Is It Time To End The Failed Handicap System.

FixdePitchmark

;)

It is clear from the posts on here ,that the handicap system does not work.

Could a new system be created.

A system based on a stroke score you have achieved.
Like Football. If you score a 75 or less you are in division 1
75 - 80 division 2.

In other words, no strokes, no lazy stableford.

etc , etc.

Time for a re-think. Time for me to have a re-think. But a lad off 28 playing a guy off 4 needs some soul searching in my view.

ryaner777

If everybody played stroke play all the time it would take hours and hours to get around.

Imagine being behind a society ( especially one with me in it ) on a saturday or sunday and everyone playing stroke play ?

maybe if you had all divisons over 12 h'cap in a situation that they had to play stableford and under had to play stroke play ?

At least its good to have a thread on coming up with suggestions to improve the system instead of just giving out about the bandits that abuse it.

mike12

Seems like a bit of a lazy post. Most clubs have different divisions so that is there already.
The point of handicapping is for everybody to be able to play together off a level playing field. No fun in sticking all the 22 plus handicaps off out together and all the 5 or less guys.
I have shot 73 once in my life so that would put me division 1 where i would be finishing 10 or more shots behind most of the guys every week.
Have another think about it and see what else you can come up with.

The slope system has some pluses when playing new courses if you are off 10 in your home course but you are playing some where like the European club you would get to play off 12 or 13 for the day.
Mike

MP62

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

;)

It is clear from the posts on here ,that the handicap system does not work.

Could a new system be created.

A system based on a stroke score you have achieved.
Like Football. If you score a 75 or less you are in division 1
75 - 80 division 2.

In other words, no strokes, no lazy stableford.

etc , etc.

Time for a re-think. Time for me to have a re-think. But a lad off 28 playing a guy off 4 needs some soul searching in my view.

Another drunken post?, perhaps we should ban drink to save this kind of embarrassment
The only thing that's clear from the other thread is that a tiny minority will always cheat and then try to justify it later.
The handicap system isn't perfect and doesn't claim to be, but when adhered to in an honest fashion, it works very well, e.g look at the UK.

FixdePitchmark

But, it would do your head in, all the .1 stuff and pulling and not giving in cards. Then having same teams winning stuff.

I think it was a post yesterday of lads not playing in a cross wind, was the final insult for me.

It just seems to be a constant problem on here.

FixdePitchmark

mike12 wrote: »

Seems like a bit of a lazy post. Most clubs have different divisions so that is there already.
The point of handicapping is for everybody to be able to play together off a level playing field. No fun in sticking all the 22 plus handicaps off out together and all the 5 or less guys.
I have shot 73 once in my life so that would put me division 1 where i would be finishing 10 or more shots behind most of the guys every week.
Have another think about it and see what else you can come up with.

The slope system has some pluses when playing new courses if you are off 10 in your home course but you are playing some where like the European club you would get to play off 12 or 13 for the day.
Mike

Yes not my best - :mad:

But does the existence of divisions, support the theory that the handicap system is not working.

Division of a handicap system, goes against the principle of a handicap system. Therefore there is already an attempt to overcome the flaws.

GreeBo

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

But, it would do your head in, all the .1 stuff and pulling and not giving in cards. Then having same teams winning stuff.

I think it was a post yesterday of lads not playing in a cross wind, was the final insult for me.

It just seems to be a constant problem on here.

And your system addresses this how? Unless you have a referee beside each player then the game is open to cheating. Other sports DO have a referee and people still cheat.

PARlance

When we all get on the European or US Tour, all this worry will be behind us

FixdePitchmark

GreeBo wrote: »

And your system addresses this how? Unless you have a referee beside each player then the game is open to cheating. Other sports DO have a referee and people still cheat.

Other sports don't have a handicap system.

Friends of mine new to golf think it is daft. Sometimes you need to say, ok have we in golf just got this all wrong ? It is only for the great brains on here to say , hey - your full of **** again and why , cool, now I know why.

But, from reading on here , it is far from a small little problem.

GreeBo

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Other sports don't have a handicap system.

Friends of mine new to golf think it is daft. Sometimes you need to say, ok have we in golf just got this all wrong ? It is only for the great brains on here to say , hey - your full of **** again and why , cool, now I know why.

But, from reading on here , it is far from a small little problem.

How does the handicap system change whether or not people cheat?

Why do your friends think its daft? Because they are not used to sports where you are your own referee?

FixdePitchmark

GreeBo wrote: »

How does the handicap system change whether or not people cheat?

Why do your friends think its daft? Because they are not used to sports where you are your own referee?

Because they are from sports with no handicap.

They nearly buy into it, then see some lad off 17 taking the piss and winning a trophy and the lad off 9 gets a head cover. They just laugh and say that lad is taking the piss off 17, golf is for old fat men.

