[Jim Hoak]

I searched and there has been a previous thread about the new handicap rules.  But this previous discussion was primarily debating whether the new rules were good or not.  That discussion is over; in less than 2 months, we will have a new handicap system all over the world!

For everyday golfers, there will only be two aspects to the new rules that will require a change in behavior:
1)  The new maximum score on a hole for reporting under Equitable Stroke adjustment will be a net double-bogey.
2)  Scores will need to be reported immediately and daily to be included in the algorithm adjustment discussed below.

However, behind the scenes there will be several changes all done by the computer:
1)  Handicaps will be adjusted daily, so we will need to check before we play.  Presumably, in a multi-day tournament, the handicap at the beginning will govern play on later dates.
2)  The system will calculate the handicap from the best 8 (vs. 10 currently) of the last 20 scores, and there will no longer be a discount applied to this calculation.
3)  There will be an algorithm in the system that will adjust the course rating of the course if scores from that day are out of the ordinary, due presumably to weather primarily.  This adjustment can only raise the rating by 3 points or down by 1 point maximum.  There has been a lot of discussion of this feature of the new system, but I suspect it will only come into play very rarely.  It replaces the UK system that allowed the club to adjust the course rating for unusual weather days.
4)  It is expected that all scores--tournament or casual play--will be reported.  But I wonder if all clubs and players will follow this practice.  There are only 3 exceptions to reporting a score--fewer than 13 holes played for an 18-hole score (or 7 for a 9-hole score); alternate shot/foursome play; or a special event like one-club, scramble, etc.  That means that better ball/fourball scores are to be counted with an estimate allowed if a ball is picked up.  Balls not in play should not be played out and slow down play.

There are other minor aspects to the new rules.  Not everyone is going to like them, but there is no need to debate them.  It's done/they're coming.  They were done to allow for a worldwide system of handicaps.  And they are in small part a reaction to the testing that showed a bias in the old rules that hurt lower handicappers.

What do you think this will do the game of golf?  I expect a negative reaction to them on this site.  I, for one, am supportive and I compliment the worldwide golf associations that debated and settled on them.

[Jon Wiggett]

And so the madness goes on. Why don't they just ask players what handicap they think they should have? Just glad as a professional my play is not affected by this terrible system.

[Wayne_Kozun]

I imagine the reaction will somewhat depend on where you live. The changes are less significant in North America so I imagine there will be less reaction here. We are used to entering a score after every round.


In Canada it was not too many years since ESC changed from maximum score holes of bogey, dbl, triple depending on handicap, to a fixed gross score like 7. Now that is changing again and I guess the new system means you have to be more aware of whether you get a stroke on a hole to know if ESC applies.

[Jim Sherma]

How will this impact the culture of match play? When over in the UK&I I always see a lot of locals that appear to be playing match play and not putting out once the home ls decided. This was one of the dynamics that lead to the fast pace of play that is common over there. Once the change occurs is seems like they will be in the position of playing fast and not posting your rounds, playing fast and posting estimates of what you think is fair, or you necessarily slowing down the pace of play as everyone in the group putts out everything.


Since most of the US club members seems to be playing some combination of the estimate/slow play methods it saddens me that this will likely drive the rest of the world more toward that model.

[Jim Hoak]

Jon--Not all of us are lucky or skilled enough to compete at golf without  a handicap.  I'm sorry you regard it as madness, but handicaps are what make golf a great game for 99% of us.  It is what separates us from other games that can't be played with people of varying abilities.

Jim--You are right that that is a risk.  But slower play is not a given.  Honest estimating is needed.  I believe it can work without slowing down play.

[Thomas Dai]

‘Honest estimating’. That’s an interesting factor when the handicap that the computer calculates is then used in competitive medals, stablefords, matches etc where prizes, sometimes pretty significant prizes given that golf for non-pros is supposed to be ‘amateur’, are awarded.
And from the opposite perspective, interestingly posted scores can produce vanity or dubious hcps which can then allow those so inclined to enter otherwise restricted events at the expense of those with accurate handicaps.
Atb

[Jim Hoak]

Thomas--All valid points.  Let's hope the implementation of these new rules is as good or better than the current rules.  They shouldn't make things worse--and at least they get us into this century of technology.
The rules continue to require each club to have a handicap chairman who has in theory the obligation to confront cheaters and outliers.  Will this work?  I don't know.
And certainly the new rules are better than Jon's suggestion that each person should just use the handicap they think they should have.

[Mark Pearce]

Jon--Not all of us are lucky or skilled enough to compete at golf without  a handicap.  I'm sorry you regard it as madness, but handicaps are what make golf a great game for 99% of us.  It is what separates us from other games that can't be played with people of varying abilities.

Jim--You are right that that is a risk.  But slower play is not a given.  Honest estimating is needed.  I believe it can work without slowing down play.

