New Worldwide Handicap System

PabloAndRoy wrote: »

He mentioned one player who plays off a high 20. Has been given a much higher HI. He said a recent Stableford would have scored 60 points off this HI ;-)

But you need to look at the underlying data to see if it's correct, if anything is missing or added in error. Most of the errors we've seen seem to relate to missing away scores. None so far that would make a significant change to HI.

PabloAndRoy wrote: »

Yes, it's the same. Although I think it is a combination of 9 holes or 18 holes to a total of 54 holes.

You could do nine hole scores under CONGU too.

Irishdaywalker wrote: »

In relation to the new handicap index for the members, ESR's or general play adjustments are not factored so they all need to be amended as well.

No they don't as they do not form part of he WHS.

newport2 wrote: »

Score Differential Calculation = (113/Slope Rating) x (Adj. Gross Score – Course Rating)

Work that out for your top 8 and it's the average of them

It's the top 8 Score Differentials from the last 20 Score Differentials rather than pick your top 8 scores and get the average Score Differential.

It's a subtle difference but if you play on lots of different courses with varying slopes and course ratings it can be quite a difference.

blue note wrote: »

Here's a question.

I'm looking at the different course ratings from the different tees in Tramore. From the green tees, it's a par 72, course rating 70.5, slope rating 132. From the red tees it's a par 75, course rating 73.8, slope rating 132. The red tees are in front of the greens on every hole.

So I thought you no longer have ladies tees, but rather the course is rated in terms of difficulty from each tee for the scratch golfer and bogey golf. And my understanding of those figures is that the scratch golfer should go around in 70.5 shots from the green tees and 73.8 shots from the red tees. This obviously doesn't make sense.

Am I misunderstanding it? Or have they split ladies and mens tees and marked them differently?

You'll see in the database an F or an M beside the ratings. I'll leave you to figure out what those letters stand for.

Interesting factoid. We asked Golf Ireland if we could have our yellow tees rated for women as well. They were happy to oblige and had a visit arranged until the county lockdown arrived. So we'll have to wait. But I'm posting this because a lot of people don't know you can do this.

willabur wrote: »

it has probably been covered already but how is ESR taken into account in the new system?
Its an reduction to handicap that doesn't involve a round of golf

Literally nine posts above yours. :rolleyes:

willabur wrote: »

Thanks!!

82 pages - not going to scroll through it all

It's only 31 if you set the post per page count to 40 in your preferences. :pac:

Golfgraffix wrote: »

Got ours today, out of 410 members there were very few anomalies. Maybe about 20 members we need to address.

What I did notice is that for members where scores went back a few years due to low round numbers they didn’t factor in any of the annual review adjustments or general play adjustments.

J

Well that's by design I suppose.

We're finding members with a good few away scores with some of those away scores missing. The odd one or two home scores missing too, but the away ones are definitely a thing. A quick count of 2020 scores and comparison with what's on record usually shows these up. Internally, the system seems to work very well, but (as with all big data imports) there's always a few anomalies.

Brewster wrote: »

Hi folks, I was made aware of my index from club. I was playing off 15.0. I was given 12.8. I have 14 scores in the system since September 2019, hence I believe they average my best four rounds. My best score differentials this year were 12, 14, 16 and 17. This would give me 14.75, and was pretty much were I expected to be. Am I doing something wrong?

Handicap index isn't your playing handicap for the course, you need to calculate what your playing handicap will be.

Brewster wrote: »

I didn’t think that was relevant to calculating initial index. My playing handicap will be higher, but not sure this is the issue. Every golfer in the club will be playing off a higher playing handicap. I believe index should be an average of my four best scores.

Until you get to 15 rounds and it's the average of your best 5. Why did they give you 12.8 if your index works out at 14.75?

Brewster wrote: »

Hi folks, I was made aware of my index from club. I was playing off 15.0. I was given 12.8. I have 14 scores in the system since September 2019, hence I believe they average my best four rounds. My best score differentials this year were 12, 14, 16 and 17. This would give me 14.75, and was pretty much were I expected to be. Am I doing something wrong?

