WHS working well for me

[Orikoru]

Do your comps not have a draw, so that you know the time you are teeing off before you turn up?

They've scrapped the online booking and replaced it with a three-tee start, so you have to arrive at the crack of dawn and nobody is allowed to tee off later than 9:30, unless you play after 12:30 - so I take the latter. Honestly not sure how that works with comps, I'm just annoyed by it generally.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

I've not entered many comps lately because they've got rid of the booking system

I agree with much of your post, especially about casual rounds being just that.

However this..are your club mental? Why would you get rid of the booking system? Until Covid we were a turn up and go club, Covid obviously necessitated having to track people so bookings were introduced. Now they are here to stay, almost unanimous acceptance even for bounce games, we will never go back. Would love to know the logic?

 

[Orikoru]

I agree with much of your post, especially about casual rounds being just that.

However this..are your club mental? Why would you get rid of the booking system? Until Covid we were a turn up and go club, Covid obviously necessitated having to track people so bookings were introduced. Now they are here to stay, almost unanimous acceptance even for bounce games, we will never go back. Would love to know the logic?

Like all stupid golf decisions I imagine it's because of 'tradition'. My friends and I only joined last Christmas and it was suggested the online booking had been brought in for long-term, not just Covid. But, once the restrictions were lifted they went back to 'how it's always been' which was a three-tee start, meaning everyone turns up first thing in the morning and is put into groups. Not allowed to tee off between 9:30 and 12:30 - never mind that we used to play at 10:30 to 11 ish every Saturday. I believe if you pay a 7-day membership you should be allowed to tee off whenever suits, but if nothing changes I guess I'll be moving on next year.

 

[Swango1980]

Like all stupid golf decisions I imagine it's because of 'tradition'. My friends and I only joined last Christmas and it was suggested the online booking had been brought in for long-term, not just Covid. But, once the restrictions were lifted they went back to 'how it's always been' which was a three-tee start, meaning everyone turns up first thing in the morning and is put into groups. Not allowed to tee off between 9:30 and 12:30 - never mind that we used to play at 10:30 to 11 ish every Saturday. I believe if you pay a 7-day membership you should be allowed to tee off whenever suits, but if nothing changes I guess I'll be moving on next year.

That sounds bizarre. The booking system at my last club was rubbish. You had to sort out playing partners, then phone club to see what was available (and often owner fitted you in between official 8 minute slots if no space). It completely killed the social side at the club (its biggest strength) as we could no longer have roll ups. As such, the Mens Section of the club has fallen apart, Committee collapsed and there is barely anyone left. Since August competitions have been cancelled as not enough players to play (most have left the club), and those that have gone ahead have had less than 10 entrants. The club championship was ridiculous, as the winning score was so high, at best it would only have got within 10 shots of the worst winning score since 2012 (since records began). And the weather was nice this year for both rounds.

However, at new club, they use Club V1 members hub, and I love it. You can see what is available and book immediately. You can see who is playing also, so if you've no one to play with you may recognise someone and join them. I guess many clubs use this. There is a group that have gone out for years any weekend day there is no competition, meet up for a drink, organise groups and then go out. The club have accommodated them by giving them 8 consecutive slots from around 10am on non-competition days. So, all in all, it seems like the club have done well to accommodate the needs of all types of players.

 

[jim8flog]

You are a real outlier though with 20 in 3 months. Most even quite active golfers will not reach 20 cards in a year. I think a dozen singles a year is about average (they will be playing plenty more competitions though - interclub, teams, matchplays, fourballs, etc). 20 cards in 3 years is a significant portion of the active handicap golfing population I would say. So are you really saying the system doesnt work ?

Having a discussion across the table with guys I play with on a fairly regular basis all of them including me have twenty scores in since May. Several of the swindles I play now encourage all participants to put in a card every time they play in it.

I will say that the vast majority of guys I play with regularly play several times a week. The joys of being retired or self employed.