Jim,


I'm not Jon, and he will correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think he has a problem with the concept of the handicap system.  I do think, like me, he has a problem with the lunacy of reporting every round, rather than only those played in competition.  I suspect that he won't be as bothered as I will be by the madness of reporting scores when playing matches with mates when I pick up on 4 or 5 holes, or the idiocy of entering meaningless scores when you could be in the bar.  The CONGU system works well and is less easily gamed than this new system, which appears to have been chosen simply because most US golfers don't play enough official competitive golf to maintain a meaningful handicap.  These handicaps will be used in competition.  The words "honest estimating" have no place in a system to be used for competition.

[jeffwarne]

Jon--Not all of us are lucky or skilled enough to compete at golf without  a handicap.  I'm sorry you regard it as madness, but handicaps are what make golf a great game for 99% of us.  It is what separates us from other games that can't be played with people of varying abilities.

Jim--You are right that that is a risk.  But slower play is not a given.  Honest estimating is needed.  I believe it can work without slowing down play.

Jim,
  The CONGU system works well and is less easily gamed than this new system, which appears to have been chosen simply because most US golfers don't play enough official competitive golf to maintain a meaningful handicap.  These handicaps will be used in competition.  The words "honest estimating" have no place in a system to be used for competition.

It was the US system that was broken and the reason US golfers couldn't compete against UK golfers.
Why they chose to adopt a system similar to the US model is beyond me.
At least the UK system was based in fact not fantasy."honest estimating".....no room for error or fraud there....

[Jason Topp]

A detail I had not understood until now is the importance of par to the handicap calculation.


https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/handicapping/world-handicap-system/world-handicap-system--education-resources.html



 If I am reading it correctly, if the formula yields a handicap of 10 on a par 70 course with a course rating of 72, one's handicap for that course will be 12.  Conversely if the course were rated at 68 for a par of 70, one's handicap will be 8. 


I am unsure whether that innovation will be worth the trouble.  People have a hard enough time converting an index into a course handicap. 

[Kalen Braley]

Sandbaggers worldwide are taking thier proverbial toasts. 

P.S. As Jeff Warne puts it they got this whole thing backwards, why am,I not surprised..

[Jim Hoak]

Mark and Jeff--I'm not going to defend the US system vs. the CONGU system, because I think you are probably right that it is a better system.  However, the US-style of golf does not have regular "tournament" play that would allow for only posting those scores.  The governing bodies recognized that and decided, I guess, that the value of having a worldwide handicap system outweighed the inconveniences caused to non-US golfers.  I don't know if I agree with that balancing of interests or not, but it is done.
I'm not involved with any of the rules-making groups so I can't defend them.  But I can say that I don't like playing with a US handicap against UK or European players.  Their handicaps are not fair in competition with US players; they are 2-4 strokes or more higher, so fair international competition with handicaps is not possible.
In any case, I knew when I posted this topic that it would probably devolve into the same arguments/discussion we have had on the subject before--which system should be adopted.  If the non-US players don't like the outcome, your criticism should be with your governing bodies.  There is no point in rehashing the argument here.  In less than 2 months, the system goes into place.  So let's not go over the same arguments that we had 2 years ago when this was proposed.
If anyone has anything productive to say besides how the decision was wrong, let's hear it.

[MClutterbuck]

Every country can restrict which rounds count and which do not towards handicap... Also, in some countries, adjustment will be every 15 days, not daily.

[Pete_Pittock]

Every country can restrict which rounds count and which do not towards handicap... Also, in some countries, adjusyment will be every 15 days, not daily.

Can you please cite a publication that allows this.

[Scott Warren]

There is information here:
https://www.randa.org/en/news/2019/11/whs-to-roll-out-in-2020

The Rules of Handicapping are encompassed within seven Rules to inform administrators and golfers on how an official Handicap Index is calculated and administered, with some flexibility given to national associations based on how the sport is played and enjoyed in their region.

Not only can different countries determine what sorts of rounds count, GB&I will not be adopting the system until the final quarter of 2020.

[jeffwarne]

Mark and Jeff--I'm not going to defend the US system vs. the CONGU system, because I think you are probably right that it is a better system.  However, the US-style of golf does not have regular "tournament" play that would allow for only posting those scores.  The governing bodies recognized that and decided, I guess, that the value of having a worldwide handicap system outweighed the inconveniences caused to non-US golfers.  I don't know if I agree with that balancing of interests or not, but it is done.
I'm not involved with any of the rules-making groups so I can't defend them.  But I can say that I don't like playing with a US handicap against UK or European players.  Their handicaps are not fair in competition with US players; they are 2-4 strokes or more higher, so fair international competition with handicaps is not possible.
In any case, I knew when I posted this topic that it would probably devolve into the same arguments/discussion we have had on the subject before--which system should be adopted.  If the non-US players don't like the outcome, your criticism should be with your governing bodies.  There is no point in rehashing the argument here.  In less than 2 months, the system goes into place.  So let's not go over the same arguments that we had 2 years ago when this was proposed.
If anyone has anything productive to say besides how the decision was wrong, let's hear it.

what possibly can we say productive?
That Americans are on a level playing field when they play against UK golfers?(I agree with that statement so there's one)
If you knew this thread would devolve, why bother to post it?


