Changes to Handicap System for 2016/17

golfwallah

CONGU has just announced changes in the handicap system which come into effect from 1st January 2016.

Among the changes are increased "local" handicap allowed at a players home club and changes relating to handicap adjustments for 9 hole competitions.

Will be interesting to see how this all works out in practice - see Golf Monthly article.

Norfolk Enchants_

golfwallah wrote: »

CONGU has just announced changes in the handicap system which come into effect from 1st January 2016.

Among the changes are increased "local" handicap allowed at a players home club and changes relating to handicap adjustments for 9 hole competitions.

Will be interesting to see how this all works out in practice - see Golf Monthly article.

All welcomed changes, the most notable been 4ball better-ball HC increased from 3/4 to 90% (not sure I'm a fan of that one) and the inclusion of mens category 4 for CSS calculations (they've been geting away with murder for far too long;)).

Russman

Mostly ok changes, but totally disagree with 9 hole scores being used for handicapping purposes.

Going from 3/4 to 90% for 4/balls is probably a nod to the Cat 4 players who generally have a huge issue with 3/4

Interesting that seven consecutive 0.1s can lead to an upward review, would seem to go against the "rumour" in the thread from the other day, and make a lot more sense.

Norfolk Enchants_

Russman wrote: »

Mostly ok changes, but totally disagree with 9 hole scores being used for handicapping purposes.

Going from 3/4 to 90% for 4/balls is probably a nod to the Cat 4 players who generally have a huge issue with 3/4

Interesting that seven consecutive 0.1s can lead to an upward review, would seem to go against the "rumour" in the thread from the other day, and make a lot more sense.

To be fair to CONGU and cat 4 players it's safe to say this is not the reason used to bring about the new change, it's more to do with statistical analysis, although you can be sure that there will be some golfers who will still complain it's too severe:pac:;).
Have to disagree with you regarding 9 hole comps, it'll be great to facilitate the golfer who cant commit to 18. Obviously the main weekend comp will be 18 and 9 holes comps can run on weekdays during the summer and on occasion at weekends during the winter when daylight is limited

alxmorgan

Russman wrote: »

Mostly ok changes, but totally disagree with 9 hole scores being used for handicapping purposes.

I'd imagine this is an attempt to provide a quicker alternative to 18 holers in the winter/evenings. More and more people are finding it hard to justify the amount of time away from home that a full round takes but still want the buzz of competitive golf.

d15ude

alxmorgan wrote: »

I'd imagine this is an attempt to provide a quicker alternative to 18 holers in the winter/evenings. More and more people are finding it hard to justify the amount of time away from home that a full round takes but still want the buzz of competitive golf.

great for after work comps!

Letree

I don't quite get the 9 hole thing. Is it only to apply to a 9 hole comp. Or if you are playing 18 holes and have a great 9 will you be cut.

searay

Russman wrote: »

Mostly ok changes, but totally disagree with 9 hole scores being used for handicapping purposes.
.

Our captains prize is an 18 hole qualifier with the top 18 playing off over 9 holes.

In the last 2 years it's been won by players who shot standard scratch over 18 and shot great scores in the play-off to come through the field. Neither were cut under the current system despite being the best scorers over the competition.

The guys didn't do anything wrong but I think the system is wrong, in not recognising the play-off as qualifying.

I also think that where clubs run competitions over say 12/15 holes, congu rules should allow adjustments.

SaveOurLyric

Letree wrote: »

I don't quite get the 9 hole thing. Is it only to apply to a 9 hole comp. Or if you are playing 18 holes and have a great 9 will you be cut.

Only applies to a nine hole comp.

SaveOurLyric

searay wrote: »

Our captains prize is an 18 hole qualifier with the top 18 playing off over 9 holes.

In the last 2 years it's been won by players who shot standard scratch over 18 and shot great scores in the play-off to come through the field. Neither were cut under the current system despite being the best scorers over the competition.

The guys didn't do anything wrong but I think the system is wrong, in not recognising the play-off as qualifying.

It cannot be a qualifying competition because it outside the rules of golf - you have already played on the course that day.

cackhanded

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

It cannot be a qualifying competition because it outside the rules of golf - you have already played on the course that day.

