Golf Club Atlas
GolfClubAtlas.com => Golf Course Architecture Discussion Group => Topic started by: Rob Marshall on March 16, 2025, 01:09:54 PM
-
Are you guys still just posting competition scores or every round you play like the US?
-
Very few people I know post every round. Most never post a non competition round.
Those that do are generally trying to get their handicap down…
… or up! 😉
-
I still just post competition rounds (probably about 20 a year).
Makes the competition count for more as I’m not going to win it!
-
A mix of the two.
Won't post casual rounds if
e.g. ....
wind is predicted to howl
greens spiked
ground sodden
if its a very easy mates affair
heavy rain means I just want to get it done
matchplay
an other reason.
Curiousity piqued so I checked. Last year I recorded 34 of approx 100 rounds. Indice dropped 1.2
-
Indice dropped 1.2
What's an Indice? Is it related to an index?
-
I think in two years I have recorded one general play round. It felt like cheating, so I won't do it again.
-
More importantly what do the rules of handicapping say in the UK?
If you're supposed to (required to) post your casual rounds as we are in the U.S. (so long as they're not solo, etc.), then you're in breach of the rules by not posting them.
But, some countries are still only posting certain rounds, like weekly comp rounds. So, what do the Rules of Handicapping say in the UK?
-
Hi Erik,
I’m not sure if the rule is you “have” to or you are recommended to.
Whichever, it changed with the WHS 4 years’ ago. And many players - me included - choose to ignore it because we believe that handicaps should be formed from a controlled, competitive environment; and because we want to play casual golf without always having a card in hand.
-
A WHS administered and used on a different basis in different parts of the World doesn’t seem like a WHS to me.
Return to card, pencil, comp in the U.K. would be nice. Mind then you’d likely get folks with grifter hcps from elsewhere entering and getting priority spots at elite UK events.
Atb
-
I'm pretty sure it's not a rule and I don't think it is even recommended. I think it is just something you can do if you want. As I've just joined a club after many years of not being a member I haven't played in any club comps since pre-WHS but I have played a lot of casual golf in that time. Off the top of my head I can think of only one golfer who I've played with who has kept a card every time we've played.
Anecdotally speaking, I'm not sure the system is all that popular and at one of my former clubs there is grumbling that the system is being abused. A case in point is one long standing member who has played off a 8 or 9 handicap for a good number of years and plays a lot of golf, has been putting in cards for casual rounds that have been in the 90's and then when the medal comes around he rediscovers his old form and duly picks up the first prize with his inflated handicap. He's been called out on it by other members but seems totally unabashed about it. Sadly the Committee are likely to get involved.
Of course that type of behaviour would be almost impossible if it was only competition scores that counted towards handicap.
Niall
-
Of course that type of behaviour would be almost impossible if it was only competition scores that counted towards handicap.
Niall
Manipulation went on before the WHS and will go on no matter what changes are brought in.
Pretty sure there's analoagous behaviour in The Old Testament, Shakespeare, Machiavelli, Sun Zu, Wodehouse, Potter etc, etc.
What I miss from the old days is the adjustment made on the day to reflect how the course played. The Competion Scratch Score was frequently 2 shots different from the Standard Scratch Score.
A links course on a windless day VS a day with a 15mph + wind might be 2 strokes different. A 25 mph + wind might be worth 4 shots.
Since WHS I've never seen my score adjusted to take this into account, even in Club Competions.
-
Hi Erik,
I’m not sure if the rule is you “have” to or you are recommended to.
Whichever, it changed with the WHS 4 years’ ago. And many players - me included - choose to ignore it because we believe that handicaps should be formed from a controlled, competitive environment; and because we want to play casual golf without always having a card in hand.
It is the player's responsibility to:
Player A player is expected to:Act with integrity by following the Rules of Handicapping and to refrain from using, or circumventing, the Rules of Handicapping for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage,
- Attempt to make the best score possible at each hole,
- Submit all acceptable scores to provide reasonable evidence of their demonstrated ability,
- Submit acceptable scores for handicap purposes as soon as possible after the round is completed and before midnight local time,
- Play by the Rules of Golf, and
- Certify the scores of other players.
Acceptable Score
A score from an authorized format of play which meets all the provisions set out within the Rules of Handicapping (see Rule 2 Scores for Handicap Purposes).
https://static.whsplatform.englandgolf.org/clubs/1000-1/uploads/downloads/whs/2024-update/2024-rules-of-handicapping.pdf (https://static.whsplatform.englandgolf.org/clubs/1000-1/uploads/downloads/whs/2024-update/2024-rules-of-handicapping.pdf)
https://www.englandgolf.org/world-handicap-system (https://www.englandgolf.org/world-handicap-system) says social scores are now "allowed".
The reason why I ask is that I know in some countries or territories, only the "comp" rounds were allowed to be posted. The WHS, as I understand it, allows for countries to specify what "acceptable" scores are.
In the U.S., you're required to (per the list of requirements above) submit all acceptable scores. You're generally required to post your scores if you meet the other requirements (don't play three balls to practice, play with someone else, etc.). If you don't, your handicap index is by rule invalid/incorrect.
-
Tony
Yes, there might have been an element of manipulation in the old days but the system in terms of medal comps, wasn't as open to abuse as the present system is. Match-play comps might be a different matter and anyone winning the class 2 or 3 match-play events usually should have been wearing a sombrero with a Colt 45 tucked into his belt.
The bigger issue for me though is not one or two people gaming the system and turning a genuine comp into a farce, but rather the effect that the new system has on golfing culture in this country. In that respect I'm heartened by what I've seen so far in terms of the majority of players eschewing the card and pencil mentality (ignoring cards kept for a stableford sweep) and just having a friendly game without the need to hole out/keep score etc on each and every hole. Not that it's all rosy as, again anecdotally, I'm hearing that medal day isn't as popular as it once was at some clubs, probably due to the type of characters I refer to above. That's a great shame IMO.
Niall
-
Return to card, pencil, comp in the U.K. would be nice.
Well I certainly still fill in a card with a pencil when I play in a comp! But I do like the ability to enter scores by App, and the live scoring element that technology provides. Far too rarely I can spend an afternoon checking to see if I'm still leading/in second/in third......
-
Hi Erik,
I’m not sure if the rule is you “have” to or you are recommended to.
Whichever, it changed with the WHS 4 years’ ago. And many players - me included - choose to ignore it because we believe that handicaps should be formed from a controlled, competitive environment; and because we want to play casual golf without always having a card in hand.
It is the player's responsibility to:
Player A player is expected to:Act with integrity by following the Rules of Handicapping and to refrain from using, or circumventing, the Rules of Handicapping for the purpose of gaining an unfair advantage,
- Attempt to make the best score possible at each hole,
- Submit all acceptable scores to provide reasonable evidence of their demonstrated ability,
- Submit acceptable scores for handicap purposes as soon as possible after the round is completed and before midnight local time,
- Play by the Rules of Golf, and
- Certify the scores of other players.
Acceptable Score
A score from an authorized format of play which meets all the provisions set out within the Rules of Handicapping (see Rule 2 Scores for Handicap Purposes).
https://static.whsplatform.englandgolf.org/clubs/1000-1/uploads/downloads/whs/2024-update/2024-rules-of-handicapping.pdf (https://static.whsplatform.englandgolf.org/clubs/1000-1/uploads/downloads/whs/2024-update/2024-rules-of-handicapping.pdf)
https://www.englandgolf.org/world-handicap-system (https://www.englandgolf.org/world-handicap-system) says social scores are now "allowed".
The reason why I ask is that I know in some countries or territories, only the "comp" rounds were allowed to be posted. The WHS, as I understand it, allows for countries to specify what "acceptable" scores are.
In the U.S., you're required to (per the list of requirements above) submit all acceptable scores. You're generally required to post your scores if you meet the other requirements (don't play three balls to practice, play with someone else, etc.). If you don't, your handicap index is by rule invalid/incorrect.
In the UK system you are allowed to submit a non-competition score, but in order to do so you have to declare in advance of the round that your score will be submitted and then you have to submit it. You can't start double, double and then decide not to post it. In the app, you put in that you are going to play a round for handicap purposes, then you go play, submit the score in the app together with a note about who your attester is. They then get a message from the app telling them they have to attest to that score. They do that and then the score is submitted. I'm not exactly sure what happens if you don't submit after saying that you will, but I imagine it won't work out well for your handicap status. It's not easy to game the system without help from someone else. Basically the same as when you play in a competition.
In the US, you can go play with three random people you don't know and then it's on you to submit the score - no oversight. That's the main difference there.
-
Michael
I think the point Erik is making is that the rules either state or suggest depending on your interpretation, that we should be posting scores and that it isn't really optional. I don't think the wording is 100% clear but I'd agree that it does strongly suggest, to me at least, that we should be posting scores every time we play.
