Your New WHS Index

But GreeBo, doesn’t that kinda take us back to the basic question of “what is a handicap ?” Fair enough, under CONGU it was supposed to be potential and an argument could be made that you going from 2.5 to 3.4 is similar to getting a few 0.1s under the old way. Maybe (with all due respect, it’s purely as an example), you were never really a 2.5, but had a good day(s) and got down and now you’re finding your real level over time ? I know from experience that once you get low and start to creep up you never think you’ve disimproved, you’re always just playing badly and never really ever accept you’re not the golfer you once were. I think just as our level can improve with practice, lessons etc., it can also disimprove for many reasons, lack of play, lack of confidence, poor technique, injury/illness etc. I don’t think it’s fixed at the best you were. I’d bet that next spring there will be a heap of mid to high guys that won’t be able to get close to their handicap because the dry summer this year has lead to 50 yards of run and totally inflated their scores, whereas they’ll be goosed in the soft ground next April.

This system in my opinion gives too much weight to a couple of decent scores.

I started the year at 2.5 & I am at 0.1 now, if I go through each score taking 2.5 as being a 3 handicap and working off what CSS was for our blue and whites markers then I would still be off 2/3 handicap instead of scratch.

I have been a member for 35 years and before the new index the CSS off the blues would be 36pts most of the time and 38pts off the whites. Obviously that can change but I used those metrics.

So I went through all my scores for 2022 working off the basis that I started at 2.5, from here I ignored the new WHS index and so if I shot +2 off the blues then this was 37pts & a 0.1 cut.

After going through all the scores, I would now be 2.4 and I include buffer zones so 35pts off blues & 36/37pts off whites I treated as no change.

@GreeBo you seem to be considering handicap and skill level as static metrics here. Surely they were identical golfers 6 months ago but are no longer so and thus handicap should reflect that?

It depends on your handicap. Looks like your handicap changed between the two rounds. Have a look at your WHS index for the two rounds.

But the problem is that no matter how well I played, I could simply never have 50 points. Its just not possible. No professional golfer can do it either, which to me would indicate that there is a problem!

I don't think you lads are understanding my point, I've probably badly explained. I've already said it though, I am not nor ever have been a single figure golfer, and I don't believe I should be either or that I will be. Potential is having or showing the capacity to develop into something in the future. All I am saying is that I have shown and proven I have the potential. Not everyone lives up to their potential.

But, lets leave that aside, because this is about WHS. So my argument is that in some cases (such as mine), people have been given back to many shots to quickly. The result of this is that they are more likely to now shoot a higher score when they go out on a good day. Something none of us (well with a couple of odd exceptions) think is correct. This is possibly the main gripe about WHS.

I've basically said I've an artificially high handicap and you have told me otherwise. 🤣 But yep, I agree with you here and it what I've been saying that just because I've been playing bad this year, doesn't mean that I'm any worse of a player.

Exactly my point

anyway, 4 ball last night, myself (14 PH) and the old man were doing ok for the front 9, but weren't dovetailing that well so only shot 19 points

Luckily I played better on the back 9 (+3 gross) and we came home with 30 points.

but I'm deluding myself to believe that my handicap is overstated as a result of WHS 😀

reactionary is exactly it but i think the variance handicap rising is too lenient

it adjusts a decent score straightaway and disregards a bad one until it is one of 8.

so it is easy to manipulate for those that way inclined

tbh I'm less worried about bandits, I dont think there is every anything you can do about that. But to me WHS is a dumbing down of golf. Dont worry about getting better, WHS will keep feeding you shots until you are "competitive"

The issue is that higher handicappers are going to shoot far more points in excess of 36 than lower ones are, if they both have an exceptional day on the course. In a big club (like mine is), there will almost always be someone who has an exceptional day and comes in with a crazy score. It's not the same guys, week in week out, it's not down to bandits. It's just there's enough high golfers that someone will nearly always do it.

In congo, if you shot 46 points, your cut for it took years to get back. In WHS, it might only last 2 months. It's almost like you've a better chance of winning with WHS if you're wildly inconsistent. Shoot one great round in 20 and you're in the money, shoot 5 great rounds in 20 and you're not.

That said, there are elements of both I prefer. I don't think there's any system that will keep everyone happy. Category's are the best route to level the field somewhat IMO.

@ Newport is spot on for me.

It actually would be a better system if upward moves were supressed by even 1/2 (Imo

But there have been points well made above, that the system tells you the average golfer you are ...and that is massive change of mindset for everyone.

And probably ego damaging for some..

Now you've said it

I feel like this should be a "I don't know what a tracker mortgage is" moment 😁😁

Its weird, I can actually agree with both sides of the debate. Not really sure what that means tbh.

That's it exactly, under WHS you're a scratch handicapper, like it or not, under CONGU, who knows, depends on what you started at in round 1 of your stretch of golf. They're such wildly different systems all our preconceptions of what a scratch guy or a plus guy or a 20 handicapper is have now gone out the window. They're literally not comparable at all, in any shape or form, especially with WHS regenerating itself completely every 20 rounds. Under CONGU you could be getting the benefit (?) of a stretch of good golf for potentially years. I think its definitely harder to hold a low handicap under WHS, as you have to perform, and not live off 3 good rounds last summer. I think that's probably a good thing tbh, but probably hard for a scratch guy to accept that a run of poor golf leads to him not being a scratch guy.

That's not a buffer though, thats just a deferring of your bad score which at some point could be one of your top 8.

Buffer in CONGU meant that round didnt impact your handicap now or ever in the future. That system accepted that you werent going to play well everyday and thus wouldnt play to your handicap everyday. You could argue that it was weighted too much towards potential, but if so, WHS is weighted far too much towards average.

Average has no real world meaning for rounds of golf, there are too many outside influences and the sample space of 20 is far too small. Any other field would laugh at you for deriving anything from a sample of 20.

"vanity" handicap? I've been of 2.5-2.9 since the system came in last year actually, just recently bumped up as I dropped off a couple of level par rounds, I'll be back under 3 soon enough.

tbh your personal comments about my ego and vanity are pretty ridiculous as you dont know me from Adam.