I would agree 20 cards in three years is significant for those that that only put in cards when they play in a comp however even if you are only playing once a week, allowing for course conditions etc that is around 40 opportunities to put in a card.

 

[jim8flog]

100% this, nearly every golfer 4 and under in the old system was cut over the winter, we'd one +2 went to +4 without a ball being struck.

I am surprised by that. I assume it was from the annual review. As you are no doubt aware, any change the old Cat 1 golfers had to be ratified by County. In all my years on a handicap committee we only put in 2 requests to county to change a such a player.

 

[Orikoru]

That sounds bizarre. The booking system at my last club was rubbish. You had to sort out playing partners, then phone club to see what was available (and often owner fitted you in between official 8 minute slots if no space). It completely killed the social side at the club (its biggest strength) as we could no longer have roll ups. As such, the Mens Section of the club has fallen apart, Committee collapsed and there is barely anyone left. Since August competitions have been cancelled as not enough players to play (most have left the club), and those that have gone ahead have had less than 10 entrants. The club championship was ridiculous, as the winning score was so high, at best it would only have got within 10 shots of the worst winning score since 2012 (since records began). And the weather was nice this year for both rounds.

However, at new club, they use Club V1 members hub, and I love it. You can see what is available and book immediately. You can see who is playing also, so if you've no one to play with you may recognise someone and join them. I guess many clubs use this. There is a group that have gone out for years any weekend day there is no competition, meet up for a drink, organise groups and then go out. The club have accommodated them by giving them 8 consecutive slots from around 10am on non-competition days. So, all in all, it seems like the club have done well to accommodate the needs of all types of players.

That's how it was when we joined until about a month ago. We have the IG Member app and you could just go on there and book yourself into a timeslot, easy as pie. You could join another member's group if you wish. They just scrapped it all for the weekends. You can still use it on weekdays though. Great.

 

[Deleted member 3432]

I am surprised by that. I assume it was from the annual review. As you are no doubt aware, any change the old Cat 1 golfers had to be ratified by County. In all my years on a handicap committee we only put in 2 requests to county to change a such a player.

I think he means the handicaps went from +2 to +4 on introduction of WHS

 

[nickjdavis]

All this talk about folks gaming the system to get higher handicaps has intrigued me for a while now. To my mind you have to either be submitting a raft of high scores in very short timeframe in order to manipulate your handicap upwards and it should be reasonably easy to spot....lots of rounds submitted, large movement in index, probably a load of folks hitting the soft cap/hard cap limits. Otherwise the only way is to pre-register for a round and then not enter your score if it is a good one by deleting your scoring intent.

So....I extracted a report of the general play rounds submitted between June 1st and August 15th figuring that anyone trying to manipulate their handicap would be looking to replace their entire record (20 rounds) and that 10 weeks playing twice a week was not unreasonable.

Of 450 male members, just 12 golfers had submitted 20 or more GP cards in the time frame considered. The 12 golfers had played 20,21,21,21,22,22,24,26,27,27,29 and 31 rounds each. Their total playing history amounted to between 26 rounds and 117 rounds. Most golfers recent GP rounds represented 60-75% of their total rounds. The average across the group was 58% but this was dragged down by the guy who had 117 scores in his record, removing one low and one high outlier and the group average of the remaining 10 golfers was that 68% of their total record was made up of scores from the last 10 weeks.

So then, which of these golfers have been swinging it to manipulate a higher handicap then? Of the 12 golfers there are two guys who's scores currently have a soft cap having risen 3 and 3.4 strokes above their low index. 7 players have indexes that are within 0.2 of their low index. The remaining three are 0.9, 1.4 and 1.9 higher.

The two guys who are in soft cap....both of them have low indexes that are as a result of a couple of exceptional rounds earlier in their record. They both typically shoot in the mid to low 90's with one player occasionally drifting into 3 figures and on ultra rare occasions shooting in the 80's. The other guy plays maybe two or three shots better. I notice that, since I originally dragged the data off the system that one of them has had a slight cut in index taking him out of the soft cap. If either of these guys are actually trying to manipulate a higher index then they need to make a better effort in my opinion.

