Bad news for bandits

nomunnnofun

Received this email from my club this morning. Looks like the bandit's playground is coming to an end and handicap reductions on general play will be easier to monitor and apply. Great news.:)

As you may be aware new Handicap & Competition software has been recently introduced in the club. It has been tested over the past few weeks for signing in to competitions in the proshop and also for entering scores in the mens locker room. A touchscreen has been installed in the mens locker room to make returning scores and enquiring of handicaps more user .

For all future mens competitions scores will be returned through the computer.
Competitions include:
Singles
Fourballs
Team Events
Matchplays
Winter League

Singles competitions will remain the only competitions that handicaps will be adjusted automatically through the computer.

There will be no handicap reductions applied by the computer for features in other events,however as usual, they will be taken into account for general play and annual review.

alxmorgan

Bout time

The_Architect

If I am reading this right, then I call it madness.

What scores are you putting in for matchplay, for team events?

What happened to picking up your ball when you're out of a hole? This kind of thing will just result in slower play.

Or am I reading it wrongly?

blue note

The_Architect wrote: »

If I am reading this right, then I call it madness.

What scores are you putting in for matchplay, for team events?

What happened to picking up your ball when you're out of a hole? This kind of thing will just result in slower play.

Or am I reading it wrongly?

Fair point. What scores are you entering in for fourballs / team events? The scores you contributed to the group or the team's score?

Russman

The_Architect wrote: »

If I am reading this right, then I call it madness.

What scores are you putting in for matchplay, for team events?

What happened to picking up your ball when you're out of a hole? This kind of thing will just result in slower play.

Or am I reading it wrongly?

Agreed, totally unworkable for matchplay etc. And what about foresomes ??
Usual story of a sledgehammer to crack an acorn.

Dbu

This seems totally ridiculous to be honest
OP ask your club how this will be enforced.

mike12

we had software in my last club where you could enter team scores on the computer seem normal to me if the software can handle it.

nomunnnofun

It has been in use the last few weeks. For a fourball competition, I entered my score and my partners score for every hole and it works out the best stableford score between us to give the overall points tally.
If I was out of a hole and had picked up my ball, I entered 0 on system. Obviously, no CSS or automatic handicap reductions seen but at least the system is capturing my 40 points versus my playing partners 18. A few of those 40 pointers in team format comps should trigger an alert with the handicap sec hopefully.
Not 100% but I imagine this is how it is working.

Dbu

Still need to be convinced how this would work in a foursomes for example

nomunnnofun

I agree it is impractical for foursomes and I imagine that it would be disregarded for such but we only have about 2 of those each year in my club so not really a big deal. Let all the bandits pay their annual sub for the 2 rounds of golf and battle it out to win 2 comps each year;) I reckon It's a major improvement on the way it has been up to now though.

Russman

nomunnnofun wrote: »

I agree it is impractical for foursomes and I imagine that it would be disregarded for such but we only have about 2 of those each year in my club so not really a big deal. Let all the bandits pay their annual sub for the 2 rounds of golf and battle it out to win 2 comps each year;) I reckon It's a major improvement on the way it has been up to now though.

And just how many real bandits are actually in your club ? It seems like an awful lot of effort to catch the few genuine ones out there (who, if they are real good ones, will be able to manage the system effectively anyway).

As an aside, can clubs put in a local rule that all cards must go on the computer ? Genuinely asking as I thought all a player was obliged to do under the rules of golf was basically enter their gross score and handicap on their card and return the card ? You're not even obliged to add up your scores afaik.

newport2

Dbu wrote: »

Still need to be convinced how this would work in a foursomes for example

They just say they will be taken into account for annual review. You're probably not going to do well in several foursomes without playing reasonably well yourself, irregardless of how good your partner is. Fourballs maybe. I expect it will be just used for exceptional cases though, ie suspected bandits overall record looked at to back up suspicions.

newport2

Russman wrote: »

And just how many real bandits are actually in your club ? It seems like an awful lot of effort to catch the few genuine ones out there (who, if they are real good ones, will be able to manage the system effectively anyway).

