WHS working well for me

[wjemather]

My thoughts exactly, I don’t think it’s particularly arduous to subtract 1 from your CH if you are above 11. It’s just part of WHS, I just get on with it.

We also do 90% thing for a friendly 4BBB, maybe my playing group are just odd?

It would be a bit more complex if you were in Scotland, as unrounded CH is used to calculate PH.

 

[Orikoru]

If you're all similar handicaps or your Slope is close to 113 (as it is at Grim's Dyke), it won't make much difference, but is looking at a chart by the first tee/pro shop really that onerous?

Usually well past any such chart before we've even thought about it. It really doesn't matter to us, the three of us have had the same handicaps for ages now pretty much so we just go with what we know.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Even though people are explaining that it is neither lazy nor poor arithmetic because the accuracy of handicaps in the first place is greater than 0.1? It is probably 1 or greater anyway. So concern about 'precision' in one element is misplaced when the error is greater than that. It would be like complaining about road signs not giving precision to feet and inches, so that you know the distance to your destination. Yes, factually it would be more correct and precise. But in practice, useless precision.

I disagree that inaccuracies of a different calculation mean that the poor and lazy calculation of the average of best eight is excusable.
An improvement would be an improvement. Such an improvement would not be pointless or useless.

To quote a figure (Handicap Index) to one decimal place, it should be accurate to one decimal place when it is derived from 8 other figures. That is why differentials of two decimal places are needed for this to be so.

Otherwise, to use your road sign analogy, Handicap Index should be a whole number as it is derived from 8 figures that are accurate to only one decimal place.

 

[wjemather]

I disagree that inaccuracies of a different calculation mean that the poor and lazy calculation of the average of best eight is excusable.
An improvement would be an improvement. Such an improvement would not be pointless or useless.

To quote a figure (Handicap Index) to one decimal place, it should be accurate to one decimal place when it is derived from 8 other figures. That is why differentials of two decimal places are needed for this to be so.

Otherwise, to use your road sign analogy, Handicap Index should be a whole number as it is derived from 8 figures that are accurate to only one decimal place.

The HI is not simply "derived from 8 other figures"; as explained earlier, there are hundreds of values used to produce the Course and Slope ratings, upon which everything else is built - rounding during this process has a far greater effect than rounding of the SDs. Therefore it would seem apparent that SDs are rounded to an appropriate level of arithmetic precision (1dp) given the precision of the rating values used to calculate them. It seems rather illogical to argue for greater precision than can be afforded by the input variables on the basis of a desire for accuracy.

 

[rosecott]

It’s your prerogative, I can’t imagine why anyone would score themselves differently to normal. Our comp requirements are to have entered your CH and PH if you didn’t factor in the 95% for PH it’s a DQ.

You obviously know that DQ is completely wrong in this instance. Why are you and other members not challenging this?

 

[Voyager EMH]

The HI is not simply "derived from 8 other figures"; as explained earlier, there are hundreds of values used to produce the Course and Slope ratings, upon which everything else is built - rounding during this process has a far greater effect than rounding of the SDs. Therefore it would seem apparent that SDs are rounded to an appropriate level of arithmetic precision (1dp) given the precision of the rating values used to calculate them. It seems rather illogical to argue for greater precision than can be afforded by the input variables on the basis of a desire for accuracy.

I make no other assumptions, claims of accuracy etc of the whole system or any other aspect of the system.
I merely state, as a fact, that the average of 8 calculation is lazy and poor arithmetic, as I have clearly illustrated.

 

[Wabinez]

I make no other assumptions, claims of accuracy etc of the whole system or any other aspect of the system.
I merely state, as a fact, that the average of 8 calculation is lazy and poor arithmetic. as I have clearly illustrated.

very true.

the point being that no-one really cares. Play well and ge that cut to 2.8 so you can play off 3 rather than 4.

or move to Scotland so you can have 2 decimal points

 

[Swango1980]

very true.

the point being that no-one really cares. Play well and ge that cut to 2.8 so you can play off 3 rather than 4.

or move to Scotland so you can have 2 decimal points

Here here

 

[wjemather]

I make no other assumptions, claims of accuracy etc of the whole system or any other aspect of the system.
I merely state, as a fact, that the average of 8 calculation is lazy and poor arithmetic. as I have clearly illustrated.

While it is a fact that the SD rounding generates variations in the HI result, your conclusion that it is "lazy and poor arithmetic" (or "wrong" or "inaccurate") is incorrect. As others have said, I think it's time you let it go.

 

[Voyager EMH]

While it is a fact that the rounding generates variations in the result, your conclusion (that it is "lazy and poor arithmetic", or "wrong" or "inaccurate") is incorrect. As others have said, I think it's time you let it go.

I will if you will. The average of 8 calculation does not produce an accurate result to one decimal place sometimes. Is this a true statement? Make no reference to any other calculations.

