Course vs Playing Handicap

[snagy2000]

https://www.whs.com/articles/2019/playing-handicap.html#:~:text=The use of Course and,a Handicap Index is maintained

 

Seems to me if you use Course handicap rather then the Playing handicap after an allowance adjustment, you could possibly be creating an unfair game for one or more of the players. 

 

Am I missing something? 

[mark m]

You should provide more information. Handicap allowances are recommendations and the recommendations can vary depending on field size. Was the competition stroke play or match play? What were the terms of the competition?

[snagy2000]

1 minute ago, mark m said:

You should provide more information. Handicap allowances are recommendations and the recommendations can vary depending on field size. Was the competition stroke play or match play? What were the terms of the competition?

Match play and the rules state "80 HDCP" which is very vague. No reference to course or playing handicap. Based on 2020 move to WHS, I'd assume the "Playing" is to be used since it covers allowances.

[mark m]

You are going to need to talk to the Committee. For match play, here are the recommendations (100% individual & 90% Fourball). You’ll need to confirm it was supposed to be 80%. And below is the player responsibility from the Rules of Golf.

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by mark m

[mark m]

There is also this:

 

Even if it is too late, some good can come of an inquiry if the terms are made more clear for everyone going forward. I hope what I posted helps you. There are others here who are expert on these types of rules issues.

 

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by mark m

[snagy2000]

4 minutes ago, mark m said:

You are going to need to talk to the Committee. For match play, here are the recommendations (100% individual & 90% Fourball). You’ll need to confirm it was supposed to be 80%. And below is the player responsibility from the Rules of Golf.

 

Oh it's 80% and I'm not worried about recommendations, it's been this way "for 5-6 years" I was told. I'm more concerned with a Head Pro and MGA  who are not familiar with the WHS and what "Course" & "Playing" handicap means and are not properly allocating strokes in their tournaments when using allowances less than 100% per WHS. Just wanted to validate my understanding that using playing handicap is appropriate instead of course handicap when less than 100% allocations are used. Basically the Course handicap turns into the Playing handicap when less than 100%. 

[mark m]

In my experience the GHIN smart phone app works great for the calculation. Just add the players and use the drop down box next to handicap allowance to select the correct percentage. The number next to P.H. (playing handicap) would be the number to use. It sounds like that is what you did(?) I hope everything was done properly. Best, Mark

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by mark m

[snagy2000]

Just now, mark m said:

In my experience the GHIN smart phone app works great for the calculation. Just add the players and use the drop down box next to handicap allowance to select the percentage. It sounds like that is what you did(?) I hope it everything was done properly. Best, Mark

Yup, exactly what I did. Plus I showed them the WHS guidance, rule 6.1, rule 6.2 and appendix C. Just impossible to convince those who have no clue at times. It's embarrassing for them and to our club IMO. 

 

Thanks for the chat. Hopefully others will chime in. 

[mark m]

We’ve had a few elected that don’t know much, and don’t want to learn, but they do like to put their thumb on the scale!

[nsxguy]

51 minutes ago, snagy2000 said:

Oh it's 80% and I'm not worried about recommendations, it's been this way "for 5-6 years" I was told. I'm more concerned with a Head Pro and MGA  who are not familiar with the WHS and what "Course" & "Playing" handicap means and are not properly allocating strokes in their tournaments when using allowances less than 100% per WHS. Just wanted to validate my understanding that using playing handicap is appropriate instead of course handicap when less than 100% allocations are used. Basically the Course handicap turns into the Playing handicap when less than 100%. 

 

I guess, assuming you're here in the States, I could understand the Head Pro not knowing, but the "MGA" is your local Metropolitan Golf Association, no ?

 

I find it hard to believe the MGA wouldn't be "familiar" in WHS.

 

But since the recommended playing hdcp percentages are "recommendations" I guess it's not necessary to follow them but,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

 

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by nsxguy

[snagy2000]

7 hours ago, nsxguy said:

 

I guess, assuming you're here in the States, I could understand the Head Pro not knowing, but the "MGA" is your local Metropolitan Golf Association, no ?

 

I find it hard to believe the MGA wouldn't be "familiar" in WHS.