I didn't see anything in the documents with a clear and obvious caveat that exempted the UK or anywhere else but I only quickly scanned through them. However I vaguely remember that when they brought them in there was some chat about scoring being optional. I've also heard it said that in the UK there is a chance the current system will be binned or drastically altered but that might just be wishful thinking on the part of myself and others.
Niall
-
Michael
I think the point Erik is making is that the rules either state or suggest depending on your interpretation, that we should be posting scores and that it isn't really optional. I don't think the wording is 100% clear but I'd agree that it does strongly suggest, to me at least, that we should be posting scores every time we play.
I didn't see anything in the documents with a clear and obvious caveat that exempted the UK or anywhere else but I only quickly scanned through them. However I vaguely remember that when they brought them in there was some chat about scoring being optional. I've also heard it said that in the UK there is a chance the current system will be binned or drastically altered but that might just be wishful thinking on the part of myself and others.
Niall
I live in the US so I'm basically guessing about this, but I would think the UK would not want match play rounds to be used for handicap purposes. In the US, you do use those. I thought there was enough flexibility in the system to enable both of those to be true at the same time.
-
Let me ask my UK friends how they treat this situation: I don't know if you call this a two ball competition but let's say you are playing two player teams with one best ball for each team, not alternate shot. Does the player whose score does not count have to finish the hole and record a score for the hole for the round? Are golfers in the UK limited as to the maximum number of strokes they can take on a hole for handicap posting purposes?
-
I think the point Erik is making is that the rules either state or suggest depending on your interpretation, that we should be posting scores and that it isn't really optional. I don't think the wording is 100% clear but I'd agree that it does strongly suggest, to me at least, that we should be posting scores every time we play.
Yeah, in the U.S., that is definitely the rule. It is the responsibility of the player to post all acceptable scores.
-
Let me ask my UK friends how they treat this situation: I don't know if you call this a two ball competition but let's say you are playing two player teams with one best ball for each team, not alternate shot. Does the player whose score does not count have to finish the hole and record a score for the hole for the round? Are golfers in the UK limited as to the maximum number of strokes they can take on a hole for handicap posting purposes?
Jerry,
Fourball competitions do not count for handicap so the answer to your first question is no, the non-counting player does not have to finish the hole. However, I’ve just discovered that - in Ireland anyway - they will count your score through some kind of pro-rata if the better-ball combined scores 42 Stableford points or better and you individually contribute to 9 or more of the scoring holes.
To your second point, the answer again is no. Although handicap usually converts your score in to Stableford and then back to gross (I.e. if I score a 7 on a par-4 where I have no stroke, it will give me a 6 as the best score that counts for zero Stableford points. If I had a stroke on that hole, it would give me a 7.)… so it’s a form of yes I guess.
-
Hi Erik,
I’m not sure if the rule is you “have” to or you are recommended to.
Whichever, it changed with the WHS 4 years’ ago. And many players - me included - choose to ignore it because we believe that handicaps should be formed from a controlled, competitive environment; and because we want to play casual golf without always having a card in hand.
Where is the line drawn in terms of which rules you deem to be proper vs. those to be ignored?
-
Hi Erik,
I’m not sure if the rule is you “have” to or you are recommended to.
Whichever, it changed with the WHS 4 years’ ago. And many players - me included - choose to ignore it because we believe that handicaps should be formed from a controlled, competitive environment; and because we want to play casual golf without always having a card in hand.
Where is the line drawn in terms of which rules you deem to be proper vs. those to be ignored?
It's neither a rule, nor a law, in the UK, so Ally isn't ignoring one.
-
Hi Erik,
I’m not sure if the rule is you “have” to or you are recommended to.
Whichever, it changed with the WHS 4 years’ ago. And many players - me included - choose to ignore it because we believe that handicaps should be formed from a controlled, competitive environment; and because we want to play casual golf without always having a card in hand.
Where is the line drawn in terms of which rules you deem to be proper vs. those to be ignored?
To be clear, there is no requirement to submit general play scores in GB&I, nor is it even recommended. England Golf, for example, merely say that WHS “allows” a player to do this. Submitting GP scores when playing matchplay (a not-insignificant proportion of social golf rounds, I’d guess) is actively discouraged, not least because the “most likely score” feature hasn’t been adopted over here; if you’re submitting a score you have to do it under the full rules of strokeplay golf, so no gimmes and (technically at least) no saying “I can’t be bothered to go back to the tee for a lost ball” when there is still a chance of scoring better than a net double bogey.
What is being discussed is that clubs should be more active in encouraging golfers to submit scores from informal competitions (weekly roll-ups etc.).
Since WHS was implemented I’ve submitted nearly 150 scores, just one of which was a GP round (and that was only because my partner dropped out of a 4-ball competition, so I played on my own and marked a card for my playing partners) and not once have I been asked to attest a GP scores for someone else.
-
To be clear, there is no requirement to submit general play scores in GB&I, nor is it even recommended.
I don't know that we agree on the language.
Among the player's responsibilities (requirements) is "Submit all acceptable scores to provide reasonable evidence of their demonstrated ability." An "acceptable score" is "A score from an authorized format of play which meets all the provisions set out within the Rules of Handicapping (see Rule 2)." If you look at the "authorized format of play" table you'll see "General Play" is listed as an authorized format of play. The only real confusion is that later it says that you must still register to submit your score after a round of general play.
I know when the WHS first came out, some countries (or golf associations) were going to continue using only competitive rounds, but I think the WHS is slowly trying to push the rest of the world to align more with how the USGA has always done it. That way is to require all rounds played under the conditions to make them acceptable rounds (which again includes General Play).
The language reads to me that golfers in the UK should be posting General Play rounds, but because there's this additional step… they're kind of looking the other way for a little bit longer.
The quotes above are all from the England PDF I linked to earlier.
-
England Golf's website says: "The World Handicap System™ now allows golfers to register scores for handicapping purposes during a general play round. Acceptable scores include those played with friends, colleagues and in societies. You can now submit social scores directly via the My England Golf App (https://www.englandgolf.org/whs-app)." It does not say that you must. Very few club members do. You can repeatedly point to what the website says, Erik, but you can't change the facts. If you don't like what we're telling you, take it up with England golf, rather than telling us we're wrong.
-
The UK tradition was always that only competition rounds, in which (crucially) all putts had been holed out, counted for handicapping purposes, and NB under the WHS some clubs still insist that to play in certain competitions you MUST submit a designated number of competition cards, and not just general play scores, in order to participate. Harlech, for one, does this.
This convention is absolutely the case at the UK elite level, where the organisers of major scratch competitions with low handicap limits will scrutinise the entries and rule out entrants with a majority of general play cards in their indices.
The other tricky thing is that there is still, in reporting terms, no single UK system and the four Home Unions each have their own, slightly different ways of running the WHS and were not, until recently, able to talk to each other electronically. That is changing.
Overall I would guess that the large majority of UK rounds go ‘unrecorded’. Of the forty rounds I played with my own ball last year, four were submitted for handicap purposes. That won’t I suspect be at all atypical.
-
In the UK system you are allowed to submit a non-competition score, but in order to do so you have to declare in advance of the round that your score will be submitted and then you have to submit it. You can't start double, double and then decide not to post it. In the app, you put in that you are going to play a round for handicap purposes, then you go play, submit the score in the app together with a note about who your attester is. They then get a message from the app telling them they have to attest to that score.
Nice summary.
The attester bit is crucial.
That this doesn't seem to apply in all areas of World is a huge weakness in the WHS.
atb
-
Mark, it'd be helpful if you actually read the posts before replying. And it'd also be helpful if you stopped making assumptions based on previous incorrect assumptions.
The wording and the rules are in a somewhat contradictory state right now, and so I'm not "telling" anyone anything: I'm asking, and hypothesizing about the gradual shift that may be occurring.
REQUIRED:
The WHS PDF that governs England says a player is "expected" to post "all acceptable scores." General Play is an acceptable score, and an approved format, thus, among the player's responsibilities is to post all General Play scores that otherwise meet the definition for an acceptable score (conforming equipment, etc.).
NOT REQUIRED:
The language about how you "can" post a General Play or a "social" score is ambiguous at best, leading to the general questions around the current state of the rules, expectations, etc.
Do you deny that there's a conflict in the way the rules are written in these two parts? Or is it just the history of not having had to or even been allowed to post casual play scores that is leading to your insistence that the language in the "required" section above (my labels) doesn't mean what it seems to pretty clearly say? Or do you acknowledge it says that, but give more weight to the ambiguous language about how you "can" post a social round score?
———————
Again, I think that the WHS is in transition in countries/associations where comp scores used to be all that you could count to a phase where it'll be much more like the U.S. has been - where the rules/expectations/requirements are that almost all scores, including casual rounds, will be posted.