As an aside, can clubs put in a local rule that all cards must go on the computer ? Genuinely asking as I thought all a player was obliged to do under the rules of golf was basically enter their gross score and handicap on their card and return the card ? You're not even obliged to add up your scores afaik.

Both my current club and my last club both had rules regarding suspension from competitions if you ran up more than 3 un-entered scorecards in one season.

Russman

nomunnnofun wrote: »

It has been in use the last few weeks. For a fourball competition, I entered my score and my partners score for every hole and it works out the best stableford score between us to give the overall points tally.
If I was out of a hole and had picked up my ball, I entered 0 on system. Obviously, no CSS or automatic handicap reductions seen but at least the system is capturing my 40 points versus my playing partners 18. A few of those 40 pointers in team format comps should trigger an alert with the handicap sec hopefully.
Not 100% but I imagine this is how it is working.

But that's just the point, you could be playing very well in a fourball and score, say, 3 or 4 points on 10 holes and simply pick up your ball for the other 8. Your points total is in no way reflective of how you played, or indeed of how you can play because we can all birdie a hole but nobody would suggest that's someone's level. Fourball scoring is also totally different because you have the safety net of a partner so will be more relaxed than in a singles and might take more risks that may come off on a good day.

Russman

newport2 wrote: »

Both my current club and my last club both had rules regarding suspension from competitions if you ran up more than 3 un-entered scorecards in one season.

Un-entered or not returned ? I mean someone could put their card in the box and not bother (for whatever reason) to use the computer. Plenty of times I've finished a round after being first out and the computer hasn't been working or switched on so we'd just throw our cards in the box. As far as I remember, and its been a few years since I was involved, but the computer is regarded as as an aid to compiling results/CSS etc, not the definitive article.

AGC

Is this not just what is in place anyway? Reductions automatically for singles events and hcaps can be reviewed following results in other events.

I have been previously cut for winning match play events.

AGC

Russman wrote: »

Un-entered or not returned ? I mean someone could put their card in the box and not bother (for whatever reason) to use the computer. Plenty of times I've finished a round after being first out and the computer hasn't been working or switched on so we'd just throw our cards in the box. As far as I remember, and its been a few years since I was involved, but the computer is regarded as as an aid to compiling results/CSS etc, not the definitive article.

Yeap, if you enter the comp and return your card that is OK. Some clubs may have local rules but as rules go it is not mandatory

newport2

Russman wrote: »

Un-entered or not returned ? I mean someone could put their card in the box and not bother (for whatever reason) to use the computer. Plenty of times I've finished a round after being first out and the computer hasn't been working or switched on so we'd just throw our cards in the box. As far as I remember, and its been a few years since I was involved, but the computer is regarded as as an aid to compiling results/CSS etc, not the definitive article.

Not entered or not returned. Their main concern was the CSS and it getting skewed by bad scores not returned, but every entry had to have a card to back it up.

Russman

newport2 wrote: »

Not entered or not returned. Their main concern was the CSS and it getting skewed by bad scores not returned, but every entry had to have a card to back it up.

Hmmm, I'm not sure you can penalise someone who puts their card in the box and doesn't bother to enter it on the computer, I could be wrong though.

CSS getting skewed is a big problem and I've no issue at all with punishing non returned cards, but if a card is in the box, its returned IMO.

AGC

If they haven't entered well then they aren't in the comp. If they try enter after they play well that is a different story

Russman

AGC wrote: »

If they haven't entered well then they aren't in the comp. If they try enter after they play well that is a different story

Absolutely. It was a big problem in my club (probably still is), where guys would pay into the comp in the shop but not enter on the computer until they were finished if they had a good score. If they didn't have a good score or were going to get 0.1 they just wouldn't enter. It was too much of a hassle to check the book against the computer and tick off names, so nothing was done about it.

nomunnnofun

Russman wrote: »

And just how many real bandits are actually in your club ? It seems like an awful lot of effort to catch the few genuine ones out there (who, if they are real good ones, will be able to manage the system effectively anyway).

As an aside, can clubs put in a local rule that all cards must go on the computer ? Genuinely asking as I thought all a player was obliged to do under the rules of golf was basically enter their gross score and handicap on their card and return the card ? You're not even obliged to add up your scores afaik.

