World Handicap System

[duncan mackie]

Hot news

http://www.golf.org.au/newsdisplay/99811

Well worded explanations of the practical application of the soft cap (historic handicap anchor mechanism) and overall better presented than the main worldwide announcement!

 

[BTatHome]

Hmm, so based on the soft/hard cap my handicap would not be above 6 until the miraculous 73 'anchor point' disappears ... it could then increase to 9 immediately?

It's a logical capping system and hopefully works well to ease the panic from many players thinking about bandits and sandbaggers.

 

[jim8flog]

The CONGU stats show that 55% of handicap matches are won by the lower handicapper. You must be the exception or are getting older

I have always been interested in where they get the information for the 'stats'. I know we have never been sent a questionnaire at our club.

 

[jim8flog]

One of the interesting points is that Australia will be allowed to keep their handicap limits of 36/45.

Given that the increase in handicaps limits in the UK to 54 was only supposed to be a interim measure pending introduction of the WGHS will these now be revised?

 

[rulefan]

I have always been interested in where they get the information for the 'stats'. I know we have never been sent a questionnaire at our club.

Does your club keep such matchplay information? I suspect many don't.

As it happens when I first saw that and mentioned it to our club manager, he said that 10 or more years worth of draw sheets were in a box in the attic. He always put them there 'just in case'. In case of what, I never asked.

Anyway, we went through them and found them to be consistent with CONGU. Those years when 3/4 applied fitted their figure also (62%).
But in one year, all but one of 4 comps had the lower cappers winning every game.

 

[duncan mackie]

I have always been interested in where they get the information for the 'stats'. I know we have never been sent a questionnaire at our club.

They could get it straight out of IG in our case; but accept that there wont have been a whole load of historical data from such recent innovations (in the scale of things)

 

[rulefan]

I have always been interested in where they get the information for the 'stats'. I know we have never been sent a questionnaire at our club.

Myth …..

“It is unfair in singles match play to require the lower handicap player to concede full handicap difference to his opponent. Three-quarters of the difference was more equitable.”


• Numerous researchers and golfing bodies including the United States Golf Association, English Golf Union and Scottish Golf Union have investigated the relative merits of full versus three-quarters difference in handicap.

• All of these independent pieces of research have come to a single conclusion – full difference between the handicaps of the two players is clearly the more equitable allowance.

• A Scottish Golf Union survey covering 4000 handicap singles matches showed:

	¾ Diff	Full Diff.
Matches won by lower handicap player	61%	55%
Matches won by the higher handicap player	39%	45%

From the above it can be seen that even when conceding full difference the lower handicap player retains an advantage.

• To further explore the significant advantage given to the lower handicap player by limiting the handicap allowance in match play to ¾ of the difference in handicaps, a handicap match play event with a large entry was analysed in detail.

• The following table tracks the representation, and hence performance of players in respect to Handicap Category at various stages of the competition.

						Handicap Category
Representation		Cat.1		Cat.2		Cat.3		Cat.4
	No.		%	No.		%	No.		%	No.		%
Comp. Start	27		13	104		50	72		34.5	5		2.5
Last 32	9		28	21		65.5	2		6.5	0		0
Last 4	2		50	2		50	0		0	0		0
Finalists	2		100	0		0	0		0	0		0

• The above is a fairly dramatic example of the bias in favour of the better player but the general trend repeats in the majority of club singles handicap events.

• In addition, the increasing probability of the lower handicap player prevailing with an increase in strokes conceded was clearly demonstrated as follows:

Difference in	No. of Matches Won by	No. of Matches Won by	% of Matches Won by
Handicaps
Higher Handicap Player	Lower Handicap Player	Lower Handicap Player
(Strokes)
1 to 2	20	28	58
3 to 5	19	40	68
6 to 8	12	29	71
9 to 11	7	22	76
12 to 14	0	11	100
15 to 18	0	4	100

• CONGU recommends the full difference between the handicaps of the two players in singles match play. A Union may at its discretion make this recommendation mandatory.

 

[clubchamp98]

The CONGU stats show that 55% of handicap matches are won by the lower handicapper. You must be the exception or are getting older

Both,
But I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that practicing lots to keep cat1 is not really worth it.
I would be really dangerous off 12 like lots of others that think like this!

 

[jim8flog]

@ rulefan

So it was 400 Scottish players

Therein lies the problem

 

[Deleted member 15344]

Both,
But I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that practicing lots to keep cat1 is not really worth it.
I would be really dangerous off 12 like lots of others that think like this!

Do you only play the game to win then ? Or do you play the game to be as good as you can - if you’re too worried about being beaten by higher handicaps than you then just play in scratch KO and comps
This year are big KO was won by a 6 HC , the Winter KO a 4 and 6 HC’s - most of the comps are won by lower HC’s

Your posts just sound like sour grapes that you can’t win

 

[IanG]

I suspect (but have no evidence) that the perception held by (some) low handicappers that they are at a disadvantage comes simply from there being many, many more high handicappers than low handicappers. So when they do get beat, it is most often by a high handicapper, simply because there are more of them in the draw.

 

[guest100718]

Do this new system have a slight flaw in it?


It works well if everyone tries their best in each round. Does it fall down if there are loads of players who essentially give up on their rounds after they have a few bad holes.

There is loads of these types of players. Head goes down and dont push to score the best they can on the day.