Right now casual play round posting seems like it's optional because you "can" submit those scores (even though the other language says you are "expected to" submit them), but I could see in the future that language aligning more with what the USGA has said for decades.
-
I talked with another person and he's suggesting that the "can" applies to the pre-registration, after which your choice is made: you must (required to) submit the score if you pre-registered, and you cannot if you did not.
In the U.S., the "registration" is almost assumed: we are expected to post all scores in which we are playing golf under the rules. I can see that as a way of understanding the seemingly contradictory language.
Previously, I don't think General Play (casual rounds) could be submitted in the UK at all, only comp rounds, no? If so, is this a transition to a system more like in the U.S., or is this the end of the line?
-
I talked with another person and he's suggesting that the "can" applies to the pre-registration, after which your choice is made: you must (required to) submit the score if you pre-registered, and you cannot if you did not.
In the U.S., the "registration" is almost assumed: we are expected to post all scores in which we are playing golf under the rules. I can see that as a way of understanding the seemingly contradictory language.
Previously, I don't think General Play (casual rounds) could be submitted in the UK at all, only comp rounds, no? If so, is this a transition to a system more like in the U.S., or is this the end of the line?
The old UK system only applied rounds played in competition. There was a possibility for a club committee to change someone's handicap for general play (called Rule 19). Generally speaking this was only used for people whose ability had changed significantly for some reason - occasionally they'd apply it for a very out of character score - like a 15 handicap shooting 3 over they might bring them down an additional bit, or they'd bring someone's handicap up if they had surgery or something else that made them much worse overnight. To change someone whose handicap was in category 1 (5.4 or lower) you had to do that with the county body's review.
Under the new system, you can submit a general play score, but the powers that be want that score to be as close to competition standard as possible. I think most people in the UK are trying to get their handicap down. Playing in a competition brings its own pressure to bear and would likely have people play more conservatively than if they're just out with their buddies. By stating in advance that you are going to submit your score for handicap, you bring at least some of that pressure with you and you're much more likely to play sensibly. I think most people don't want that pressure most of the time. They just want to have fun. So they let people choose their flavor while still enabling the handicap system to do its job.
One of the other big differences between golf in the US and the UK is that most clubs in the UK are effectively semi-private. The costs of membership are MUCH more reasonable and so most people are members of clubs and those clubs typically run pretty frequent competitions. In the US, the vast majority of people don't have access to competitions unless they go out of their way to find them. It would mean that if handicaps only depended on competition rounds then it would be very difficult to get a handicap at all. Obviously that's not ideal and so the trend has been towards all scores being included.
Upshot is I highly doubt that the UK will move further towards the US system of all scores. I don't think people would want that and CONGU at least does recognize that they serve the people who play the game
-
I talked with another person and he's suggesting that the "can" applies to the pre-registration, after which your choice is made: you must (required to) submit the score if you pre-registered, and you cannot if you did not.
This is what Michael said a few posts ago. If you declare an intent to submit a general play score then you must (or have an assumed Net 36 over score). Also, crucially, and as Michael said, a general play score in England requires attestation by a playing partner.
-
And you have to hole all the putts. Even in a casual game among friends. Which inter alia takes longer. No gimmes permitted in General Play returns. And I think Michael’s point about the higher proportion of UK rounds being played in the context of club competitions or matches is a very important one. When it costs you $1000 per annum to belong to somewhere like Harlech, with a decent fixture list, this all looks a bit different.
Have always been a bit unclear as to whether gimmes are permitted in US or Australian General Play returns?
-
And you have to hole all the putts. Even in a casual game among friends. Which inter alia takes longer. No gimmes permitted in General Play returns. And I think Michael’s point about the higher proportion of UK rounds being played in the context of club competitions or matches is a very important one. When it costs you $1000 per annum to belong to somewhere like Harlech, with a decent fixture list, this all looks a bit different.
Have always been a bit unclear as to whether gimmes are permitted in US or Australian General Play returns?
If you take gimmes in your game in the US, you count whatever your "most likely score" would be. If it was 3 feet away then you'd count that as one. If it was 15 feet, then you'd count that as 2. It all gets a bit questionable to me. What if it's 6 feet and you have them three times in a row? Do you count all of them as holed? None of them? Some blend? It's not particularly clear.
-
Upshot is I highly doubt that the UK will move further towards the US system of all scores. I don't think people would want that and CONGU at least does recognize that they serve the people who play the game
That remains to be seen. I've heard both sides — that they're looking to really unify it, and include all scores so handicaps are truly "world" — and the other side that they're not going to require the same posting rules like we have in the U.S.
This is a step toward unification of the rules, but maybe it's the final step.
-
Most UK clubs have frequent competitions (at least monthly, more often pretty much weekly or even bi-weekly) during the season. Handicaps mean something.
To us, the US system, with estimation of scores on holes (the idea of giving yourself a six footer as Michael suggests is anathema), counting scores in rounds that don't count for anything and, worst, no attestation, is a cheat's charter. The WHS is unpopular enough in the UK (mostly unfairly, I think). Changing it to allow the mayhem that is US style score recording would cause it to lose all credibility. I can't see England Golf and the other home unions going for that.
-
To us, the US system
And yet, they're looking to unify the WHS. You don't like the U.S. system, but that doesn't mean the UK isn't headed there.
Changing it to allow the mayhem that is US style score recording would cause it to lose all credibility. I can't see England Golf and the other home unions going for that.
It doesn't mean it isn't headed there after a long time. Is the accepting of casual round scores the first step of a few, or the last step? Unless someone here is on the handicap committee of the R&A or England Golf (or whatever it's called)… We'll have to wait and see.
-
Erik
There is absolutely no way that most GB&I golfers will ever accept a requirement to post every score - regardless of what the governing body were to say. Culturally it just wouldn’t be acceptable and England Golf et al (and the R&A) know that.
On the few occasions when I’ve played with North American golfers who’ve submitted a general play score, it’s been staggering to me just how many rules of golf they’ve broken (as any one of us might do in a casual round). That just wouldn’t stand over here.
-
The GP scores are the fatal flaw of the WHS. The number of GP rounds played by the rules of golf are near zero. This, coupled with the ambiguity of peoples expectations, "most likely scores", etc. makes most handicaps useless. This is just taking human nature into account and not even accounting for people actively gaming the system in either direction. I was very disappointed when the WHS adopted the US's GP rules as opposed to the UK's pre-WHS system of only counting medal-day rounds played under the rules of golf and holing all putts.
So few people seem to be able to play to their handicaps when everyone is playing by the rules. I guess that within a tight group of players that are consistently playing with each other it kind of all works out (but would also work out without the formal handicapping system), otherwise I think it's effectively worthless.
-
Erik
There is absolutely no way that most GB&I golfers will ever accept a requirement to post every score - regardless of what the governing body were to say. Culturally it just wouldn’t be acceptable and England Golf et al (and the R&A) know that.
On the few occasions when I’ve played with North American golfers who’ve submitted a general play score, it’s been staggering to me just how many rules of golf they’ve broken (as any one of us might do in a casual round). That just wouldn’t stand over here.
As per James (and Mark). It is much more likely that GB&I unions will bow out of the WHS altogether rather than move further towards General Play rounds.
-
To us, the US system
And yet, they're looking to unify the WHS. You don't like the U.S. system, but that doesn't mean the UK isn't headed there.
Changing it to allow the mayhem that is US style score recording would cause it to lose all credibility. I can't see England Golf and the other home unions going for that.
It doesn't mean it isn't headed there after a long time. Is the accepting of casual round scores the first step of a few, or the last step? Unless someone here is on the handicap committee of the R&A or England Golf (or whatever it's called)… We'll have to wait and see.
Of course, there's always the alternative that the Us move towards the rest of the World (I know, absurd in the current environment) and require attestation and pre-election for general play, and introduce a bias towards competitive rounds. But that would require US casual and club golfers to see golf as a sport, rather than a pastime.
-
There is absolutely no way that most GB&I golfers will ever accept a requirement to post every score
You've polled the majority, or you're guessing based on how you and some people you know probably feel? And you can accurately predict how golfers will feel in the future? And, ultimately, I'm asking whether the requirement to post may be instituted, not how people will feel about it. Thanks for the jingoism. :D
If y'all play by the Rules of Golf, what's the issue with posting a non-comp round that follows the other guidelines of an acceptable round?
Of course, there's always the alternative that the Us move towards the rest of the World (I know, absurd in the current environment) and require attestation and pre-election for general play, and introduce a bias towards competitive rounds. But that would require US casual and club golfers to see golf as a sport, rather than a pastime.
