Handicap System (s)

Another subject that crops up on a regular basis, but is worth debating in some detail, without going into the surrounding issues about engineering a handicap etc. What we need to decide by consensus, is if the present system is good, does it work and is it an accurate reflection upon your game.

My simplistic interpretation is that a handicap is given to each player, so that when competing all players have the same chance of winning - a level playing field/a leveller. If this is the case, then I question the rule in certain club competions, medals etc, whereby play will be 3/4 handicap etc as this will surely benefit the lower h/c player. So why do we use variations of the actual handicap which is supposed to be a fair way of making things even.

We also have a few vagaries at some clubs, whereby they agree to CONGU rules but don't strictly adhere to them, if you get my drift. Most clubs are linked into the system and in theory nobody should need to carry around a h/c certificate as any queries can easily be sorted by the club in question, just logging onto the system and entering your name, club or even your own unique ID.

The general game changes somewhat if playing with an American, which is a good example. They will tell you they play off 12, when in real-terms it could be 16 because of the way things work in the States. Indeed club comps' over there will mean that entrants will play off different tee boxes dependant upon their handicap. So I could be playing off the back box whilst my partner plays off the ladies tee?

It's the 21st century and our sports does seem to have some archaic rules, which should really be uniform throughout the world, as it's the same game everywhere. The handicapping system should be one of the most important principles in the sport, but yet somehow doesn't cut it(Even though its really the only sport that attempts to). This is probably why there are so many arguments/discussions on the subject, because it's not an open and shut case.

I think that the system largely works pretty well. Obviously there are anomolies and (perhaps thanks to the large number of competitions at clubs, as well as society days etc.) those anomolies seem to come up quite often, but given the huge number of competetive rounds played per year in the UK I think it is a pretty good system

One thing to remember is that ones allocated handicap is (loosely) defined as being based on a score you are capable of - not what you would score regularly. Hence the "buffer zone" where you are allowed a certain number of shots (depending on your handicap category) worse than your handicap before being "penalized" for it by going up. This means that in a standard stableford competition, I would be expected to score 32-33 points on an average day but (subject to CSS vagaries) I wouldn't be cut unless I scored 36+ points.

I think the figure usually quoted is that you should be expected to play to your handicap (36 points stableford) only 3 or 4 times a year. However, we all know that people can have stellar days from time to time and hence the 40, 41 and 42 points we often see. In fact I heard just the other day of a guy playing off a 4 handicap who shot a gross 65 (par 70) for 45 points.

My simplistic interpretation is that a handicap is given to each player, so that when competing all players have the same chance of winning - a level playing field/a leveller. If this is the case, then I question the rule in certain club competions, medals etc, whereby play will be 3/4 handicap etc as this will surely benefit the lower h/c player. So why do we use variations of the actual handicap which is supposed to be a fair way of making things even.

It is a CONGU recommendaion these days that any singles type competition (2-ball matchplay or individual medal) should now be played off full handicap (where matchplay previously was a fraction). I can see the sense in still have 3/4 difference for 4-ball matchplay where you have two players effectively palying as a team and so if one player has a bad hole, the pertner still has the opportunity to remedy the team situation. Same goes for betterball stableford comps

Davie the CSS seems to be the bigger problem, so why do we have it. It does cause a hell of a lot of confusion at times, as you think one things going to happen and then a couple of days later something completley different occurs when results are posted. Surely without it we would see more players being cut and more going up. This would be a more accurate reflection about a players present form. There are also plenty of courses where players find it almost impossible to be cut due to the local rule about ignoring the white tee and using the championship tee. In these cases the handicap should be allocated for handing in 3-cards from these tees, and not the yellows.

In general play at my club or anywhere else, I play to or under my handicap. You stated that the average player should play to his handicap 3 or 4 times per year, yet in my case I only fail to play to it a few times each year. This should mean my handicap is wrong and should be lower, yet impossible at my club, as a fantastic round in a medal means actually playing to my handicap. The norm is me getting 0.1 added after each comp' - this then says my handicap is too low??

Not sure I understand you Doc. The CSS shouldn't cause that much confusion (although the way it is calculated can be pretty mysterious, but the average Joe doesn't need to know how it is calculated - just accept it)

All the CSS does really is take conditions into account on a particular day .. so while a course may be SSS 70, on a competition day with particularly bad conditions (ropey early season greens, bad weather, heavy rain, strong wind etc) then the CSS may well climb to 71 or 72 to reflect that.

I've never encountered what you say about "ignoring white tees" for competitions, but this should also be handled. If you submitted your first 3 cards for handicap from teh yellow tees, then that first handicap should be calculated against the SSS for the yellow tees (probably 3 or more shots lower than the championship tees). Similarly, when rounds are played from said championship tees, adjustments will be made to your handicap based on the SSS (or CSS) from those championship tees.

In general play at my club or anywhere else, I play to or under my handicap. You stated that the average player should play to his handicap 3 or 4 times per year, yet in my case I only fail to play to it a few times each year. This should mean my handicap is wrong and should be lower, yet impossible at my club, as a fantastic round in a medal means actually playing to my handicap. The norm is me getting 0.1 added after each comp' - this then says my handicap is too low??

I suspect from this you mean that you paly your casual play rounds from the yellows? In which case you should measure your score against the yellow SSS (and not par) so perhaps you really aren't playing to your handicap in the majority of rounds. If you really ARE playing to your handicap that many times in social rounds (measured against the SSS for the tees played) then indeed your handicap IS too high and the fact that you can't reproduce that form in medals suggests that either you struggle in competition conditions, or that the SSS values assigned for your course are dubious.

Davie, no I play all my casual rounds from the white tees at my club, even though we're not supposed to. For the last 2 years I have only played the minimum of 3 QC events because of the tee situation, and yes i know the comittee should sort it out, but won't, which means many players are like me and don't bother entering, leaving the way open for those that don't mind. This year i'll be playing at least 3 medals at my away club, and using these cards at my home club instead of playing QC's there. There is no difference in my play in QC's, the difference is always a 3 shot differential due to the fact that at least 2 par 4's become par 5's, so always start off in deficit which is stupid.

The reality is that I play officially off 17.5 (18) but in general play or anywhere else to an average of 14. When I joined my club I played off 16.4(16) but get 0.1 added every time I play a comp, except twice when playing a blinder and coming in with 34 and 35 points to stay still.

But irrespective of my own personal problems at my club, I'm interested in your views about the yank model. You are obviously fairly happy with our CONGU system and think it seems to be the best. Yet why are there so many different models, and how would you feel about playing with a yank who went off the red's

I think the current system is pretty good to be honest, although when getting to Cat 1, it can take some to get lower.

I recently joined a new club and carried my handicap over from my previous club which is 1.8. I entered my first competition last Saturday and unbeknown to me, they had missed the . out so I played off 18. 56 points later, I had won my first competition at a canter :-) Made quite a name for myself when the leader board was published - it was soon rectified though :-(

Did they disqualify you?

No because I put my handicap on the card and it was the secretary who had messed it up on the computer when I joined. 44 points won in the end so it made no difference anyway but that was my personal best stableford score even if it was only for a couple of hours