Would You Ask for a Handicap Increase

[CMAC]

a couple of points for those that think the AR handles everything!

if a player hasn't played 4 Q comps/scores the AR will ignore him/her
even then these won't be time weighted in the case of subsequent injury etc ie a player scoring buffer in Jan 13 followed by 3 v poor scores late in the year when they start again (with 1 leg - I exagerate to make a point)

most clubs have a surprisingly high percentage of players with (i) or non (c) handicaps - which doesn't matter to the rest but there's an increasing number of players playing 3 to keep one, and in the events they play they can distort the CSS calculation to the detriment of everyone else (over the long term).

there's a strong argument that the system should compromise on the statistical accuracy inherent in 4 scores in favour of picking up everyone with an active, competing, handicap by using 3 - at least in the context of creating a review item - but then there's the counter view that without detailed knowledge of the individual outside any Q scores there really shouldn't be any adjustment applied!

short version - good on the committee here for taking the wider issues on board, together with the work associated with it!

as a seperate point the injured golfers really aren't the issue here in practice - they should be dealt with as and when rather than considered at an arbitrary point in their recovery period.

whats the AR? :angry:

 

[SGC001]

I was at the club at the weekend and there was a form on the notice board to put your name down if you feel that your handicap needs changing as part of the annual review. There were 2 sections, one for those who felt that a cut was in order and one for those who felt that an increase was needed. On the list there was one name asking to be considered for a cut (mine) and best part of a dozen names asking to be considered for an increase.

Am I alone in thinking that it is a bit odd asking for an increase. The aim of the game is to get your handicap down as low as you can so why on earth would you want it bumped up at the end of the year. May be just me but I felt it a bit disheartening that so many more members would be looking to up their handicap rather than look to get it as low as possible.

As will have been said earlier injury and age are but 2 reasons why people may wish to be considered for an increase and should be considered for an increase. Some people would prefer to struggle on with a handicap they cannot play too and take offence at an increase (so wouldn't put their name down) and some may see they are no longer competitive and want the increase for that reason. It takes all sorts, some play to get as low as they can, some fun, some to win, some may not seem as worried as others about getting their handicap down.

If you accept that people should have handicaps to play, then it would seem sensible to believe that people should have appropriate handicaps for their ability. Those too high or too low skewing results and also CSS.

Edit: I've known of people who have developed a serious health problem and been unable to play for a while and then when able to play but still with serious issues choose not play because they couldn't play to their handicap and were embarrassed. This then led to them missing out socially and on a limited amount of exercise that may have been good for them.

 

[rosecott]

I've always thought the handicap ways are a bit out of touch. So easy to go down but only a max 0.1 increase the other way. My pal who was off 28 shot a 47 pointer. He struck the ball badly, got lucky bounces and even bladed one across the green and it hit the flag and went it. He got a cut to 19 with exeptional scoring. He will or never will play to that again. With a 0.1 Increase he would have to play 90 comps to get back to his "should be handicap"

Something seriously wrong there with your handicap committee's actions. The maximum he could be cut from a 28 handicap for his 47 points would probably be around 4.4 - depending on CSS and par. He would have to have shot a score of 4 better than CSS on another occasion to produce an ESR and that would be only a maximum 3 shot cut if the 2 rounds were very close together. So a cut of 9 is not possible.

 

[Val]

whats the AR? :angry:

Annual review

 

[CMAC]

Annual review

TA! tried all combinations except that one bleeding abbreviations they really GOMT's

 

[HawkeyeMS]

TA! tried all combinations except that one bleeding abbreviations they really GOMT's

LOL

 

[Beezerk]

Could winter golf and therefore lack of playing be a reason to ask for an increase?
Going from playing 2, 3 or 4 times a week to maybe once can have a drastic effect on some players games.
I know it has for me :thup:

 

[chrisd]

I see no reason against putting the sheet up. It fills in missing information for the AR and just because someone asks for a change, a good review system, will look at the players record and known facts before adjusting anyone up or down.

I have mentioned to our Secretary that my general play might merit a cut in the AR as the club wouldn't look at the West Hill card I submitted and some other good results in team games and non qualifing golf. It's now up to them!