WHS & ISV Issues (Please post only if you are a handicap secretary or involved in admin at your club)

[mikejohnchapman]

Is there any way to determin which players are subject to the hard or soft cap without going through each individual score?

The reporting on Club V1 doesn't offer the anchor point as a selectable field and I can't see anything in the EG Platform that will help.

Believe it or not we have a player who has already hit the soft cap.

 

[2blue]

We have it set in our Players Charter the same as CONGU. 3 qualifying rounds in the last 12 months. I really don't know if this is enough or not. I have asked my Committee to comment, and await replies. My own thoughts are that 5 or 6 rounds in the last 12 months would be more representative, but I wouldn't want to change our Charter again for a minor alteration. Before the season starts I will email all members with the terms.

Yeah with so many new members we've moved to 5 Club Comps in the last 12 months (not casual rounds) for Board Comps.

 

[IanMcC]

Yeah with so many new members we've moved to 5 Club Comps in the last 12 months (not casual rounds) for Board Comps.

In an ideal world I would set it at 5 rounds. One of my committee members also said 5. We set the Charter saying same as CONGU though, 3 rounds in last 12 months, so we are going to keep it like that for 2021, and review it in the Autumn. I wouldn't like to make a distinction between club comps and casual rounds. They all have the same effect on ones Index, but I know where you are coming from.

 

[Deleted member 3432]

In an ideal world I would set it at 5 rounds. One of my committee members also said 5. We set the Charter saying same as CONGU though, 3 rounds in last 12 months, so we are going to keep it like that for 2021, and review it in the Autumn. I wouldn't like to make a distinction between club comps and casual rounds. They all have the same effect on ones Index, but I know where you are coming from.

Are you not in danger of creating a two tier handicap structure within the club, 'regular' competition golfer and 'social or non competition' golfers.

WHS is promoted as making the game more inclusive and accessible is it not?

 

[2blue]

Are you not in danger of creating a two tier handicap structure within the club, 'regular' competition golfer and 'social or non competition' golfers.

WHS is promoted as making the game more inclusive and accessible is it not?

They could still have a H/cap from casual rounds, no problem. Not easy to see why they need one if not play in competitions?

 

[IanMcC]

Are you not in danger of creating a two tier handicap structure within the club, 'regular' competition golfer and 'social or non competition' golfers.

WHS is promoted as making the game more inclusive and accessible is it not?

I've read your post 3 or 4 times, and can only assume you meant to speak to 2blue, who does take the policy of differentiating between casual and comp rounds. As a discussion point, did you disagree with the CONGU 3 rounds before c status was gained? That also was a 2 tier scheme under your guidance.

 

[Deleted member 3432]

I've read your post 3 or 4 times, and can only assume you meant to speak to 2blue, who does take the policy of differentiating between casual and comp rounds. As a discussion point, did you disagree with the CONGU 3 rounds before c status was gained? That also was a 2 tier scheme under your guidance.

Yes it would help if I was bright enough to be able to multi quote so apologies.

I think the congu 3 rounds was well intentioned but also flawed as it lead to golfers abandoning competition play altogether as their handicaps don't increase quick enough as ageing causes a decline in their standard of golf.

If I use my dad as an example he stopped playing comps at around age 80 as he could not play to his high teens handicap. Eventually he got given a 2 or 3 shot increase but still not anywhere near enough.

He stopped playing for a couple of years as he didn't enjoy playing seniors comps with 'young men' who smashed it 80 yards past him and who he was giving loads of shots to. He rejoined this summer and under the WHS he is going to have a handicap that is more realistic to his ability.

In my reply to 2Blue my concern is their seems to be a concern at his club over Board Comps being won by golfers who may have handicaps gained through social golf only. Surely it doesn't matter now, a handicap is a handicap?

I now there is scope for clubs to make restrictions for entry to comps but under WHS is is not more aimed at creating seperate divisions/comps for the higher handicap golfer?

