World Handicap System (WHS)

[Swango1980]

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.

I agree, three supplementary cards are no indication whatsoever that the golfer played those rounds (or tried to) to the best of their ability, so it can still be manipulated. Although, given that they've had to submit them, I guess it may put them on the handicap secretary's radar at the very least. But yes, it simply looks like the organiser's will need to look for other methods of trying to ensure golfers have a "fair" handicap.

Just in relation to your Point 1 above, although WHS authorities will allow 4 ball and match play comps to be used for handicap, this will not be the case in England? At any rate, this leads me to another pet hate of mine. I don't agree that Match Play or 4-ball scores should be used. Yes, when great scores from these events are achieved, I'd like to find some method of being able to look at handicap. So, I understand this is one way of doing it, I'm just not convinced it is the right way. Problem is, when a player picks up well before holing out, it becomes a bit Mickey Mouse when you simply make up a score for that hole. In those type of events, a player could pick up on many holes. And not just if they play badly. They could play very well, but simply pick up on many holes because their opponent had a disaster, or players in their 4-ball team had already scored the points on that hole so no need to putt out. Seems like it could be easier to manipulate handicap as well. For example, you play a great match, but if you lose one or two holes along the way, just stick down a nett double bogey (even if you would have had par, but your opponent had already sank nett eagle or birdie). So, ultimately you'd have submitted a higher score than you would have done in reality, and from what I've read there is no need for anyone to sign for it to validate it? But, this is a separate issue anyway, and been discussed by many on other threads.

 

[rulefan]

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?

Straight answer - yes.
Re using 'c' as a filter to eliminate bandits. IMO it is almost worth less than useless. Most ' ' status players are naturally going up because of age or time. They are more likely to play over their handicap when they do play.

 

[rulefan]

.

Re Opens
I have just had it confirmed that a query by an authorised committee member of an away player's record will show his Index, number of round played 'recently' and date last played.
If there is any doubt, the player could have (or sign in to) an app which would allow him to show his full playing record if the organiser wants to go that far.

 

[upsidedown]

I like the way New Zealand are very transparent with "Players record"
Below is a link to a player who I picked as he won the last Open at my old club out there

https://www.golf.co.nz/MyGolf/Scores.aspx?memberid=457333&Code=359524522

 

[rulefan]

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.

Clubs in this area have an arrangement where we inform the others about potential bandits. If banditry is established, they are refused entry to all our opens and their club secretary is informed.
Incidentally, are you aware of the England Golf directive that players must report all away 4BBB and Am/Ams to their home club. During the last couple years a number of players have had their handicaps reduced or even suspended as a result of complaints and investigations.

 

[Swango1980]

Clubs in this area have an arrangement where we inform the others about potential bandits. If banditry is established, they are refused entry to all our opens and their club secretary is informed.
Incidentally, are you aware of the England Golf directive that players must report all away 4BBB and Am/Ams to their home club. During the last couple years a number of players have had their handicaps reduced or even suspended as a result of complaints and investigations.

I wasn't aware of this directive. I've always felt it is a great idea that, for any Open event, each organiser send the scores back to the home clubs (although, I guess this may be a bit of a pig with postage or scanning and e-mailing, especially if a team consists of players from different clubs). It would be great to see a single system, perhaps, where organisers can plug in scores into a database which links into each players club, and then their home club is automatically informed. If a pattern of very good results is observed, then handicap secretaries can make adjustments they feel necessary.

I know that, even with a central system, a lot of organisers wouldn't want to go through the hassle of entering all the scores, but if enough did it, at least it would still catch out the bandits. Or, if it could all be linked to the touchscreens, and get the players to enter the scores like they do in normal club comps.

Last season, I received to Open scores from one club, so either only one club tends to do this in our area, or it is the only club in which any of our players played in that does it.

 

[upsidedown]

I wasn't aware of this directive. I've always felt it is a great idea that, for any Open event, each organiser send the scores back to the home clubs (although, I guess this may be a bit of a pig with postage or scanning and e-mailing, especially if a team consists of players from different clubs). It would be great to see a single system, perhaps, where organisers can plug in scores into a database which links into each players club, and then their home club is automatically informed. If a pattern of very good results is observed, then handicap secretaries can make adjustments they feel necessary.

I know that, even with a central system, a lot of organisers wouldn't want to go through the hassle of entering all the scores, but if enough did it, at least it would still catch out the bandits. Or, if it could all be linked to the touchscreens, and get the players to enter the scores like they do in normal club comps.

Last season, I received to Open scores from one club, so either only one club tends to do this in our area, or it is the only club in which any of our players played in that does it.

That's exactly what happens in NZ , course you've played will input your score onto the central system You can see from the link I posted that his scores from 6 different courses have been recorded

 

[rulefan]

I wasn't aware of this directive. I've always felt it is a great idea that, for any Open event, each organiser send the scores back to the home clubs (although, I guess this may be a bit of a pig with postage or scanning and e-mailing, especially if a team consists of players from different clubs). It would be great to see a single system, perhaps, where organisers can plug in scores into a database which links into each players club, and then their home club is automatically informed. If a pattern of very good results is observed, then handicap secretaries can make adjustments they feel necessary.

