I thought it was the low HC's who were moaning
Here's one low handicapper who has never moaned about being beat by a high handicapper. Its up to me to play well, and if the other guy plays better, fair play to them. In the majority of games, if the low handicapper is knocking it long down the middle and putting it on the green pretty much every time the high handicapper crumbles under the pressure. They start trying to play like the low handicapper, forcing every shot, instead of playing with their shots.
I can't see giving someone 2 or 3 more shots changing their mind set much.
Fyldewhite
Tour Winner
Firstly, I'm all for the full handicap allowance in singles, the reasoning is pretty sound and overall the lower handicapper is still slight favourite. However, it's well recognised that higher handicappers score more randomly. On a round by round basis in general handicapping theory but also on a hole by hole basis. You see scoring patterns like 4,3,4,7,5,3,4,8,8 etc. But in better ball, the partner is likely to have the same sort of pattern but with the bad holes distributed differently. Compared to the more consistent low handicappers this "Tom and Jerry" effect can make for very good (some would say "silly") scores and I always thought that the 3/4 allowance was to help balance this by giving the higher handicappers fewer shots.
To me this change is exactly the opposite of the singles change a few years ago.......taking a situation where the higher handicappers have an advantage and increasing that advantage. Not that I enter many currently, but yes I'd be less likely to now and see this as a completely unnecessary change.
To me this change is exactly the opposite of the singles change a few years ago.......taking a situation where the higher handicappers have an advantage and increasing that advantage. Not that I enter many currently, but yes I'd be less likely to now and see this as a completely unnecessary change.
Good post, and yes it is unneccessary. It won't stop me playing and it won't make a huge difference IMHO.
Give it 10yrs and it'll be one arm tied behind your back if you're under 10 h'cap, and hopping on one leg if under 5.
Norrin Radd
Tour Winner
Brian the change has been made because the statistics show that the lower h/cap player has had an advantage over the higher h/cap player .[dont ask where the stats are i cant remember but i have no reason to lie]as i have already posted and which it seems everyone has ignored [thats their choice by the way]that to make the game equal in terms of percentage of shots given the percentage should be 105%
you never know someone might just take note ,i doubt it and the low h/cappers will still bleat on about how unfair life is being so good at golf .
just because you are a cat1 or there about it dosent give you a god given rite to beat a higher h/capper.
you never know someone might just take note ,i doubt it and the low h/cappers will still bleat on about how unfair life is being so good at golf .
just because you are a cat1 or there about it dosent give you a god given rite to beat a higher h/capper.
the smiling assassin
Challenge Tour Pro
It's about time CONGU stopped kidding themselves that handicap allowances are the issue and sort out the actual handicap itself. The system works fairly well for assigning a handicap for use in competitive medal play (assuming regular participation), but it's completely inappropriate to use these handicaps for friendly relaxed games, Matchplay, team games because none of these formats figure in the calculation of a golfers handicap. It's simple but for some reason they don't see it 
Doon frae Troon
Ryder Cup Winner
Scrambles and 4BBB are pretty poor forms of golf. IMO.
When I played I avoided them like the plague.
When I played I avoided them like the plague.
Region3
Ryder Cup Winner
I've seen the stats before regarding difference in singles between high hc and low hc, and totally agree with the high hc receiving 100% of the difference.
If anyone knows where the stats are regarding "105% difference in better ball required to level the playing field", I'd love to read it.
It must exist somewhere if so many people are quoting it.
D
Deleted Member 1156
Guest
Why shouldn't the lower handicappers have an advantage? Surely they put more into their game and should be rewarded accordingly?
Region3
Ryder Cup Winner
And regarding the OP's question, it won't affect what I will and won't enter next year.
I'll play in all the club competitions regardless because it's golf.
I'll still play in opens because it's a good way to play other courses.
League to Dubai excepted, I don't enter any national matchplay comps anyway so there'll be no change there.
I'll play in all the club competitions regardless because it's golf.
I'll still play in opens because it's a good way to play other courses.
League to Dubai excepted, I don't enter any national matchplay comps anyway so there'll be no change there.
Region3
Ryder Cup Winner
Because the theory is that handicap golf should be a level playing field, a fair competition between different standards of golfer.
Some people enjoy the journey of trying to get better, and their reward is a lower handicap and more control of their ball. It's supposed to be fun, so if working to improve is fun then all is well and good.
I don't think it's right to deny others a fair crack at the whip if practicing is their idea of hell and get their fun just from being on the course. If they were somehow forced to improve to have a chance of winning anything, they might just not bother or stop entering comps, and that's not good for the game.
Cheifi0
Challenge Tour Pro
Don't see why that should be taken into consideration. It's about making the format as fair as possible and therefore more enjoyable for all. You already have your reward by been able to play better golf.
D
Deleted Member 1156
Guest
Fair comment Gary but I don't agree.
upsidedown
Tour Winner
Wise words from Region 3 there .
As for original question , nope wont put me off one iota
As for original question , nope wont put me off one iota
MendieGK
Tour Winner
I'm with Gordon a little here. Golf is the only sport that seems to 'reward' mediocrity. So yes, I do think there should be some incentive to lower handicappers in these events
I don't enter match plays at our club not because of fear of playing against a higher handicap but due to the absolute ball ache it is arranging matches.
However, our current winter league (best two scores up until Xmas from a max of 12 rounds) is currently being lead with a score of 93pts off 3/4 handicap! That's 21 under par. Yes the course is shorter etc, but that's bloody stupid. I had 8 birdies last weekend on our way to 43pts (my pp off 9 basically walked round) and we were 5shots back of the best score that weekend.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 16999
Guest
Not sure if you're looking for a bite😃
Who says Low Handicappers put more in to their game, going by some forum members, there are mid-high handicappers who put as much as possible into the game and there are cat 1 golfers who just play, never had lessons etc.
What about natural ability? Or people simply reaching their level. If it was simply down to how much you put it, wouldn't everybody be Cat 1?
Nope, won't put me off entering them all 😎
Old Skier
Tour Winner
I've been one of our committee doing handicaps for a number of years, hopefully fairly and consistently. The only (few) low handicappers that have complained about the handicaps of those that beat them are normally low handicappers who are unable to constantly play near to their handicap.
CONGU has been accessing actual scores from qualifiers for a number of years now and supposedly been running various models to see what are the best handicap allocations for the various comps.
Have they got it right - the jury is out at the moment but 3/4 was never the answer. I remember the same winges when it went to full in singles match play yet around here the good low handicappers are still the winners, I suspect apart from the odd upset it will be the same with BB.
The best solution were clubs are worried about this is to run different comps for different handicaps, simple.
CONGU has been accessing actual scores from qualifiers for a number of years now and supposedly been running various models to see what are the best handicap allocations for the various comps.
Have they got it right - the jury is out at the moment but 3/4 was never the answer. I remember the same winges when it went to full in singles match play yet around here the good low handicappers are still the winners, I suspect apart from the odd upset it will be the same with BB.
The best solution were clubs are worried about this is to run different comps for different handicaps, simple.
At the end of the day, I'll play every comp I can. I always hope to do my best and win, although I accept the chances are always slim. I'll play regardless of how the handicaps are worked out. Nothing will change that
the smiling assassin
Challenge Tour Pro
Yes they have. Despite that being an utterly pointless exercise. If they really wanted to arrive at the correct solution, they'd be studying scores from matches, not medals. It's a completely different format, mentality. To try and draw matchplay stats out of medal scores is unbelievably flawed.
Agreed, but if CONGU tried even harder maybe it wouldn't have to be like that!
