Will GHIN website make new World Handicap score adjustments automatically?

[Roadking2003]

I'm not buying what you are selling. There is no outrage. And adults can handle information. Hiding golf information because they are afraid that we might ask questions is silly.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

To me the PCC seems gimmicky with regard to the weathers impact. Weather can change dramatically during the course of a day. Perhaps horrible at one time and nice at another. For example if the majority of golfers on a given day play on a very windy afternoon, even if the morning wind was calm those morning players would be impacted by the afternoon PCC, wouldn't they? I'm not convinced this made the system better and wonder if it was a compromise with another HC authority?

[rogolf]

Why do you suspect a "compromise"? The WHS was agreed to by all involved, and I'm sure that the decisions were made by consensus as the best for all concerned. Sometimes golfers just need to look at the big picture, as has been done for the Rules of golf. (And I do recognize that a camel is a horse designed by a Committee.)

[nsxguy]

Consensus ? Compromise ? What's in a name,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[rogolf]

To me, a "compromise" means that you lowered your standards to meet someone else's. Not the same as consensus, which suggests that it's the best for the majority. Maybe it's just my perception of the words.

[nsxguy]

No worries, they're close enough.

Compromise - An agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.

[jvincent]

I'm assuming that the PCC is very close to the CONGU CSS system. Which was fully explained in their handicap manual.

[Shilgy]

Not just weather is involved. It is the scores that matter. Greenkeeper argues with his wife and set pins in diabolical locations....tees are tougher...heck, the club championship at your local club. EVERYTHING that can drive up scores you can think of would be a factor.

[Newby]

Not at all similar, although the aim was the same. It is however similar to the Australian system.

 

 

[Newby]

Yes. It is only score related. Why scores may have been affected is not a direct consideration.

[davep043]

My interpretation is that they looked at each of the previously existing systems, and tried to choose the best aspects of each for the WHS. In some cases, it may have been a choice between two equally attractive options, and in those cases I think the word probably IS compromise. In deciding on specific numbers, like the hard and soft caps, it may have been a compromise between differing opinions. The specifics of designing a handicap system are relatively subjective, I don't believe there's a singe right or wrong answer to many of the questions. I guess that "compromise" can lead to "consensus".

[jvincent]

My quick read of the Australian system it looks very similar to CONGU.

But the point is that if the WHS doesn't publish their system we will never know.

[davep043]

For those who really WANT to see the PCC calculations, can you tell me why? Totally separate from the issue of whether it SHOULD be released, I'm asking why you as an individual want to see it.

[Augster]

Right.

Most probably won’t be able to follow the math that is involved. Also, an individual would have to have access to every score posted at that course every day in order to do the calculations.

Once the formula goes into statistically significant standard deviations per handicap index and orders of magnitude, probabilities of each individual HI shooting outside the norm enough to enact the PCC, I’d say most people will already be asleep.

Are people looking for reading material at night to put them to bed? The “formula” they use is going to be incredibly complex and basically worthless to the individual without all the data input each day.

[sui generis]

Yet we'll happily drink a Coke without knowing the secret 69 herbs and spices and ground up insects which make it taste.

[jvincent]

Math and golf nerd here, so mostly just curious.

Also, I believe everything handicap related should be fully transparent. Whether the golfing masses can understand it or not is a moot point.

[davep043]

I understand that point of view, even if I don't share it. I wouldn't be surprised if they're keeping this quiet for now at least partly so they can evaluate how it works. Because nobody really sees all the scores used in the calculation, nobody will be able to tell if they choose to tweak the "decision points" a bit based on real-world experience. I'm sure that "decision point" term isn't one normally used, I hope you understand what I mean.

[cxx]

The more people who review the process, the better. The scrutiny from outside helps point out problems and provide solutions much earlier than if the details are hidden. I grant you that this might be a little uncomfortable for the originators of the process but who cares about that.

I don't think the ideas or the calculations behind the PCC are that complicated and should be explainable with some basic statistics.

 

[jvincent]

I wouldn't be surprised if they are keeping it under wraps to allow some tweaking.

I'm still going to argue that transparency is still a good idea. Then when they make a change they can explain it.

[Newby]

I don't know if you've seen this but wade through the spiel and see page 69 for the nitty gritty. It doesn't look much like CONGU to mehttps://www.statisticalsolutions.com.au/uploads/1/4/6/4/14643210/daily_scratch_rating_-_sept_2012.pdf

Compare it the Clause 18 and Appendix B of the CONGU Manualhttps://www.congu.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2018-CONGU-Manual-2019.pdf

 

[jvincent]

On a related note, Golf Canada just enabled the new handicap system online.

Our scoring history now has additional column for "Adjustment" and "Adjusted Differential". There's also a statistics view that looks like it will show HBH details if you enter those.

[jvincent]

Thanks, I hadn't seen that. Definitely different from the CONGU method.

[davep043]

In GHIN, I see a column for PCC, but nothing for "adjustments". Within the Admin website, there are additional columns for Exceptional Score Adjustments (automatic) and Adjustments by the Committee. I'm not sure how those will be shown for a player if they occur, perhaps that column simply doesn't show unless there ARE adjustments applied.

[jvincent]

I assume the "Adjustment" column is PCC.

[Newby]

Could that relate to Appendix C?

[davep043]

I don't think so, Appendix C for Handicap Allowances in different formats relates to Playing Handicap, I don't think that should be a factor in Handicap Posting. Those columns would keep track of adjustments from sections 5.9, and 7.1a(ii)

In the seminar I attended, we discussed the ways in which "Adjustments" will be applied. The Exceptional Score Adjustment is automatically applied when a posted score produces a Differential 7 strokes or more below a players Handicap Index. If that happens, each Differential in the players past 20 scores is automatically reduced by 1.0 (by 2.0 if the differential is 10 or more below his HI), which (obviously) reduces his Handicap Index by 1.0. In that case, the "ESA Adjustment" column would show 1.0 for those scores. Scores posted subsequently would not be adjusted as long as they're not really low, so the effect of that Exceptional score fades and new scores are posted. If he shoots another really low score, the 20 differentials in his record at that time would again be reduced by 1.0. If its soon enough after the first one, some of those differentials would have a total of 2.0 strokes adjustment. So that's the function of the ESA column in the Admin website (Section 5.9 of the Handicap Rules). Similarly, if a Committee chooses to impose a modification of a Handicap Index, one way they can apply it is through an Adjustment of his last 20 differentials. (7.1a(ii))

[Newby]

Makes sense. Thanks

[BlackDiamondPar5]

No doubt course set up is a factor but at least that is generally consistent across the day. But the big variable is weather within a given day. The PCC is likely to be inappropriate depending on the time someone plays that day because of the weather. Also impacting is the number of rounds played and posted... Even with requiring a min of 8 rounds to calculate the PCC that in all likelihood could result in a high STD Dev PCC. Then you have guys or organizations that don't get scores keyed immediately which presents more issues for PCC. When is the cut off for calculating PCC? Can it adjust days and weeks after you post? How can you guys not see this as a very real issue?

[Newby]

It seems that it worked successfully in Australia.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

I've never seen a merger/acquisition that resulted in optimal decisions---- and I've been part of many. Pride and power will always sway decisions. I don't see how multiple HC authorities and the participants within could totally put pride aside. I'm going to bet some dug in their heels and compromises had to be made... thus the camel.