Notable Scores/Cut by Observation

Hacker111

Can I have a definitive on this please.. I have heard so many stories/rules on the matter. I know my club cut players on their Winter performances last year but are not this year.. I have heard of clubs cutting a player who may have won or placed in 3 or more fourball competitions.. what is official position on fourball/winter games/team events etc....

Jul3s

Hacker111 wrote: »

Can I have a definitive on this please.. I have heard so many stories/rules on the matter. I know my club cut players on their Winter performances last year but are not this year.. I have heard of clubs cutting a player who may have won or placed in 3 or more fourball competitions.. what is official position on fourball/winter games/team events etc....

Have a look here

Hacker111

Jul3s wrote: »

Have a look here

I did, no joy...

Russman

As far as I know (haven't looked at it in a couple of years to be honest), the rule is along the lines of ".....if in the opinion of the handicap secretary a player's handicap, he must be cut...."

If this is still the case, it basically gives committees power to cut as they please although most clubs have a points system of some sort for cuts in non-singles competitions.

Hacker111

Russman wrote: »

As far as I know (haven't looked at it in a couple of years to be honest), the rule is along the lines of ".....if in the opinion of the handicap secretary a player's handicap, he must be cut...."

If this is still the case, it basically gives committees power to cut as they please although most clubs have a points system of some sort for cuts in non-singles competitions.

I have heard of personally at least two clubs were solicitors letters were produced after such a cut was implemented.. member stating that such a cut is illegal etc... what is the rule?

LostPassword

Hacker111 wrote: »

I have heard of personally at least two clubs were solicitors letters were produced after such a cut was implemented.. member stating that such a cut is illegal etc... what is the rule?

As a rule, people who produce solicitors letters when they get a handicap adjustment that they don't like are total bell-ends.

PhilipMarlowe

There used to be a document that outlined cuts for a few notable scores - the amount of any cut was dependent on the category of the golfer.
Now, all society/matchplay/inter-club etc. (stuff outside qualifying singles) golf tends to be dealt with at annual review time. This annual review takes place after the season and before the year end. The handicap committee sends off it's suggestions to the GUI (branch) (after much brandy and cigars at the members' expense of course) and once approved, the adjustments are reflected on the players' records before the year end (this is important for inter-club considerations).

Handicap cuts are the responsibility of the home club (don't need approval) and can (in theory) be done at any time but would tend to be handled at annual review unless there is a pressing need.

Solicitors letter my arse...

Russman

LostPassword wrote: »

As a rule, people who produce solicitors letters when they get a handicap adjustment that they don't like are total bell-ends.

Not always true, I know of two cases where a dislike of two people lead to them getting a number of cuts on observation - in these cases it was the handicap sec who was the bell-end. I'm talking cuts from 9 to 6 for winning a number of singles competitions and getting cut based on the CSS anyway. GUI told the handicap sec to sort his house out or they would come in and do it for him - the cuts were reversed.

Hacker111

PhilipMarlowe wrote: »

There used to be a document that outlined cuts for a few notable scores - the amount of any cut was dependent on the category of the golfer.
Now, all society/matchplay/inter-club etc. (stuff outside qualifying singles) golf tends to be dealt with at annual review time. This annual review takes place after the season and before the year end. The handicap committee sends off it's suggestions to the GUI (branch) (after much brandy and cigars at the members' expense of course) and once approved, the adjustments are reflected on the players' records before the year end (this is important for inter-club considerations).

Handicap cuts are the responsibility of the home club (don't need approval) and can (in theory) be done at any time but would tend to be handled at annual review unless there is a pressing need.

Solicitors letter my arse...

Thanks Philip

Mr. Larson

I thought if you accumulated 3 notable scores then a GP cut was applied. The only grey area for me is the definition of a notable score. This could vary per club maybe and might change between summer and winter. I know in my club a notable score in Winter was determined as 45pts for 18 holes. During the summer, if you get a good singles score and 2 team scores then you've accumulated the three notable scores. It is not based on prizes though as there may be a small field on a given day.

I can't believe anyone would push back/grumble on a general play revision. That's flagrant banditry, publicly displayed. With the same people winning team events the whole time the Hcap committees need to be empowered to combat it as they see fit and in the interest of fairness to all members.

DoctaDee

Jabberwocky wrote: »

..............I can't believe anyone would push back/grumble on a general play revision. That's flagrant banditry, publicly displayed. With the same people winning team events the whole time the Hcap committees need to be empowered to combat it as they see fit and in the interest of fairness to all members.

Yeah agree completely ... I think every club has the "specialist" Team Event team, our one in particular also tend to run fairly well in non-qualifying singles comps, winter leagues etc. They returned a team score of 104 in a "2 to count" a while back, when 2nd place returned 95 ... complete banditry .. and yet ... and yet .... they are shoe-in players for Inter Club comp teams ..