They will have a pile of awful cards and then a cracker when they eventually play well and keep it going.

Their average scores won't be representative of their scoring ability.

I'm guilty of this. but as it's average of my best 8 I wouldn't think this matters so much

 

[Jamesbrown]

Come to think of it this new system would also save me money.
The main reason I’m at my current club is because they have 3 qualifiers a week.

When social rounds become eligible for handicap purposes I can look at alternative cheaper courses.
Supplementaries seem to be knacker ache to arrange and come with a £5 admin fee. Better yet the handicap secretaries are ex directory on IG.

 

[rulefan]

I suspect (but have no evidence) that the perception held by (some) low handicappers that they are at a disadvantage comes simply from there being many, many more high handicappers than low handicappers. So when they do get beat, it is most often by a high handicapper, simply because there are more of them in the draw.

An analysis was made of the distribution of winners by handicap, derived over three years from 2622 competitions involving some 250000 rounds.
It was shown that there is goodcorrelation between the number of players at a given handicap and their winningfrequency.
The average handicap of the winning player was found to be 13.3 which bears veryfavourable comparison to the average club handicap of 14 (discounting those membersplaying less than three qualifying competitions p.a.)

 

[clubchamp98]

Do you only play the game to win then ? Or do you play the game to be as good as you can - if you’re too worried about being beaten by higher handicaps than you then just play in scratch KO and comps
This year are big KO was won by a 6 HC , the Winter KO a 4 and 6 HC’s - most of the comps are won by lower HC’s

Your posts just sound like sour grapes that you can’t win

yes that’s right I hate losing.
Especially to people I know should be lower but just can’t be bothered .

Its not the high caps who are the problem it’s the 12/18 guys who can play but stay where they are

Just imagine a scenario in football that the top five teams have to give everyone else a one goal start, and the bottom five a two goal start, that’s what is happening in golf imo.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

yes that’s right I hate losing.
Especially to people I know should be lower but just can’t be bothered .

Its not the high caps who are the problem it’s the 12/18 guys who can play but stay where they are

Just imagine a scenario in football that the top five teams have to give everyone else a one goal start, and the bottom five a two goal start, that’s what is happening in golf imo.

Well you certainly are bitter

“Should be lower but can’t be bothered” ?!how do you know they can’t be bothered

People play the game for different reasons a lot just for a bit of competitive fun , 99% have the HC they do for a reason

If you can’t handle losing to someone of a higher HC then don’t play in the matchplay Comps then or dry your eyes and suck it up it’s just a game and moaning and attitudes like yours give low HC a bad name. If you are that serious go and play scratch games or maybe you have a HC you can’t play too.

And your scenario is irrelevant - Golf has a Handicap System to try and level the playing field so that we can all compete together as much as possible - if you don’t like it then play scratch

 

[duncan mackie]

Come to think of it this new system would also save me money.
The main reason I’m at my current club is because they have 3 qualifiers a week.

When social rounds become eligible for handicap purposes I can look at alternative cheaper courses.
Supplementaries seem to be knacker ache to arrange and come with a £5 admin fee. Better yet the handicap secretaries are ex directory on IG.

Unless you are cat 1 you have been able to maintain a c handicap through supplementals for some time now (and can also manage it as a cat 1 with rounds later in the year.
You seem to be at the only club I'm aware of that charges for supplemental administration - may I ask which one? Seems entirely counter to the principles; and even more so going forward.
The social rounds eligible for handicapping are envisaged to be on exactly the same terms as sup plementals currently - although direct score entry is also assumed to underly administration.

 

[Grant85]

Matchplay certainly doesn't help low handicappers (especially at a reasonably short course or 'easy' set up).

High handicappers can turn up and get a shot on most holes and it is quite easy to put pressure on a low man who feels he has to hit every green.

On a championship course / set up the good play is better rewarded for a low handicapper.

Remember handicaps are generated almost exclusively in medal / strokeplay format. Maybe the odd stableford round counts, but the format heaps a lot of pressure on mid to high players who can play most shots, but not string enough good shots together to score well over 18 holes... even if they do make par or bogey at most holes, a couple of wayward shots OB or into serious trouble is a card wrecker.

 

[Imurg]

Unless you are cat 1 you have been able to maintain a c handicap through supplementals for some time now (and can also manage it as a cat 1 with rounds later in the year.
You seem to be at the only club I'm aware of that charges for supplemental administration - may I ask which one? Seems entirely counter to the principles; and even more so going forward.
The social rounds eligible for handicapping are envisaged to be on exactly the same terms as sup plementals currently - although direct score entry is also assumed to underly administration.

We get charged a pound for supplementary cards..

 

[rosecott]

Matchplay certainly doesn't help low handicappers (especially at a reasonably short course or 'easy' set up).

High handicappers can turn up and get a shot on most holes and it is quite easy to put pressure on a low man who feels he has to hit every green.

On a championship course / set up the good play is better rewarded for a low handicapper.

Remember handicaps are generated almost exclusively in medal / strokeplay format. Maybe the odd stableford round counts, but the format heaps a lot of pressure on mid to high players who can play most shots, but not string enough good shots together to score well over 18 holes... even if they do make par or bogey at most holes, a couple of wayward shots OB or into serious trouble is a card wrecker.

Handicaps are based on stableford scores.