I spoke too soon as Mark takes the jingoism crown. :P Y'all don't have the monopoly on playing by the rules, playing quickly, or treating golf like a sport. And generalizing this kind of stuff is just silly.
-
I spoke too soon as Mark takes the jingoism crown. :P Y'all don't have the monopoly on playing by the rules, playing quickly, or treating golf like a sport. And generalizing this kind of stuff is just silly.
You really are quite thick, sometimes, aren't you, Erik, despite how clever you think you are? A couple of people offer an opposite opinion to yours, based von (golfing) cultural differences, and we're jingoistic? You might not get the irony (self-reflection not being a strength) but it really is quite extraordinary.
-
You really are quite thick, sometimes, aren't you, Erik, despite how clever you think you are?
And you're perpetually insulting and a host of other things. Among your flaws… your inability to read what's written.
A couple of people offer an opposite opinion to yours
Please find the part where I said any opinions were "wrong" (opinions can't be wrong or right, just statements of fact) or even disagreed with the opinions. I only pointed out where people seem to be making assumptions, sharing anecdotes, and not considering how things might change in the future.
Here's the thing… If y'all think that a bunch of U.S. guys are putting in phony scores based on six foot gimmes and the sort (it undeniably happens, no doubt), what's it to you? How does that affect your day to day life? You'd wipe the floor with people doing that if, for example, you were required to post casual scores in the UK and people started doing similarly over there.
I don't get the outrage. It's misplaced at best, unless you're somehow offended that "Billy Bob claims he's a 5, but I've seen him play golf…" and his handicap is lower than you're "100% completely honest 9.1 index."
-
There is absolutely no way that most GB&I golfers will ever accept a requirement to post every score
You've polled the majority, or you're guessing based on how you and some people you know probably feel? And you can accurately predict how golfers will feel in the future? And, ultimately, I'm asking whether the requirement to post may be instituted, not how people will feel about it. Thanks for the jingoism. :D
Wow! You asked questions about what happens in GB&I. I respond and that is somehow “jingoistic”!? Could you retract that accusation please.
-
But that would require US casual and club golfers to see golf as a sport, rather than a pastime.
That was my point from earlier. The fundamental difference in golf culture between the US and the UK requires differences in the handicap system. So either they remain different or one side has to concede to the other. In my experience, belonging to two clubs in the UK with a combined about 1,500 members and from reading newspaper articles and magazine articles and just knowing how people treat the game in general, people there won't like the change. It's an ingrained aspect of the culture that your handicap is only impacted when you have a card in your hand and it matters. I know this the same way that you know that US casual and club golfers would need to see golf as a sport and not a pastime.
-
Wow! You asked questions about what happens in GB&I. I respond and that is somehow “jingoistic”!? Could you retract that accusation please.
Just as soon as y'all stop acting morally superior over the rules of handicapping, as if what's done in the U.S. for decades now is just morally reprehensible and no self-respecting Englishman would be caught dead even considering posting a casual round, ha ha ha. Sure.
Otherwise, no, I won't take back a word that means "overly patriotic or nationalistic." There's probably a better word out there, as this isn't political, really… but… you seem to be just as offended by this as the idea of posting a casual round. ;D
I know this the same way that you know that US casual and club golfers would need to see golf as a sport and not a pastime.
There are plenty of golfers in the U.S. who see it as a sport (and plenty in the UK who see it as a pastime), and I don't think the handicap system is the determining factor there at all.
-
Wow! You asked questions about what happens in GB&I. I respond and that is somehow “jingoistic”!? Could you retract that accusation please.
Just as soon as y'all stop acting morally superior over the rules of handicapping, as if what's done in the U.S. for decades now is just morally reprehensible and no self-respecting Englishman would be caught dead even considering posting a casual round, ha ha ha. Sure.
Otherwise, no, I won't take back a word that means "overly patriotic or nationalistic." There's probably a better word out there, as this isn't political, really… but… you seem to be just as offended by this as the idea of posting a casual round. ;D
I know this the same way that you know that US casual and club golfers would need to see golf as a sport and not a pastime.
There are plenty of golfers in the U.S. who see it as a sport (and plenty in the UK who see it as a pastime), and I don't think the handicap system is the determining factor there at all.
I don't think anyone is suggesting that one is better than the other. Just that they are different.
In the UK, most friendly games are played between friends and are most likely to be match play. People may play stroke play from time to time too, but I'd think it was not the norm. Most golfers belong to clubs that run competitions frequently through the playing season, so there are plenty of competitions available to most people. Handicaps have therefore been based on competition scores and it's been like that for at least 50 years I think. Those handicaps get used for club competitions and it's important that everyone's handicap be a fair representation of how they play in competition and they are.
The majority of golfers in the US don't belong to a club. There are events for better players run by regional golf associations and then the odd thing here and there like the Amateur Players Tour or the Golfweek Amateur Tour that have flighted events for players of varying ability. Both of those use their own handicaps from their own events for flighting purposes, not GHIN. in the metro New York area, there are perhaps 200 people who play in those two semi regularly. I know there was a golf channel one as well - not sure if that's still going - let's say 1,000 total. Other than that, I think probably 90+% of US golfers don't play in competitions at all, so they can't get a handicap unless general play scores are included. Their handicaps get used to even off matches they play against each other. For them, their handicaps should be a fair representation of how they play when they play with their friends in friendly games and they are.
To make these two different groups use the same system is going to be a big (and unwelcome) change to one or other of those groups of people and they'll make the handicaps of whoever changes not fit for purpose.
The only time that's really an issue is when you bring those two groups of golfers together (such as in elite events where handicap is used to determine eligibility). The WHS did a decent job of at least moving the underlying theme together, but the other parts are I would think too difficult. Not that I wouldn't put it past them to push something unpopular on people - lord knows it's not unprecedented.
-
Wow! You asked questions about what happens in GB&I. I respond and that is somehow “jingoistic”!? Could you retract that accusation please.
Just as soon as y'all stop acting morally superior over the rules of handicapping, as if what's done in the U.S. for decades now is just morally reprehensible and no self-respecting Englishman would be caught dead even considering posting a casual round, ha ha ha. Sure.
Otherwise, no, I won't take back a word that means "overly patriotic or nationalistic." There's probably a better word out there, as this isn't political, really… but… you seem to be just as offended by this as the idea of posting a casual round. ;D
I know this the same way that you know that US casual and club golfers would need to see golf as a sport and not a pastime.
There are plenty of golfers in the U.S. who see it as a sport (and plenty in the UK who see it as a pastime), and I don't think the handicap system is the determining factor there at all.
I genuinely wasn’t expressing a view of superiority, moral or otherwise. I have no issue at all with the way things are done in the US but I know that it’s very different over here. You were the one suggesting that the rules aren’t being applied correctly in the UK.
As for “jingoistic”, rest assured that my opinion of you has absolutely nothing to do with your nationality.
-
I don't think anyone is suggesting that one is better than the other. Just that they are different.
That's not how I or the others I showed this to read it. There's often a general looking down upon the U.S. system from those in the UK, Australia, etc.
In the UK, most friendly games are played between friends and are most likely to be match play.
From all I've read, that's changed quite a bit in the last 20 years, and I'd be curious to know how often that happens now as compared to a long time ago, particularly among younger golfers. I'm not saying stroke play is the majority, just that all I've seen is that it's increasing in popularity quite a bit.
I genuinely wasn’t expressing a view of superiority, moral or otherwise.
Okay, then I got it wrong, likely because of the history I mentioned just above. The U.S. system is slammed fairly regularly by those who insist that it's silly or beneath them to consider posting a casual round. I apologize. Sorry.
If you're looking for a recent example, look at Mark calling it a "cheat's charter" despite the fact that it only harms the "cheater." :P
You were the one suggesting that the rules aren’t being applied correctly in the UK.
No, I was asking how people squared up the idea that the rules expect you to post all rounds… with the idea that you "can" pre-register to post a casual round. It's not the clearest language.
-
I appreciate the apology Erik. Thank you.
-
As for “jingoistic”, rest assured that my opinion of you has absolutely nothing to do with your nationality.
Thank you, James. I rarely laugh out loud these days.
-
If you're looking for a recent example, look at Mark calling it a "cheat's charter" despite the fact that it only harms the "cheater." :P
Really? Have you ever considered that players could record inaccurately high scores, pad their handicap and then win net competitions? A genuine problem in many club open competitions here, even before general play scores were counted.
Or what about the very low handicapper, who fails to gain entry to an elite competition, where entry is decided by the lowest handicaps, where a player does get in with an artificially low handicap (this has happened locally here recently).
Which is not to say that handicap manipulation wasn't possible under CONGU (I once had a playing partner in a minor medal turn round on the 15th tee and comment "I'm scoring quite well here, Pearcey, better start tapping it around on the greens"), but it was harder (and obviously impossible without cheating in the other direction).