Personally I just rock up and play as well as I can and try to play my best golf. We don't have board comps apart from Club Champs and winning a comp will get you £30 max, (2 divisions and overall comp winner) so no ego driven need to see name on a wall.

 

[Deleted member 3432]

They could still have a H/cap from casual rounds, no problem. Not easy to see why they need one if not play in competitions?

Gives them an opportunity to play if they wish.

 

[2blue]

Yes it would help if I was bright enough to be able to multi quote so apologies.

I think the congu 3 rounds was well intentioned but also flawed as it lead to golfers abandoning competition play altogether as their handicaps don't increase quick enough as ageing causes a decline in their standard of golf.

If I use my dad as an example he stopped playing comps at around age 80 as he could not play to his high teens handicap. Eventually he got given a 2 or 3 shot increase but still not anywhere near enough.

He stopped playing for a couple of years as he didn't enjoy playing seniors comps with 'young men' who smashed it 80 yards past him and who he was giving loads of shots to. He rejoined this summer and under the WHS he is going to have a handicap that is more realistic to his ability.

In my reply to 2Blue my concern is their seems to be a concern at his club over Board Comps being won by golfers who may have handicaps gained through social golf only. Surely it doesn't matter now, a handicap is a handicap?

I now there is scope for clubs to make restrictions for entry to comps but under WHS is is not more aimed at creating seperate divisions/comps for the higher handicap golfer?

Personally I just rock up and play as well as I can and try to play my best golf. We don't have board comps apart from Club Champs and winning a comp will get you £30 max, (2 divisions and overall comp winner) so no ego driven need to see name on a wall.

It's more to protect the Honours Boards from new members just getting new h/caps & burgling the Boards, as has happened in the past. Requiring 5 Comps at least gives a possible opportunity to monitor them. We had 100 new members last year, many with new H/caps. It may not work but members know that at least we are trying.

 

[Deleted member 3432]

It's more to protect the Honours Boards from new members just getting new h/caps & burgling the Boards, as has happened in the past. Requiring 5 Comps at least gives a possible opportunity to monitor them. We had 100 new members last year, many with new H/caps. It may not work but members know that at least we are trying.

I understand what you are trying to do but lets be honest improving golfers have always had a good chance to win comps until they find their natural level and golf becomes harder.

Take away the honours boards and there will be less moaning from members when someone has a good round and wins a comp.

 

[Swango1980]

I understand what you are trying to do but lets be honest improving golfers have always had a good chance to win comps until they find their natural level and golf becomes harder.

Take away the honours boards and there will be less moaning from members when someone has a good round and wins a comp.

Take away the honours boards, and there may be more moaning from members that there are a lack of prestigious competitions.

If there is an entry limit to honour board competitions, do new members honestly complain they do not play? I doubt it. Ad a new member, I would just try and spend my first stint at a club trying to get accustomed to new club and members. As long as I can still play in events for handicapping purposes, it should take no effort or time to play in 5 comps. If I was a long term member but without the 5 comps under my belt, then I still wouldn't feel.i have a right to complain when many more members have shown more commitment and support to comps.

I do completely understand trying to protect prestigious comps from those with handicaps that are too high. Since lockdown in march, we have had over 100 new members, many who.have handed in 3 cards for handicap. It is clear many of these have improved significantly since their first handicap, a couple of guys dropping around 5-10 shots in first fee rounds since getting handicap. One guy got a handicap in the 30's and entered the friendly winter doubles. Won his matches 7&6, 8&7 and 7&5, at least 2 of those matches against golfers with good records over the years. Due to Covid, however, this guy has had little opportunity to play in any "qualifying" comps. Would it be right if he got his name on the honours board after it was one of his first official comps and he scored 50+ points? I reckon that would put off many members in playing who simply feel they have no chance once they have an established handicap. Whereas, not permitting new player to win until he has 5 5 comps will unlike deter him. He is clearly playing well, motivated, and will continue to submit rounds until he gets 5.