 

[rulefan]

Full Course Handicap is equitable for fields of fewer than 30 players - only CONGU (that I'm aware of) has decided to apply the allowance to all competitions.

Why on earth would you want to use 95% allowances in rollups?? Absolutely unnecessary. (As you describe) it's just lower handicappers tipping the odds in their favour.

In fact Australia don't have a distinction between CH and PH. They build it in to one figure called the Daily Handicap.
A side effect is that there is a bias towards lower handicappers in matchplay.

 

[Backsticks]

In fact Australia don't have a distinction between CH and PH.

I realise now that I misread the briefings on the rationale for the WHS. The goal was to have a single name, not a single system. Even if that meant more handicap systems used in different countries than ever before.

 

[AussieKB]

In fact Australia don't have a distinction between CH and PH. They build it in to one figure called the Daily Handicap.
A side effect is that there is a bias towards lower handicappers in matchplay.

You got that wrong, in Australia the bias is towards high handicaps as they receive full difference, not 3/4 of difference.

 

[rulefan]

You got that wrong, in Australia the bias is towards high handicaps as they receive full difference, not 3/4 of difference.

I hadn't realised that Australia were still on 75% prior to WHS. I do not see any mention of it in the 2017 manual.
CONGU switched many years ago when studies by the EGU, SGU and USGA determined that 61% of matches were won by the lower capper using 75%. And even on full difference 55% of matches are won by the lower capper.

 

[need_my_wedge]

Not working for my lad up in Scotland. He can't put in general play cards to the IG or EG app, and just been told that the club can't (won't) help him as they have no access to Scottish golf. He's tried registering with the Scottish golf app, but because his home club is in England, he has no ability to put cards in via their app either . So much for global system. Anyone know how he can submit cards without changing golf clubs to a local one in Scotland for the next year?

 

[wjemather]

Not working for my lad up in Scotland. He can't put in general play cards to the IG or EG app, and just been told that the club can't (won't) help him as they have no access to Scottish golf. He's tried registering with the Scottish golf app, but because his home club is in England, he has no ability to put cards in via their app either . So much for global system. Anyone know how he can submit cards without changing golf clubs to a local one in Scotland for the next year?

He simply needs to send his scores from Scotland to the handicap committee at his home club in England, who must then input them directly on the England Golf system (EG have advised clubs of the process). Alternatively, he will need to have a home club in Scotland and provide his handicap record to each club every time he moves between the two, in order for his respective local records can be updated.

There remains a massive misunderstanding of what is meant by world handicap system. It simply means that the underlying mechanisms (i.e. the USGA Course & Slope Rating System, and the various calculations) that are used in producing a Handicap Index are effectively the same throughout the world, which means that handicaps are equivalent and portable.

 

[Swango1980]

Not working for my lad up in Scotland. He can't put in general play cards to the IG or EG app, and just been told that the club can't (won't) help him as they have no access to Scottish golf. He's tried registering with the Scottish golf app, but because his home club is in England, he has no ability to put cards in via their app either . So much for global system. Anyone know how he can submit cards without changing golf clubs to a local one in Scotland for the next year?

Probably join another club with a better handicap Committee, or more helpful handicap Committee? It is a pity that the systems do not talk to each other though, particularly the different UK ones. I guess there are a fair few golfers who travel over the borders a lot to play golf. WHS was very much sold on the fact that is will be a much better system for those playing their golf abroad (which I feel is a very small % of golfers), yet by the sounds of it, it is so far proving worse for those simply wanting to play within different parts of the UK (due to the technology, rather than WHS itself).

 

[wjemather]

You got that wrong, in Australia the bias is towards high handicaps as they receive full difference, not 3/4 of difference.

While the bias has shifted significantly towards the higher handicappers from how it was under the old system, according to the statistical analysis that has been presented by the authorities, low handicappers remain slightly favoured.

 

[Deleted member 3432]

Not working for my lad up in Scotland. He can't put in general play cards to the IG or EG app, and just been told that the club can't (won't) help him as they have no access to Scottish golf. He's tried registering with the Scottish golf app, but because his home club is in England, he has no ability to put cards in via their app either . So much for global system. Anyone know how he can submit cards without changing golf clubs to a local one in Scotland for the next year?

Take a photo of completed scorecard and send to home club who will have to submit the score manually.

We have members who have Scottish clubs as their home club and there is a workaround by having 2 CDH numbers but it is still a faff and the above is the easiest method.

Its like going back in time and having to record away score scores in a book and the handicap secretary updating your handicap at some random time in the future.

 

[need_my_wedge]

He simply needs to send his scores from Scotland to the handicap committee at his home club in England, who must then input them directly on the England Golf system (EG have advised clubs of the process).

This is how I understood it and what I discussed/ suggested with our handicap secretary. He was having none of it, insisting there was nothing he could do for anyone playing at Scottish courses. Doesn't seem much of a way forward unless he joins a club local in Scotland.