I try explain it, but they say that is mad or for horses. Anyway - stick with your own.

djimi

I guess in most other sports you dont get players of such varying levels playing against one another. I play cricket, and you never have a guy who is divison 1 standard playing in the same game as a guy who plays division 7.

BigChap1759

As above no system can, or should make allowances for people who want to cheat - the CONGU handicap system does a bloody good job of allowing golfers of massively different abilities to compete together.

All the moaners on here do my head in - if you don't like the current system then you have a few choices - lobby CONGU directly with your contructive suggestions for change, play off scratch, only play socially or try another sport..............and breathe

slave1

There's no panecea to address folk who abuse the handicap system, the current system is fine if you take the view of level playing field and always out to get your handicap down (within the rules).
When prizes come into play it starts collapsing IMHO.

AGC

No matter what the system there will be issues.

My 2 biggest issues with the system are:

1: In my home club from medals to weekly events you will see standard scratch at -1 no matter what sort of scores you see come through. IMO if they could do something about the individual categories and standard scratch it would be a massive help. Somebody in CAT 4 should not affect CAT 1

2: The amount of lads that you see playing in championships that can't break 80 yet enter year after year off + handicaps while lads just outside don't get a chance.

Point 2 is more a rant:p

BigChap1759

I could be wrong but I'm fairly sure CAT4 scores have no influence on calculating the CSS - anyone care to confirm?

AGC

BigChap1759 wrote: »

I could be wrong but I'm fairly sure CAT4 scores have no influence on calculating the CSS - anyone care to confirm?

Sorry you are right. CAT 3

FixdePitchmark

djimi wrote: »

I guess in most other sports you dont get players of such varying levels playing against one another. I play cricket, and you never have a guy who is divison 1 standard playing in the same game as a guy who plays division 7.

That is the sort of system that would work well - a stroke divison system.
The aim is to move up a divison, this would make people want to improve. You can drop a divison if you can't keep up (yearly). But like all other sports the prestige will be based on the divison you are in. Not winning the Vauxhaul Conference.

Early days with this concept

Dublin Spur

in my club the vast majority of major honours go to members in the 10 to 20 handicap range, every year its always the same.

The low handicappers rarely get a look in and usually have to wait for a scratch cup to come along before having a chance of glory.

The problem is as I see it that 42/43/44 points usually wins the big events at my club and that would mean a 5 handicapper (like myself) would need to shoot something like -2 or -3 gross in order to compete where as a 15 handicapper only has to shoot +7 or +8.

In my opinion, this is where the handicap system breaks down, it's simply not true that shooting -3 for a player off 5 is the same difficulty as shooting +7 for a player off 15.

And that's why the golfers in the teen handicap range usually hoover up all the big prizes while the lower players have very little to show for it other than having a handicap they are proud of and knowing that are a better player then most "winners"

The simple solution is to have class scoring in every compeition (senior/junior/intermediate/minor), therefore every player has a chance of winning out of their own peer group and it's a much more even playing field. Some might say that you always need 1 overall winner but I don't see why you couldn't have 4 (1 winner per class) if it was for the good of the game.

GreeBo

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

That is the sort of system that would work well - a stroke divison system.
The aim is to move up a divison, this would make people want to improve. You can drop a divison if you can't keep up (yearly). But like all other sports the prestige will be based on the divison you are in. Not winning the Vauxhaul Conference.

Early days with this concept

You mean like the current handicap class system?

GreeBo

Dublin Spur wrote: »

in my club the vast majority of major honours go to members in the 10 to 20 handicap range, every year its always the same.

The low handicappers rarely get a look in and usually have to wait for a scratch cup to come along before having a chance of glory.

The problem is as I see it that 42/43/44 points usually wins the big events at my club and that would mean a 5 handicapper (like myself) would need to shoot something like -2 or -3 gross in order to compete where as a 15 handicapper only has to shoot +7 or +8.

In my opinion, this is where the handicap system breaks down, it's simply not true that shooting -3 for a player off 5 is the same difficulty as shooting +7 for a player off 15.

And that's why the golfers in the teen handicap range usually hoover up all the big prizes while the lower players have very little to show for it other than having a handicap they are proud of and knowing that are a better player then most "winners"

The simple solution is to have class scoring in every compeition (senior/junior/intermediate/minor), therefore every player has a chance of winning out of their own peer group and it's a much more even playing field. Some might say that you always need 1 overall winner but I don't see why you couldn't have 4 (1 winner per class) if it was for the good of the game.

Mathematically the higher the handicap the more room for improvement you have and thus you are going to get people shooting significantly under par. This is maths, its not people abusing the system.


All Medal competitions in my club have prizes per class.

FixdePitchmark

Dublin Spur wrote: »

in my club the vast majority of major honours go to members in the 10 to 20 handicap range, every year its always the same.

The low handicappers rarely get a look in and usually have to wait for a scratch cup to come along before having a chance of glory.