 

But since the recommended playing hdcp percentages are "recommendations" I guess it's not necessary to follow them but,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

 

 

 

Maybe it's just me, but if the Pro Shop is responsible for preparing official match scorecards and the Head Pro has instructed his staff on how to do it, he better be familiar with the WHS rules which came into effect 3 1/2 years ago. But he's a blamer/minimal effort type of guy. This has been made clear throughout the years on this and other issues. He has no idea of the updated guidance and the Men's Golf Associations "Handicap Chairman" has never responded. 

 

This is straight out of the WHS guidance and is pretty cut and dry IMO:

 

If a handicap allowance is applied, such as the recommended 85% in four-ball stroke play, the adjusted Course Handicap is defined as a Playing Handicap. A Playing Handicap represents the number of strokes the player receives during the round and is used to determine the outcome of a game or the winners of a competition.

 

 

[Colin L]

You always use your Playing Handicap when you play.  The clue is in the word "Playing".

[snagy2000]

3 minutes ago, Colin L said:

You always use your Playing Handicap when you play.  The clue is in the word "Playing".

Agree! When people look at their GHIN app, a lot of them don't know this and at times, there can be a difference between the Course & Playing number and people get confused on which one to use. 

[Augster]

CH is your index put through the CR/SLOPE formula to come up with a CH number. 
 

PH is calculated using the CH number times the recommended %, or another percentage, for the type of play. 
 

A player’s player’s PH is the number of shots he gets that day. 
 

It is crazy sad if, as you describe, this isn’t being calculated correctly by the committee. It’s been around since the WHS started 3.5 years ago. 
 

I think some education is in order and I’m sorry you’re having to deal with this. 

[snagy2000]

3 minutes ago, Augster said:

CH is your index put through the CR/SLOPE formula to come up with a CH number. 
 

PH is calculated using the CH number times the recommended %, or another percentage, for the type of play. 
 

A player’s player’s PH is the number of shots he gets that day. 
 

It is crazy sad if, as you describe, this isn’t being calculated correctly by the committee. It’s been around since the WHS started 3.5 years ago. 
 

I think some education is in order and I’m sorry you’re having to deal with this. 

Unfortunately, I did have a negative result because of their inability to understand the rules and fix the problem. Instead of winning 2&1 on the 17th, I ended losing on the 20th hole.

 

Trying to talk to our Head Pro about the issue is uselesss as he just dismissed me as "complaining". As a former Handicap Chairman at another club, I sent an email to our club's MGA about the issue and have come to learn they're just as uneducated on the subject as the Head Pro. Although, at least, the MGA President acknowledged my email and is trying to understand the issue and promises to discuss at their next monthly meeting. Again, their "Handicap Chairman" has been silent. Problem is, they can discuss all they want but they currently don't understand the rules so how effective will it really be? I told the MGA President I will not play any events until I see compliance on their end. 

 

 

[Augster]

We play 4BBB with an 80%. The GHIN app handles it brilliantly. It’s, literally, been around for YEARS at this point. 
 

There really are no excuses for the folks in charge not to know this beyond, “We just don’t care.”

 

Yikes. 

[North Butte]

The game in which I play 99% of my non-solo rounds just uses the straight-up course handicap for the tees each person is playing. On various days we might be playing formats which do or don't have some suggested percentage other than 100% for "playing handicap". This group's preferences have pretty much been set in stone since Tiger Woods was wearing short pants and I don't foresee them ever decided to all pull out their phones and select a different percentage before each round, five days a week. 

[BIG STU]

1 hour ago, snagy2000 said:

Unfortunately, I did have a negative result because of their inability to understand the rules and fix the problem. Instead of winning 2&1 on the 17th, I ended losing on the 20th hole.

 

Trying to talk to our Head Pro about the issue is uselesss as he just dismissed me as "complaining". As a former Handicap Chairman at another club, I sent an email to our club's MGA about the issue and have come to learn they're just as uneducated on the subject as the Head Pro. Although, at least, the MGA President acknowledged my email and is trying to understand the issue and promises to discuss at their next monthly meeting. Again, their "Handicap Chairman" has been silent. Problem is, they can discuss all they want but they currently don't understand the rules so how effective will it really be? I told the MGA President I will not play any events until I see compliance on their end. 

