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

[IanMcC]

I have no issue going through all cards and correcting errors. I am retired and have the time. The further we get from 2nd November, however, only convinces me that CSI are a company not fit for purpose. It's a shame, because my golf club will never leave them, as there would be too much admin moving 700 members' details. All CSI management should hang their heads in shame.

 

[Old Skier]

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.

If players don’t have the ability or knowledge on how to keep track on what could be a changing index it will cause some issues.

I have yet to meet a completely savvy RoG committee, that includes me and EG and rules officials, if your club has that luxury then well done.

 

[Old Skier]

I have no issue going through all cards and correcting errors. I am retired and have the time. The further we get from 2nd November, however, only convinces me that CSI are a company not fit for purpose. It's a shame, because my golf club will never leave them, as there would be too much admin moving 700 members' details. All CSI management should hang their heads in shame.

I can assure you at the moment clubs are having as many, and in some cases more issues with their ISVs.

 

[rulefan]

I wouldn't necessarily disagree but in mitigation there are extenuating circumstances. CONGU/WHS were very tardy in getting the system specifications to the ISVs. dotgolf had a team over here but it was very limited. The effective time table set down by EG/CONGU did not provide for full destruction testing. Although the database conversion and nightly update process was fully specified (supposedly) the ISVs were virtually left to work out the player/club facing parts for themselves. Which is why IG, HM, CSI etc are experiencing different problems. Admittedly CSI seem to be suffering from more complaints than HM but there is a significant difference in their numbers of customers.
It really boils down to the fact that project management was notable by its absence.

 

[rulefan]

If players don’t have the ability or knowledge on how to keep track on what could be a changing index it will cause some issues.

I agree but that is a different issue and is not an ISV problem.

I have yet to meet a completely savvy RoG committee, that includes me and EG and rules officials, if your club has that luxury then well done.

If only

 

[Rocco]

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.

Hi rulefan thanks,I appreciate that the WHS system will fully take account of a players actual index and handicap for course played, that is not the issue...the dilemma is in producing a correct competition result sheet..

I fully accept that it is a players responsibility to ensure correct handicap on card but mistakes do happen and surely the competition result should be based on what he has entered on card. (or does this no longer apply ?)

This is nothing to do with being Tech savvy either,I don’t know if you are involved in Club V1 admin but there is simply no way of producing a result sheet based on an incorrectly low handicap entered on card...i.e a result sheet for a 23 handicap player will always produce a published result based on 23 handicap even if puts 18 on card, therefore still looking for a Club V1 solution

 

[Rocco]

I have no issue going through all cards and correcting errors. I am retired and have the time. The further we get from 2nd November, however, only convinces me that CSI are a company not fit for purpose. It's a shame, because my golf club will never leave them, as there would be too much admin moving 700 members' details. All CSI management should hang their heads in shame.

Hi Ian,,,are you actually saying that after a player has submitted his card you are changing his handicap on his card if it is incorrect ?.this is a whole new avenue to go down..
i agree with the rest of your comments though.

 

[jim8flog]

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.

Surely what handicap is used is irrelevant to WHS adjustment. The adjusted gross and differential will be same.

IG used to have the facility to adjust a players handicap for 'this comp only'.

 

[IanMcC]

Hi Ian,,,are you actually saying that after a player has submitted his card you are changing his handicap on his card if it is incorrect ?.this is a whole new avenue to go down..
i agree with the rest of your comments though.

During the winter period since the changeover I have received cards with many incorrect handicaps. People using the wrong conversion chart, people using their index as their course handicap, people trying to incorporate playing handicap, and even people using their old CONGU handicap. None of our winter comps are 'qualifiers', as we pick and place in the whole general area.
To this effect, I have been ignoring any incorrect Course Handicaps written on the card, and trying to educate people. Once we start playing qualifiers again, I will make it clear to my members that I will be less tolerant.
I think rulefan hit the nail on the head when he stated that WHS takes care of the handicap changes, but the M&H people sort out the comp. So, I see nothing wrong with checking the card of all the (potential) comp winners, and relegating them from prizes if needs be. Let WHS do its thing, and M&H do theirs.

 

[rulefan]

Surely what handicap is used is irrelevant to WHS adjustment. The adjusted gross and differential will be same.

IG used to have the facility to adjust a players handicap for 'this comp only'.

That was a CONGU facility for a committee to make an adjustment for an Away player (Clause 23.9). Amongst other things it could be used to 'control' sandbaggers.

 

[rosecott]

Surely what handicap is used is irrelevant to WHS adjustment. The adjusted gross and differential will be same.

IG used to have the facility to adjust a players handicap for 'this comp only'.

Handicapmaster has retained the ability to reduce the player's handicap "for this comp only", but only if the score is entered via the software. There is no option to do this for a player self-entering via the Masterscoreboard. Would he have changed it to a lower handicap if there was the option? I doubt that very much. The person administering the competition does, however, have the ability to edit the score - and the handicap - in the software if he gets the scorecard or a photograph of it. The competition result would be based on any reduced handicap "for this competition only" but the gross score would still go to WHS for any handicap adjustment based on the correct handicap.