The only interesting point is, why 5 rounds? Some clubs will stick with 3, some might say 5 or any other arbritary number. Some might have 0. Is this something that was chosen fairly randomly based on a few peoples opinion, or was it a vote by all members who play comps? No issue with it, but something our club will need to sort out soon.

 

[Deleted member 3432]

Take away the honours boards, and there may be more moaning from members that there are a lack of prestigious competitions.

If there is an entry limit to honour board competitions, do new members honestly complain they do not play? I doubt it. Ad a new member, I would just try and spend my first stint at a club trying to get accustomed to new club and members. As long as I can still play in events for handicapping purposes, it should take no effort or time to play in 5 comps. If I was a long term member but without the 5 comps under my belt, then I still wouldn't feel.i have a right to complain when many more members have shown more commitment and support to comps.

I do completely understand trying to protect prestigious comps from those with handicaps that are too high. Since lockdown in march, we have had over 100 new members, many who.have handed in 3 cards for handicap. It is clear many of these have improved significantly since their first handicap, a couple of guys dropping around 5-10 shots in first fee rounds since getting handicap. One guy got a handicap in the 30's and entered the friendly winter doubles. Won his matches 7&6, 8&7 and 7&5, at least 2 of those matches against golfers with good records over the years. Due to Covid, however, this guy has had little opportunity to play in any "qualifying" comps. Would it be right if he got his name on the honours board after it was one of his first official comps and he scored 50+ points? I reckon that would put off many members in playing who simply feel they have no chance once they have an established handicap. Whereas, not permitting new player to win until he has 5 5 comps will unlike deter him. He is clearly playing well, motivated, and will continue to submit rounds until he gets 5.

The only interesting point is, why 5 rounds? Some clubs will stick with 3, some might say 5 or any other arbritary number. Some might have 0. Is this something that was chosen fairly randomly based on a few peoples opinion, or was it a vote by all members who play comps? No issue with it, but something our club will need to sort out soon.

I would be asking new members to put in as many cards as possible from social play to ensure their handicap reflects improvement in their game.

What about the long standing mid handicap member who suddenly decides to get lessons, practice his butt off and suddenly improves 6 or 7 shots a round, no different to the improving new member scenario.



We need to remember that at some stage we were all new golfers and no doubt a lot of us on this forum have won a comp or two before we found our natural level and hit the plateau.

 

[Swango1980]

I would be asking new members to put in as many cards as possible from social play to ensure their handicap reflects improvement in their game.

What about the long standing mid handicap member who suddenly decides to get lessons, practice his butt off and suddenly improves 6 or 7 shots a round, no different to the improving new member scenario.



We need to remember that at some stage we were all new golfers and no doubt a lot of us on this forum have won a comp or two before we found our natural level and hit the plateau.

That is a very different scenario. You have a long standing member who has put in a lot of effort and work. If he wins, it is well deserved.

A new member, especially new golfer, need put in no effort at all. Many will naturally improve significantly as they get used to the game, and used to the course. The 2 are very very different.

 

[nickjdavis]

. Whereas, not permitting new player to win until he has 5 5 comps will unlike deter him. He is clearly playing well, motivated, and will continue to submit rounds until he gets 5.

The only interesting point is, why 5 rounds? Some clubs will stick with 3, some might say 5 or any other arbitrary number. Some might have 0. Is this something that was chosen fairly randomly based on a few peoples opinion, or was it a vote by all members who play comps? No issue with it, but something our club will need to sort out soon.

We have a rule whereby members getting a handicap for the first time are unable to win any of the first three comps they enter. They are told this at the time of joining.

Three times this year I had to ring new members who'd joined in March, then found they couldn't play, then when general restrictions were lifted went out and practised like hell, then when we restarted comps in mid July swept the board in their first comp!!!Each of the three players I spoke to were quite happy with the rule and were simply delighted that they'd played well and were getting their handicaps down quickly.