Well, I wouldn't think there are a lot of bandits in my club to be honest but all you need to do is look at the fresh threads posted here on a Monday morning to see that these few bandits from my club and all the other bandits in other clubs tend to be one of the major gripes among golfers today. I don't think entering (2*18 scores fourball) (4*18 scores Team of 4) in the computer is that much effort to be honest. Perhaps 5 minutes added onto your round of 4 hours.:o
In my club, if card is not entered in the computer, you can get banned from the next comp. If the computer is broken, it must be noted on the card before entering it in the box.
I think the whole point of this system is that there will be a trackable record of all scores in non - stroke events. There will always be ways to manipulate but surely, this should make it easier to spot regular themes.

Russman

nomunnnofun wrote: »

Well, I wouldn't think there are a lot of bandits in my club to be honest but all you need to do is look at the fresh threads posted here on a Monday morning to see that these few bandits from my club and all the other bandits in other clubs tend to be one of the major gripes among golfers today. I don't think entering (2*18 scores fourball) (4*18 scores Team of 4) in the computer is that much effort to be honest. Perhaps 5 minutes added onto your round of 4 hours.:o
In my club, if card is not entered in the computer, you can get banned from the next comp. If the computer is broken, it must be noted on the card before entering it in the box.
I think the whole point of this system is that there will be a trackable record of all scores in non - stroke events. There will always be ways to manipulate but surely, this should make it easier to spot regular themes.

I take your point, but to play devil's advocate, a "real" bandit will simply have 8 or 9 "no scores" on their cards so their 18 hole total will be low. I'm not sure there's any benefit to be gained from it. If you're going to cut them based on "wins", well then the prize book will already have all that info anyway. What good is looking at a person's best 9 holes out of a full round ?

And how do you enter matchplay scores ? I just can't see the point in it to be honest.

Slightly tongue in cheek, most of the complaints about bandits are borne of jealousy and guys who can't play to their own handicaps anyway !!

I'd say banning someone for not using the computer could be fraught with danger if the wrong person was banned, say a half blind guy who forgot his glasses........ Our learned friends would have a field day.

newport2

Russman wrote: »

Hmmm, I'm not sure you can penalise someone who puts their card in the box and doesn't bother to enter it on the computer, I could be wrong though.

CSS getting skewed is a big problem and I've no issue at all with punishing non returned cards, but if a card is in the box, its returned IMO.

It was a local rule and I was told that was the penalty. Didn't actually know anyone penalised though, so maybe it was an empty threat

GreeBo

It's been like this in my club for years, without a problem.
Don't see what the fuss is about. Mostly it helps the comp committee determine winners etc, only the single scores are used for handicap purposes, outside of observation, as usual.

The_Architect

Well if it were my club, I'd only be putting in scores for singles stableford or strokeplay. Because those are the only competitions where you are individually scoring.

Golf doesn't need us to fall more in to a card and pencil mentality.

That way of thinking (i.e. scoring every round you play) is part of the reason the rounds are so slow in the States.

mike12

nomunnnofun wrote: »

Well, I wouldn't think there are a lot of bandits in my club to be honest but all you need to do is look at the fresh threads posted here on a Monday morning to see that these few bandits from my club and all the other bandits in other clubs tend to be one of the major gripes among golfers today. I don't think entering (2*18 scores fourball) (4*18 scores Team of 4) in the computer is that much effort to be honest. Perhaps 5 minutes added onto your round of 4 hours.:o
In my club, if card is not entered in the computer, you can get banned from the next comp. If the computer is broken, it must be noted on the card before entering it in the box.
I think the whole point of this system is that there will be a trackable record of all scores in non - stroke events. There will always be ways to manipulate but surely, this should make it easier to spot regular themes.

I think you are taking it up incorrectly there is no need to enter 4 18 hole scores in a 4 person team event you only enter the 2 players who scored on each hole, the system isn't to catch bandits it just to compile the results.

BigChap1759

Russman wrote: »

Absolutely. It was a big problem in my club (probably still is), where guys would pay into the comp in the shop but not enter on the computer until they were finished if they had a good score. If they didn't have a good score or were going to get 0.1 they just wouldn't enter. It was too much of a hassle to check the book against the computer and tick off names, so nothing was done about it.