-
In the UK, most friendly games are played between friends and are most likely to be match play.
From all I've read, that's changed quite a bit in the last 20 years, and I'd be curious to know how often that happens now as compared to a long time ago, particularly among younger golfers. I'm not saying stroke play is the majority, just that all I've seen is that it's increasing in popularity quite a bit.
Anecdotes are not evidence, but I have never in my life played a social round at stroke play, always either a match or an informal Stableford. I only have one friend who plays stroke play for leisure. Although, interestingly, he has only taken the game up in the last couple of years, so perhaps there is a trend that way. Bloody small sample though :)
-
I have definitely seen a trend of the 30s-40s scoring a card even when playing matchplay. We even have a retired chap in this parish who has started this evil practice. I have taken to walking to the next tee and playing rather than watching guys practice on my time.
I long for the true American system to kick in over here. We are 2/3rds there…may as well go whole hog. Out of the hole, guesstimate a score and move on. It’s just a bloody handicap for hacker amateurs. It’s taken way too seriously. Real players play flat and anyone who plays for real money has their own handicap system.
Ciao
-
“Real players play flat and anyone who plays for real money has their own handicap system”
Amen. The group I play in 3 days a week don’t even know what their GHIN index is. We have our own system. That’s the index they care about. Only scores in the “game” count. Nothing else.
-
When I asked the question I didn't expect this and I was just looking for someone from the UK to let me know what they were doing because a friend insisted that the UK posted scores the way we do in the states.
I would say that the UK system is the system that makes the most sense. Play by the rules and all putts are holed. How can you get a truer handicap? However I loved this.....
"Real players play flat"
Is there anything better than playing straight up scratch golf?
-
Real players play flat and anyone who plays for real money has their own handicap system.
Real "Real Players" play in very high quality amateur events where a low handicap is required for entry. So this comment ignores that, for elite amateurs, handicaps are very important.
-
So few people seem to be able to play to their handicaps when everyone is playing by the rules.
Your index is an average of the best 8 of 20 last recorded scores. Even assuming an even distribution of scores in that 8 (and, in reality, there'll be a smaller number of lower scores) that would mean that you would not expect a player to play "to their handicap" more than 4 times in 20 or once in five. In reality, the proportion will be lower than that, particularly amongst higher handicaps.
Why do people expect that players should "play to their handicap"?
-
Real players play flat and anyone who plays for real money has their own handicap system.
Real "Real Players" play in very high quality amateur events where a low handicap is required for entry. So this comment ignores that, for elite amateurs, handicaps are very important.
That certainly used to be true in the UK - I'm not sure if it still works that way in everything. In the US, the exemptions into big events are typically based on WAGR, not handicap and qualifiers are used for everyone not exempt - there may be a handicap requirement to enter, but if you're planning on qualifying, then reaching the handicap cut off shouldn't be too strenuous.
-
Real players play flat and anyone who plays for real money has their own handicap system.
Real "Real Players" play in very high quality amateur events where a low handicap is required for entry. So this comment ignores that, for elite amateurs, handicaps are very important.
That certainly used to be true in the UK - I'm not sure if it still works that way in everything. In the US, the exemptions into big events are typically based on WAGR, not handicap and qualifiers are used for everyone not exempt - there may be a handicap requirement to enter, but if you're planning on qualifying, then reaching the handicap cut off shouldn't be too strenuous.
It's not the case for competitions where enough players with WAGR points enter, maybe, but there are still a lot of quite serious amateur open competitions where entry is restricted to certain handicaps and, if there are more entrants than places, those go to the lowest handicaps. Perhaps not, any more, the very top events but at a level that is certainly real "real" golf, in a way that Daryl's three times a week money game may struggle to be.
-
Have you ever considered that players could record inaccurately high scores, pad their handicap and then win net competitions?
If you're intent on cheating, you can cheat by missing some putts in a comp, hitting a ball or three OB, etc. I feel as though the context with posting casual rounds was that players aren't playing serious golf and having to deal with the pressure, taking gimmes, etc. That's only going to generally lower their index.
Or what about the very low handicapper, who fails to gain entry to an elite competition, where entry is decided by the lowest handicaps, where a player does get in with an artificially low handicap (this has happened locally here recently).
That can and does happen, yes.
Which is not to say that handicap manipulation wasn't possible under CONGU (I once had a playing partner in a minor medal turn round on the 15th tee and comment "I'm scoring quite well here, Pearcey, better start tapping it around on the greens"), but it was harder (and obviously impossible without cheating in the other direction).
Right, it's still possible. And if the guy's intent is to inflate his index he's not going to wait until the 15th and make it so obvious.
Anecdotes are not evidence, but I have never in my life played a social round at stroke play, always either a match or an informal Stableford. I only have one friend who plays stroke play for leisure. Although, interestingly, he has only taken the game up in the last couple of years, so perhaps there is a trend that way. Bloody small sample though :)
I'd love to see how this trend has shifted over the last 20 years in the UK and the rest of Europe. Though I think match play is still king, I think stroke play (including Stableford) is on the rise and I wonder when it may overtake match play.
It’s just a bloody handicap for hacker amateurs.
Except for the "entry into events" stuff… yeah.
-
Real players play flat and anyone who plays for real money has their own handicap system.
Real "Real Players" play in very high quality amateur events where a low handicap is required for entry. So this comment ignores that, for elite amateurs, handicaps are very important.
Mark,
What is your definition of elite? If you are a 2 and play in the city championship are you considering that elite? Is a division 3 college player elite? I've played in many scratch tournaments and never have considered myself elite.
-
"Or what about the very low handicapper, who fails to gain entry to an elite competition, where entry is decided by the lowest handicaps, where a player does get in with an artificially low handicap (this has happened locally here recently)."
Qualifiers solve this issue don't they? That's what they did many years ago in my district championship. Went to a qualifier. No issues.
-
Real players play flat and anyone who plays for real money has their own handicap system.
Real "Real Players" play in very high quality amateur events where a low handicap is required for entry. So this comment ignores that, for elite amateurs, handicaps are very important.
Mark,
What is your definition of elite? If you are a 2 and play in the city championship are you considering that elite? Is a division 3 college player elite? I've played in many scratch tournaments and never have considered myself elite.
The players I have in mind have a "+" in front of their index. So not super elite, but competing at a near national level.
-
I feel as though the context with posting casual rounds was that players aren't playing serious golf and having to deal with the pressure, taking gimmes, etc.
That might have been your context but I don't think it was the context on this side of the pond, where the fact that rounds were played in competition and with attestation was just as important.
Have we established that lack of attestation, at least, can harm more than the "cheater" (in the case of artificially low handicaps at the scratch and better level, I'm very comfortable with that word)?
-
"Or what about the very low handicapper, who fails to gain entry to an elite competition, where entry is decided by the lowest handicaps, where a player does get in with an artificially low handicap (this has happened locally here recently)."
Qualifiers solve this issue don't they? That's what they did many years ago in my district championship. Went to a qualifier. No issues.
They do and they work fine for big events. In the NY Metro area, the major events all have qualifiers, but there are maybe 600-1,000 people all wanting to play in it and that's a good way to break it down. The Long Island stuff they tend to just have the event. Maybe 200 people looking to play and a field of 150. It's hard to justify a qualifier for that, especially when you need to find a course willing to host them and people willing to officiate them etc. It's already a relatively full schedule. LI events are just first come first served provided your handicap is below the cut off. UK events they accept all applications and then just cut off the highest handicaps until they reach their field size. I know the cut off varied quite a bit. If the Surrey County Champs were at Sunningdale, you might need to be 0.5 to get in. If it was at a more run of the mill place then 3.5 might be good enough.
-
I’ve skimmed (and in some cases scrutinised) the posts in this thread, there appears to be a relevant item that has not been explored… EG’s acceptable formats for scorecard intent to be created… matchplay has been referred to, and correctly identified as not acceptable, though four ball better ball has not (apologies if I missed the post), FBBB is not acceptable for general play submission (it was included in a 2024 update for competition play), as such, and without a shadow of a doubt this absolutely disqualifies the vast majority of golfers considering posting a general play round to EG ineligible for posting. IC
-
I am simply at a loss as to what the question is here other than there are some who don't like the change in handicap computation and have chosen to ignore it. They can do so but how is this any different than any other means of not following the rules? If one's club or organization wants to have different rules for playing in their competition they are free to do so , i.e. the club has chosen to only include rounds played in stroke play competitions in computing handicaps for their events which is perfectly fine but a player who chooses to play at another club's competition must follow their rules which may include following the current guidelines.