If your current system doesn't involve the submission of a photograph of the scorecard, you are not going to be able to change anything in the result if you normally publish it fairly quickly. The problem then is "do you change the results if you subsequently find that a player has entered a lower handicap figure which would have affected his position in the prizes if it had been used?". How would you handle that?

 

[jim8flog]

[QUOTE="rosecott, post: 2295937, member: 10467"
If your current system doesn't involve the submission of a photograph of the scorecard, you are not going to be able to change anything in the result if you normally publish it fairly quickly. The problem then is "do you change the results if you subsequently find that a player has entered a lower handicap figure which would have affected his position in the prizes if it had been used?". How would you handle that?[/QUOTE]

We do not use photos. Cards are returned and checked by the appropriate person.

We do reopen competitions to correct errors.

eg the last person who did the cards had incorrectly DQd someone (not a DQ reason). When it was corrected he went from DQ to first place.

 

[Swango1980]

Hi rulefan thanks,I appreciate that the WHS system will fully take account of a players actual index and handicap for course played, that is not the issue...the dilemma is in producing a correct competition result sheet..

I fully accept that it is a players responsibility to ensure correct handicap on card but mistakes do happen and surely the competition result should be based on what he has entered on card. (or does this no longer apply ?)

This is nothing to do with being Tech savvy either,I don’t know if you are involved in Club V1 admin but there is simply no way of producing a result sheet based on an incorrectly low handicap entered on card...i.e a result sheet for a 23 handicap player will always produce a published result based on 23 handicap even if puts 18 on card, therefore still looking for a Club V1 solution

It is a good question, and to clarify, you are asking this question from the perspective of a COMPETITION secretary rather than a HANDICAP secretary.

And, to clarify, what you have found is that, if a player puts a handicap on their card that is too LOW, then from a competition results perspective, their result should be based on that lower handicap. However, the problem is that Club V1 does not allow this, and it will simply publish their result based on their correct handicap.

Clearly an issue, but I personally expect quite a few Committees are going to be very lenient, if not simply ignore any handicap mistakes on the card. Under the Rules of Golf they shouldn't, but WHS has added to Player confusion as to what handicaps they put on their card or how to get those values. There is no clear guidance as to how a Committee should act if they put the numbers in the wrong box, or if they just put in an Index and nothing else. Some think DQ as no Course Handicap, others say assume Index is their Course handicap (even though that was clearly not their intention), but that would require the competition sec to spot this, and manually reduce their index until their Course Handicap matches their Correct Index. They turn up, some know their index, others don't. Some can use a Phone App, others can't. Once they finally get their Index, they need to use the chart to get their course handicap. I've seen several read from the wrong tees, or read the wrong row and therefore come up with the wrong course handicap. Many have got in a complete muddle then about working out Playing handicap, with some simply using course handicap and others calculating it wrong. It may have no impact on their score for handicapping, but that does not pacify them when they get confused why their published result is different to what they thought they had.

Their may be argument that WHS is fairer, but it is many more times confusing when using it in practice.

 

[rosecott]

[QUOTE="rosecott, post: 2295937, member: 10467"
If your current system doesn't involve the submission of a photograph of the scorecard, you are not going to be able to change anything in the result if you normally publish it fairly quickly. The problem then is "do you change the results if you subsequently find that a player has entered a lower handicap figure which would have affected his position in the prizes if it had been used?". How would you handle that?

We do not use photos. Cards are returned and checked by the appropriate person.

We do reopen competitions to correct errors.

eg the last person who did the cards had incorrectly DQd someone (not a DQ reason). When it was corrected he went from DQ to first place.[/QUOTE]

We, also, do not have submission of photographed scorecards. Following the original guidance, scorecards are posted in a clearly labelled locked box. These are removed after a minimum of 48 hours in the box. Up to the date of our last competition, there has been no need to change the competition result and, I hope that will continue.

 

[Old Skier]

For those on V1 and haven’t logged on for a while, new updated release notes available from 25 Jan.

 

[fenwayrich]

For those on V1 and haven’t logged on for a while, new updated release notes available from 25 Jan.

Thanks for the information. I had a quick look today to add some narrative for our Opens, and saw that it's now possible to set up competitions based on maximum Handicap Index as well as Playing Handicap. Hopefully by the time we are back on the course, all problems will have been ironed out.

 

[rulefan]

For those on V1 and haven’t logged on for a while, new updated release notes available from 25 Jan.

Have you got a link please?

 

[Old Skier]

Have you got a link please?

It’s a downloadable pdf, pm me your email and I can forward it

 

[IanMcC]

For those on V1 and haven’t logged on for a while, new updated release notes available from 25 Jan.

Cheers. I dont have access to the full narrative of the changes, but one thing they have fixed is the 2 tee stableford playing handicap calculations. If we ever start playing golf in Wales again, at least I can now run the comps through ClubV1.

 

[IanMcC]

The policy over at Club Systems must be changing somewhat. At 1130 yesterday morning (Sunday) I wrote to them requesting a 9 hole mixed comp template. By tea time they had replied, stating that the template is now added. Great stuff.