I can understand players getting it wrong while they get used to the change, but there is no excuse for clubs & committees - as a positive, such reports are highlighting to counties where help is needed in getting clubs up to speed.
True, but you would be surprised that it is the some of the more switched on clubs that get it wrong. I think it shows that attendance at seminars (both national and local) and pumping out information doesn’t always mean it goes in and is really understood.
Sorry, but this was a headline change that was exceedingly difficult to miss; it would be impossible for switched-on clubs to get it wrong.
What they got wrong was putting up rounded CH boards and not explaining to members (or not getting it through) that they shouldn’t calculate PHs from them and when they were bombarded by questions/complaints not remembering the advice they received or the rationale or, in the moment, being able to do the maths to give the right answer or maybe not briefing all their committee members who were facing the members convinced that they were getting the wrong number of shots and that it was the computer’s or system’s fault.
Sorry again, but this isn't a change that happened some time ago, that could be easily forgotten by now. They also don't need to "do the maths"; that's what they have <insert chosen ISV here> for; they simply need to know that PH is calculated by that software for them (as it has been since WHS came in).
They are responding to players who are asking why 95% of 15 is still 15 or 95% of 4 is 3 etc. etc. and just saying 'that is what the <insert chosen ISV here>' says is not answering the question or satisfying the aggrieved party - they are being faced with irate members who are insisting the the computer or <insert chosen ISV here> has got it wrong - When you are asked what are you going to do about it? on the 1st tee obviously even committed volunteers who have attended seminars e.g. at The Bristol didn't have the answers to hand - that is why I know about it.
The answer they give to player is that it isn't simply "95% of 15" or "95% of 4" (any more) because the software now calculates Playing Handicaps using unrounded values, so players can no longer easily do the calculation themselves from their Course Handicap, and they simply have to trust that the software is doing it correctly.
I'm not the one claiming that people who don't know the basics of the changes (or have forgotten them after just 3 weeks) are "switched-on".
Overcomplicating things is definitely not the answer.
Does this comment support our approach or criticise it? I can’t read the implication in your words.
No issue with providing PH lookup tables for competitions that are being run through software, but advising use of "machine precision" in casual play adds unnecessary complexities and is contrary to union guidance.
It’s not unnecessary complication, we provide very simple look up PH boards and it’s not against any Union guidance.
It's entirely up to the organiser but without software, anything other than just using course handicaps for a small group is creating unnecessary work for no benefit.
Interesting that this issue is now rearing its head on the England Golf Volunteer Hub on Facebook as well.
Looks like EG's mixed tee calculator is double rounding. Yikes.