I thought you couldn't enter a score until a set time had passed after entering?

Russman

BigChap1759 wrote: »

I thought you couldn't enter a score until a set time had passed after entering?

Dunno, guess it depends on the setting or system ? It'd be a good security feature though.

I know you definitely can enter and immediately enter your score in my place. It could often happen legitimately too, say, the pro is a few minute late turning up to open, the first guys out might go on ahead and pay/enter when they finish. Or if the lines are being re-jigged to maybe accommodate someone who has turned up on spec, maybe two fourballs becoming three threeballs, there's an extra group to go so the guys might fire away to save time and do their bookkeeping at the end.

nomunnnofun

mike12 wrote: »

I think you are taking it up incorrectly there is no need to enter 4 18 hole scores in a 4 person team event you only enter the 2 players who scored on each hole, the system isn't to catch bandits it just to compile the results.

Possibly !!! So, are you saying the two players who didn't score should be input as 0 for that hole? I would have thought if, from a team of four, you had two 3 pointers and two 2's, these should all be input. Why put in zero when you actually got a bogey If you have taken your 6 shots and are out of the hole, then by all means pick up the ball and move on to speed up play and enter 0 on the system.
Why not use the system to its full capabilites of tracking individual scores and compiling results:)

Ronney

Had this for a few years in my place. 4 Ball/Teams you just enter No score for who ever doesnt count only takes 30 seconds more than a single card entry.

Be interested to see how you deal with match play though. Given that holes are conceded at certain points or putts given you could technically be entering false scores.

Tracking individuals scores in team events can be misleading as you regularly have "free putts", eg your partner is in for par and you have a birdy putt, there is no worry about missing so can be extra agressive at it.

Russman

nomunnnofun wrote: »

Why not use the system to its full capabilites of tracking individual scores and compiling results:)

I guess the natural extension to that though would be why bother with 4-balls and team events at all, if we decide we want every score tracked ?
Why would you want to track individual scores, if they're not in singles comps ? Scores in "team" type events compared to scores made in singles is an apples v oranges comparison IMO. You've got pressure or lack of, you're partner can show you the line, give you a club etc. etc. Most people will "freewheel" in a 4 ball and play their most aggressive taking on shots they'd never ever attempt in a singles.

PARlance

nomunnnofun wrote: »

Possibly !!! So, are you saying the two players who didn't score should be input as 0 for that hole? I would have thought if, from a team of four, you had two 3 pointers and two 2's, these should all be input. Why put in zero when you actually got a bogey If you have taken your 6 shots and are out of the hole, then by all means pick up the ball and move on to speed up play and enter 0 on the system.
Why not use the system to its full capabilites of tracking individual scores and compiling results:)

We're talking about bandits and possibly a team of bandits here Nom.
If they had 4 3's they'd still only put in the 2 3's with blanks in that instance.

This new format won't make them honest all of a sudden.

GreeBo

PARlance wrote: »

We're talking about bandits and possibly a team of bandits here Nom.
If they had 4 3's they'd still only put in the 2 3's with blanks in that instance.

This new format won't make them honest all of a sudden.

But there is nothing in the OP to suggest its for handicap purposes.
It certainly isnt in my club.
You mark your card the exact same way you do today and then enter those scores in the computer. No new requirements to finish out every hole or anything like that.
It does all the crap figuring out winners, countback etc, etc.
The Comp Committee just needs to manually check the cards of the winners, rather than wade through hundreds of cards.

I really think people are reading far too much into it!

PARlance

GreeBo wrote: »

But there is nothing in the OP to suggest its for handicap purposes.
It certainly isnt in my club.
You mark your card the exact same way you do today and then enter those scores in the computer. No new requirements to finish out every hole or anything like that.
It does all the crap figuring out winners, countback etc, etc.
The Comp Committee just needs to manually check the cards of the winners, rather than wade through hundreds of cards.

I really think people are reading far too much into it!

Reading too much into the title "Bad news for bandits" ???