How is it any different to a 36 hole comp on one day with two separate CSS's?

slave1

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

It cannot be a qualifying competition because it outside the rules of golf - you have already played on the course that day.

I came from way back to win our Presidents prize years back, it pissed and I play the same in the rain and won by half a shot over the final 9 (18 hole earlier thT day to qualify), I was cut 2 shots and the only person to be cut that day, go figure as I sure as hell could not?

Myksyk

slave1 wrote: »

I came from way back to win our Presidents prize years back, it pissed and I play the same in the rain and won by half a shot over the final 9 (18 hole earlier thT day to qualify), I was cut 2 shots and the only person to be cut that day, go figure as I sure as hell could not?

That sounds like you got a general play cut.

Myksyk

I'd be worried that the upward review after 7 0.1s plays into the 'hcp builders' hands.

Letree

Myksyk wrote: »

I'd be worried that the upward review after 7 0.1s plays into the 'hcp builders' hands.

Crazy idea. Local clubs are tormented with handicap builders. They are getting more and more shameless in my club.

Norfolk Enchants_

Myksyk wrote: »

I'd be worried that the upward review after 7 0.1s plays into the 'hcp builders' hands.

Nothing to be worried about, it's only a review, and while the review itself may be mandatory the HC adjustment(if any) must be sanctioned by the clubs HC committee, who will be well aware of who the HC builders are.
In summary this is a good move and brings the CONGU system more inline with EGU/USGA handicap system which is a truer reflection of current ability.

Russman

Letree wrote: »

Crazy idea. Local clubs are tormented with handicap builders. They are getting more and more shameless in my club.

How can you identify a handicap builder ? (Genuinely)

sydneybound

Russman wrote: »

How can you identify a handicap builder ? (Genuinely)

If someone plays in 20 comps to get .1s and it's €5 a comp the so called bandit is paying €100 to the club. That's a good clubman if you ask me!

I've been out of club golf for a long while, I don't understand this notion of handicap building. People going out and getting 0.1s on purpose?

So you end up playing off a higher handicap... which you just get cut from again? I don't get it.

SaveOurLyric

Nova Numerous Shortchange wrote: »

I've been out of club golf for a long while, I don't understand this notion of handicap building. People going out and getting 0.1s on purpose?

So you end up playing off a higher handicap... which you just get cut from again? I don't get it.

There is a lot to recommend it :

- you enjoy always being in the shakeout for classics and scrambles, and pick up some pretty nifty prizes on a fairly regular basis
- if you build properly, you are virtually guaranteed plenty of interclub team golf. That means loads of freebe games on other courses, free food and drink, and the acclaim of being a great representative of your club. You can rack up Pierce Purcell trophies for example, to beat the band.
- you can choose which competitions you are interested in having a go at, even with the penalty of a the ensuing cut. This means you have a much better chance of picking up a serious club comp like a captains, or presidents
- you can do very well in fourball/foursome comps without making your handicap too vulnerable to being cut. Again, leads to plenty of fun competitive golf, nice trophies, nice prizes
- you are always competitive against your mates, whether its just bragging rights, or taking the money off them every Sunday. They jibe that you're a bandit. You answer, no just competitive. Or lucky. Can hardly play to this handicap in fact and should be given another shot or two in the annual review. etc. etc.
- you can laugh at the fools who struggle to maintain their handicap and only have a shot at winning a comp once every second year or so. But secretly thank them for funding your golf.
- you will aquire quite a reputation as a charming rogue. But you know they are really just jealous and they cant touch you. Heck, you might sue.


Hope this helps. Everyone should try it.

markthespark77

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

There is a lot to recommend it :

- you enjoy always being in the shakeout for classics and scrambles, and pick up some pretty nifty prizes on a fairly regular basis
- if you build properly, you are virtually guaranteed plenty of interclub team golf. That means loads of freebe games on other courses, free food and drink, and the acclaim of being a great representative of your club. You can rack up Pierce Purcell trophies for example, to beat the band.
- you can choose which competitions you are interested in having a go at, even with the penalty of a the ensuing cut. This means you have a much better chance of picking up a serious club comp like a captains, or presidents
- you can do very well in fourball/foursome comps without making your handicap too vulnerable to being cut. Again, leads to plenty of fun competitive golf, nice trophies, nice prizes
- you are always competitive against your mates, whether its just bragging rights, or taking the money off them every Sunday. They jibe that you're a bandit. You answer, no just competitive. Or lucky. Can hardly play to this handicap in fact and should be given another shot or two in the annual review. etc. etc.
- you can laugh at the fools who struggle to maintain their handicap and only have a shot at winning a comp once every second year or so. But secretly thank them for funding your golf.
- you will aquire quite a reputation as a charming rogue. But you know they are really just jealous and they cant touch you. Heck, you might sue.


