World Handicap System (WHS)

[sunshine]

I know many people who stop caring about their score when they know they aren't going to make buffer. People who carry on playing but effectively NR at the point they know the round is gone and don't keep track of their score after that point.

Under the CONGU system, if you're a 5 handicapper it doesn't matter if you shoot +7 or +27, the 0.1 increase is the same. The new system looks like it will change that as +27 will affect the average a lot more than +7! Are there any measures to normalise rogue scores (other than best 8 in 20 principle)?

I know many people who play most of their golf without a card in their hand, so will have a lot less than 20 "official" scores in the last two years.

 

[USER1999]

I know many people who stop caring about their score when they know they aren't going to make buffer. People who carry on playing but effectively NR at the point they know the round is gone and don't keep track of their score after that point.

Under the CONGU system, if you're a 5 handicapper it doesn't matter if you shoot +7 or +27, the 0.1 increase is the same. The new system looks like it will change that as +27 will affect the average a lot more than +7! Are there any measures to normalise rogue scores (other than best 8 in 20 principle)?

I know many people who play most of their golf without a card in their hand, so will have a lot less than 20 "official" scores in the last two years.

The net double rule will still apply, so a 0 will be a net double for h/cap purposes.

 

[woofers]

I know many people who stop caring about their score when they know they aren't going to make buffer. People who carry on playing but effectively NR at the point they know the round is gone and don't keep track of their score after that point.

Under the CONGU system, if you're a 5 handicapper it doesn't matter if you shoot +7 or +27, the 0.1 increase is the same. The new system looks like it will change that as +27 will affect the average a lot more than +7! Are there any measures to normalise rogue scores (other than best 8 in 20 principle)?

I know many people who play most of their golf without a card in their hand, so will have a lot less than 20 "official" scores in the last two years.

I believe there are (will be) "soft caps" and "hard caps" to prevent undue fluctuations in handicaps.

 

[rulefan]

Using the above process with a starting point of 2018, say, and basing it on a total of 6 scores will produce a very different result from that produced from a full 20 (that may go back 6 or more years).

I think that scores from 6 year ago would have little relevance today. It has been suggested to me that they may go back further. But if you think of the Annual Review, even with half a dozen cards this year, I suspect most handicap committees will not go looking backwards for scores.
The transition file will be accessible to handicap committees to make adjustments if they feel it necessary.
But remember, the transition process is designed to produce WHS relevant handicaps not CONGU copies. Particularly to adjust for slope.

 

[rulefan]

The new system looks like it will change that as +27 will affect the average a lot more than +7! Are there any measures to normalise rogue scores (other than best 8 in 20 principle)?

A +27 score is very unlikely to appear in the average of the best 8
There will be a Cap process which will protect against sudden increase.

I know many people who play most of their golf without a card in their hand, so will have a lot less than 20 "official" scores in the last two years.

So their handicap (however calculated) will be pretty meaningless anyway

 

[rulefan]

Another issue that we will certainly face is that we do not have slope ratings for all ofnthe tees upon which historic scores are based - I cannot believe that we are alone in this!

My understanding is that the results of the recent rating excercise, CR (actually CSS is used) and Slope values will be used. However the SSS is in the stored record so if it changes it will know the course has been rerated but the slope won't be known. I guess they would use the 125 for courses not yet rated. If it is thought to be worth dealing with, I'm sure they will have invented a 'close enough' algorithm. IMO any fudge will not materially affect the results. The most significant part of the transition calculation, particularly for the mid to high handicapper, is the introduction of slope.

 

[Swango1980]

You won't in fact keep it as it goes completely in November

With removing the "c" from a handicap under WHS, will a player be required to submit a minimum number of cards to allow them to use their handicap in competitions? Or, could they get a handicap, and then never submit a qualifying score again, but simply go around and play in Open competitions? If the conditions of individual competitions are that, a player must have submitted a certain number of cards over a year, how would they know what a player has done or not done over the last year? Obviously, at the moment, organisers of competitions can simply prohibit players from playing, or at least winning prizes, if they do not have "c" with their handicap.

 

[rulefan]

With removing the "c" from a handicap under WHS, will a player be required to submit a minimum number of cards to allow them to use their handicap in competitions? Or, could they get a handicap, and then never submit a qualifying score again, but simply go around and play in Open competitions? If the conditions of individual competitions are that, a player must have submitted a certain number of cards over a year, how would they know what a player has done or not done over the last year? Obviously, at the moment, organisers of competitions can simply prohibit players from playing, or at least winning prizes, if they do not have "c" with their handicap.