I agree that this new initiative has / will have next to no effect on Bandits. It'll save on admin work but I don't think a bandit in the country will be worrying about it.

The topic is a combo of the OP and the thread title, no?

And yes, I agree obv, the OP'er is reading far too much into it IMO.

Russman

GreeBo wrote: »

But there is nothing in the OP to suggest its for handicap purposes.

No, but to be fair, his second sentence, along with the thread title would imply he thinks it is or should be.

And, the more you think about it, all it realistically can be used for is to record scores for results purposes, any other use that its put to is so unrealiable as to be guess work with regard to what a player might or might not have had on a given hole that was "scratched".

GreeBo

PARlance wrote: »

Reading too much into the title "Bad news for bandits" ???

I agree that this new initiative has / will have next to no effect on Bandits. It'll save on admin work but I don't think a bandit in the country will be worrying about it.

The topic is a combo of the OP and the thread title, no?

And yes, I agree obv, the OP'er is reading far too much into it IMO.

Russman wrote: »

No, but to be fair, his second sentence, along with the thread title would imply he thinks it is or should be.

And, the more you think about it, all it realistically can be used for is to record scores for results purposes, any other use that its put to is so unrealiable as to be guess work with regard to what a player might or might not have had on a given hole that was "scratched".

Thats the OP's interpretation of the clubs message though.
The message from the club has no mention of trying to address handicaps, other than to specifically state that nothing will change!

SnowDrifts

Is the bigger problem not the lack of cuts the handicap secretary applies for team events/fourballs? I've had a few good results at home and away the year before last and documented the away scores hoping to get a cut and I got nothing! Think for one of the fourballs we won, I had 40pts. The provision is already there for cuts to be applied in that case.

PARlance

GreeBo wrote: »

Thats the OP's interpretation of the clubs message though.
The message from the club has no mention of trying to address handicaps, other than to specifically state that nothing will change!

Well, we are (all) disagreeing with the OP's interpretation......

As a side note. There was a few motions put forward by the GUI recently that were clearly addressing bandits... There was no mention of bandits or "addressing handicaps" (which assumes something is wrong). I don't think a club or body would ever explicitly mention that in a communication.
So I can see why the OP has read between the lines in this case. I just think he has read it wrong.

PARlance

SnowDrifts wrote: »

Is the bigger problem not the lack of cuts the handicap secretary applies for team events/fourballs? I've had a few good results at home and away the year before last and documented the away scores hoping to get a cut and I got nothing! Think for one of the fourballs we won, I had 40pts. The provision is already there for cuts to be applied in that case.

I guess they'll say they don't have the time. Maybe it's a two person role. One to look after the review side of things. Not too easy to get volunteers I guess.

Personally I think a quick and easy fix is to cut all winning (top 3 maybe) teams by 0.5 per individual.
It may not be the fairest if someone has had a stinker. But I think a win should equal a cut no matter what.
Let the prize be the consolation for the lad that got cut and was carried by teammates.

mike12

nomunnnofun wrote: »

Possibly !!! So, are you saying the two players who didn't score should be input as 0 for that hole? I would have thought if, from a team of four, you had two 3 pointers and two 2's, these should all be input. Why put in zero when you actually got a bogey If you have taken your 6 shots and are out of the hole, then by all means pick up the ball and move on to speed up play and enter 0 on the system.
Why not use the system to its full capabilites of tracking individual scores and compiling results:)

Because thats the way you fill out a team even on a score card first 2 in the hole go on the card if you can't score any better then you pick up you don't finish out.

gman127

Would it not be just as handy to give a small cut to everyone on the prize winning teams regardless.

Say:
1st - all cut 0.3
2nd - all cut 0.2
3rd - all cut 0.1

I know you'll end up cutting players who shouldn't be, but it's not that big a cut and on average the deserved cuts to players who should get them would out balance those who don't.

And there really isn't that many fourball / foursome / team events on a given clubs calender anyway.

Even if I didn't play particularly well on a given day, if I'm walking up to collect a prize, I'll take the cut!