What of other golfers in the soft/hard cap category? We currently have a further 9 golfers who are in soft cap territory and 2 golfers who have a hard cap applied. We will get rid of the two guys with a hard cap first...neither have played since 2019. The remainder are all regular players with generally a good mix of competition and general play and they've all submitted half a dozen scores this summer. 2 players low indexes were achieved at a previous club prior to joining us. 2 players have seen good scores from september/october last year start to drop off their record (as we move into those months then the 365 day time frame for when LI is determined will render these scores irrelevant) and two further players Low Index was skewed downwards by a couple of good rounds they shot early in their record which have rarely been approached. The remaining golfers you can see their scoring records are just slowly but surely declining.

The vast majority of 23 golfers discussed above are seniors.

From looking at what data is available to me I just cannot see any evidence that handicap manipulation, with a view to gaining a competitive advantage, is taking place at our club. Now that's just one club....its not representative I know....but I haven't seen anyone who is talking about handicap manipulation being rife under the new system do any work that is similar to either confirm or deny said suspicions.

 

[Banchory Buddha]

I am surprised by that. I assume it was from the annual review. As you are no doubt aware, any change the old Cat 1 golfers had to be ratified by County. In all my years on a handicap committee we only put in 2 requests to county to change a such a player.

No it was from the direct conversion to WHS, his home course is not ours, but I know he wasn't reviewed. Also our lowest "home" player went from 2.1 (if I recall) to 0.9, there were no reviews conducted, everything was a direct conversion.

 

[Swango1980]

All this talk about folks gaming the system to get higher handicaps has intrigued me for a while now. To my mind you have to either be submitting a raft of high scores in very short timeframe in order to manipulate your handicap upwards and it should be reasonably easy to spot....lots of rounds submitted, large movement in index, probably a load of folks hitting the soft cap/hard cap limits. Otherwise the only way is to pre-register for a round and then not enter your score if it is a good one by deleting your scoring intent.

So....I extracted a report of the general play rounds submitted between June 1st and August 15th figuring that anyone trying to manipulate their handicap would be looking to replace their entire record (20 rounds) and that 10 weeks playing twice a week was not unreasonable.

Of 450 male members, just 12 golfers had submitted 20 or more GP cards in the time frame considered. The 12 golfers had played 20,21,21,21,22,22,24,26,27,27,29 and 31 rounds each. Their total playing history amounted to between 26 rounds and 117 rounds. Most golfers recent GP rounds represented 60-75% of their total rounds. The average across the group was 58% but this was dragged down by the guy who had 117 scores in his record, removing one low and one high outlier and the group average of the remaining 10 golfers was that 68% of their total record was made up of scores from the last 10 weeks.

So then, which of these golfers have been swinging it to manipulate a higher handicap then? Of the 12 golfers there are two guys who's scores currently have a soft cap having risen 3 and 3.4 strokes above their low index. 7 players have indexes that are within 0.2 of their low index. The remaining three are 0.9, 1.4 and 1.9 higher.

The two guys who are in soft cap....both of them have low indexes that are as a result of a couple of exceptional rounds earlier in their record. They both typically shoot in the mid to low 90's with one player occasionally drifting into 3 figures and on ultra rare occasions shooting in the 80's. The other guy plays maybe two or three shots better. I notice that, since I originally dragged the data off the system that one of them has had a slight cut in index taking him out of the soft cap. If either of these guys are actually trying to manipulate a higher index then they need to make a better effort in my opinion.