 

 

I am not saying this to be sarcastic in any shape form or fashion. Someone who has experience doing it as a former Chairman should be elected since it seems your Association's guy does not know what he is doing and you seem pretty much up on things to me.

Up until April this year I never had an "official" handicap because I did not play Am events. I am a former PGAOA class A and Mini Tour player. I had to get my Am status back to play our Men's League which I did. We use some other system besides GHIN which seems to be ok. Our Chairman seems to be spot on and is willing to answer questions. I am still learning the system myself. 

[nsxguy]

1 hour ago, Augster said:

CH is your index put through the CR/SLOPE formula to come up with a CH number. 
 

PH is calculated using the CH number times the recommended %, or another percentage, for the type of play. 
 

A player’s player’s PH is the number of shots he gets that day. 
 

It is crazy sad if, as you describe, this isn’t being calculated correctly by the committee. It’s been around since the WHS started 3.5 years ago. 
 

I think some education is in order and I’m sorry you’re having to deal with this. 

 

OK, a confession first. Playing almost entirely individual stroke play and match play, even though being aware of the Handicap Allowances (since I was occasionally involved in a "strange" game, as in 4BBB, or a 2-man scramble), I never realized there was a 95% recommendation for individual games and frankly, my USGA member club NEVER used same (for individual play).

 

I count a single instance where I ever needed to look at those allowances, that being 2-man scramble (of all things )

 

I sympathize with ol' snagy simply because he lost a match he should have won by apparently being on the wrong side of the rounding "bubble".

 

That said, this Playing Handicap ain't the easiest thing going (although the USGA Course Handicap Calculator is a big help). I wonder if they have a worksheet to do a large(r) field all at once rather than go through the calcs for each individual player.

 

Anywho, it should be noted that before calc'ing the Playing Handicap one must use the" UNrounded" Course Handicap (Calculator gives only the whole number & then expects you to know to do subsequent PH - i.e. no further instructions).

 

I say "unrounded" because the CH calc IS rounded, but to the nearest 10th of a stroke. e.g. 10.34 is rounded down to 10.3 for the about to occur(?) PH calc.

 

But seriously, OUCH !!! I don't see that spelled out in 6.1 UNTIL one gets to the Interpretations, which appears to only apply to 9-hole scores. And even then, it's at the very bottom, and says "Otherwise, the full calculated value is retained and rounding occurs only after the Playing Handicap calculation"

 

 

In MY experience (no doubt others will have other experiences)

 

Stroke Play

 

Casual group (from same tees) - "OK, Mike is 9.7 so he gets 10, Joe's 9.1 so he gets 9, Harry's 12.5 so he gets 13, and I'm 11.1 so I get 11". The End.

 

Casually "organized" event (i.e. > 4 players) - IF the "game" doesn't use some sort of homemade ratcheting system - Use the Course Handicap Calculator for each player. The End.

 

Organized event - Use USGA Course Handicap Calculator, then the Playing Handicap adjustment (IF ANY, since the table of pctgs is "RECOMMENDED"), then round to the nearest whole stroke. The End

 

 

 

[nsxguy]

53 minutes ago, BIG STU said:

I am not saying this to be sarcastic in any shape form or fashion. Someone who has experience doing it as a former Chairman should be elected since it seems your Association's guy does not know what he is doing and you seem pretty much up on things to me.

Up until April this year I never had an "official" handicap because I did not play Am events. I am a former PGAOA class A and Mini Tour player. I had to get my Am status back to play our Men's League which I did. We use some other system besides GHIN which seems to be ok. Our Chairman seems to be spot on and is willing to answer questions. I am still learning the system myself. 

 

"We use some other system besides GHIN which seems to be ok"

 

May I ask how you determine it "seems to be OK" ?

 

Needless(?) to say, it is fairly unusual for a regular player's WHS index to go up or down by a full shot for a single round. The higher the index the more likely it is to happen, but,,,,,,,,

 

I mean I've played in 3 games this year that do NOT (strictly) use GHIN and it drives me a bit nutz.

 

One is a quota game. Stableford scoring and all "points over quota" get paid. This game ratchets up 1 (sometimes 2) points/strokes for the next round if you're anything over quota. Anyone who isn't PLUS points - quota drops by 1.