Its been 3 comps ever since I've been a member (20yrs) so not sure what the decision making process to come up with the number was, but I guess that if a player puts in 3 rounds for his handicap, then another 3 rounds would seem a reasonable amount of time to see some sort of "playing record" develop, so you could see if there was an issue with the initially allocated handicap.

Yes a player could easily "play conservatively" in those first three rounds and then go out and "try" but, despite all you read about banditry, its my experience that the vast majority of golfers don't actually have that "cheating" mentality within the confines of their club golf....however it does seem that you get more of a tendency to cheat in with manipulated handicaps in open events with lucrative prize funds....perhaps cheating strangers is psychologically more palatable to such people?

 

[Rocco]

Since the introduction of Handicap Index and Course Handicap a player could get confused and enter a handicap which is lower than entitled e.g. enters 22 on card when entitled to 23.
The players score is then entered in to Club V1 but it gives a result based on 23 handicap . however his score should be based on what he enters on card if lower i.e 22 (obviously D.Q if player puts higher handicap than entitled to).
Previously there was a facility on Club V1 to adjust a players handicap prior to his score being input..
Club support advise that since the switchover to WHS that it is no longer a feature on the system...this is unsatisfactory ,do they actually understand the Rules of Golf/handicapping. What is the correct procedure ?

 

[Old Skier]

Since the introduction of Handicap Index and Course Handicap a player could get confused and enter a handicap which is lower than entitled e.g. enters 22 on card when entitled to 23.
The players score is then entered in to Club V1 but it gives a result based on 23 handicap . however his score should be based on what he enters on card if lower i.e 22 (obviously D.Q if player puts higher handicap than entitled to).
Previously there was a facility on Club V1 to adjust a players handicap prior to his score being input..
Club support advise that since the switchover to WHS that it is no longer a feature on the system...this is unsatisfactory ,do they actually understand the Rules of Golf/handicapping. What is the correct procedure ?

As a V1 user I’m interested in this, was a reason given for the withdrawal of the procedure?

 

[Rocco]

As a V1 user I’m interested in this, was a reason given for the withdrawal of the procedure?

The reply from CSI Care Support : Unfortunately since the switchover to WHS ,this is no longer a feature on the system to adjust handicaps in Club V1.

As a user of Club V1 you will be well used to not getting a satisfactory answer to your specific query , a further message has been sent to them requesting what to do for a lower handicap on card.. reply to that still awaited ...hence posting on here and HDID forum to get some feedback.....will post if anything further received from Support.

 

[rulefan]

Since the introduction of Handicap Index and Course Handicap a player could get confused and enter a handicap which is lower than entitled e.g. enters 22 on card when entitled to 23.
The players score is then entered in to Club V1 but it gives a result based on 23 handicap . however his score should be based on what he enters on card if lower i.e 22 (obviously D.Q if player puts higher handicap than entitled to).
Previously there was a facility on Club V1 to adjust a players handicap prior to his score being input..
Club support advise that since the switchover to WHS that it is no longer a feature on the system...this is unsatisfactory ,do they actually understand the Rules of Golf/handicapping. What is the correct procedure ?

Wouldn't the facility to enter 22 (in this case) cause problems with the the correct calculation of his Score Differential (used to calculate his new Index). WHS is primarily about handicaps not competition results. The DQ error should be sorted out off-line.

 

[Old Skier]

Wouldn't the facility to enter 22 (in this case) cause problems with the the correct calculation of his Score Differential (used to calculate his new Index). WHS is primarily about handicaps not competition results. The DQ error should be sorted out off-line.

IMO this is another pointer that with the WHS the powers to be “assume “ that everyone is going to be IT savvy and will be able and have access to using the technology

 

[rulefan]

IMO this is another pointer that with the WHS the powers to be “assume “ that everyone is going to be IT savvy and will be able and have access to using the technology

I assume you mean 'players' when you say 'everyone'. Why should players be concerned? Their correct (WHS) handicap will be in the system. Card figures are the concern of the RoG savvy committee. If they aren't, they should be.