I know that, even with a central system, a lot of organisers wouldn't want to go through the hassle of entering all the scores, but if enough did it, at least it would still catch out the bandits. Or, if it could all be linked to the touchscreens, and get the players to enter the scores like they do in normal club comps.

Last season, I received to Open scores from one club, so either only one club tends to do this in our area, or it is the only club in which any of our players played in that does it.

Of course, the scores from open qualifying comps (ie individual) are transmitted to the player's home club automatically. It is only BB and am/am that there need be any manual intervention. Many clubs only send details for prize winners.

All ISV systems I know of provide for open comps and allow players to enter their own scores on the PSI terminals

 

[Swango1980]

Scenario: A golfer gets his handicap index to an all year low of 5.0 under WHS. He then realises there is a big comp in 4-5 weeks time. Luckily for him, he can play most days of the week, so decides to submit 20 card between now and then. The scores are terrible compared to his ability. So, although these 20 scores may result in a handicap index of 20, it only goes up to 10 due to the hard cap.

The comp is a non qualifying type anyway, and he quite likes the fact he got an extra 5 shots (maybe more once you calculate his playing handicap). He decides he really only wants to ever play in non qualifying team open events. So, although he is stuck on an Index of 10 for 11-12 months, after that he can quickly get it to 15, then after another year to 20, etc.

Is my understanding of WHS and the hard cap correct? if so, it is probably fairly obvious that for a player to get 15 extra shots in 3 years (more than 15 when course handicap calculated at most courses), for example, under the current system would be much trickier than WHS. If this sort of thing did happen, what power would the handicap sec have in cutting the handicap back down to around 5, and how would that impact further handicap calcs when the player submits more cards, given that you have just effectively ignored his last 20 scores? And, if the player strenuously denied cheating, and said it represents his current form, do we just say he is a liar, or wait until he shoots an unbelievable score in a comp?

It is these rapid changes that worry me as a handicap secretary. Under the current system, it's almost not a concern as a player would need to go through a significant more amount of effort for the same gains.

 

[nickjdavis]

I wouldn't say it is much trickier under CONGU to do what you describe.

Under the current system, if I play 21 rounds where my handicap goes up 0.1 each time, I will also get another 3 shots back under the exceptional (bad) scoring rules (due to there being 3 sets of 7 consecutive 0.1s). Throw in the computer aided annual review at year end and its possible that further shots may be given back if the differentials are big enough. So 21 bad rounds under CONGU will get me at least 5.1 shots back, possibly more....so its just as easy to contrive your way to a higher handicap under CONGU.

 

[Swango1980]

I wouldn't say it is much trickier under CONGU to do what you describe.

Under the current system, if I play 21 rounds where my handicap goes up 0.1 each time, I will also get another 3 shots back under the exceptional (bad) scoring rules (due to there being 3 sets of 7 consecutive 0.1s). Throw in the computer aided annual review at year end and its possible that further shots may be given back if the differentials are big enough. So 21 bad rounds under CONGU will get me at least 5.1 shots back, possibly more....so its just as easy to contrive your way to a higher handicap under CONGU.

That's a bad example. To go up 5.0 under WHS takes 20 rounds. That's an increase of 5.9 in course handicap at my course. For the same increase under CONGU, it would take 59 bad scores to go in.

Furthermore you cannot use continuous review or annual review to make up the same deficit, as these rely on your handicap secretary to physically apply those increases. Do you think they would? In fact, there is general guidance (in congu manual), that recommends NOT increasing a players handicap after 7 0.1 rounds or more if they have played to buffer in last year (from memory)

 

[rulefan]

I haven't seen any yet but I am sure there will be facilities/reports available to track/highlight suspicious scoring patterns

 

[Swango1980]

I

I haven't seen any yet but I am sure there will be facilities/reports available to track/highlight suspicious scoring patterns

Hope so

One great scheme. play all season as best you can to get good handicap. At end of season, between November to February (4 months), submit 20 bad rounds to get index increase of 5.0 (5.9 course handicap increase at my course). Then start next season on your nice big handicap, and start playing well again, winning many competitions, especially early season.

Clearly suspicious, but the golfer could justifiably say "I just play badly in winter as it's cold, greens bobbly, mentally hate it, etc". I can't guarantee he is lying, so I'd have to tell him he is not allowed to submit winter cards, although others can. Hmmm, will I get accused of discrimination? Tongue in cheek a little there, but it is a great way to play the system

 

[Deleted member 15344]

You must have such a great outlook on your fellow golfers - whatever system is in there will always be people who try and play the system , nothing is full proof , if people are that desperate to win they go the extreme lengths you mention then what can you do about it ? People manufactured their handicap in the old system , they will do it in the new system - it certainly doesn’t open up the field for people to go mad and get multiple shots back - suspect 99.9% have a bit more pride than that - using extreme examples to try and pick holes is a bit silly

 

[Swango1980]

I

You must have such a great outlook on your fellow golfers - whatever system is in there will always be people who try and play the system , nothing is full proof , if people are that desperate to win they go the extreme lengths you mention then what can you do about it ? People manufactured their handicap in the old system , they will do it in the new system - it certainly doesn’t open up the field for people to go mad and get multiple shots back - suspect 99.9% have a bit more pride than that - using extreme examples to try and pick holes is a bit silly

It is interesting you criticise my outlook on fellow golfers, and then immediately go on to explain how some of our fellow golfers try and play the system. ironic.

