Soft Cap Duration

[rzitup]

With the World Handicap system they have implemented a soft cap that throttles your index once it moves upwards 3 points.  I am all for this, but question the amount of time it lingers.  I was a 6.1 to start the year, which was my lifetime low.  I quickly fell off of that, moving up 3 strokes quickly (mid Feb).  I have leveled off as a 10ish since, so have been throttled basically the entire year.  

I am a different golfer since then (i stink now!) but still have this legacy issue from back when I was a better golfer!

It seems to me the soft (and hard) cap would be more reelvant sticking around for a shorter period of time?

[rogolf]

The soft and hard caps are based on the low handicap index.  From the Handicapping Manual:

Low Handicap Index

The lowest Handicap Index achieved by a player during the 365-day period (one year) preceding the day on which the most recent score on their scoring record was played (see Rule 5.7 Low Handicap Index).

[rzitup]

Just now, rogolf said:

The soft and hard caps are based on the low handicap index.  From the Handicapping Manual:

Low Handicap Index

The lowest Handicap Index achieved by a player during the 365-day period (one year) preceding the day on which the most recent score on their scoring record was played (see Rule 5.7 Low Handicap Index).

Correct.  I am questioning the 1 year duration.  I am, and I would guess others too, a different golfer one year later.  1 year just seems a long time to me.  

[Halebopp]

You can always ask for your handicap to be reviewed by the handicap committee.

[rzitup]

4 minutes ago, Halebopp said:

You can always ask for your handicap to be reviewed by the handicap committee.

I always assumed this was just a once time correction, so this is not a real fix to this issue.  

I am questioning the amount of time the WH system assesses a soft cap (1 year).  It just seems a long time to supress.

[Shilgy]

5 minutes ago, rzitup said:

Correct.  I am questioning the 1 year duration.  I am, and I would guess others too, a different golfer one year later.  1 year just seems a long time to me.  

It is a rolling one year.  I am guessing from your post your have not reached the 5.0 cap to your index? 
As to the logic of the cap. The handicap index is a look into your potential. If something has changed with you physically you can petition your handicap committee for an adjustment as @Haleboppmentioned.  If not physical your potential is still there.

[rogolf]

11 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

It is a rolling one year.  I am guessing from your post your have not reached the 5.0 cap to your index? 
As to the logic of the cap. The handicap index is a look into your potential. If something has changed with you physically you can petition your handicap committee for an adjustment as @Haleboppmentioned.  If not physical your potential is still there.

I think the handicapping authorities have done away with the idea that a handicap index represents a player's "potential", replacing it with "demonstrated ability."  Minor point though - some days it feels like my "demonstrated inability".

Handicap Index

The measure of a player’s demonstrated ability calculated against the Slope Rating of a golf course of standard playing difficulty (that is, a course with a Slope Rating of 113) (see Rule 5.2 Calculation of a Handicap Index).

Edited November 5, 2020 by rogolf

[Shilgy]

9 minutes ago, rogolf said:

I think the handicapping authorities have done away with the idea that a handicap index represents a player's "potential", replacing it with "demonstrated ability."  Minor point though - some days it feels like my "demonstrated inability".

Handicap Index

The measure of a player’s demonstrated ability calculated against the Slope Rating of a golf course of standard playing difficulty (that is, a course with a Slope Rating of 113) (see Rule 5.2 Calculation of a Handicap Index).

You are correct. I used the old phraseology. Like saying the hole was halved instead of tied.☺️

 

Does that mean we are all square? 

Edited November 5, 2020 by Shilgy

[rogolf]

3 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

You are correct. I used the old phraseology. Like saying the hole was halved instead of tied.☺️

 

Does that mean we are all square? 

Actually, "halved" and "all square" are still in the Rule book.  😀

[Sawgrass]

36 minutes ago, rogolf said:

Actually, "halved" and "all square" are still in the Rule book.  😀

So true.  Alas, "dormie" has got dormant. 