-
I am simply at a loss as to what the question is here other than there are some who don't like the change in handicap computation and have chosen to ignore it. They can do so but how is this any different than any other means of not following the rules? If one's club or organization wants to have different rules for playing in their competition they are free to do so , i.e. the club has chosen to only include rounds played in stroke play competitions in computing handicaps for their events which is perfectly fine but a player who chooses to play at another club's competition must follow their rules which may include following the current guidelines.
Sorry Jerry. I’m not clear. Who do you think has chosen to ignore the change?
-
I am simply at a loss as to what the question is here other than there are some who don't like the change in handicap computation and have chosen to ignore it. They can do so but how is this any different than any other means of not following the rules? If one's club or organization wants to have different rules for playing in their competition they are free to do so , i.e. the club has chosen to only include rounds played in stroke play competitions in computing handicaps for their events which is perfectly fine but a player who chooses to play at another club's competition must follow their rules which may include following the current guidelines.
Sorry, Jerry, I have no idea what you are talking about? Who has chosen to ignore the rules? England Golf? Who are responsible for the rules? That, err, doesn't make any sense at all?
-
I have definitely seen a trend of the 30s-40s scoring a card even when playing matchplay. We even have a retired chap in this parish who has started this evil practice. I have taken to walking to the next tee and playing rather than watching guys practice on my time.
Don't lots of younger players use technology to record a score with an app like Golfshot, or club sensors like Arccos? I have done that for a decade or more and I see other doing the same. Here in Canada our governing body, Golf Canada, has released an app that uses GPS to give yardages and keeps your score, facilitating uploading to the central system.
Another advantage of submitting every score, at least when they are hole by hole scores, is it allows for better data collection for which hole gets which stroke allocation.
-
I thought that some were in disagreement with the changes in handicap calculation which is to now include all rounds except those that are pure practice playing multiple balls, etc. The statements I thought made it their position that only stroke play competitions should be included in handicap calculations. If I am incorrect then I am sorry for any misstatements on my part.
-
I am simply at a loss as to what the question is here other than there are some who don't like the change in handicap computation and have chosen to ignore it. They can do so but how is this any different than any other means of not following the rules? If one's club or organization wants to have different rules for playing in their competition they are free to do so , i.e. the club has chosen to only include rounds played in stroke play competitions in computing handicaps for their events which is perfectly fine but a player who chooses to play at another club's competition must follow their rules which may include following the current guidelines.
Jerry,
It is not a rule. You are not obliged to post casual rounds. It's as simple as that.
Quote from England Golf:
The World Handicap System™ now allows golfers to register scores for handicapping purposes during a general play round.
From the WHS FAQ at England Golf:
Q: Do I have to record all scores?
A: Players should submit all singles competition scores and have the ability to pre-register and
submit scores from social games played in accordance with the rules of golf. Accuracy of a player’s
Handicap Index will be improved the greater the number of scorecards submitted.
From Golf Ireland:
Pre-register your round
A player is required to pre-register their intent to submit
an acceptable 9-hole or 18-hole score in general play for
handicap purposes.
Registration must be done prior to the start of play and
should be done in the manner established by the Handicap
Committee or national association.
If it were mandatory to record all casual rounds, there would be no requirement to pre-register the intention to submit a score for a casual round; it would be taken for granted that all casual rounds are to be submitted, therefore no pre-registering would be needed.
Same procedure described at Golf England:
How do I submit a social score?
To post a general play score from any venue, a golfer is required to:
Pre-register the round with the host club.
This can be done on the My England Golf App, via the club’s own computer software or by simply telling the Pro/Club Manager of an intention to submit a score
Play and enjoy the round in accordance with the Rules of Golf
Enter the score using the My England Golf App or ask the host club to enter the score on your behalf either onto the WHS™ platform or their club software
If the vast majority of golfers in the GB&I were flaunting such a rule, we would have heard about it by now. There is no rule.
-
Okay, I stand corrected. It does then make me wonder why a player would post a non-competition round as I think it would be generally accepted that you are likely to score better in a non-competition round.
I know this is off topic but I believe related: you are not allowed to post a score if you use a rangefinder/laser with the slope feature or any other feature other than distance measuring turned on. So many people I play with believe you can have those features on unless it is a competition round. (At least in the US)
-
One of the several differences between U.S. and GB&I golfing cultures is that golf clubs in GB&I hold monthly medals, where golfers play a formal stroke-play round, holing every putt and having their scores attested. This gives a GB&I golfer 8-10 chances a year to post a score to establish/maintain a handicap.
Very few clubs in the U.S. (at least the ones I am familiar with) have regular stroke-play events like this. In fact, very few U.S. clubs have formal events where individuals post a medal score. Almost all tournament play at clubs in the U.S. is either match play, better ball play or foursomes play.
This accounts for some of the different opinions/perspectives here.
-
David,
I think that is the big difference between GB&I and the US; I also believe there is quite a difference in the number of competitions at Irish clubs when compared with UK clubs.
I think it's quite common in Ireland for clubs to hold single (stroke/stableford) competitions every weekend. Many clubs have mid-week open competitions to attract non-members. Then there are the Open Weeks (many of which are up to 10 days long), Open Weekends and Scratch Cups (Senior/Junior/Intermediate). I have to say the competitive nature of Irish golf is insane; there are so many club competitions, senior competitions, inter-club, inter-county, provincial, etc., it's crazy!
-
I thought that some were in disagreement with the changes in handicap calculation which is to now include all rounds except those that are pure practice playing multiple balls, etc. The statements I thought made it their position that only stroke play competitions should be included in handicap calculations. If I am incorrect then I am sorry for any misstatements on my part.
When the last major change was made to unify the handicap systems, I was told by a staffer of the USGA and two or three senior volunteers with interest in handicapping, that the USGA agreed to exclude unaccompanied rounds as a concession to the R & A for its inclusion of non-competitive rounds to calculate a valid index. It was not a matter of either being optional, though players under R & A's system had some lead time, a year as I recall, to comply.
I made the argument against not posting unverified rounds (playing as a "onesome") that integrity was a cornerstone of the game and that I couldn't remember an instance outside of a formal competition where cards were traded and two signatures required to post a score. Nevertheless, the concession was made to unify the systems, but it has been well-known that in the UK and Australia, golfers ignore this putative agreement.
Not being a competitive golfer any longer, I could not establish a meaningful handicap by only posting competitive rounds. That being the case, when I've played in the UK, it is very clear to me that USGA handicaps are 3-6+ strokes lower (conjecture) than those of my local counterparts. It is not a big deal in "friendly" matches like in the Buda, but opens such as the Carnegie Shield is another matter all together, even before considering the home turf advantage.
All of this handicap stuff was not a concern when I was young and could get into most local events and national qualifiers (subject to the 8-10 stroke performance rule). Now that I sport a 9.5 index, it is of some significance as I go against young Europeans and Ausies playing off a 15 who outdrive me by 50 yards with a 3-metal and I'm giving 5 strokes. It is not much of a competition if we're working from different bases, one reflective of tournament performance, the other mostly on casual rounds, the majority played on a home course.
I don't know that there is a solution outside games played by known parties. Though it won't work in the U.S., I believe the R & A system is superior.
-
I know this is off topic but I believe related: you are not allowed to post a score if you use a rangefinder/laser with the slope feature or any other feature other than distance measuring turned on. So many people I play with believe you can have those features on unless it is a competition round. (At least in the US)
Jerry
In my experience guys don’t turn off non yardage features. It just seems to be accepted that it’s not a big deal to use this info.
Ciao
-
Sean: That just seems to be kind of absurd - do they have other rules that they just don't care about? Perhaps playing a ball as it is since it is only a little bit out of bounds? I guess it would be more comparable to the "breakfast ball" on the first tee which I don't particularly like as it makes you unprepared for when you don't have that option in a competition.
-
Sean: That just seems to be kind of absurd - do they have other rules that they just don't care about? Perhaps playing a ball as it is since it is only a little bit out of bounds? I guess it would be more comparable to the "breakfast ball" on the first tee which I don't particularly like as it makes you unprepared for when you don't have that option in a competition.
When not holing out for any number of holes and making up your score seems to be acceptable then having a measuring device doesn't seem the biggest crime.
Niall
-
Mark - Agree with everything you say. It's not that a given individual should expect to shoot their handicap, but the distribution of scores should reflect the handicaps playing. It's the extent of the skewed distribution that is crazy to see. I would expect to see some reasonable part of the field shooting at or better than their handicap (10-20% maybe). I do not see that at my own club's events let alone regional events away from most of the players' home courses.
So few people seem to be able to play to their handicaps when everyone is playing by the rules.
Your index is an average of the best 8 of 20 last recorded scores. Even assuming an even distribution of scores in that 8 (and, in reality, there'll be a smaller number of lower scores) that would mean that you would not expect a player to play "to their handicap" more than 4 times in 20 or once in five. In reality, the proportion will be lower than that, particularly amongst higher handicaps.