What of other golfers in the soft/hard cap category? We currently have a further 9 golfers who are in soft cap territory and 2 golfers who have a hard cap applied. We will get rid of the two guys with a hard cap first...neither have played since 2019. The remainder are all regular players with generally a good mix of competition and general play and they've all submitted half a dozen scores this summer. 2 players low indexes were achieved at a previous club prior to joining us. 2 players have seen good scores from september/october last year start to drop off their record (as we move into those months then the 365 day time frame for when LI is determined will render these scores irrelevant) and two further players Low Index was skewed downwards by a couple of good rounds they shot early in their record which have rarely been approached. The remaining golfers you can see their scoring records are just slowly but surely declining.

The vast majority of 23 golfers discussed above are seniors.

From looking at what data is available to me I just cannot see any evidence that handicap manipulation, with a view to gaining a competitive advantage, is taking place at our club. Now that's just one club....its not representative I know....but I haven't seen anyone who is talking about handicap manipulation being rife under the new system do any work that is similar to either confirm or deny said suspicions.

Pre WHS last year, when when golfers were advised to start handing in supplementary scores, I started piling them in from social golf. When I get of to a horrid start, especially in a social round, I don't really bother about score and start experimenting. It often leads to high scores by the end of the round. Based on my thoughts on handicap manipulation, I tried to experiment to see if it would be possible to get a nice handicap increase in short period of time. Thankfully, WHS has made this east to analyse, as they have all these scores on record and show what index was for each round.

On 3/7/21 my Index would have been 6.4 (Course handicap = 7). By 8/8/21 (just over a month later) my Index was 9.7 (Course handicap = 11). To be fair, I played 17 rounds in that time. However, not all rounds were bad either, with 4 rounds in the 70's (Score diffs of 8.9, 8.0, 8.9 and 8.0). However, it showed I could easily increase my handicap, without playing terribly every single round. I easily got into my soft cap, and wouldn't have been hard to get to my hard cap if I wished. So, my course handicap went up 4 shots in that time. Under CONGU it would have gone up 1.5. I suppose the other thing to bear in mind, if a golfer permanently had this attitude, their low index would be higher than it could be anyway, so their hard cap +5 index would actually be more than their potential ability anyway.

Thankfully I've got my Index back down to 7.0 now

 

[nickjdavis]

Pre WHS last year, when when golfers were advised to start handing in supplementary scores, I started piling them in from social golf. When I get of to a horrid start, especially in a social round, I don't really bother about score and start experimenting. It often leads to high scores by the end of the round. Based on my thoughts on handicap manipulation, I tried to experiment to see if it would be possible to get a nice handicap increase in short period of time. Thankfully, WHS has made this east to analyse, as they have all these scores on record and show what index was for each round.

On 3/7/21 my Index would have been 6.4 (Course handicap = 7). By 8/8/21 (just over a month later) my Index was 9.7 (Course handicap = 11). To be fair, I played 17 rounds in that time. However, not all rounds were bad either, with 4 rounds in the 70's (Score diffs of 8.9, 8.0, 8.9 and 8.0). However, it showed I could easily increase my handicap, without playing terribly every single round. I easily got into my soft cap, and wouldn't have been hard to get to my hard cap if I wished. So, my course handicap went up 4 shots in that time. Under CONGU it would have gone up 1.5. I suppose the other thing to bear in mind, if a golfer permanently had this attitude, their low index would be higher than it could be anyway, so their hard cap +5 index would actually be more than their potential ability anyway.

Thankfully I've got my Index back down to 7.0 now

But that's quite extreme by most standards and, given the reports that are available, pretty easily identifiable....17 rounds in five weeks and a jump in index into soft cap territory should trigger a Spanish Inquisition into your golfing practices, complete with comfy chair and soft cushions.

I'm happy to agree that a golfer can easily wipe out his recent playing record in a month if he is so determined and, within the constraints of the capping system, get himself a higher index....but I reckon said golfer would stand out like a sore thumb pretty quickly when a couple of the reports are analysed.

 

[Swango1980]

But that's quite extreme by most standards and, given the reports that are available, pretty easily identifiable....17 rounds in five weeks and a jump in index into soft cap territory should trigger a Spanish Inquisition into your golfing practices, complete with comfy chair and soft cushions.