[davep043]

1 hour ago, rzitup said:

With the World Handicap system they have implemented a soft cap that throttles your index once it moves upwards 3 points.  I am all for this, but question the amount of time it lingers.  I was a 6.1 to start the year, which was my lifetime low.  I quickly fell off of that, moving up 3 strokes quickly (mid Feb).  I have leveled off as a 10ish since, so have been throttled basically the entire year.  

I am a different golfer since then (i stink now!) but still have this legacy issue from back when I was a better golfer!

It seems to me the soft (and hard) cap would be more reelvant sticking around for a shorter period of time?

I'm going to make sure I have this right.  You started the year at 6.1.  The soft cap kicked in when your calculated HI exceeded 9.1.  Now you're at about 10 (subject to soft cap) which means your uncapped HI would be about 11, since the soft cap essentially halves any upward movement past the initiation point.  That's one stroke.  

Any system which intends to limit intentional handicap manipulation is going to also limit some unintentional handicap changes.  You may legitimately be one of the innocents caught in the system.  But its one measly stroke.  Its not that big a deal.

 

[Mr. Bean]

2 hours ago, rzitup said:

I always assumed this was just a once time correction, so this is not a real fix to this issue.  

I am questioning the amount of time the WH system assesses a soft cap (1 year).  It just seems a long time to supress.

 

May I ask why you suddenly 'suck' ?

[jvincent]

1 hour ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

May I ask why you suddenly 'suck' ?

 

Because golf?

Edited November 5, 2020 by jvincent

[Augster]

Demonstrated ability. 
 

Did you demonstrate that you were a 6.1? Yes. 
 

Play better. The system knows you can.
 

And if Dave has the math right, it’s one shot. 

[rzitup]

On 11/5/2020 at 9:02 AM, davep043 said:

I'm going to make sure I have this right.  You started the year at 6.1.  The soft cap kicked in when your calculated HI exceeded 9.1.  Now you're at about 10 (subject to soft cap) which means your uncapped HI would be about 11, since the soft cap essentially halves any upward movement past the initiation point.  That's one stroke.  

Any system which intends to limit intentional handicap manipulation is going to also limit some unintentional handicap changes.  You may legitimately be one of the innocents caught in the system.  But its one measly stroke.  Its not that big a deal.

 

I'm not complaining about my situation, I was more asking about the idea of the soft cap sticking around for one year, vs. a shorter time.  Someone above mentioned that "my potential still exists".  I would counter that 10 months later, my potential is quite different.

Maybe I am a more volatile golfer than others, but I tend to move up and down quite a bit.  Or maybe it seems like a longer time because the beginning of the year, when this system kicked in, was my exact low index.

 

Here is my index for the past 9 years...

[rzitup]

19 hours ago, Augster said:

Demonstrated ability. 
 

Did you demonstrate that you were a 6.1? Yes. 
 

Play better. The system knows you can.
 

And if Dave has the math right, it’s one shot. 

 

This is my point...the system sucks if it thinks today, I can play as good as I did a year ago (when my low point was established).  the 120 rounds I have played since indicate otherwise.  

[Mr. Bean]

4 minutes ago, rzitup said:

 

This is my point...the system sucks if it thinks today, I can play as good as I did a year ago (when my low point was established).  the 120 rounds I have played since indicate otherwise.  

 

The system does not suck but you do, if your playing ability has degraded so fast that your handicap cannot follow. Seriously.

[davep043]

10 minutes ago, rzitup said:

Or maybe it seems like a longer time because the beginning of the year, when this system kicked in, was my exact low index.

I think this is it, its a bit of a statistical anomaly that you'd have your handicap increase so dramatically in such a short time, after an equally rapid improvement.  I can understand if there was a real physical change, but if you're just playing bad, that's a different matter.  I suppose the one thing you can look forward to is that after the first of the year your handicap can increase pretty quickly, as your 12-month low will be rising quickly.  But if you're really stable now, it won't go up all that much before the soft cap no longer has an effect.