At no point have I said what the majority of golfers will do. But, as a handicap secretary I heard to be prepared for the 0.1% that do. If you played in a competition with 100 competitors, if only 1 of those has happened to get 5-6 shots added on to their handicap over the winter, I suspect you would like some action to be taken?

Under the current system, the same player would need to hand in around 50-60 supplementary scores over winter for the same effect.

 

[duncan mackie]

I
It is interesting you criticise my outlook on fellow golfers, and then immediately go on to explain how some of our fellow golfers try and play the system. ironic.

Under the current system, the same player would need to hand in around 50-60 supplementary scores over winter for the same effect.

nothing like that many, as pointed out #70, which you then dismissed

 

[Swango1980]

I

nothing like that many, as pointed out #70, which you then dismissed

I didn't dismiss this Duncan. I addressed it precisely in the next post.

There is no way a golfer would put in 20 supplementary cards over the winter currently, and then have the handicap secretary give them the extra 3-4 shots under continuous review before the next season to match what WHS would automatically give them. If this did happen, good luck to the handicap secretary when he defends his decision.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I
It is interesting you criticise my outlook on fellow golfers, and then immediately go on to explain how some of our fellow golfers try and play the system. ironic.

At no point have I said what the majority of golfers will do. But, as a handicap secretary I heard to be prepared for the 0.1% that do. If you played in a competition with 100 competitors, if only 1 of those has happened to get 5-6 shots added on to their handicap over the winter, I suspect you would like some action to be taken?

Under the current system, the same player would need to hand in around 50-60 supplementary scores over winter for the same effect.

Firstly no one is going to do what you suggest - so what exactly are you preparing for

Secondly - what are you actually going to do if you think someone is going to try and getting more shots ? How can you prove it ?

Been a handicap Secretary for a lot of years previously and it’s nothing but scaremongering - the same when they handicaps increased to 36 etc

You appear to be creating scenarios in your head that just are unrealistic and trying to find the most extreme levels you can get.

 

[Swango1980]

Firstly no one is going to do what you suggest - so what exactly are you preparing for

Secondly - what are you actually going to do if you think someone is going to try and getting more shots ? How can you prove it ?

Been a handicap Secretary for a lot of years previously and it’s nothing but scaremongering - the same when they handicaps increased to 36 etc

You appear to be creating scenarios in your head that just are unrealistic and trying to find the most extreme levels you can get.

Again, you contradict yourself. You say some people play the system, yet now say nobody will do this. That's confidence.

Secondly, you ask how can I prove it? that is EXACTLY the point I am making. I can't prove it, but if it happens what can I do???

It could well be the case a golfer does play terribly over winter, and honestly, so they could still get a big handicap increase over winter. Wouldn't necessarily take 20 cards either, as your last few rounds before winter may not have been great anyway. Even if the odd one was decent, your much higher average over winter could still result in a +5 index increase even with a few of your main season scores still in the mix.

It scares me that, those that are in favour of the WHs completely ignore the simple mathematics I have described above. I hope those in charge of implementing it have taken it more seriously, and as rulefan commented, may have at least systems in place to iron things like this out. I do not want club golfers complaining to me if others seem to be going up very quickly, and suspiciously, then expecting me to sort it out without any decent recommendations to follow

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Again, you contradict yourself. You say some people play the system, yet now say nobody will do this. That's confidence.

Secondly, you ask how can I prove it? that is EXACTLY the point I am making. I can't prove it, but if it happens what can I do???

It could well be the case a golfer does play terribly over winter, and honestly, so they could still get a big handicap increase over winter. Wouldn't necessarily take 20 cards either, as your last few rounds before winter may not have been great anyway. Even if the odd one was decent, your much higher average over winter could still result in a +5 index increase even with a few of your main season scores still in the mix.

It scares me that, those that are in favour of the WHs completely ignore the simple mathematics I have described above. I hope those in charge of implementing it have taken it more seriously, and as rulefan commented, may have at least systems in place to iron things like this out. I do not want club golfers complaining to me if others seem to be going up very quickly, and suspiciously, then expecting me to sort it out without any decent recommendations to follow

People have played the system by playing a round to get .1 back to gain a single shot before a KO or comp , or they just play the three rounds a year and then go and play opens

No one will be putting in 20 deliberatly poor rounds just to get shots back in the manner you suggest - it’s just not going to happen so why worry