World Handicap System (WHS)

[rulefan]

IanMcC

I agree with db7; use the playing handicap. Incidentally do you you currently use 15/18 of handicap?

 

[Swango1980]

The Clause you mentioned above makes a specific point on this.

G2.1b/1
For multi-tee or mixed-tee competitions the Handicap Allowance may include additional strokes for players who play from the tees with the higher Course Ratings. Players should be aware that under these circumstances any additional strokes they receive could affect when they pick up on a hole in certain formats, for example Stableford or Par/Bogey.

Yeah, that is why I mentioned that point, as the comment I was replying to also made reference to this statement

 

[IanMcC]

IanMcC

I agree with db7; use the playing handicap. Incidentally do you you currently use 15/18 of handicap?

The 15 hole comps are only in the Winter. No, we have never used 15/18ths of handicap.

 

[balaclava]

I came back this country in 2005 from Southern Africa where I had played all my golf (never played golf in the UK). I joined my local Club and I was shocked by two aspects of golf here - the overwhelming percentage of medal to Stableford games and the CONGU HC system and my first post on this forum was to that effect. So what you ask?
The response I got back then clearly indicated that the majority on here believed that 1. All other countries has the same HC system 2. Medal predominated over Stableford because that was necessary for HC purposes. So what you ask again?
I have just seen a demo on the WHC system by Intelligent golf and it looks like this system (WHCS) is the same HC system I played in southern Africa which (loosely) was the best diffs on the best 8 games from the last 20 (the last 20 x 18 holes anywhere including social games). So what you ask for a third time?
Having lived in umpteen countries before returning here I was shocked at how we (English) believe we invented it (everything) and we know best! Up you CONGU

 

[Swango1980]

I came back this country in 2005 from Southern Africa where I had played all my golf (never played golf in the UK). I joined my local Club and I was shocked by two aspects of golf here - the overwhelming percentage of medal to Stableford games and the CONGU HC system and my first post on this forum was to that effect. So what you ask?
The response I got back then clearly indicated that the majority on here believed that 1. All other countries has the same HC system 2. Medal predominated over Stableford because that was necessary for HC purposes. So what you ask again?
I have just seen a demo on the WHC system by Intelligent golf and it looks like this system (WHCS) is the same HC system I played in southern Africa which (loosely) was the best diffs on the best 8 games from the last 20 (the last 20 x 18 holes anywhere including social games). So what you ask for a third time?
Having lived in umpteen countries before returning here I was shocked at how we (English) believe we invented it (everything) and we know best! Up you CONGU

1. Never heard anyone think every country uses the same system. Either people were aware that wasn't the case, or they didn't really care as it didn't impact them (which is fine, just like I wouldn't be bothered if a South African though the UK used their system or not)
2. I've been playing since 2005, most comps are actually Stableford at my club, so I'm not sure who would think this. Anyone who has played Stableford will know their handicap can be adjusted, and therefore would know medal golf is not the only format suitable for handicaps. So, anyone who thinks that is either at a club who ONLY play medals and they are none the wiser, or someone that plays few comps, only happened to play in medal, and didn't realise stableford counted.

3. We know best? There are advantages and disadvantages of any system. Obviously England Golf think there is merit in moving to WHS, as I'm sure it hasn't been without huge effort and cost to switch systems. I'm sure there has been debate for years whether any benefit of a World Handicap System would be worth the cost and effort involved in getting there. It has finally happened, but the big test is when it goes live and golfers have a year or 2 to get used to it.

 

[rulefan]

I came back this country in 2005 from Southern Africa where I had played all my golf (never played golf in the UK). I joined my local Club and I was shocked by two aspects of golf here - the overwhelming percentage of medal to Stableford games and the CONGU HC system and my first post on this forum was to that effect. So what you ask?
The response I got back then clearly indicated that the majority on here believed that 1. All other countries has the same HC system 2. Medal predominated over Stableford because that was necessary for HC purposes. So what you ask again?
I have just seen a demo on the WHC system by Intelligent golf and it looks like this system (WHCS) is the same HC system I played in southern Africa which (loosely) was the best diffs on the best 8 games from the last 20 (the last 20 x 18 holes anywhere including social games). So what you ask for a third time?
Having lived in umpteen countries before returning here I was shocked at how we (English) believe we invented it (everything) and we know best! Up you CONGU

It may be of interest to know that the first formal handicap system is generally accepted to be that introduced in England in 1898 by members of Royal Wimbledon GC and primarily the Ladies Golf Union (of Great Britain & Ireland). In 1905 it was proposed to the Metropolitan Golf Association that the then British system of averaging be adopted. That was followed by another prominent golf association of the period, the Massachusetts Golf Association.

Further, that use of the two major pre-WHS handicap formats was split between CONGU style (the whole of Europe) and US style (USA and Australia). Smaller golfing areas including Argentina and South Africa used variants of one or the other.

 

[jim8flog]

2. Medal predominated over Stableford because that was necessary for HC purposes.

I do not understand why it is necessary to have medal over stableford for handicap purposes, They both work well for HC purposes. More likely it is because some see it as more of a challenge.

Our comps are roughly on the basis of 4 Stablefords to one medal and since coming out of lockdown the only medals have been club championships.

 

[rulefan]

In England last year 43% of qualifiers were played as Medals and 49% as Stableford.

