like America where club competitions barely exist, but that was primarily because people wouldn't need to enter comps to maintain their handicap.

If banditry goes unchecked then there will also be disinclination of "honest" handicappers to enter due to the feeling that it's a waste of time and entry fee.

After a few years of WHS I'm even more fearful for the future of club competitions.

 

[RichA]

The system is what it is. Golf is about honesty. Cheats will always find a way to cheat.
Even if submission of cards and scores via the EG app is monitored with ruthless efficiency, a cheat will still have dozens of opportunities to improve their lie, "find" their ball in the rough, steal an inch marking their ball on the green, etc.

 

[Dando]

Agreed. Clubs should not allow folk without a reasonable number (to be agreed) of club comp scores to win prizes in Opens. If it's all Gen Play scores, who is policing that?? No one. Then they appear in Team Comps and clean up.

at my course we have only had 2 or 3 "club comps" in the almost 3 years i have been a member so 99.9% of my cards have been GP cards so my handicap is 6 rather than the 14 it was when i first joined.

 

[rulefan]

Of course it has. With the EG app you can submit a score - any score - and get your mate to sign it off. Nobody checks. You can basically engineer whatever handicap you want if you were that way inclined.

You can argue that it was possible before with supplementary cards or whatever, but you'd need more brass on you to do it in person. With the app it's practically anonymous.

The availability of apps has nothing to do with a new opportunity to cheat in WHS. Apps would have come regardless of WHS.
You mention EG in particular; do all apps have the same loophole? I thought others (? IG, V1, GG, HM) had tighter controls.

 

[Swango1980]

I haven't.

You haven't????? I think you forgot someone? Someone we play with at my club who has gone up 8-10 shots and now always has his coffee bought for him as it is loser buys the drinks

I would add to that guy, another chap who didn't like a lot of people he had to play with in handicap drawn comps. So, in about 2-3 weeks he submitted a load of general play scores scores, course handicap went from around 8 to 11-12, and now he plays with people he is happier with.

There are stories about quite a few people all throughout the club who have higher handicaps than they should. These stories always existed even before WHS, but WHS no doubt gives these people an opportunity to increase their handicap much more rapidly. If we are honest enough to admit these people do actually exist

 

[Orikoru]

The availability of apps has nothing to do with a new opportunity to cheat in WHS. Apps would have come regardless of WHS.
You mention EG in particular; do all apps have the same loophole? I thought others (? IG, V1, GG, HM) had tighter controls.

As I've said, it's easier to submit a card on the app than it is to fill out an actual card, get it signed, and post it - plus the physical card is more likely to be checked. As others have said - I could sit in my lounge and submit a bogus card in the app if I wanted to.

I don't know about the other apps because I tend to use MyEG and everyone has access to it anyway, so not sure the relevance of what you ask.

 

[Swango1980]

The availability of apps has nothing to do with a new opportunity to cheat in WHS. Apps would have come regardless of WHS.
You mention EG in particular; do all apps have the same loophole? I thought others (? IG, V1, GG, HM) had tighter controls.

Apps may have come in regardless.

But if a player wanted to get a handicap increase of, say, 3 shots, then they'd need to submit about 30 rubbish scores pre WHS, and no good ones. With WHS, going up 3 shots might only require a handful of rounds, if you are about to lose a string of older scores you submitted when you were on top form.

 

[rosecott]

You haven't????? I think you forgot someone? Someone we play with at my club who has gone up 8-10 shots and now always has his coffee bought for him as it is loser buys the drinks

I would add to that guy, another chap who didn't like a lot of people he had to play with in handicap drawn comps. So, in about 2-3 weeks he submitted a load of general play scores scores, course handicap went from around 8 to 11-12, and now he plays with people he is happier with.

There are stories about quite a few people all throughout the club who have higher handicaps than they should. These stories always existed even before WHS, but WHS no doubt gives these people an opportunity to increase their handicap much more rapidly. If we are honest enough to admit these people do actually exist

If you knew about these two players, how come your Handicap Committee didn't?