Hacker111

DoctaDee wrote: »

Yeah agree completely ... I think every club has the "specialist" Team Event team, our one in particular also tend to run fairly well in non-qualifying singles comps, winter leagues etc. They returned a team score of 104 in a "2 to count" a while back, when 2nd place returned 95 ... complete banditry .. and yet ... and yet .... they are shoe-in players for Inter Club comp teams ..

Thats the part that I don't agree with.. guys who are well known and blatant "handicap minders" are rewarded for this behaviour by being put on various club teams... what a contradiction......

DoctaDee

Hacker111 wrote: »

Thats the part that I don't agree with.. guys who are well known and blatant "handicap minders" are rewarded for this behaviour by being put on various club teams... what a contradiction......

Completely agree Hacker ... a lot of duplicity and without generalising it seems most prevalent in the 12-18 h/c range in our place .. which brings as number of options to selectors when selecting Pierce Purcell in the 1st instance, and complimenary partners for Jimmy Bruen etc.

foxyboxer

Hacker111 wrote: »

Thats the part that I don't agree with.. guys who are well known and blatant "handicap minders" are rewarded for this behaviour by being put on various club teams... what a contradiction......

Agreed. Isn't the whole point of playing to become better i.e. a lower handicapper? Can't understand the mentality of 'handicap minders'.

Mr. Larson

To be fair, the person selecting the team wants to put out the strongest team possible. Although they are [probably] on the committee they are solely responsible for selection for a particular team/panel. It's not their role to police banditry or set example. That's the role of the Handicap Secretary/Committee. I'm not defending it, just saying that that's probably how it is.

DoctaDee

Jabberwocky wrote: »

To be fair, the person selecting the team wants to put out the strongest team possible. Although they are [probably] on the committee they are solely responsible for selection for a particular team/panel. It's not their role to police banditry or set example. That's the role of the Handicap Secretary/Committee. I'm not defending it, just saying that that's probably how it is.

Yep agree, point well made. Tho I do remember one occasion when a selector made a beeline for a lad 2 fairways away when he heard he'd turned 9 with a strong score to remind him that he'd be ineligible for next years team if he dipped below the cutoff handicap..

Russman

Exactly, building a handicap is against the spirit of the game, but, there are so many clubs setting up their teams for one year from the previous autumn, its almost rampant.
Once a few clubs start doing it the others almost always have to follow to be competitive, particularly in that sort of mid-handicap range of Pierce Purcell, Jimmy Bruen, Metro etc etc.

Clubs get a bad name for it eventually but they still get tha elusive penant.

AldilaMan

DoctaDee wrote: »

Yeah agree completely ... I think every club has the "specialist" Team Event team, our one in particular also tend to run fairly well in non-qualifying singles comps, winter leagues etc. They returned a team score of 104 in a "2 to count" a while back, when 2nd place returned 95 ... complete banditry .. and yet ... and yet .... they are shoe-in players for Inter Club comp teams ..

Are you in Hollywood Lakes ? Sounds exactly like my club !

Golfgraffix

Can you ask to be cut? I really want to get back to 10, where I was before the kids came along. Over 4 years I have got the full allowance of 4 shots, so back to 14.

I am now down to 12.5 (I think) but last month I had 2 really good 4 ball scores, 51 and 44 in the space of two weeks. I know the 51 is scandalous but it was one of those days, my partner was off 28 and had 24 on the front on his own and i think i was -1 gross for the last 8 holes.

J

DoctaDee

AldilaMan wrote: »

Are you in Hollywood Lakes ? Sounds exactly like my club !

LOL...... I'm sure Hollywood Lakes will be delighted !!

Mr. Larson

Golfgraffix wrote: »

Can you ask to be cut? I really want to get back to 10, where I was before the kids came along. Over 4 years I have got the full allowance of 4 shots, so back to 14.

I am now down to 12.5 (I think) but last month I had 2 really good 4 ball scores, 51 and 44 in the space of two weeks. I know the 51 is scandalous but it was one of those days, my partner was off 28 and had 24 on the front on his own and i think i was -1 gross for the last 8 holes.

J

I don't think 2 scores [albeit very impressive scores] is sufficient to qualify for a general play revision, it has to be three. If you feel your scores have gone unnoticed by the handicap secretary then you should feel free to contact him drawing attention to your scores but it's highly unlikely they will make a downward adjustment outside the criteria, just because you asked for it. Sounds like you just need to be patient and you will get there based on scores like that though

DoctaDee

Just dug this out for a spot of reading if interested, relation to GP revisions - interestingly they look more @ the subjective issue of a players general playing ability improving - which isn't necessarily aligned with their scoring ... http://www.handicapmaster.org/handicaps/Unified_Handicapping_System_Page3.php

mr.mickels

LostPassword wrote: »

As a rule, people who produce solicitors letters when they get a handicap adjustment that they don't like are total bell-ends.

most likely