 

[Bwgan]

When courses are rated, I'm guessing each hole is rated and then calculated to give a course rating.
Therefore will each hole have a difficulty rating, and therefore a new SI assigned? (possibly?)

 

[jim8flog]

When courses are rated, I'm guessing each hole is rated and then calculated to give a course rating.
Therefore will each hole have a difficulty rating, and therefore a new SI assigned? (possibly?)

It is the club that sets the SIs. There is a laid down procedure in The Rules of Handicapping and the club does not have to change what it has set already.

 

[rulefan]

When courses are rated, I'm guessing each hole is rated and then calculated to give a course rating.
Therefore will each hole have a difficulty rating, and therefore a new SI assigned? (possibly?)

There is no decree/mandate in the WHS which replaces any of the many methods used to establish the allocation of Stroke Indices.
However there is a recommendation in the Rules which relies on hole-by-hole data from the Course Rating procedure.
My club is studying the effect on our course.

 

[Bwgan]

It is the club that sets the SIs. There is a laid down procedure in The Rules of Handicapping and the club does not have to change what it has set already.

Why i was asking was, out of interest I took all the comps this year and actually worked out the holes actual playing difficulty. Most of them were good, a couple holes different to their actual SI (and i'm sure if I did another years worth of data it would get closer). However 2 holes were way adrift playing +4 easier on SI and -5 on SI more difficult. Me I would just swap the holes SI's around (they are both on the back 9). I was hoping WHS might sort...

 

[Swango1980]

Why i was asking was, out of interest I took all the comps this year and actually worked out the holes actual playing difficulty. Most of them were good, a couple holes different to their actual SI (and i'm sure if I did another years worth of data it would get closer). However 2 holes were way adrift playing +4 easier on SI and -5 on SI more difficult. Me I would just swap the holes SI's around (they are both on the back 9). I was hoping WHS might sort...

SI's are not strictly set based on absolute hole difficulty. Difficulty is a primary factor, but they are meant to be spread out, and avoid low stroke indexes on 1st hole (and 10th potentially). This is because their main purpose is for Match Play, and indicating when players get shots. Spreading them out ensures the shot holes are spread out, and avoiding a low index on the first is to help avoid someone of a marginally higher handicap getting a shot on a play off hole.

Although, I understand there may be new recommendations?

 

[rulefan]

I was hoping WHS might sort...

There are presently two major ways clubs in CONGU allocate SIs. The 'old' way - based on difficulty and the new - based on significance of position in match play.
The WHS recommendation is a little more complex but aims to reconcile both aims.

All the CONGU ISV software will give you an historical playing/scoring difficulty. WHS approaches it objectively by using difficulty from from the Course Rating data and then strategically allocating the Indices to triads of six holes.

 

[Ethan]

SI's are not strictly set based on absolute hole difficulty. Difficulty is a primary factor, but they are meant to be spread out, and avoid low stroke indexes on 1st hole (and 10th potentially). This is because their main purpose is for Match Play, and indicating when players get shots. Spreading them out ensures the shot holes are spread out, and avoiding a low index on the first is to help avoid someone of a marginally higher handicap getting a shot on a play off hole.

Although, I understand there may be new recommendations?

On a side note, wouldn't it be more sensible to allocate shpts on the holes where your handicap differs? You are a 8 handicap and your opponent is 12. Wouldn't it be better to give the shots on SI 9-12?

 

[jim8flog]

On a side note, wouldn't it be more sensible to allocate shpts on the holes where your handicap differs? You are a 8 handicap and your opponent is 12. Wouldn't it be better to give the shots on SI 9-12?

This is something I have advocated for years. It gets rid of all this stupid messing around with SIs and stops meaning that the 8 handicap player, as now, is expected to shoot the hardest holes on the course in fewer shots than the 12 handicapper.

It is the old trouble of "we have always done it that way"

 

[Green Man]

SI's are not strictly set based on absolute hole difficulty. Difficulty is a primary factor, but they are meant to be spread out, and avoid low stroke indexes on 1st hole (and 10th potentially). This is because their main purpose is for Match Play, and indicating when players get shots. Spreading them out ensures the shot holes are spread out, and avoiding a low index on the first is to help avoid someone of a marginally higher handicap getting a shot on a play off hole.

Although, I understand there may be new recommendations?

On our course the first three holes have SI 4,2 then 6. Making it hard again for the poor low handicappers.

 

[abjectplop]

Likely covered already in this thread so apologies for asking, but what's the deal with the equivalent of CSS on the new system to account for weather? I'm thinking of joining a links course next year and it can really blow at times (east coast Scotland).....is the new system as flexible as CSS in accounting for crazy conditions?!

 

[rulefan]

Likely covered already in this thread so apologies for asking, but what's the deal with the equivalent of CSS on the new system to account for weather? I'm thinking of joining a links course next year and it can really blow at times (east coast Scotland).....is the new system as flexible as CSS in accounting for crazy conditions?!

The Playing Conditions Calculation does much the same job. It is calculated from and applied to all scores returned by midnight on the day.

 

[YandaB]

Is this still going to happen for November? The reason that I ask is that about a quarter of the courses in my area have still to get their ratings onto NCRDB. Is there a big delay between the rating happening and it appearing on the database? I presume things like scorecards need re-printing, the lookup tables need creating, printing, mounting etc. We are almost into October and from the outside it would appear that there still seems like a lot to be done.