And how did the one who went up 8-10 shots manage that with the Hard Cap system?

 

[harpo_72]

When WHS was first introduced I feared it might cause a drop off in club competition entries and at worst case we'd end up like America where club competitions barely exist, but that was primarily because people wouldn't need to enter comps to maintain their handicap.

If banditry goes unchecked then there will also be disinclination of "honest" handicappers to enter due to the feeling that it's a waste of time and entry fee.

After a few years of WHS I'm even more fearful for the future of club competitions.

The irony of our Saturday roll up was a low handicap player saying he wouldn’t win because he couldn’t shoot 40+ points .. which in his defence was and is the common winning scores.
He won the roll up with 40pts , I was 2nd on 39pts with an out bound 22pts and I would love to say I backed off deliberately.. I didn’t I was just hitting the ball so pure I was airmailing greens and loving it.

So we all know we have to shoot 40+points or 5 shots better than our playing handicap to win.

 

[Oldbutwise]

You haven't????? I think you forgot someone? Someone we play with at my club who has gone up 8-10 shots and now always has his coffee bought for him as it is loser buys the drinks

I would add to that guy, another chap who didn't like a lot of people he had to play with in handicap drawn comps. So, in about 2-3 weeks he submitted a load of general play scores scores, course handicap went from around 8 to 11-12, and now he plays with people he is happier with.

There are stories about quite a few people all throughout the club who have higher handicaps than they should. These stories always existed even before WHS, but WHS no doubt gives these people an opportunity to increase their handicap much more rapidly. If we are honest enough to admit these people do actually exist

Interesting that one. He must have achieved that increase over 2 years given the hard cap.

 

[harpo_72]

If you knew about these two players, how come your Handicap Committee didn't?

And how did the one who went up 8-10 shots manage that with the Hard Cap system?

Someone would have had to witnessed these cards .. surely that also makes them complicit?

 

[Beedee]

I thought in the old system, after 7 0.1's you were eligible for a review and another 1.0 back. It was subject to a few restrictions like no cuts in the last 12 months iirc. So for a player who'd done the bare minimum to keep a "c" handicap for a year or two, and then decides they want a few extra shots - 7 bad rounds = 0.7. Review = 1.0, another 7 bad rounds =0.7 then maybe another review = 0.1. A possible 2.4 or 3.4 shots back for 14 rounds in the old system.

As for apps - it was always going to happen, especially with Covid happening about the same time.

 

[Bdill93]

As I've said, it's easier to submit a card on the app than it is to fill out an actual card, get it signed, and post it - plus the physical card is more likely to be checked. As others have said - I could sit in my lounge and submit a bogus card in the app if I wanted to.

I don't know about the other apps because I tend to use MyEG and everyone has access to it anyway, so not sure the relevance of what you ask.

That's the biggest thing/ fault about it.

I could get the lowest handicap on the forum by this time next week without playing a single round and never leaving my house.

I reckon I could also get up to about 17 in the same time frame, maybe a bit longer as id need to knock some scores off my record.

Certainly easier to go lower than higher if manipulating.

 

[Swango1980]

If you knew about these two players, how come your Handicap Committee didn't?

And how did the one who went up 8-10 shots manage that with the Hard Cap system?

I should have clarified.

Just before WHS, he was around 18/19. Since WHS, we played a bit at our old club, and then many of us moved to other clubs (he came to the one I did). He hasn't played many comps at the new club (still has about 2 or 3 scores from the old club we were members of), but his course handicap was 28 up until a week before the winter (no scores could be enterd after that). We managed to make him submit his last social score of last year, which got him to 27 (i.e. forced him to pre register before teeing off the first).

Even with that in mind, over the winter he has shot over 50 points twice this winter, and it is unusualy for him to be under 40 points (in fairness, the course set up could be 2 or 3 shots easier than it would normally be). So he pretty much hammers everyone each time he plays.