 

The other is stroke play, net. Pays a number of places based on # of players. Gross skins, Closest to pins as well. But the handicaps are adjusted thusly. Net 75 or higher, 'cap goes up 1. Handicaps drop for the next round based on net score.

 

Net -2, 'caps drops 1, -4 drops 2, -6 drops 3, -8 drops 4.

 

Unless 1 is a 30+ 'cap I can't imagine any scenario where one's cap could go down by more than about 1.5 on ANY single round.

 

The 3rd game is slightly better. Only difference from GHIN is this game uses best 4 of last 8 to establish the 'cap for the day. Otherwise, it's a straight net game.

 

But, those are the games. Don't like it ? Find another one. .

[BIG STU]

7 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

"We use some other system besides GHIN which seems to be ok"

 

May I ask how you determine it "seems to be OK" ?

 

Needless(?) to say, it is fairly unusual for a regular player's WHS index to go up or down by a full shot for a single round. The higher the index the more likely it is to happen, but,,,,,,,,

 

I mean I've played in 3 games this year that do NOT (strictly) use GHIN and it drives me a bit nutz.

 

One is a quota game. Stableford scoring and all "points over quota" get paid. This game ratchets up 1 (sometimes 2) points/strokes for the next round if you're anything over quota. Anyone who isn't PLUS points - quota drops by 1.

 

The other is stroke play, net. Pays a number of places based on # of players. Gross skins, Closest to pins as well. But the handicaps are adjusted thusly. Net 75 or higher, 'cap goes up 1. Handicaps drop for the next round based on net score.

 

Net -2, 'caps drops 1, -4 drops 2, -6 drops 3, -8 drops 4.

 

Unless 1 is a 30+ 'cap I can't imagine any scenario where one's cap could go down by more than about 1.5 on ANY single round.

 

The 3rd game is slightly better. Only difference from GHIN is this game uses best 4 of last 8 to establish the 'cap for the day. Otherwise, it's a straight net game.

 

But, those are the games. Don't like it ? Find another one. .

For me the handicaps seem legit and they will change sometimes from day to day as you post scores. They do a computer pick for each day and so far it seems the teams and games are pretty well matched up. I for one am having fun and have not heard any bickering or accusations of sandbagging etc. And the games change up from day to day. So IMHO things seem ok by me I am happy the way they are doing things

Edited August 7, 2023 by BIG STU

[rogolf]

15 hours ago, mark m said:

You are going to need to talk to the Committee. For match play, here are the recommendations (100% individual & 90% Fourball). You’ll need to confirm it was supposed to be 80%. And below is the player responsibility from the Rules of Golf.

 

Please be aware that the recommendations for allowances are not part of the Rules of golf.  Further, they are recommendations only, and the Committee in charge of the competition can decide to use different allowances in the Terms of the Competition.

[mark m]

4 minutes ago, rogolf said:

Please be aware that the recommendations for allowances are not part of the Rules of golf.  Further, they are recommendations only, and the Committee in charge of the competition can decide to use different allowances in the Terms of the Competition.

Yes. I am aware of that. And from his subsequent posts, the OP is well aware of it as well. 
 

Edited August 7, 2023 by mark m

[Augster]

Correct. The WHS/USGA PH recommended handicap allowance percentages were put out there based on tens of thousands of data points to use those percentages to make the game more equitable. 
 

Also correct is that any individual committee can decide what percentage they want to use, or no percentage at all, in their competitions. 
 

Lastly, the GHIN app computes the PH correctly so one doesn’t have to do all the long division. I’ve done the long division. The app comes out correct when going from index to CH to PH for every percentage. 
 

It’s sad that the committee, in this instance, didn’t use the percentages to adjust the PH. It is their prerogative to do so, but they SHOULD be doing it intentionally instead of not knowing anything about it. By allowing full CH, they are giving higher caps a little bigger edge than they should. Since many equitable matches come down to one stroke, playing CH only, in a format that should have been percentaged to a PH, may give an advantage to the higher cap. 