The problem is as I see it that 42/43/44 points usually wins the big events at my club and that would mean a 5 handicapper (like myself) would need to shoot something like -2 or -3 gross in order to compete where as a 15 handicapper only has to shoot +7 or +8.

In my opinion, this is where the handicap system breaks down, it's simply not true that shooting -3 for a player off 5 is the same difficulty as shooting +7 for a player off 15.

And that's why the golfers in the teen handicap range usually hoover up all the big prizes while the lower players have very little to show for it other than having a handicap they are proud of and knowing that are a better player then most "winners"

The simple solution is to have class scoring in every compeition (senior/junior/intermediate/minor), therefore every player has a chance of winning out of their own peer group and it's a much more even playing field. Some might say that you always need 1 overall winner but I don't see why you couldn't have 4 (1 winner per class) if it was for the good of the game.

Fair play, calling it as it is.

That is what i've been trying to say in my brainstorming -
That is what people who are new to golf say to me.

There is something nice about all playing together in the one sport, it makes the game very friendly. That is why when people take advantage of that it makes it very sad.

Great Idea - now we are getting places.

mike12

Dublin Spur wrote: »

in my club the vast majority of major honours go to members in the 10 to 20 handicap range, every year its always the same.

The low handicappers rarely get a look in and usually have to wait for a scratch cup to come along before having a chance of glory.

The problem is as I see it that 42/43/44 points usually wins the big events at my club and that would mean a 5 handicapper (like myself) would need to shoot something like -2 or -3 gross in order to compete where as a 15 handicapper only has to shoot +7 or +8.

In my opinion, this is where the handicap system breaks down, it's simply not true that shooting -3 for a player off 5 is the same difficulty as shooting +7 for a player off 15.

And that's why the golfers in the teen handicap range usually hoover up all the big prizes while the lower players have very little to show for it other than having a handicap they are proud of and knowing that are a better player then most "winners"

The simple solution is to have class scoring in every compeition (senior/junior/intermediate/minor), therefore every player has a chance of winning out of their own peer group and it's a much more even playing field. Some might say that you always need 1 overall winner but I don't see why you couldn't have 4 (1 winner per class) if it was for the good of the game.

All the comps in my club have a divisional section, If you look at it from your starting handicap down to where you are now you would have had years when you got cut 4 or 5 strokes those are the years you have a chance of winning i went from 18 to 12 over 3 years and won 2 captains prizes during that time. Now i feel that my chances are gone as i am down as low as i can go at it is the time of the other guys that are improving.

Only way to stop the 42 points winning everything is only allow you to play after you have maintained a handicap for 3 years where you have practiced and played at least twice a week so you have all your improving done before you are allowed to play in comps:D.
Mike

FixdePitchmark

GreeBo wrote: »

You mean like the current handicap class system?

No - something a bit more radical that counts all strokes. No strokes given.

GreeBo

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

No - something a bit more radical that counts all strokes. No strokes given.

Ok, so you are taking a system where by and large people of vastly different abilities get to compete fairly with each other and replacing it with one where its way more likely that you are directly competing with people who are of a different standard than you?

Think of the premier league...I think we can all name the top 4 teams year in year out. Thats what you are advocating we change to.
Within each division you are going to have huge gulfs in class and nothing to balance that out.
At the moment we have a system where the Acrington Stanleys can compete against and beat the Man Uniteds.

How would you fancy being the guy who just scrapes into Division 2 playing for the same prizes as guys who are just outside Division 1, who average 10 strokes less than you a round?

Not sure you have thought this through tbh...

Leprechaun77

The handicap system has not failed IMO. This structure encourages people to take up the game, and remain playing regardless of ability. This new suggestion would lead to a form of elitism if you ask me and would be detrimental to the long term viability of the game.

Not everyone can play to single figures, but the handicapping method allows the 20 handicap to compete against better players and gives him a real chance of beating him....nothing worse than playing a game where you know you are going to get beaten. Eventually you will say ' feck this for a game of soldiers'. As with everything in life, some people will abuse whatever system is in place. A suggestion might be to focus on stamping out the abuse rather than changing the whole system.

FixdePitchmark

GreeBo wrote: »

Ok, so you are taking a system where by and large people of vastly different abilities get to compete fairly with each other and replacing it with one where its way more likely that you are directly competing with people who are of a different standard than you?

Think of the premier league...I think we can all name the top 4 teams year in year out. Thats what you are advocating we change to.
Within each division you are going to have huge gulfs in class and nothing to balance that out.
At the moment we have a system where the Acrington Stanleys can compete against and beat the Man Uniteds.

How would you fancy being the guy who just scrapes into Division 2 playing for the same prizes as guys who are just outside Division 1, who average 10 strokes less than you a round?

Not sure you have thought this through tbh...

The divisions can be much tighter than 10 shots. 2, to 3, to 5, to 8 Fibonacci my friend.