Hope this helps. Everyone should try it.

great review, explains it well..

Myksyk

Norfolk Enchants_ wrote: »

Nothing to be worried about, it's only a review, and while the review itself may be mandatory the HC adjustment(if any) must be sanctioned by the clubs HC committee, who will be well aware of who the HC builders are.
In summary this is a good move and brings the CONGU system more inline with EGU/USGA handicap system which is a truer reflection of current ability.

I'd still be worried. I've been a H/C sec for years. I can pretty much guarantee the builders will moan and want the reason for not reviewing them upwards. They will point out that the 7 0.1s indicate they are not able to play to current handicap ... Why wouldn't you review them upwards if the only available hard data is 7 0.1s? What else is there to go on?

SaveOurLyric

Myksyk wrote: »

I'd still be worried. I've been a H/C sec for years. I can pretty much guarantee the builders will moan and want the reason for not reviewing them upwards. They will point out that the 7 0.1s indicate they are not able to play to current handicap ... Why wouldn't you review them upwards if the only available hard data is 7 0.1s? What else is there to go on?

A missing component in the handicap adjustment algorithm for me has always been TIME. The current system nudges you up and down without any regard for the period between changes or a time based trend of returns. There does not seem to be anything in this proposal to rectify this unfortunately.

For example : an occasional, yet reasonably active summer golfer, who plays through the spring summer and only returns 7 upward revisions in 4,5 or 6 months should be looked at with a view to an upward revision. The golfer who is putting in one or more cards per week, and after a cut, puts in 7 'point one' cards in the next few week should NOT be adjusted upwards. This stands to the common sense that we all consider when we look at dodgy handicap management. Yet the system is blind to this. Even the old pre decimal adjustment system with handicaps entirely in the control of a handicap committee handled this situation. The current Congu system does not. And facilitates quick handicap 'correction' merchants.

Russman

Ahh the lesser spotted handicap builder, often spoken about but rarely seen in real life. Mostly because he's a product of people's imaginations. I say mostly because no doubt there are some out there, IMO there are far fewer than some would like to think.

IMHO there's way too much bravado, bar-talk, rumour etc involved. You see it on both sides. You get someone who's played poorly and says or boasts "sure I was only out for 0.1", when the truth is they were trying like mad but played sh!t and are too embarrassed to admit it.

On the other side of the coin you see guys who were low handicap 10 or even 20 years ago and have drifted out as they get older. Yet you hear their peers saying "sure Joe used to be off 5, how is he now 12 ?" People often forget the passage of time.

Or someone hits a few impressive shots on a Wednesday evening, plays poorly on the Saturday and the guy he played with on Wednesday wonders "....jaysus, I played with him on Wednesday and he played great, how is he off 10, he must have been pulling....."

Rant over ! :D
Can't remember how it relates to the rule changes, ohh yeah, the seven 0.1s and a potential upwards review - in reality I can't see anyone getting a review barring injury/sickness or exceptional circumstances. I'd say it'll be rarely used to be honest. Too open to potential bias.

SaveOurLyric

Russman wrote: »

Ahh the lesser spotted handicap builder, often spoken about but rarely seen in real life. Mostly because he's a product of people's imaginations. I say mostly because no doubt there are some out there, IMO there are far fewer than some would like to think.

I am not sure anyone claims there are hoards of them.
But the thing is, it only takes two or three of them in a club, featuring in competitions far more frequently than should be possible, permanent fixtures on teams, and the 'crack' team assembled for classics etc, for them to have a very high profile.
You cannot dismiss their damage to the game by looking at their brute numbers relative to the non-bandits.