[nsxguy]

44 minutes ago, BIG STU said:

For me the handicaps seem legit and they will change sometimes from day to day as you post scores. They do a computer pick for each day and so far it seems the teams and games are pretty well matched up. I for one am having fun and have not heard any bickering or accusations of sandbagging etc. And the games change up from day to day. So IMHO things seem ok by me I am happy the way they are doing things

 

But Stu, that's the question. IS your handicap "legit" ? That is, it's using GHIN, OR, if not, does the system being used at least calculate it roughly(?) the same way as GHIN ?

 

As for organizing the comp via handicaps and with a computer, that's fine. My club always played a team game. We got the X best players by cap, made them captains and they picked across the board whoever they wanted.

 

But had we done that via a computer, simply arranging the teams via some sort of algorithm, by handicap or just assigning guys going "down the list", by handicap, no matter so long as some/many/most considered the resulting teams "fair".

 

[Shilgy]

3 hours ago, Augster said:

We play 4BBB with an 80%. The GHIN app handles it brilliantly. It’s, literally, been around for YEARS at this point. 
 

There really are no excuses for the folks in charge not to know this beyond, “We just don’t care.”

 

Yikes. 

If I’m reading you’re abbreviation correctly you’re just as wrong as the OP’s pro though.  Recommended is 85% for four ball stroke play and 90% for four ball match play.  Why use 80%?

[Newby]

24 minutes ago, Augster said:

Also correct is that any individual committee can decide what percentage they want to use, or no percentage at all, in their competitions. 
 

Not in England, where they are compulsory.

[snagy2000]

1 hour ago, Augster said:

Correct. The WHS/USGA PH recommended handicap allowance percentages were put out there based on tens of thousands of data points to use those percentages to make the game more equitable. 
 

Also correct is that any individual committee can decide what percentage they want to use, or no percentage at all, in their competitions. 
 

Lastly, the GHIN app computes the PH correctly so one doesn’t have to do all the long division. I’ve done the long division. The app comes out correct when going from index to CH to PH for every percentage. 
 

It’s sad that the committee, in this instance, didn’t use the percentages to adjust the PH. It is their prerogative to do so, but they SHOULD be doing it intentionally instead of not knowing anything about it. By allowing full CH, they are giving higher caps a little bigger edge than they should. Since many equitable matches come down to one stroke, playing CH only, in a format that should have been percentaged to a PH, may give an advantage to the higher cap. 

What's sad is the GHIN we all pay for annually at our club does provide the PH, but the Head Pro doesn't understand it's usage, and is too "stubborn" to admit he's wrong. Plus he's just comfortable doing things like they have always been done, minimal work effort, which is wrong and lazy IMO. 

 

This has never been an issue about recommended handicap % allowances. This is an issue about knowing and following the current WHS rules so every golfer has a fair game.

 

 

3 hours ago, BIG STU said:

I am not saying this to be sarcastic in any shape form or fashion. Someone who has experience doing it as a former Chairman should be elected since it seems your Association's guy does not know what he is doing and you seem pretty much up on things to me.

Up until April this year I never had an "official" handicap because I did not play Am events. I am a former PGAOA class A and Mini Tour player. I had to get my Am status back to play our Men's League which I did. We use some other system besides GHIN which seems to be ok. Our Chairman seems to be spot on and is willing to answer questions. I am still learning the system myself. 

Unfortunately, I have a lot of dislike for our Head Pro and his way of doing business, as this is not the first time we've bumped heads this year over his inability to do his job correctly. Thus, I refuse to be involved with him or the MGA until they get their "stuff" straightened out. 

 

 

Edited August 7, 2023 by snagy2000

[Augster]

1 hour ago, Shilgy said:

If I’m reading you’re abbreviation correctly you’re just as wrong as the OP’s pro though.  Recommended is 85% for four ball stroke play and 90% for four ball match play.  Why use 80%?

Cuts down on possible sandbagging. 80% makes it much harder for a possibly inflated cap to shoot net par. It affects higher caps more than lower caps. 
 

They chose 80% years and years and years before the WHS came out with 90% (match play). So we play 80% for 4BBB matches. 

[Shilgy]

33 minutes ago, Augster said:

Cuts down on possible sandbagging. 80% makes it much harder for a possibly inflated cap to shoot net par. It affects higher caps more than lower caps. 
 

They chose 80% years and years and years before the WHS came out with 90% (match play). So we play 80% for 4BBB matches. 

Like you say it certainty favors the lower caps.