But, what you said up there is what sport is, you work hard to become division 1, you go bad you are division 2. Life, not we are all the same - not like that in any other sport.

FixdePitchmark

Leprechaun77 wrote: »

The handicap system has not failed IMO. This structure encourages people to take up the game, and remain playing regardless of ability. This new suggestion would lead to a form of elitism if you ask me and would be detrimental to the long term viability of the game.

Not everyone can play to single figures, but the handicapping method allows the 20 handicap to compete against better players and gives him a real chance of beating him....nothing worse than playing a game where you know you are going to get beaten. Eventually you will say ' feck this for a game of soldiers'. As with everything in life, some people will abuse whatever system is in place. A suggestion might be to focus on stamping out the abuse rather than changing the whole system.

There are people who play sport at all levels all over the world, we are not getting rid of that.

GreeBo

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

The divisions can be much tighter than 10 shots. 2, to 3, to 5, to 8 Fibonacci my friend.

But, what you said up there is what sport is, you work hard to become division 1, you go bad you are division 2. Life, not we are all the same - not like that in any other sport.

0,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34
Hmm thats much better, so at the top end you have a gap of 13 shots or 8 shots?
I'm not saying there is a problem with having divisions, I'm saying that the people at the bottom of the division have no chance of competing against the people at the top of division, due to the 8,13 or 21 shot difference between them.
Your attempt to make things fairer has just made it worse. The same people will win everything.
How do you move between these divisions? If your divisions are based on handicap then you haven't solved anything.

onlyfinewine

The handicap system is mathematically pretty good, the problem is that it can be manipulated, particularly by the point one merchants. What you need to do is to discourage handicap building and I have not seen anything on this thread that would help achieve that goal. Anytime a golfer can decide not to play his best on purpose and gather an increase in handicap without any checks or balances it will inevitably lead to abuses.

My suggestion is that all point one increases be held in Limbo until the annual review by the handicap secretary. This would allow a more level playing field over time and do away with the ability to increase your handicap quickly after being cut for a good performance. It would also highlight the amount of point one increases versus the excellent scores achieved during the year.

Unfortunately it would also have the effect of reducing the amount of open singles that would be played and thus depress revenues in the short term.

FixdePitchmark

GreeBo wrote: »

0,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34
Hmm thats much better, so at the top end you have a gap of 13 shots or 8 shots?
I'm not saying there is a problem with having divisions, I'm saying that the people at the bottom of the division have no chance of competing against the people at the top of division, due to the 8,13 or 21 shot difference between them.
Your attempt to make things fairer has just made it worse. The same people will win everything.
How do you move between these divisions? If your divisions are based on handicap then you haven't solved anything.

average score. all strokes counted.

Didn’t think 0,1,1, 2 made sense –

Anyway, the point i’m making is that the range is not linear. The higher your typical score, the larger your range, the better the opportunity to improve. That is why the range in the higher groups could be in the order of 8 or even 13.

Another flaw in the handicap system is the failure to apply any relativity to the score. This is particularly flawed with lower handicap players. So a guy off 5 may be 2 shots better and get 38 pts. A guy off 18 gets 2 shots better he gets 38. In fact, this can be further magnified by the stroke index of the holes (as in the 5 handicapper having no shots on the holes in question). I think the guy off 5 should win in the 38pts example above.

I’m not saying that any system is going to be perfect, but I’d imagine there is unspoken unease amongst the lower handicap players about the unfairness of the system. I think the lower handicap players have said that a bit here.

I also considered a score ratio scale, to establish winner. A guy off 18 scoring + 16 would be a score of 0.888888, while a guy off 5 scoring +4 would be 0.8. So 0.8 is the winner.

Just a bit of hypothetical brainstorming, no harm done, it is not as if it is (ever) going to change. The vast majority of golfers are of higher handicap, so can’t see much push or even inclination for a change. It suits me as I’m in the range were it is easier to win things. I just don’t think it is fair on lads in single figures. What on earth would a guy off 5 have to do to score 40 pts, that is like a full time job at that stage, maybe 5, 6 hours a week practice, 3 games a week.

But hey perhaps they don’t mind, they have the lowest score and scratch cups etc.

The handicap system is fun and that is all that matters, but perhaps it is the greatest obstacle to people improving in golf. I’ve seen it with friends who are happy out with a shot a hole and would not ever want to change that for the world.

Anyway, GreeBo – no point in arguing hypothetical modernisation, you tend to stick to the traditions of the game and logic in argument. I respect that.

I’ll leave this with a comment that a friend of mine, taking up golf said to me, I was trying to explain the greatness of the handicap system. He from a background of top level soccer, not a clue about golf.

“But, why doesn’t the best player win the trophy ?”.

He is wrong, I know, but perhaps an outsider can see problems in something that those within are blind to.

PARlance

Dublin Spur wrote: »

in my club the vast majority of major honours go to members in the 10 to 20 handicap range, every year its always the same.