Russman

SaveOurLyric wrote: »

I am not sure anyone claims there are hoards of them.
But the thing is, it only takes two or three of them in a club, featuring in competitions far more frequently than should be possible, permanent fixtures on teams, and the 'crack' team assembled for classics etc, for them to have a very high profile.
You cannot dismiss their damage to the game by looking at their brute numbers relative to the non-bandits.

Agree 100%, but no amount of rule changing will catch them all. There will always be a few bad eggs trying to gain an advantage (in all sports). There's a big danger IMO of the cure killing the patient, if too much emphasis is placed on trying to catch these guys with rules that will impact the genuine cases and perhaps put them off playing.

Letree

Nova Numerous Shortchange wrote: »

I've been out of club golf for a long while, I don't understand this notion of handicap building. People going out and getting 0.1s on purpose?

So you end up playing off a higher handicap... which you just get cut from again? I don't get it.

Most people i know at it are doing so for teams.

slave1

Russman wrote: »

Agree 100%, but no amount of rule changing will catch them all...

Bang on, all the rules of golf and CONGU and you can do nothing about folk making up scores and submitting and as outright brutal as it sounds it still happens...

Letree

Letree wrote: »

Most people i know at it are doing so for teams.

That is just straight up cheating imo.

Norfolk Enchants_

Myksyk wrote: »

I'd still be worried. I've been a H/C sec for years. I can pretty much guarantee the builders will moan and want the reason for not reviewing them upwards. They will point out that the 7 0.1s indicate they are not able to play to current handicap ... Why wouldn't you review them upwards if the only available hard data is 7 0.1s? What else is there to go on?

I think you might be getting ahead of yourself, this new change only flags a candidate as a potential review, it doesn't automatically mean a upward adjustment, also I'd be fairly certain that the change will come with a proper set of guidelines.
I wouldn't be worried at all, as with most things that relate to CONGU, there will be an "Ireland" clause and most likely this change will be implemented differently over here (if at all).

irishtoffee

Loads of handicap builders at my club, they get their prize then never break 30 points until they get at least a shot back and then strike again and so on.

Russman

irishtoffee wrote: »

Loads of handicap builders at my club, they get their prize then never break 30 points until they get at least a shot back and then strike again and so on.

That's the system working as its designed to do. Most golfers don't play to their handicap most of the time.

What do you expect amateur club golfers to do in their next number of rounds after a good score, continue to play well ?? Golf's not like that. Most people can't string two good rounds together, its only natural that after a win, your next few scores will be worse.

Walter Alright

Hi,

We got an email last week informing us to sign in on the computer for the weekly 12 hole Turkey competitions.

I got an email from Howdidido today with this weeks results which were marked as non qualifier and the CCS is shown as 0. I didn't play in the comp & I'm not sure whether I will be able to play over the next few weeks.

I assume winter rules are in place, as in placing & no 0.1's.

With the changes to handicap system introduced this year and the handicap year changed to Jan-Dec as opposed to Mar-Oct I'm wondering whether cuts will be made to handicaps.

Previous years there were no cuts applied and the same few cleaned up every winter.

Any idea whats happening in your club and whats the official GUI stance?

Thanks

mjsc1970

We're only a 9 hole course, so, over the winter period there are only 9 hole comps.

If you win a prize (1st or one of the 3 classes), we're cut an effective shot for every win. That cut in handicap is only applicable to 9 hole comps.

ForeRight

Maybe you've to sign in if there's a winter league

A New earth

Walter Alright wrote: »

Hi,

We got an email last week informing us to sign in on the computer for the weekly 12 hole Turkey competitions.

I got an email from Howdidido today with this weeks results which were marked as non qualifier and the CCS is shown as 0. I didn't play in the comp & I'm not sure whether I will be able to play over the next few weeks.

I assume winter rules are in place, as in placing & no 0.1's.

With the changes to handicap system introduced this year and the handicap year changed to Jan-Dec as opposed to Mar-Oct I'm wondering whether cuts will be made to handicaps.

Previous years there were no cuts applied and the same few cleaned up every winter.

Any idea whats happening in your club and whats the official GUI stance?

Thanks

No automatic cuts, probably making it easier for the card checkers. All scores, of course, should be taken into consideration by the handicap committee when they are having their semi annual review of handicaps, but as there is a review due this month it would probably be next May before winter scores would be looked at. You can get an out of course cut anytime if you are regularly shooting the lights out.