Why do people expect that players should "play to their handicap"?
-
Wow! You asked questions about what happens in GB&I. I respond and that is somehow “jingoistic”!? Could you retract that accusation please.
Just as soon as y'all stop acting morally superior over the rules of handicapping, as if what's done in the U.S. for decades now is just morally reprehensible and no self-respecting Englishman would be caught dead even considering posting a casual round, ha ha ha. Sure.
Otherwise, no, I won't take back a word that means "overly patriotic or nationalistic." There's probably a better word out there, as this isn't political, really… but… you seem to be just as offended by this as the idea of posting a casual round. ;D
I know this the same way that you know that US casual and club golfers would need to see golf as a sport and not a pastime.
There are plenty of golfers in the U.S. who see it as a sport (and plenty in the UK who see it as a pastime), and I don't think the handicap system is the determining factor there at all.
I approve this message.
Appears the "World Handicap System" devised jointly by the R&A and USGA is a myth...
-
Based on my experience with American golfers and USGA caps vs my understanding of the UK system, it seems like the preferred methodology depends on the goal.
Whether that be a leisurely method to track basic player ability with little to no oversight among a user base of golfers where the vast majority either don't understand the rules, care to play by them, or deliberately manipulate them.
VS one that more accurately assesses player ability with mechanisms for accountability, oversight, and integrity of competitions.
-
Appears the "World Handicap System" devised jointly by the R&A and USGA is a myth...
Another poor/shallow take by Chris. Never mind that the ROW adopted course ratings and slope, or that the U.S. did away with solo rounds in prep for this, or that other concessions were made (ROW allowing non-comp rounds is on that list).
-
What I find interesting that was in an earlier post is that the USGA did away with posting solo rounds "as a concession" to the UK. I've never understood why I can play with three strangers out of town and post effectively whatever I want but I can't post a score when I play alone in what is supposed to be a game of honor and integrity. In an early discussion about handicapping it was never mentioned that this was a concession by the USGA.
-
Funnily enough, in a sense the USGA is saying we trust you and you alone to post your score without any verification, but we do want you to be playing with someone - presumably that makes it less likely you'll be playing two balls or totally mucking around. The UK system is saying we don't trust you to post a score on your own - we need verification from someone else that you scored what you say you scored. Maybe that's some kind of cultural difference, but I don't think the USGA is questioning your honor or integrity
-
This has been explained to you before, Rob.
The simplest answers are:
1. When using a handicap it’s never alone. It’s always with people. So, with people is more like the conditions in which you’ll use the index than it is if you’re alone.
2. It was a concession to the ROW for the WHS (with MUCH stricter) rules.
"Lack of honesty" isn't in the top 30 reasons why the USGA went this route… and the list is only about five items long. If anything, as Michael says, the UK method of requiring attestation says more about whether they feel you're honest than the USGA's system of non-attestation.
The U.S. system is not questioning your honor/integrity. At all.
I don't know how to make it any clearer for you.
-
This has been explained to you before, Rob.
The simplest answers are:
1. When using a handicap it’s never alone. It’s always with people. So, with people is more like the conditions in which you’ll use the index than it is if you’re alone.
2. It was a concession to the ROW for the WHS (with MUCH stricter) rules.
"Lack of honesty" isn't in the top 30 reasons why the USGA went this route… and the list is only about five items long. If anything, as Michael says, the UK method of requiring attestation says more about whether they feel you're honest than the USGA's system of non-attestation.
The U.S. system is not questioning your honor/integrity. At all.
I don't know how to make it any clearer for you.
Erik, What I have gathered per the post I was referring to, is that the only reason the USGA doesn't allow you to post when playing alone is SOLEY because of a concession to the UK. It appears or is applied by that poster that it was going to be allowed before that concession.
As for the UK system it appears to me to be the most accurate system. Ball is in the hole. Score is attested. Doesn't get any better than that imo.
-
This has been explained to you before, Rob.
The simplest answers are:
1. When using a handicap it’s never alone. It’s always with people. So, with people is more like the conditions in which you’ll use the index than it is if you’re alone.
2. It was a concession to the ROW for the WHS (with MUCH stricter) rules.
"Lack of honesty" isn't in the top 30 reasons why the USGA went this route… and the list is only about five items long. If anything, as Michael says, the UK method of requiring attestation says more about whether they feel you're honest than the USGA's system of non-attestation.
The U.S. system is not questioning your honor/integrity. At all.
I don't know how to make it any clearer for you.
When you actually apologized to one of the UK guys in an earlier post I thought your identity had been hijacked as grace has never been a strong suit for you. I noticed you’ve regained your usual high handed snark in short order and have taken aim at the people you generally ignore. ::) Lesson book light today?
-
Funnily enough, in a sense the USGA is saying we trust you and you alone to post your score without any verification, but we do want you to be playing with someone - presumably that makes it less likely you'll be playing two balls or totally mucking around. The UK system is saying we don't trust you to post a score on your own - we need verification from someone else that you scored what you say you scored. Maybe that's some kind of cultural difference, but I don't think the USGA is questioning your honor or integrity
Good point Michael, but that doesn't make sense if the USGA only disallowed single player posting as a concession. (two balls or mucking around wouldn't seem to come into play) However, maybe there was no concession. I don't know but I believe the poster.
I guess the question I would ask is which system provides the best indicator of your playing ability?
-
This has been explained to you before, Rob.
The simplest answers are:
1. When using a handicap it’s never alone. It’s always with people. So, with people is more like the conditions in which you’ll use the index than it is if you’re alone.
2. It was a concession to the ROW for the WHS (with MUCH stricter) rules.
"Lack of honesty" isn't in the top 30 reasons why the USGA went this route… and the list is only about five items long. If anything, as Michael says, the UK method of requiring attestation says more about whether they feel you're honest than the USGA's system of non-attestation.
The U.S. system is not questioning your honor/integrity. At all.
I don't know how to make it any clearer for you.
When you actually apologized to one of the UK guys in an earlier post I thought your identity had been hijacked as grace has never been a strong suit for you. I noticed you’ve regained your usual high handed snark in short order and have taken aim at the people you generally ignore. ::) Lesson book light today?
Tim, Nothing I didn't expect.
-
Sean: If you choose to hole out every putt then you have the right to do so. You may have to wait until the other players have done so such as in the case where your putt is conceded by your opponents but you still can do it. Although there may be some questioning looks on the faces of others in your group if you keep missing 2 footers that had been conceded :) On the other hand, there is no shall we say grey area when it comes to lasers using the slope feature. Heck, there are some traditionalists who refuse to use a laser and that is their right to do so.
-
"WHS" and "soft/hard cap" both = bogus nonsense.
-
Erik, What I have gathered per the post I was referring to, is that the only reason the USGA doesn't allow you to post when playing alone is SOLEY because of a concession to the UK.
Point remains it has nothing to do with the USGA calling into question your honesty.
Tim, thanks for contributing to the topic… as usual, your post is entirely personal and doesn't even feign sticking to the topic at all. Nothing I didn't expect. :P
-
This has been a highly entertaining thread. Only points I might add:
1. the idea that Americans favor stroke play vs. match play - nothing could be further from the truth, at least at private clubs. In friendly games there is always a match and that is the driver of the competition, but we still keep (and enter) scores for handicap purposes.
2. I think someone said scores shouldn't be posted for four-ball matches - I may have misunderstood, but >90% of US private club golf is four-ball golf, where the focus is the match but all four players enter their personal scores afterward.
3. I agree that US handicaps tend to be lower because we play a lot of golf in the comfortable surroundings of friends, with little of the pressure of 'competition'. Having said that 'competition' exists in different forms, and at one of my clubs we have 'sweeps' every weekend day...but generally play with our buddies and I tend to score well. Then every now and then we have a serious competition and the pressure is ratcheted up and I can be counted on to come in 3-6 strokes higher than on a normal Saturday!
-
Erik, What I have gathered per the post I was referring to, is that the only reason the USGA doesn't allow you to post when playing alone is SOLEY because of a concession to the UK.
Point remains it has nothing to do with the USGA calling into question your honesty.
Tim, thanks for contributing to the topic… as usual, your post is entirely personal and doesn't even feign sticking to the topic at all. Nothing I didn't expect. :P
I’m at a loss that someone from Pennsylvania seems consumed with how handicaps are administered in the UK? ::)
-
Erik, What I have gathered per the post I was referring to, is that the only reason the USGA doesn't allow you to post when playing alone is SOLEY because of a concession to the UK.
Point remains it has nothing to do with the USGA calling into question your honesty.
Tim, thanks for contributing to the topic… as usual, your post is entirely personal and doesn't even feign sticking to the topic at all. Nothing I didn't expect. :P
So it was a concession and nothing to do with not using your index when playing alone.