The low handicappers rarely get a look in and usually have to wait for a scratch cup to come along before having a chance of glory.

The problem is as I see it that 42/43/44 points usually wins the big events at my club and that would mean a 5 handicapper (like myself) would need to shoot something like -2 or -3 gross in order to compete where as a 15 handicapper only has to shoot +7 or +8.

There's one major thing here that I feel you're not taking into consideration and that is the % of golfers and their handicap range.

Swords Open Golf Club list their members and HC's
http://www.swordsgolfclub.ie/mens/club-directory-2012.1485.html

From these lists
57% of their members are 10-20 HC (inclusive)
40% are 21+ HC's
Only 3% are HC 9 or less.

(The low HC % seems very low to me, maybe it's not a true reflection on most clubs. Anyone know the splits in their own clubs? )

In a club like this, the majority of any honours should be going to the 10-20 HC's purely due to the amount of members in that category.

42/43/44 winning a comp is ok as long as it's not the same guys winning each time.
For every Mid HC'er shooting 44 there could be 9 others shooting much much lower.
Exceptions are more frequent with greater numbers.

It's the % of golfers in the mid handicap range that is causing the problem not the system itself.
If you sent 5 low hc's and 5 mid hc's out for a ten man comp, I'd safety say that the top of the leader board would be weighted towards the Low HC's as they are the guys that are more consistent.
Throw and 30 Mid HC's into this comp and the the Mid HC's would dominate the top of the leader board (and the bottom of it...)

A low handicapper in Swords should be winning the Captains prize once every 33 years based on their present list remaining constant.

GreeBo

ok fdp, average scores.
i average 15 over and you average 22 over and we are in the same category. you are never going to win anything.
that's the flaw with ignoring individual handicaps. as i said you just made the problem worse. now for each category you have you are going to have half the people in it who can't win (assuming an even distribution of averages throughout the group)
the guys off the higher handicaps are supposed to win more often.there are far more of them and they have far more room to improve. that doesn't make the system unfair that's probability and statistics. the fairness of the system comes from two guys off very different handicaps play each other in a fair game.
but i guess we can agree to disagree !

onlyfinewine

onlyfinewine wrote: »

The handicap system is mathematically pretty good, the problem is that it can be manipulated, particularly by the point one merchants. What you need to do is to discourage handicap building and I have not seen anything on this thread that would help achieve that goal. Anytime a golfer can decide not to play his best on purpose and gather an increase in handicap without any checks or balances it will inevitably lead to abuses.

My suggestion is that all point one increases be held in Limbo until the annual review by the handicap secretary. This would allow a more level playing field over time and do away with the ability to increase your handicap quickly after being cut for a good performance. It would also highlight the amount of point one increases versus the excellent scores achieved during the year.

Unfortunately it would also have the effect of reducing the amount of open singles that would be played and thus depress revenues in the short term.

Forgot to mention that the size of prizes should be reduced hugely. I for one would be happy with a medal to mark the achievement and not a holiday to a hot country to play golf for a week.

FixdePitchmark

GreeBo wrote: »

ok fdp, average scores.
i average 15 over and you average 22 over and we are in the same category. you are never going to win anything.
that's the flaw with ignoring individual handicaps. as i said you just made the problem worse. now for each category you have you are going to have half the people in it who can't win (assuming an even distribution of averages throughout the group)
the guys off the higher handicaps are supposed to win more often.there are far more of them and they have far more room to improve. that doesn't make the system unfair that's probability and statistics. the fairness of the system comes from two guys off very different handicaps play each other in a fair game.
but i guess we can agree to disagree !

No, I would try improve the following year, you would be in the next category , I would try harder. Same as all sports (except golf). You would have to try harder to stay in your new category. You would have the real prestige of being a category a/b/ 1/2/3. This would be the driver behind the sport, there would be nobody trying to keep handicaps high (there would be no handicap), because the sport would now be about what level you are at. It would be a further iteration of the "He is a single figure player". It would be like a belt in Judo / Karate.

The handicap system is so ingrained , it seems to be just a value in an emotionless algorithm . A winner is popped out at the end. Is this the lad who played to the best of his ability or had the wrong handicap ?

I have not resolved how players at different levels would play against each other, perhaps relative improvement on a % basis over time. Give me time on that one.
I could be saying that players at far extremes can not compete, that is the reality of 95 % of sport, is it golf's unquie selling point ? How much do the golfing comunity value this ?

Again, all hypothetical- but it is clear from boards and the points made by some golfers, they are not just a few moaners, there is real questions about the sense of the system.

In the end - nothing will change, so, don't worry be happy. Just nice to understand the logic of the sport I'm trying to get to grips with, but never can fully understand.

m r c

After reading this thread from start to finish I'm inclined to think that the current system is perfect considering it deals with humans.