[rzitup]

20 minutes ago, davep043 said:

I think this is it, its a bit of a statistical anomaly that you'd have your handicap increase so dramatically in such a short time, after an equally rapid improvement.  I can understand if there was a real physical change, but if you're just playing bad, that's a different matter.  I suppose the one thing you can look forward to is that after the first of the year your handicap can increase pretty quickly, as your 12-month low will be rising quickly.  But if you're really stable now, it won't go up all that much before the soft cap no longer has an effect.

 

All correct, i have plateaued at what I think my statistical norm will be.  I had a spurt of good golf for about 1.5 months, which caused my index to go down quickly.  It shot back up even quicker, because I play a decent amount of golf.  That left me in a spot where I was soft capped for a year.  I have no issue with the soft cap, and think it (and its parts) are great and needed.  I just question the one year duration, which seems excessive to me.  Again, it could be the sometimes inconsistent nature of my game vs. the average, but I dont know for sure thats accurate.  

[rzitup]

32 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

The system does not suck but you do, if your playing ability has degraded so fast that your handicap cannot follow. Seriously.

 

You have given zero indication of why one year is better than 6 months, or less.  In my experience, a year is too long, which means the system sucks.  Seriously.  

[Mr. Bean]

35 minutes ago, rzitup said:

 

You have given zero indication of why one year is better than 6 months, or less.  In my experience, a year is too long, which means the system sucks.  Seriously.  

 

In this thread you have already been explained that if you feel your handicap does not match your playing abilities you need to address your club. An entire system cannot be built based on individuals whose playing abilities suddenly degrade. Seriously.

[rzitup]

23 minutes ago, Mr. Bean said:

 

In this thread you have already been explained that if you feel your handicap does not match your playing abilities you need to address your club. An entire system cannot be built based on individuals whose playing abilities suddenly degrade. Seriously.

It would probably we wise to actually read what I posted.  I am not complaining about my situation, I am questioning the duration of the soft cap.  It's clear you are just responding to incite, because you responded to something you didnt even pay attention to.  My game didnt degrade (please look at the chart and ask for help interpreting it if you need).  My game has been pretty consistent, outside of a 1.5 month dip where I strung together a few good rounds.  That short spurt of short term skill/luck/whatever, has caused my index to be throttled for 10 months.  I think the system sucks, and the handicap committee at my club isnt going to address that.  

[jvincent]

For us folks who only have 6 month seasons the soft/hard caps are probably going to be an issue in the early part of the season.

 

Coming off a 6 month layoff my index is usually flat for a month or so while I knock off last season's good rounds and then it climbs for a month or so until the form returns and then it stabilizes. I hit my low cap of the season in August. It's not hard to see me bumping into the soft cap in the first two months of next season.

 

If it were me, I'd have set the soft limit to 4 strokes and the hard limit to 6. 

[davep043]

6 minutes ago, jvincent said:

If it were me, I'd have set the soft limit to 4 strokes and the hard limit to 6. 

This is a problem for anyone who defines rules, they have to draw hard lines.  Is the right number 3 strokes or 4, is the right duration 12 months, or 6?  No decision is necessarily "correct", its a judgement thing. 

Looking back at some old publications, my guess is that the 12-month look-back period carried forward the USGA's duration for Tournament Score evaluations.  In my opinion, the current soft and hard cap system is more fair than the old USGA system.  Under that system, once the Tournament Score reduction kicked in, the worse you played, the greater the T-Score reduction, so that your handicap went down as you played worse.  At least now the handicap goes up, just more slowly.

[jvincent]

4 minutes ago, davep043 said:

This is a problem for anyone who defines rules, they have to draw hard lines.  Is the right number 3 strokes or 4, is the right duration 12 months, or 6?  No decision is necessarily "correct", its a judgement thing. 