I guess I just don't see anything to discuss based on your thread discussion limitations.
Just because a decision is made, doesn't mean it's "done" forever.
If the system isn't better and there is a worldwide outcry to come up with something better, t's worth discussion and further tweaking.
"honest estimation"...still cracks me up.


The real truth is any real money players ALWAYS negotiate handicaps as well as where the shots fall( as opposed to the whims of a numbers mad handicap chairman who happens to always stroke on 9 and 18)

[MClutterbuck]

Every country can restrict which rounds count and which do not towards handicap... Also, in some countries, adjusyment will be every 15 days, not daily.

Can you please cite a publication that allows this.

If you read Spanish, please see below link:


Only Medal play and Stableford tournament rounds, or prior to start announced for handicap practice rounds with a marker will be allowed in Argentina.


https://www.aag.org.ar/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Gu%C3%ADa-Introductoria-al-Sistema-de-Handicap-Mundial-Final.pdf



 

[archie_struthers]

 




Every year from 1995-2004 I would write Dean Knuth (the pope of slope) a letter regarding issues with the USGA handicap system as we knew it. Many times would follow it up with a phone call which would invariable end with a thank you Mr Struthers for your interest. He never seemed to think my ranting about the use of potential as the key element was inherently flawed.


Think about it you shoot 71,69,76 81,80 84,77,72, 75,70, 80,70,72,79,79,73,83,70,76,71  for your twenty scores


your friend shoots between   72-75  for his  20.   who's the better player he is,  who's handicap is lower, yep the guy who shoots 80's on occasion

Remember this is with equitable stroke control which brings your scores down by scotching out the big numbers.




Now we go to best eight rounds .....really 




If people are going to fudge their handicap to win you can't stop them with rules to figure out potential so just let the committee throw the really bad guys out once in a while or at least threaten it !




   

[Dave Doxey]

Seems like a lot of complexity. 


Is it worth it, given that only a small minority of golfers carry official handicaps and there's a move to attract more players with rules simplification?


Serious sandbaggers will always find a way to game the system, anyway.  Anyone who has played in a serious net competition knows that.


Seems to me that the best way is to keep handicap calculation simple and use it to negotiate stokes on the first tee.

[MClutterbuck]

roughly 99% of players in Argentina have official handicaps and play handicap tournaments every time they play. I appreciate the system a lot. For the first time, when friends from the US, UK, Australia, South America and other regions get together for a friendly tournament, we will have a fair system to figure out who played better. Great step in the right direction by the governing bodies.

[archie_struthers]

 




I go bowling ..bowl 250 / 200 / 150  my average is 200


but play golf  go 70-77-78-69  I'm a plus handicap   but I'm not  !

[Rob Marshall]

roughly 99% of players in Argentina have official handicaps and play handicap tournaments every time they play. I appreciate the system a lot. For the first time, when friends from the US, UK, Australia, South America and other regions get together for a friendly tournament, we will have a fair system to figure out who played better. Great step in the right direction by the governing bodies.

You don't need a handicap to figure who played better. The guy with the lowest gross score did. 

The biggest head scratcher for me was when the USGA said you can't post a score unless someone is with you. Really, the game of honor and integrity?

If someone can explain how you can fairly run a net skin game please post it. We have more arguments about that in my game than I care to remember.

[archie_struthers]

 




Baseball all the at bats count


Basketball all the shots count


Bowling 150/175/200 series equals a 175 average


golf 70-80 every other day makes you a plus handicapper   not !

[SL_Solow]

Interesting, the principal criticism is the fear of sandbagging but not counting every score is criticized.  The classic sandbagger throws in high scores when he doesn't need a good one and plays up to his ability when it really counts.  So how are these concerns consistent?  Similarly, I understand the attraction of using tournament scores.  However, in the US, there is no tradition of "medal days" and there are relatively few tournaments.  Moreover, a true hustler can lay down in a minor tournament to set up the money games.  Lots of interests to balance.  I am not a big fan of the USGA but the issue is not as easy as it is being presented.  Many of the same arguments were raised when the USGA first adopted its system.  Interesting reading for those interested in the history.

[Rob Marshall]

Jeff is right real money players are negotiating the strokes. They aren’t working off the handicap system. I’ve never gotten the thrill of betting real money while giving away strokes. Makes no sense to me.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()