I got my first h/c this year 24, I had a good few .1's(7/8) then had 40 pts and was cut, another few .1's and had 38 and another wee cut. I'm off 23.1 now but I feel like a total bandit at 23 tbh BUT when it counted on captains day this year I desperately wanted to make the cut for the 2nd day I missed it by 4 strokes.
The reason I'm not a bandit is I personally cannot turn the style on and off yet but I do have the odd good day. My best in strokes in competition is 92 and my best for fun is 82. My target is to shoot 80 in a competition any day now and get a big dirty cut. The handicap system makes me want to get down to the lowest possible h/c.

I'd love to be off single digits shooting 36 pts winning nothing and watching the fellas cheat each other for a new putter etc. I want to be a good golfer not a bingo player. Keeping an artificially high h/c is cheating I'm personally not into that.

FixdePitchmark

m r c wrote: »

After reading this thread from start to finish I'm inclined to think that the current system is perfect considering it deals with humans.

I got my first h/c this year 24, I had a good few .1's(7/8) then had 40 pts and was cut, another few .1's and had 38 and another wee cut. I'm off 23.1 now but I feel like a total bandit at 23 tbh BUT when it counted on captains day this year I desperately wanted to make the cut for the 2nd day I missed it by 4 strokes.
The reason I'm not a bandit is I personally cannot turn the style on and off yet but I do have the odd good day. My best in strokes in competition is 92 and my best for fun is 82. My target is to shoot 80 in a competition any day now and get a big dirty cut. The handicap system makes me want to get down to the lowest possible h/c.

I'd love to be off single digits shooting 36 pts winning nothing and watching the fellas cheat each other for a new putter etc. I want to be a good golfer not a bingo player. Keeping an artificially high h/c is cheating I'm personally not into that.

Like it

And you did not have to read this crap thread to come up with that great bit of sense.

All I ever want to do in golf is score my best score ever.

cornerboy

onlyfinewine wrote: »

Forgot to mention that the size of prizes should be reduced hugely. I for one would be happy with a medal to mark the achievement and not a holiday to a hot country to play golf for a week.

Ah yes.....the good old classic. Once golf became a mode of fundraising for the local school or GAA club we were f**ked. And when the GAA club put up a trip to Portugal as 1st prize we were rightly f**ked.

There is nothing wrong with the Handicap system if the GUI would back the clubs in implementing it. There was a time when the handicap secretary was all powerful and if he thought you were better than the 19 handicap you were playing off.......you were cut on general play no ifs or buts. That rule still exists but the clubs are slow to implement it mainly because the GUI wont support them if they are challenged on it as several have been.

IanPoulter

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

No, I would try improve the following year, you would be in the next category , I would try harder. Same as all sports (except golf).

Probably because golf is essentialy a social sport. We don't play with people we don't like. We generally play in the same 4 ball or within the same group of people who play around our time slot. People get comfortable at a certain level be it 14/15 or whatever. They don't have time to practice so they show up once a week for a game generally playing below their potential but occasionally playing above it 43/44 points.

Lower handicappers tend to take the game a bit more serious and devote a bit more practice to it and generaly play to their ability/potential more often. They tend to be handicapped pretty close to their ability so scores of 43/44 become very rare. Lower handicappers tend to squeeze the best out of their round on a bad day to get in the buffer. Higher handicappers don't often display that resove to avoid a point one.

Dublin Spur

ajcurry123 wrote: »

There's one major thing here that I feel you're not taking into consideration and that is the % of golfers and their handicap range.

Swords Open Golf Club list their members and HC's
http://www.swordsgolfclub.ie/mens/club-directory-2012.1485.html

From these lists
57% of their members are 10-20 HC (inclusive)
40% are 21+ HC's
Only 3% are HC 9 or less.

(The low HC % seems very low to me, maybe it's not a true reflection on most clubs. Anyone know the splits in their own clubs? )

In a club like this, the majority of any honours should be going to the 10-20 HC's purely due to the amount of members in that category.

42/43/44 winning a comp is ok as long as it's not the same guys winning each time.
For every Mid HC'er shooting 44 there could be 9 others shooting much much lower.
Exceptions are more frequent with greater numbers.

It's the % of golfers in the mid handicap range that is causing the problem not the system itself.
If you sent 5 low hc's and 5 mid hc's out for a ten man comp, I'd safety say that the top of the leader board would be weighted towards the Low HC's as they are the guys that are more consistent.
Throw and 30 Mid HC's into this comp and the the Mid HC's would dominate the top of the leader board (and the bottom of it...)

A low handicapper in Swords should be winning the Captains prize once every 33 years based on their present list remaining constant.

Fair enough, I take your point.

