It is a weird thread on this site that keeps me coming back to the conclusion that I agree with Erik. But on this thread, he's spot on.
Those who argue for a handicap system (and I note they're mostly better players) obviously don't understand statistics. If the system reflected average ability, rather than potential, or peak, then it would be a disaster in competition. It's inevitable that higher handicaps have higher standard deviation of score. Lower handicap players have lower standard deviations. An inevitable result of this is that the differential between handicap and "average" gets greater as you get worse. For scratch players, I imagine that the differential is quite low.
Which means that high handicappers far more frequently score well below average (and, equally, well above average). Club handicap competitions would nearly always be won by higher handicappers. Low markers complain about that already. Imagine what would happen if the system reflected average scores!
The majority already are won by the higher handicappers..............
Data?
Fwiw, I have NOT found this to be true at the clubs I've belonged to. All of the noise surrounding the handicap system is made by low indexes who lose to higher indexes in net competitions, but noise does not equal significance.
A.G.-I agree in that most clubs have both a net and gross competition in the majority of their tournaments. There are some all net events for sure but players have the option to pass if they don’t like the format. A high handicapper has a lower chance of winning gross than a low digit has of winning the net. I usually see the higher handicappers griping about the same bandits winning the net more than the low digit guys.
I will say that, in my experience, both high and low indexes have a tendency to think that the other group is favored, which probably means the system is working the way it is intended to work.
That said, I think low indexes are MUCH more likely to complain when they lose to a high cap in a net event than the other way around. I was MGA president at a golf-only club for a couple of years, running a lot of net events. There were constant complaints from the low index guys when they lost, much moreso than the other way around. I finally told several low index guys who were constant complainers that they probably should consider just not playing in net events if losing to lesser players bothered them that much, since the whole purpose of the system is to allow golfers of different skill levels to compete against each other.