I'm happy to agree that a golfer can easily wipe out his recent playing record in a month if he is so determined and, within the constraints of the capping system, get himself a higher index....but I reckon said golfer would stand out like a sore thumb pretty quickly when a couple of the reports are analysed.

But therin lies the problem. How many clubs have Committees keeping on top of all these reports? When I was in the role, I spent a lot of time using the unsatisfied score intents report, and Club V1 reporting, to find out who was not returning scores from general play. That caused enough grief and effort tracking these and chasing players.

Now looking at the handicap change report (i think this is the one you'd use?), I'm unsure how useful this is. A lot of the big changes in handicap will likely be due to the player simply starting with very few scores on their record, and the handicap is initially very volatile. I also think you've got to select the start and end dates for the search, so depending on when your start date is could make a huge difference to the handicap change reported. Too short a period, you don't catch a drop that started before the start date. Too long a period, you do not catch a large drop in the latest scores.

To be fair, I'm no longer responsible for reviewing handicaps, so unlikely to get to use the tools available, and no doubt they'll be improved. However, even if a players Index went from 6.4 to 9.7, the player can easily defend this by saying they are playing poorly, and WHS is doing exactly what it should do, representing latest form. They could use this argument, even if they are actually playing the system, and the handicap sec cannot really know either way

 

[jim8flog]

No it was from the direct conversion to WHS, his home course is not ours, but I know he wasn't reviewed. Also our lowest "home" player went from 2.1 (if I recall) to 0.9, there were no reviews conducted, everything was a direct conversion.

I understand you now.

Before it came in the general view was that low handicappers would go lower, high handicappers higher and mid handicaps roughly the same. Which is pretty much what happened with most of the guys I know and from a quick perusal through the handicap list.

 

[nickjdavis]

But therin lies the problem. How many clubs have Committees keeping on top of all these reports? When I was in the role, I spent a lot of time using the unsatisfied score intents report, and Club V1 reporting, to find out who was not returning scores from general play. That caused enough grief and effort tracking these and chasing players.

Now looking at the handicap change report (i think this is the one you'd use?), I'm unsure how useful this is. A lot of the big changes in handicap will likely be due to the player simply starting with very few scores on their record, and the handicap is initially very volatile. I also think you've got to select the start and end dates for the search, so depending on when your start date is could make a huge difference to the handicap change reported. Too short a period, you don't catch a drop that started before the start date. Too long a period, you do not catch a large drop in the latest scores.

To be fair, I'm no longer responsible for reviewing handicaps, so unlikely to get to use the tools available, and no doubt they'll be improved. However, even if a players Index went from 6.4 to 9.7, the player can easily defend this by saying they are playing poorly, and WHS is doing exactly what it should do, representing latest form. They could use this argument, even if they are actually playing the system, and the handicap sec cannot really know either way

I started by looking at the General Play report.....just looking at folks who were submitting lots of rounds in a short period of time....this was my base assumption that anyone wanting to manipulate their handicap would be looking to throw a lot of scores into the system in a short space of time. My 2ndary assumption was that one or 2 shot increases wouldn't materially affect players chances of winning...you need to be up to 3 or 4 stroke increases....which puts you in the soft cap territory....which is why I then looked at the soft cap report.

As you say, the handicap change report is of limited use in itself as you need to weedle out all those with undeveloped score records.

I actually think that some degree of statistical analysis and trend analysis skill may be a benefit to handicap secretaries in order to be able to understand what is normal or abnormal in a scoring record.

I think the WHS has created some opportunity for manipulation dont get me wrong, but there are now tools available to extract data that will help handicap secs in their fight....some of the tools might be a bit blunt at this relatively early juncture but they should improve....hopefully!!