I suppose the point I was really trying to make is that it is a lot more difficult for a 5 handicapper to shoot 43/44 points than a 15 handicapper (in terms of how well each player has to perform in terms of their own ability)

I play off 5 and I've broken par only once in my life, this is the level of golf I need to play to in order to compete for my clubs major honours. Yet at the same time I am holding my current handicap with ease. I'm kinda in a no-mans land of 33-36 points, I maintain my handicap but never featuring in the prizes, It gets a little frustrating after a while when weaker players AWAYS win due to the system.

Corkblowin

Dublin Spur wrote: »

Fair enough, I take your point.

I suppose the point I was really trying to make is that it is a lot more difficult for a 5 handicapper to shoot 43/44 points than a 15 handicapper (in terms of how well each player has to perform in terms of their own ability)

I play off 5 and I've broken par only once in my life, this is the level of golf I need to play to in order to compete for my clubs major honours. Yet at the same time I am holding my current handicap with ease. I'm kinda in a no-mans land of 33-36 points, I maintain my handicap but never featuring in the prizes, It gets a little frustrating after a while when weaker players AWAYS win due to the system.

I don't want to come across as harsh - but you've got to stop feeling sorry for yourself. Club competitions are harder for lower handicaps - no doubt - but that's life - just be proud of the level you can play to.

Next season get out of your club & play a few junior scratch cups (& if you can a senior or 2). Off 5 you'll be one of the better players there & you'll see exactly where you game is. No calling anyone a weaker player and no handicaps coming into it - best gross score wins - end of story.

Dublin Spur

Corkblowin wrote: »

I don't want to come across as harsh - but you've got to stop feeling sorry for yourself. Club competitions are harder for lower handicaps - no doubt - but that's life - just be proud of the level you can play to.

Next season get out of your club & play a few junior scratch cups (& if you can a senior or 2). Off 5 you'll be one of the better players there & you'll see exactly where you game is. No calling anyone a weaker player and no handicaps coming into it - best gross score wins - end of story.

okay, but why should they be harder for players in certain handicap ranges ?

You say, "that's life", but that's not a very strong argument for it.

surely in a fair system everyone would have an equal chance ?

The goal should be to find a system where the winner is the player that plays best in relation to their own ability. If this can't be achieved then separate class systems should be standard so players only compete against player of similar ability, it's the fairest way.

all I would like is a more level playing field

Corkblowin

Dublin Spur wrote: »

okay, but why should they be harder for players in certain handicap ranges ?

You say, "that's life", but that's not a very strong argument for it.

surely in a fair system everyone would have an equal chance ?

The goal should be to find a system where the winner is the player that plays best in relation to their own ability. If this can't be achieved then separate class systems should be standard so players only compete against player of similar ability, it's the fairest way.

all I would like is a more level playing field

Once you get to a certain level you have to realise that stableford competitions are going to be harder to win - they are not designed for the steady player. We've more of a chance in stroke competitions, but week to week we're playing for the best gross prize. As someone else pointed out its simple maths - if you've 150 mid to high handicappers in a club one is going to shoot the lights out any given week. With only 52 weeks in a year.......

Like I said - the class systems youre looking for are in the scratch cups. But golf is about more than winning a lump of glass or something - if that's anyone's focus they're in for a lifetime of frustration playing the game.

Dublin Spur

Corkblowin wrote: »

Once you get to a certain level you have to realise that stableford competitions are going to be harder to win - they are not designed for the steady player. We've more of a chance in stroke competitions, but week to week we're playing for the best gross prize. As someone else pointed out its simple maths - if you've 150 mid to high handicappers in a club one is going to shoot the lights out any given week. With only 52 weeks in a year.......

Like I said - the class systems youre looking for are in the scratch cups. But golf is about more than winning a lump of glass or something - if that's anyone's focus playing the game they're in for a lifetime of frustration playing the game.

fair enough,

I can only speak from my own perspective and it would be nice to feature every now and again in the honours, and not have to travel to other clubs to play in scratch cups to have a chance. I'd rather play in my own club and I've paid enough money for the privilege.

The only point I was making was that the reason I rarely feature is down to a handicap system that does not treat all golfers fairly and the same.

Corkblowin

Dublin Spur wrote: »

fair enough,

I can only speak from my own perspective and it would be nice to feature every now and again in the honours, and not have to travel to other clubs to play in scratch cups to have a chance. I'd rather play in my own club and I've paid enough money for the privilege.

The only point I was making was that the reason I rarely feature is down to a handicap system that does not treat all golfers fairly and the same.

For all it's flaws the handicap system is the best thing we have - theres a few cheating the system and it's up to the clubs to weed them out.

Does your club have a golfer of the year? Ours does & it's always been won by a single figure golfer. One of my mates is off 3 and is going to win his clubs goty this year without winning anything other than a few best gross this year. By having points for the top 20 in every comp (or nominated comps) it rewards consistency throughout the year. Might be worth asking for at your AGM if it's not already in.