GreeBo

Prizes and handicap have no correlation, linking then is a mistake imo.
Css is for handicap, position is for prizes.
Is it fair to not get cut because you lost on a countback for example?

gman127

GreeBo wrote: »

Prizes and handicap have no correlation, linking then is a mistake imo.
Css is for handicap, position is for prizes.
Is it fair to not get cut because you lost on a countback for example?

On what I'd exampled it'd only be the difference of a 0.1.

The type of system you'd really need would be either too complicated to implement or too difficult to administer.

The variables are too many in group competitions, who scored on which holes and how many holes, would you go by the size of a win in match play???
-and so on.

Overall, I'd like either small cuts or leave as it is.

PARlance

GreeBo wrote: »

Prizes and handicap have no correlation, linking then is a mistake imo.
Css is for handicap, position is for prizes.
Is it fair to not get cut because you lost on a countback for example?

I think a difference can / should be made for team events. There are no cuts for a team event at present and well, it would be impossible to get a true reflection of an individual score from such an event.

So in the absence of a CSS or Cut, I think prizes (or finishing positions) could be used for team events.
These comps seem to attract more bandits, just an observation. I guess it would make sense as it's all in favour for them at present.
They've a chance of winning with no* chance of a penalty.

*with the exception of the very rare observational cut

I would guess that most honest golfers would welcome a cut based on prizes if it meant that it would be a thorn in the side of bandits.

There are very few ways to target bandits, I personally think this is a very simple one, and whilst not perfect, would go a great way to addressing the problem.

Rikand

I endorse any system that endeavours to have people appropriately handicapped.

Russman

PARlance wrote: »

I think a difference can / should be made for team events. There are no cuts for a team event at present and well, it would be impossible to get a true reflection of an individual score from such an event.

So in the absence of a CSS or Cut, I think prizes (or finishing positions) could be used for team events.
These comps seem to attract more bandits, just an observation. I guess it would make sense as it's all in favour for them at present.
They've a chance of winning with no* chance of a penalty.

*with the exception of the very rare observational cut

I would guess that most honest golfers would welcome a cut based on prizes if it meant that it would be a thorn in the side of bandits.

There are very few ways to target bandits, I personally think this is a very simple one, and whilst not perfect, would go a great way to addressing the problem.

Very rare indeed, almost unheard of I'd say. Observational cuts have largely gone by the wayside in recent years. Rightly so IMO as they're too subjective and open to abuse & personality issues.

But, is part of the problem with team events not the perception that's associated with them ? Say, every bandit was cut 2 shots tomorrow, someone will still be first, second & third in the next team event, and they're automatically assumed to be a bandit because they win - its just the way some golfers are. Irish begrudgery maybe, I dunno. I really think there's an inordinate effort being spent on a problem that granted is real, but I don't think its as big an issue as is being made out and I'm not sure there's actually a way to combat it.

PARlance

Russman wrote: »

Very rare indeed, almost unheard of I'd say. Observational cuts have largely gone by the wayside in recent years. Rightly so IMO as they're too subjective and open to abuse & personality issues.

But, is part of the problem with team events not the perception that's associated with them ? Say, every bandit was cut 2 shots tomorrow, someone will still be first, second & third in the next team event, and they're automatically assumed to be a bandit because they win - its just the way some golfers are. Irish begrudgery maybe, I dunno. I really think there's an inordinate effort being spent on a problem that granted is real, but I don't think its as big an issue as is being made out and I'm not sure there's actually a way to combat it.

I only put that in as someone on here (sorry can't remember who it was) mentioned that a certain team of widely known touring pros had received an observational cut lately.

Russman

PARlance wrote: »

I only put that in as someone on here (sorry can't remember who it was) mentioned that a certain team of widely known touring pros had received an observational cut lately.

Ohh I wasn't being smart with you at all. Its the well known "teams" doing the circuit that give a bad name to the 4 lads who happen to dovetail well or have a good day.

PARlance

Russman wrote: »

Ohh I wasn't being smart with you at all. Its the well known "teams" doing the circuit that give a bad name to the 4 lads who happen to dovetail well or have a good day.

Didn't take it as being smart at all Russman. Was just saying that to prove the point that you made that it's incredibly rare. It was the first time I had heard of any action being taken.