Looking back at some old publications, my guess is that the 12-month look-back period carried forward the USGA's duration for Tournament Score evaluations.  In my opinion, the current soft and hard cap system is more fair than the old USGA system.  Under that system, once the Tournament Score reduction kicked in, the worse you played, the greater the T-Score reduction, so that your handicap went down as you played worse.  At least now the handicap goes up, just more slowly.

Agreed that the limits had to be set somewhere. I would be curious to see numbers on how many players hit the caps.

 

Thinking about it some more I think setting the cap limits as a percentage of index might have been a better approach since low index players probably have less variability than higher ones but I have no data to back this up.

[davep043]

1 minute ago, jvincent said:

Agreed that the limits had to be set somewhere. I would be curious to see numbers on how many players hit the caps.

 

Thinking about it some more I think setting the cap limits as a percentage of index might have been a better approach since low index players probably have less variability than higher ones but I have no data to back this up.

I'd be curious too, they certainly had access to mountains of data.  The percentage idea also makes some sense, but might be perceived as giving a higher handicapper a greater opportunity to sandbag.  I don't know, really.  Like all compromises, this one isn't perfect, but isn't awful either.

[Sawgrass]

4 hours ago, davep043 said:

This is a problem for anyone who defines rules, they have to draw hard lines.  Is the right number 3 strokes or 4, is the right duration 12 months, or 6?  No decision is necessarily "correct", its a judgement thing. 

Looking back at some old publications, my guess is that the 12-month look-back period carried forward the USGA's duration for Tournament Score evaluations.  In my opinion, the current soft and hard cap system is more fair than the old USGA system.  Under that system, once the Tournament Score reduction kicked in, the worse you played, the greater the T-Score reduction, so that your handicap went down as you played worse.  At least now the handicap goes up, just more slowly.

IIR, the old T score provisions lasted for 12 months. Seems to me the cap now following that long-standing provision for 12 months is natural.

[Shilgy]

7 hours ago, rzitup said:

I'm not complaining about my situation, I was more asking about the idea of the soft cap sticking around for one year, vs. a shorter time.  Someone above mentioned that "my potential still exists".  I would counter that 10 months later, my potential is quite different.

Maybe I am a more volatile golfer than others, but I tend to move up and down quite a bit.  Or maybe it seems like a longer time because the beginning of the year, when this system kicked in, was my exact low index.

 

Here is my index for the past 9 years...

Congrats, I have never known anyone as volatile as you with handicap movement.  
Perhaps this thought is behind the 12 month rationale and perhaps not. But it just occurred to me. Let’s get silly  and there was no duration rather than 12 months. Joe Blow Sandbagger can raise his handicap in a virtually unlimited manner for the big member guest and then resume his normal play.  With the 12 month soft and hard cap the cheater pays for his sudden good play with a hard to inflate capped handicap.

As others have said, the current system does trap innocents like yourself on occasion but does do more good than harm for the rest of us penalizing cheaters.

[Mr. Bean]

20 hours ago, rzitup said:

It would probably we wise to actually read what I posted.  I am not complaining about my situation, I am questioning the duration of the soft cap.  It's clear you are just responding to incite, because you responded to something you didnt even pay attention to.  My game didnt degrade (please look at the chart and ask for help interpreting it if you need).  My game has been pretty consistent, outside of a 1.5 month dip where I strung together a few good rounds.  That short spurt of short term skill/luck/whatever, has caused my index to be throttled for 10 months.  I think the system sucks, and the handicap committee at my club isnt going to address that.  

 

This is what you wrote in your opening post:

 

'I am a different golfer since then (i stink now!)'

 

Yet you declare that your game has not degraded.

 

Make up your mind.

[Oufcfan]

Just a thought (at 01:30 in the morning), I wonder if they could have set it at 12 months, or a certain number of rounds? So for the OP who has played 120 rounds this year it could probably be said that he’s had a fluke in getting lower than maybe he ought at this point? 
 

But as someone else mentioned, the OP should talk to the handicap committee, they’re presumably an integral part of the system and could have a closer look.

 

Personally, I’m still trying to understand the finer points of WHS.