FixdePitchmark

Corkblowin wrote: »

I don't want to come across as harsh - but you've got to stop feeling sorry for yourself. Club competitions are harder for lower handicaps - no doubt - but that logic -s life - just be proud of the level you can play to.

Next season get out of your club & play a few junior scratch cups (& if you can a senior or 2). Off 5 you'll be one of the better players there & you'll see exactly where you game is. No calling anyone a weaker player and no handicaps coming into it - best gross score wins - end of story.

You may say you are harsh - but does that not prove the system is bull****.

If we sit around waiting for you to say , "I don't

---

bla ---- bla - bla".

It is not about you, it is about golf , it is about logic.

Mathematically the system is flawed, we all know that - live along with it - but don't be fooled by it.

Ratio, and % is the way to go, you can not fool logic.

PARlance

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

You may say you are harsh - but does that not prove the system is bull****.

If we sit around waiting for you to say , "I don't

---

bla ---- bla - bla".

It is not about you, it is about golf , it is about logic.

Mathematically the system is flawed, we all know that - live along with it - but don't be fooled by it.

Ratio, and % is the way to go, you can not fool logic.

How was your Kebab???

Lawless2k12

If people want to reduce banditry then maybe a change in the current .1 system be put in place? The system as it is allows you to go up 2.0 shots of your lowest handicap this year but why not just put a cap on the amount of total .1's you can actually get? I know a guy that's had just over 50 .1's so far this year in our club comps (Outside away comps). Don't know how he's not been reprimanded but if there was a cap of 15 .1's put in place it may reduce banditry in some way? Or a system which allows a different number of .1's to be gained by players in different sections such as CAT1 players can get 10, CAT2 players can get 15 etc.. Higher handicappers would need a bigger number of available .1's as they would have a lack of consistency IMO.

I see posts with people talking about new handicap systems but come on. Be realistic. The time and effort wouldn't be worth it. That's too big a change to try and bring in. A few small changes would do some good because at the end of the day there's always gonna be a few people who find loop holes in the system.

FixdePitchmark

Lawless2k12 wrote: »

If people want to reduce banditry then maybe a change in the current .1 system be put in place? The system as it is allows you to go up 2.0 shots of your lowest handicap this year but why not just put a cap on the amount of total .1's you can actually get? I know a guy that's had just over 50 .1's so far this year in our club comps (Outside away comps). Don't know how he's not been reprimanded but if there was a cap of 15 .1's put in place it may reduce banditry in some way? Or a system which allows a different number of .1's to be gained by players in different sections such as CAT1 players can get 10, CAT2 players can get 15 etc.. Higher handicappers would need a bigger number of available .1's as they would have a lack of consistency IMO.

I see posts with people talking about new handicap systems but come on. Be realistic. The time and effort wouldn't be worth it. That's too big a change to try and bring in. A few small changes would do some good because at the end of the day there's always gonna be a few people who find loop holes in the system.

A new handicap system is not like trying to get to Mars.

I'd imagine you could change by 5 shots if your game just went ? (50 * .1)

onlyfinewine

Lawless2k12 wrote: »

If people want to reduce banditry then maybe a change in the current .1 system be put in place? The system as it is allows you to go up 2.0 shots of your lowest handicap this year but why not just put a cap on the amount of total .1's you can actually get? I know a guy that's had just over 50 .1's so far this year in our club comps (Outside away comps). Don't know how he's not been reprimanded but if there was a cap of 15 .1's put in place it may reduce banditry in some way? Or a system which allows a different number of .1's to be gained by players in different sections such as CAT1 players can get 10, CAT2 players can get 15 etc.. Higher handicappers would need a bigger number of available .1's as they would have a lack of consistency IMO.

I see posts with people talking about new handicap systems but come on. Be realistic. The time and effort wouldn't be worth it. That's too big a change to try and bring in. A few small changes would do some good because at the end of the day there's always gonna be a few people who find loop holes in the system.

If instead of capping them you instead hold the granting of the point one increases for 6 months and allow handicaps to be cut for performance as per usual in the meantime you will highlight the point one merchants.

The handicap secretary can judge their ability over a reasonable period, and take classic and Society scores into account before deciding whether they should be allowed 40 or 50 point ones.

It will only affect those with lots of time to play in all these competitions and who have produced superior scores during the period. The handicap record will reflect the outstanding performances over the same time scale.

It costs nothing to implement and the big advantage is that you can keep the present system which has had an immense amount of thought and time put into it, and stop the abuse by these handicap builders.

Lawless2k12

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

A new handicap system is not like trying to get to Mars.

I'd imagine you could change by 5 shots if your game just went ? (50 * .1)

But its a lot of hassle since everyone knows the score with the present system and it's a good system if it wasn't abused.

And you probably could change 5 shots, but unfortunately the certain person I mentioned has won player of the year by a good 15 points after his 4 major wins thru the year, all above 42 points. And then the next day after this massive win, he shoots 28/29 points. Everyone knows the story.