There won't be a restriction built in to the WHS. However, competition administrators will be able to check players' records via the equivalent of the CDH (much as they can now).
The Rules of Golf provide for the Terms of Competition to specify restrictions and/or limits on the handicaps eligible for entry or use in a competition.

 

[Swango1980]

There won't be a restriction built in to the WHS. However, competition administrators will be able to check players' records via the equivalent of the CDH (much as they can now).
The Rules of Golf provide for the Terms of Competition to specify restrictions and/or limits on the handicaps eligible for entry or use in a competition.

I guess that would technically require the competition organiser to go through the records of every single competitor to ensure they meet the terms of competition? Whereas now you'd simply scan everyone's handicap to see if anyone was missing the "c"

 

[rulefan]

I guess that would technically require the competition organiser to go through the records of every single competitor to ensure they meet the terms of competition? Whereas now you'd simply scan everyone's handicap to see if anyone was missing the "c"

What do you do now? How do you currently 'scan' all the players handicaps?
I don't know what the mechanism will be but currently you have to find the individual in the CDH using his ID. This not only shows his 'c' or ' ' status but allows you to see his playing record. I don't see the facility being any different, except there won't be a 'c' to see.

 

[Swango1980]

What do you do now? How do you currently 'scan' all the players handicaps?
I don't know what the mechanism will be but currently you have to find the individual in the CDH using his ID. This not only shows his 'c' or ' ' status but allows you to see his playing record. I don't see the facility being any different, except there won't be a 'c' to see.

If it is a club competition, the competition secretary can automatically see if anyone has submitted the required 3 cards or not, simply by seeing if there is a "c" next to their handicap. However, he doesnt need to even do anything, as the comp is set up to automatically put non "c" players to bottom of leaderboard, regardless of score. He certainly never needs to view everybody's handicap record.

For open competitions, not sure. But, if "c" status is required, I'm sure it's fairly straightforward to simply look out for the "c" rather than looking at their entire record for last year.

Under WHS, if it is a necessity to go through the full playing record, I'd imagine that would be quite annoying. Unless there was a mechanism to state what playing record was required, such as 3 comps in last year, and then the system will just highlight anyone that doesnt meet the criteria

 

[rulefan]

Re a Club comp. Clubs will still be using the same front end ISV (ClubV1, IG, HM etc) to run competitions so there will be no difference in future. Remember CONGU is not concerned with the internal requirement of clubs. Hopefully, your ISV will provide some selectable filter based on no of scores or handicap limit etc.
WHS is not used for running competitions and does not recognise the concept of status (nor will CONGU).

Re Opens. The same as above for competition management but the comp secretary will normally check the status of a player when they send an entry application in. They will presumably look up an external system (CDH currently, WHS in future) and either accept or reject their entry. The entry form will of course contain the entry qualification requirements.

Having done the job for many years I don't see an issue.

 

[Swango1980]

I'm dubious to be honest. In the current system, why is there a need for a "c" status on a handicap? I presumed it was to ensure players entered the minimum number of qualifiers, thus keeping their handicap up to date. If not, they lose that "c" status, which effectively would flag this to competition organisers.

So, under WHS, this is no longer required. Why, if it has been before? Does this mean I could get a WHS handicap of, say 25, and then never submit a card ever again, but theoretically enter non qualifying opens? Yes, the organisers could put some limit on to how many comps a player has played in last year, but it would seem to be a bit of an arbitrary decision to make. Do they choose 3? Perhaps 5, 6, 7 or whatever they fancy. But, they'll still have to trawl through every entry and view their score entries, unless like you say, a filter is added to the software that they can customise for their competition.

Note: I didn't realise I could currently view players score records from other clubs using CDH on Club V1, except I can get their CDH number on CDH lookup if adding them as new member. I've had to sometimes contact England Golf to get a players details if they don't pop up at all. It would be nice if I could get a full record of any player from any club when WHS is in play.