-
I’m at a loss that someone from Pennsylvania seems consumed with how handicaps are administered in the UK? ::)
I'm at a loss at how many posts you can make that do not discuss the topic but which instead are almost entirely personal.
(https://media4.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExNm9wa2VhYWM5ZHBpODN0NGhmcXM1aXdzeXQzazZ6aTlwa3J3eGpiNSZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/BERQ4XuaKEZnq/giphy.gif)
You didn't even start posting in this topic until you had to make a comment about me. And every post you've made in this topic continues that.
So it was a concession and nothing to do with not using your index when playing alone.
No, the concession was the major one of a few reasons. Your BS about the "honesty" is more accurate in reverse than the way you've said it.
-
A concession is giving up something you wanted. I agree since it was a concession it has nothing to do with integrity or honesty. The USGA wanted to allow posting when playing alone.
-
This has been a highly entertaining thread. Only points I might add:
1. the idea that Americans favor stroke play vs. match play - nothing could be further from the truth, at least at private clubs. In friendly games there is always a match and that is the driver of the competition, but we still keep (and enter) scores for handicap purposes.
2. I think someone said scores shouldn't be posted for four-ball matches - I may have misunderstood, but >90% of US private club golf is four-ball golf, where the focus is the match but all four players enter their personal scores afterward.
3. I agree that US handicaps tend to be lower because we play a lot of golf in the comfortable surroundings of friends, with little of the pressure of 'competition'. Having said that 'competition' exists in different forms, and at one of my clubs we have 'sweeps' every weekend day...but generally play with our buddies and I tend to score well. Then every now and then we have a serious competition and the pressure is ratcheted up and I can be counted on to come in 3-6 strokes higher than on a normal Saturday!
The sentiment of this post is right-on, even if I giggle at the numbers. Like, I don't think it's quite 90+% of private club rounds that are played as fourball. That number feels about as accurate as the 100% assumed success rate of putts inside 6 feet that get picked up on the way to carding an "expected score," which is our true golf tradition unlike any other here in the States.
But the gist is true. This thread is indeed highly entertaining, for one. Also, real stroke play is very rare for Americans. While almost every American round played produces a stroke play "score," that score is usually more approximate - inclusive of things like gimmes, iffy drops, a breakfast ball, etc - than truly legitimate. We do play a lot of fourball, even as everyone in the group records a medal score for handicap purposes. And yeah, even our competitive golf is typically played in fairly comfortable surroundings. My club has competitions about every other weekend throughout the season and a league night during the week. A player who plays in every competition available, all season long, will play four total rounds without a teammate.
This elastic relationship we have between "medal score" and "posted score" probably helps explain another tradition unlike any other: Constant bitching about handicaps. I'm sure complaining about caps happens everywhere, but is that chorus of complaining as loud in places like the UK, with competition-based caps, as it is in the US?
I'm on record: I think it was a miss to bend toward the US system and not adopt the competition-based system of the UK, Australia, and elsewhere in the WHS.
-
Curious to know what percentage of posted round scores in the US would be posted by players who are actual members of golf clubs as distinct from pay-n-play, muni course etc golfers?
In the U.K. I suspect a very high percentage would be rounds posted by clubs members.
Atb
-
Curious to know what percentage of posted round scores in the US would be posted by players who are actual members of golf clubs as distinct from pay-n-play, muni course etc golfers?
In the U.K. I suspect a very high percentage would be rounds posted by clubs members.
That's part of why the differences exist. The differences are much smaller now, but they still exist.
-
Curious to know what percentage of posted round scores in the US would be posted by players who are actual members of golf clubs as distinct from pay-n-play, muni course etc golfers?
In the U.K. I suspect a very high percentage would be rounds posted by clubs members.
That's part of why the differences exist. The differences are much smaller now, but they still exist.
Any idea as to the USA proportion/percentage?
Atb
-
Great question on the proportion of private club member rounds in the US vs. public/muni play. I don't know the answer but private clubs in the US are often very pricey so I think there would be far more 'public' golfers than private. 20+ years ago when I was a casual (adult) public golfer I didn't even know how handicaps worked, and didn't post a score until I joined my first club. I would guess the overwhelming majority of private club rounds in the US are 'posted'...but would guess the opposite is true for public/muni rounds. So 'more rounds played away from private clubs' but 'more rounds posted AT private clubs' would be my guess. I wonder if the USGA has such data?
-
I'm on record: I think it was a miss to bend toward the US system and not adopt the competition-based system of the UK, Australia, and elsewhere in the WHS.
The two point system (course rating and slope rating) is much superior to the one point system that the UK used to use (just a course rating - standard scratch score). The US system is also much faster to catch up to a change in ability than the UK system was. I think the competition-based system has its merits, but it's very difficult for people who are not members of a club, which makes that not really workable in the US. For its sins, I think the WHS is a pretty good system. I think its biggest issue is the difference between the handicaps it produces and the expectations of the people who get those handicaps.
-
I'm on record: I think it was a miss to bend toward the US system and not adopt the competition-based system of the UK, Australia, and elsewhere in the WHS.
The two point system (course rating and slope rating) is much superior to the one point system that the UK used to use (just a course rating - standard scratch score). The US system is also much faster to catch up to a change in ability than the UK system was. I think the competition-based system has its merits, but it's very difficult for people who are not members of a club, which makes that not really workable in the US. For its sins, I think the WHS is a pretty good system. I think its biggest issue is the difference between the handicaps it produces and the expectations of the people who get those handicaps.
Definitely agree on the merits of using rating + slope. My statement there is strictly based on the use of comp rounds.
And I totally get the immediate reaction of "Courses in the US don't offer competitions, particularly on the public side, and therefore comp-based posting wouldn't work here." But I think that's shortsighted - it assumes that if you put a "comp rounds only" rule in place, that nothing else would change. I think it's a shortcoming of US golf that competition is so hard to find if you're a public course player, while 6 hour rounds on courses full of drunk yahoos are so easy to find. I would LOVE it if, in my city, the average local public course offered one or two comp days a month, requiring a handicap for entry, and otherwise making friendly competition readily available to anyone. It's not a strength of our golf culture that the average public golf experience is so transactional and anti-communal. I can't think of a better, realistic catalyst that could've made an impact so quickly.
-
Haven't the home golf unions in UK&Irl made the change recently to allow non-members of golf clubs obtain golf handicaps, so being a member of a club is no longer required?
I've heard that this has negatively impacted the finances of small remote clubs that offered letter-box golf memberships (at least that's what they're called in Sweden). A club in Ireland recently announced it would close and this was one of the reasons mentioned.
EDIT: I see it's called iGolf and was introduced in England, Scotland and Wales in 2021, and last year in Ireland. New Zealand also provides this option.
-
I belong to 3 Men’s Clubs here in SD and play 10 competition rounds per month; 14 of my 20 scores are C rounds. So there are serious golfers who enjoy competition here in the US. Of the 600 members at my primary course 300 play in Tournaments. Before the WHS we manually computed completion handicaps using only tournament scores. The same people stopped wining all the time and winning scores dropped from net 65-66 to net 68-70.
We have asked the SCGA to allow us to have a competition based index in addition to the all inclusive one and they have flat out refused! It seems that having a completion index as well as a regular one would be the ideal solution for the entire world. Allow Clubs to decide which one to use for their Tournaments.
WHY CANT WE HAVE A SEPERATE INDEX THAT LUMPS COMPETION SCORES?
-
Haven't the home golf unions in UK&Irl made the change recently to allow non-members of golf clubs obtain golf handicaps, so being a member of a club is no longer required?
I've heard that this has negatively impacted the finances of small remote clubs that offered letter-box golf memberships (at least that's what they're called in Sweden). A club in Ireland recently announced it would close and this was one of the reasons mentioned.
EDIT: I see it's called iGolf and was introduced in England, Scotland and Wales in 2021, and last year in Ireland. New Zealand also provides this option.
Presumably this is a result of the non-competition scores allowance that now exists.
-
I belong to 3 Men’s Clubs here in SD and play 10 competition rounds per month; 14 of my 20 scores are C rounds. So there are serious golfers who enjoy competition here in the US. Of the 600 members at my primary course 300 play in Tournaments. Before the WHS we manually computed completion handicaps using only tournament scores. The same people stopped wining all the time and winning scores dropped from net 65-66 to net 68-70.
We have asked the SCGA to allow us to have a competition based index in addition to the all inclusive one and they have flat out refused! It seems that having a completion index as well as a regular one would be the ideal solution for the entire world. Allow Clubs to decide which one to use for their Tournaments.
WHY CANT WE HAVE A SEPERATE INDEX THAT LUMPS COMPETION SCORES?
I think that's a pretty good idea. GHIN must have all the data that they would need to create a C score index