As your differentials are whole numbers and not decimals, I'm guessing you mean what you were in relation to par. Use the below to calculate your differential for each round:


Score Differential Calculation = (113/Slope Rating) x (Adj. Gross Score – Course Rating)

Brewster wrote: »

Yes, gross differentials based on par..so perhaps I have calculated it wrong?

Sounds like it. Say you have 30 points Stableford. Your CR is 71.7 and SR is 126 (par 72). So 30 points is six over plus your handicap plus par giving 6 + 15 + 72 = 93. Your SD for that round is 93 -71.7 * 113/126 = 21.3 * 0.836 = 19.1.

For strokeplay competitions it's a bit different as you have to check whether you've exceeded nett double bogey on any hole and reduce the hole score to nett double bogey for every hole that this is true for.

prawnsambo wrote: »

Well that's by design I suppose.

We're finding members with a good few away scores with some of those away scores missing. The odd one or two home scores missing too, but the away ones are definitely a thing. A quick count of 2020 scores and comparison with what's on record usually shows these up. Internally, the system seems to work very well, but (as with all big data imports) there's always a few anomalies.

We use Handicapmaster, I found that if you publish to Golfnet but go back to start of 2019 rather than the default of Jan this year it seems to pull in the missing away scores and post them.

The fix for unposted home scores is a little more cumbersome, if you add a handicap not to a player and then delete it, the next time you publish it will fix the mising scores.

Was told today that they will be doing another run at the Handicap Index this week.

J

blue note wrote: »

Here's a question.

I'm looking at the different course ratings from the different tees in Tramore. From the green tees, it's a par 72, course rating 70.5, slope rating 132. From the red tees it's a par 75, course rating 73.8, slope rating 132. The red tees are in front of the greens on every hole.

So I thought you no longer have ladies tees, but rather the course is rated in terms of difficulty from each tee for the scratch golfer and bogey golf. And my understanding of those figures is that the scratch golfer should go around in 70.5 shots from the green tees and 73.8 shots from the red tees. This obviously doesn't make sense.

Am I misunderstanding it? Or have they split ladies and mens tees and marked them differently?

Mens and Ladies are still separate in the new system. The ladies even have a different slope factor.

Also Tramore is a par 75 for the ladies. 3 more pars 5s. It just wouldnt work I guess.

Golfgraffix wrote: »

I guess so, I’ll find out for sure tomorrow

I don’t think you have to publish, I think editing the record forces handicapmaster to push it through.

Thanks again. I looked at ours and there are two areas where you can change the date. The default was for records to be updated only if they had changed since the last update, the GolfNet start date was already set to January 2019, so I changed the 'last update' setting to January 2020 and it seems (haven't checked thoroughly) that this did the trick. It took a while to run, so I'm hopeful it sorted the issue.

For others here, this might sound a bit technical, but it seems that a lot of the missing data is down to the interface between your club's software and GolfNet. The WHS system is reliant on the data that's logged to GolfNet when your club runs an update (usually after a competition). That data seems to be incomplete in certain cases, so clubs should do something like what we did and run an update that forces the system to go back in time - your mileage as to how far to go back may vary. No idea how this has happened, but could be anything from a bad connection, a competition that was closed, re-opened and closed again without updating GolfNet after one or more of those changes or some other issue.

prawnsambo wrote: »

I'm starting to see PCCs coming into the calculations. Looks like it's CSS-SSS.

Think it was always to be included. Makes no sense to not include it as strictly using Par as a metric is wrong.

If I understand correctly HI is rounded to one decimal .. correct?

So if calculated HI is 14.45 ... thats rounded to 14.5?

If yes, then when asked what my handicap is .. whats the answer? .. 14 or 15? or 14.5?

fred funk }{ wrote: »

Think it was always to be included. Makes no sense to not include it as strictly using Par as a metric is wrong.

I believed so too. So was surprised to not see it in the initial viewings. But it seems to be filtering in. I imagine this is a very painful and slow exercise.