 

[rulefan]

ClubV1 is not 'attached' to the CDH other than to transmit scores to to it. It only holds records for those players on your system. ClubV1 is only one of a number of ISVs (Independent Software Providers) which provide competition management systems to clubs. It does not hold the national database. If a player is not on your club system you cannot see any of his data unless you have access to the CDH. To see a player's scoring record you have to be an authorised official of your club and have permission from England Golf.
Incidentally, 'c' status is only a CONGU feature. It is/was not a feature elsewhere.

 

[Swango1980]

ClubV1 is not 'attached' to the CDH other than to transmit scores to to it. It only holds records for those players on your system. ClubV1 is only one of a number of ISVs (Independent Software Providers) which provide competition management systems to clubs. It does not hold the national database. If a player is not on your club system you cannot see any of his data unless you have access to the CDH. To see a player's scoring record you have to be an authorised official of your club and have permission from England Golf.
Incidentally, 'c' status is only a CONGU feature. It is/was not a feature elsewhere.

Cheers

Interesting about CDH database. When new members have joined, occasionally I've not been able to get their CDH from them or their last club or the CDH lookup on Club V1. So, as I said, I needed to e-mail England Golf who did it for me. They were helpful, and asked if I needed help getting any other CDH numbers.

However, from what you say, should someone at our club be able to have direct access to the database, rather than having to go to England Golf? I know we don't, as I'm handicap sec and the only other in charge of admin is the comp sec who doesnt have access.

The "c" status issue is not something I've ever really thought about in terms of WHS, and as I don't run comps not a concern for me directly. It just interests me as to whether applying various entry conditions will be as straightforward, or will the fact the player is no longer responsible to submit a minimum number or rounds annually simply result in most comps allowing anyone to enter so long as they've had a handicap some point in their life.

If a player has a handicap, quits for a year, or 5 years, then returns, what will happen with their handicap? as it was or recalculated?

 

[rulefan]

Someone at your club should have access to the CDH. Apart from anything else, how do you check the handicaps of open competition entrants? Further, clubs have been asked to 'cleanse' their player records and match them with the CDH in anticipation of WHS (details on the EG website).

If a player is no longer a member of an affiliated club his handicap lapses automatically. However, WHS has said that scoring records should be retained to assist with allocating a handicap should the player return or join another club. It doesn't specify if the record should be held by the club or the WHS cloud. The handicap given to a returning player will depend on the circumstances (eg how long he has been out of the game) as now. His ID will remain with him forever.

 

[duncan mackie]

I'm dubious to be honest. In the current system, why is there a need for a "c" status on a handicap? I presumed it was to ensure players entered the minimum number of qualifiers, thus keeping their handicap up to date. If not, they lose that "c" status, which effectively would flag this to competition organisers.

So, under WHS, this is no longer required. Why, if it has been before?

I think a little history might help you.

Under the WHS implementation just about everywhere else the open scores you reference will form part of the players handicap record; instant non issue.

Our (c) came about through the perceived political incorrectness of the previous (i) designation; which was fundamentally more accurate in what it represented! How clubs chose to implement their competition policy had more to do with their perceptions than any meaningful attributes the designation had. We don't require members to have it for most strokeplay competitions as an example - we have other requirements for some as well.

I agree with your principle that it was a simple test to apply for entry; easy to explain, understand and check. It was fundamentally meaningless though, it's going and, at some point, scores from all competitions will find their way onto a players record - has to happen here as well for their to be any integrity in the system.

The alternative is that if you wish to consider NQ open comps as merely a bit of fun you remove the prize tables that attract those golfers (sic) for whom the primary purpose is to win! Sorry for repeating that point.

 

[Swango1980]

Someone at your club should have access to the CDH. Apart from anything else, how do you check the handicaps of open competition entrants? Further, clubs have been asked to 'cleanse' their player records and match them with the CDH in anticipation of WHS (details on the EG website).

If a player is no longer a member of an affiliated club his handicap lapses automatically. However, WHS has said that scoring records should be retained to assist with allocating a handicap should the player return or join another club. It doesn't specify if the record should be held by the club or the WHS cloud. The handicap given to a returning player will depend on the circumstances (eg how long he has been out of the game) as now. His ID will remain with him forever.