Why do the handicap committee not know? Well, let me ask more generally, given that nearly every golfer at every club has stories of individuals that have handicaps that are far too high, why is it that the handicap committees never know? I'd suggest that there are 2 factors:

1. It is difficult to keep track of hundreds of members individually, especially if they are never seen in competitions
2. Even if they have heard stories, and seen some bad scores entered, it takes more than hearsay and a few scores to be convincing. For all they know, these scores are genuine, and those accusing someone of being a bandit are just over exaggerating. If the handicap sec actually played regularly with the golfer, then they may in a better position to decide either way.

 

[HeftyHacker]

Absolutely. I can key a card from the comfort of my living room for my nearest course. I get someone round for a beer and to watch the footy, he can sign it off before he goes!

Team comp... 2 out of 4... BINGO! Nice new shoes or a £200 bag.

You don't even need to do that, he could sign it off from the comfort of his own home - he doesn't need to be or have been anywhere near the club.

Unless that's changed recently?

 

[Swango1980]

Someone would have had to witnessed these cards .. surely that also makes them complicit?

I've clarified just above these scores were over a long time, the player has simply avoided submitting scores once his handicap got to 28. Maybe for various reasons.

But, if we were talking about a rapid increase, then if a player is willing to submit dodgy scores, it isn't far fetched their mate and marker may have the same mindset as well. I certainly wouldn't see them arguing about the score, or telling tales to the Committee on their mate?

And, there is the other issue that, even as a mate, you can't always tell a score is being manipulated. The other guy who wanted an handicap increase so he was further up the draw had submitted GP scores, playing with many different people (we always play with different people, in a group of 12-16, so it isn't always the same guy marking your score). His HCP had already gone up a couple of shots, and when I played with him (tho not his marker), we laughed at him as he missed about 5 or 6 2-3 foot putts. He took no time at all with them, but they didn't look like he was missing on purpose. Just a mixture of not taking his time and poor technique. But afterwards I questioned him about how on earth he was missing short putts and why he didn't just take a bit more time. It was then suggested he didn't like playing off 8, and so shooting bad scores wasn't a big concern. So, was he missing putts on purpose, or was he still "trying" but not trying hard enough? And, if he wasn't trying hard enough, how much should someone try on each individual shot?

 

[Swango1980]

I thought in the old system, after 7 0.1's you were eligible for a review and another 1.0 back. It was subject to a few restrictions like no cuts in the last 12 months iirc. So for a player who'd done the bare minimum to keep a "c" handicap for a year or two, and then decides they want a few extra shots - 7 bad rounds = 0.7. Review = 1.0, another 7 bad rounds =0.7 then maybe another review = 0.1. A possible 2.4 or 3.4 shots back for 14 rounds in the old system.

As for apps - it was always going to happen, especially with Covid happening about the same time.

That was the Continous Review. All that happened was that the system flagged players with at least 7 0.1 increases. It was then up to the Committee to decide what they did.

At our club, and as I was handicap sec, I'd bring a list of these players to main Committee meetings. I'd have done a bit of research first, and come up with my own ideas as to whether or not we should act. Then we'd agree what would happen at Committee, and I certainly pushed for members who were clearly struggling to have at least 1.0 increase, sometimes maybe even a bit more. Whereas other times, we'd not do anything and review again by the time of the next meeting.

But, from what I heard in hear at the time, I think a lot of clubs didn't really do much about it. I wouldn't even be surprised if some clubs never even saw the flag, or had any inclination to increase handicaps outside the Annual Review. I hear some Handicap Secs love getting their axe out, but less inclined to give some a bit of help

 

[wjemather]

Why is it that the people who moan the most about alleged cheating are the ones least likely to report anything?

 

[IanM]

Someone would have had to witnessed these cards .. surely that also makes them complicit?

Yes. Completely.