 

[azazel]

In my experience, the WHS has been completely fair on my own golf. My old handicap was 5.1 and when WHS came in my index was 3.8, which gave me a playing handicap of 4 round my home course. I've had a poor season so far - albeit with my best ever medal round thrown in - and so my index is now 5.3 and entirely reflective of how my golf has been this year.

However, the overall impact of WHS on scores at our course has been incredible. Previously, if you were -3 or -4 nett you knew you'd be in the hunt for first and almost guaranteed a prize, with winning scores often being as high as par or -1. This year, less than 40 points isn't getting you a top 5 and often not even a top 10. Nothing else has changed other than the handicap system as the course is, if anything, playing tougher than ever, so it stands to reason that WHS is "responsible".

For my part, I'm now in a no-man's land where my scores aren't going to be good enough to win the overall comp in any given week and the scratch prize isn't happening either, so all that's left is to turn up, enjoy the game and just try and shoot the best gross score I can for my own satisfaction.

 

[Old Skier]

Reading some of these posts we have appeared to go from pre WHS “ HC are all wrong, people are scoring well and not putting cards in to lower their HCs” cheats.

To post WHS “Why are people putting poor scores into the system and getting higher HCs” cheats.

 

[Jamesbrown]

Reading some of these posts we have appeared to go from pre WHS “ HC are all wrong, people are scoring well and not putting cards in to lower their HCs” cheats.

To post WHS “Why are people putting poor scores into the system and getting higher HCs” cheats.

I’ve gone from 10.6 to 9.2 to 12.6 this year! ?

That’s every round in bar a few were I know I’m not striking it well.

 

[sweaty sock]

Have to say, I agree with @nickjdavis 's assessment, I dont think deliberate manipulation is happening any more than previously.

But do think that the effect on comps is pretty clear. As @Kaz and @azazel pointed out, the widening gap in handicaps and increased winning scores, not makes it harder for the good improving golfer to win anything. I've noticed the difference in the order of merit at our club. It used to be lead every year by, regular practicing, try hard, consistent golfers. This year its a random cross section of the club with none of the usual suspects. Its regularly golfers coming off a bad spell whos handicap has jumped up. Even scratch golfers who are now off 3 - 3 shots is the difference between a 39 and a 42, it makes a big difference!

Its probably the likely outcome, we didnt need a whs, nobody I know has played competitive handicap golf across the world.

Even if they did, it's still not even the same system in the home nations, never mind the world over.

And the chosen system, the us version, is the handicap system which had the least exposure to competitive play. Most americans play zero competitive rounds - why - all the comps are won by sandbagging cheats.

I cant help but think we're on the path to join them. If my club would let me play off the back tees in regular play, there's no way I'd pay an entry fee...

 

[Old Skier]

Have to say, I agree with @nickjdavis 's assessment, I dont think deliberate manipulation is happening any more than previously.

But do think that the effect on comps is pretty clear. As @Kaz and @azazel pointed out, the widening gap in handicaps and increased winning scores, not makes it harder for the good improving golfer to win anything. I've noticed the difference in the order of merit at our club. It used to be lead every year by, regular practicing, try hard, consistent golfers. This year its a random cross section of the club with none of the usual suspects. Its regularly golfers coming off a bad spell whos handicap has jumped up. Even scratch golfers who are now off 3 - 3 shots is the difference between a 39 and a 42, it makes a big difference!

Its probably the likely outcome, we didnt need a whs, nobody I know has played competitive handicap golf across the world.

Even if they did, it's still not even the same system in the home nations, never mind the world over.

And the chosen system, the us version, is the handicap system which had the least exposure to competitive play. Most americans play zero competitive rounds - why - all the comps are won by sandbagging cheats.

I cant help but think we're on the path to join them. If my club would let me play off the back tees in regular play, there's no way I'd pay an entry fee...

I can't understand why clubs and there committees havnt done anything about sorting there comps out. The software used today allows for any amount of Divs and formats yet we continue to here that a single HIs is being used.

Showes lack of amity and understanding from committees and members.