Thanks

Our club doesn't run Open competitions, so it is not something we've had to routinely check. The only time I need to find a CDH is when a new member joins and has been a member of another club. Frustratingly, I rely on them to let me know they've been a member somewhere else, otherwise I can only assume they are brand new to the system. I've no doubt that this has resulted in multiple CDH's for one player over the years (even before I became handicap sec last year). We are a relatively small club compared to many others. We have an owner (a non-golfer), and then the Committee just tries to run things for members as best we can. But we are not a members club, so how the course or business is run overall has nothing to do with us. Unfortunately, I've never been made aware that at least one of us needs to have access to the CDH database, we just sort of start where the last guy finished off. So, should I just contact England Golf to see how we can get access?

 

[Swango1980]

I think a little history might help you.

Under the WHS implementation just about everywhere else the open scores you reference will form part of the players handicap record; instant non issue.

Our (c) came about through the perceived political incorrectness of the previous (i) designation; which was fundamentally more accurate in what it represented! How clubs chose to implement their competition policy had more to do with their perceptions than any meaningful attributes the designation had. We don't require members to have it for most strokeplay competitions as an example - we have other requirements for some as well.

I agree with your principle that it was a simple test to apply for entry; easy to explain, understand and check. It was fundamentally meaningless though, it's going and, at some point, scores from all competitions will find their way onto a players record - has to happen here as well for their to be any integrity in the system.

The alternative is that if you wish to consider NQ open comps as merely a bit of fun you remove the prize tables that attract those golfers (sic) for whom the primary purpose is to win! Sorry for repeating that point.

Thanks

So, in a nutshell, the player will have no responsibility to post scores once they have a handicap, if they choose not to. But will still have a valid handicap to compete in the same way a golfer who submits many cards (assuming that an arbitrary condition of competition hasn't been set in which a certain number of scores need to have been posted) ? I guess the Opens I am talking about, are the ones in which they are Four Ball type comps, where the best 2 scores count or Scramble type format. These won't be able to be used for handicap purposes, and I know that there are always complaints when it is discovered a few "bandit" types do the circuit with nice juicy handicaps and always seem to be in the prizes (which are often decent to try and get people to enter in the first place). I know that any system can be manipulated by these players, but I guess ensuring they had "c" status art the very least was a simple method of trying to put one hurdle in their way.

In my experience, "relaxed" comps that have not required a "c" status have usually resulted in ridiculous scores by relatively high handicappers. The word in the bar after is that these groups are known and always do well. I simply do not enter them anymore, and don't enter comps that have no such restriction. As I said, I'm not directly involved in running these, so maybe it will ultimately be a non-issue. But, I'd be interested to hear from various people who run these Open type competitions frequently and whether they think there could be any issues with removing "c" status completely.

 

[duncan mackie]

Thanks

So, in a nutshell, the player will have no responsibility to post scores once they have a handicap, if they choose not to. But will still have a valid handicap to compete in the same way a golfer who submits many cards (assuming that an arbitrary condition of competition hasn't been set in which a certain number of scores need to have been posted) ? I guess the Opens I am talking about, are the ones in which they are Four Ball type comps, where the best 2 scores count or Scramble type format. These won't be able to be used for handicap purposes, and I know that there are always complaints when it is discovered a few "bandit" types do the circuit with nice juicy handicaps and always seem to be in the prizes (which are often decent to try and get people to enter in the first place). I know that any system can be manipulated by these players, but I guess ensuring they had "c" status art the very least was a simple method of trying to put one hurdle in their way.

In my experience, "relaxed" comps that have not required a "c" status have usually resulted in ridiculous scores by relatively high handicappers. The word in the bar after is that these groups are known and always do well. I simply do not enter them anymore, and don't enter comps that have no such restriction. As I said, I'm not directly involved in running these, so maybe it will ultimately be a non-issue. But, I'd be interested to hear from various people who run these Open type competitions frequently and whether they think there could be any issues with removing "c" status completely.

1. Under many of the other WHS authorities 4 ball comps, and matchplay rounds, will form part of the handicap record.
2. Our Q stroke play comps are far from relaxed, they are the same as everyone else's monthly medals. We don't require c status to enter because it's meaningless. We do have other meaningful to us eligibility requirements on some competitions. these Will continue.
3. I agree with you that the absence of the current c indicator will be an inconvience to some competition organisers going forwards, but, like the Ireland open circuit, they will find solutions that suit their needs.

I appreciate the emotion of your open entry issue but the reality is that returning 3 supplemental cards played with a mate at some point in a calendar year is fundamentally meaningless in this context.