Should the maximum handicap be reviewed?

GreeBo · 02-10-2013 12:14AM

ajcurry123 wrote: »

Not literally!
But you have repeated the same point over, and over, and over, and over............., and over again.

You referred to putting someone on your ignore list earlier.
Unfortunately not everyone can be ignored, mods of a forum cannot be ignored, so in a sense, it has been shoved down our throat.

I've been having discussions with other posters on here, just like they have with me, amongst others. what's your problem with that exactly?

you are free to not read a post or indeed a whole thread if you don't want to...

FixdePitchmark · 02-10-2013 12:24AM

GreeBo wrote: »

I've been having discussions with other posters on here, just like they have with me, amongst others. what's your problem with that exactly?

you are free to not read a post or indeed a whole thread if you don't want to...

:rolleyes:

PhlegmyMoses · 02-10-2013 02:15AM

That ignore list stuff is pretty shoddy behaviour. In most other forms here it'll get you a card as it's considered ad hominem. For shame.

I contributed my actual thoughts on this topic in a thread a while back. Unless there is some epidemic of high handicaps winning all and sundry, I can't see any reason for change.

the greatest game · 02-10-2013 04:13AM

The high handicappers I know, it is their objective to get their handicap down, they dont like telling other golfers their handicap is 22 upwards.
I have seen some not returning cards as they do not want another point one back. Handicaps generally reflect ability... for those that can micro manage theirs to somehow turn up and win a captains prize each year..that seems like bloody hard work.

OilBeefHooked2 · 02-10-2013 04:21AM

The arrogance and ignorance of some posters on here, never ceases to amaze.

GreeBo · 02-10-2013 08:12AM

the greatest game wrote: »

The high handicappers I know, it is their objective to get their handicap down, they dont like telling other golfers their handicap is 22 upwards.

so would they not welcome starting off 18 then?

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

That ignore list stuff is pretty shoddy behaviour. In most other forms here it'll get you a card as it's considered ad hominem. For shame.
.

backseat moderation will get you a card on here and every other forum.
if you have a problem with a post, report it.

Redzah · 02-10-2013 08:32AM

lettuce97 wrote: »

I don't agree with the whole playing wrong shots thing - most of the people I know playing off 18+ need those shots cos they have no consistency in hitting the ball. Doesn't matter at all if it's a 3 wood off the deck, or 8 iron 200 yards out on a par 5 - there's probably a good chance of a crap shot.

I was off 19 a few months ago and had been for a few years. I changed putter and got a few lessons, watched a few youtube videos that clicked with me, etc, and am now off 15 and still getting small cuts. Does that mean I should have been off 15 at the start of the year cos I had the ability to play better, as long as I shelled out for lessons and a putter??

No, it means you should have been off 18 because quite frankly a double bogey :eek: on index 1 for a nett par is just too much shots, it crosses the line for me between having and not having the base skill level to play competitively (which is there in every sport) whilst maintaining a duty of care to the competitors who are busting their balls each week to play off a handicap off 18 or lower.

Russman · 02-10-2013 08:46AM

GreeBo wrote: »

I have no problem with someone having a great score in the middle of a slump...Id be more worried if they didnt.
You seemed to be suggesting that they should still be competitive during a slump, by means of an increased handicap though?

I think its even longer, nearly 10 years ago now?

You could be right, it might well be longer, the oul years are slipping by !:)

But, yes, they should still be competitive against the course, how do we know what a slump is ? Maybe they've just got a new level that's not as good as their old one.
I don't believe your handicap should be effectively what you were once able to shoot to, despite maybe not having done that for years.

There's a big difference between shooting a few bad rounds over a few weeks and playing worse than you used to for a long period of time. That's why we get 0.1s, because somebody somewhere once judged that a persons handicap and/or ability can change and small increases of 0.1 might, over time, bring their handicap closer into line with their ability.

You seem to be suggesting that there's basically no need for 0.1s, that if you've managed to get cut to x handicap, that's your level, and it won't change unless you get injured or something.

Russman · 02-10-2013 08:52AM

Redzah wrote: »

No, it means you should have been off 18 because quite frankly a double bogey :eek: on index 1 for a nett par is just too much shots, it crosses the line for me between having and not having the base skill level to play competitively (which is there in every sport) whilst maintaining a duty of care to the competitors who are busting their balls each week to play off a handicap off 18 or lower.

But there isn't a base skill level required in golf to play competitively. That's the beauty of the game, people of massively varying skill levels can and do compete against each other because of the handicapping system. Its not perfect, it never will be, but you surely can't say to someone "sorry, you're not good enough to enter a competition because we don't do higher than 18 as a handicap, its social golf for you until you improve" ?
Now, I've no idea how 28 was arrived at as a maximum, but I do think its a hell of a lot more realistic than 18 as a maximum.

There are players out there who, if they played every day, wouldn't par or bogey the index 1 hole, they shouldn't excluded IMO.

Russman · 02-10-2013 09:05AM

GreeBo wrote: »

wouldn't that mean that there is a gap between his handicap and his ability though?

golfing ability isn't linear though, the lower you get the more likely you are to have days where you play like a scratch golfer, some of the time.
that doesn't mean I'm a scratch golfer. could I beat one in an even match, sure. Will they beat me 19 times out of 20? Sure they will.
I could beat tiger woods over 1 hole of golf. if you had your money on tiger would you be happy to see him hit a driver off the tee or go for the par 5 in two against me?
probably not, because it brings in danger and he doesn't need it against me in a flat match. a high guy does the same thing when he doesn't play to the shots his handicap gives him. he brings in risk where he doesn't Need it.
Charlie mentioned earlier that it's rare enough he is on a par 5 in two, I'd be of the opinion that if he is ever on a par 5 in two his handicap should not be 22. otherwise the guy off 15 on a good day has no chance of beating Charlie on a good day.[/QUOTE]

But ability is for 18 holes of singles golf, not foresomes, where weaknesses can be covered up (or exposed). Its like a tennis player picking someone with a big serve, or a good net game for the volleying, in doubles.

Or even more appropriately, picking someone who is a good putter for a scramble, they might be terrible at every other aspect, but you only need them for the putting, doesn't mean they should be lower.

Then who should win a match between a 15 and a 22 ? It should come down to whichever of them has a good day. In theory, if the system is working there should be nothing in it apart from that one shot that one of them tries and it happens to come off, or that long putt that someone holes.
I don't know Charlie (so no offence Charlie), but that second shot on the par 5, if he had 10 balls there how many would he have hit the green with ? I'd suggest as a 22, probably only one, granted which happened to be the one on the day.

Ben1977 · 02-10-2013 09:38AM

GreeBo wrote: »

and thus I think your handicap is too high.
Think about it, where do you stop with this logic:
a guy off 5 has to have the skill of a scratch gut to compete....scratch has to have +3 , +3 fella needs to be on the tour....the tour guy needs to play like Kim Jong Il (before he died)

Surely you should have the same skill level as a 12 handicap golfer if your handicap is 12! Otherwise the system is completely broken.

All the time. Usually because they play stupid golf for their ability, whether its ignorance, stupidity or vanity the result is the same. The odd great shot, many more poor ones, that cost them more than 1 shot.
There is no reason why a guy off twice my handicap should be playing the course the same way that I am. Maybe there should be more of a punishment for being over par when you are 18+.

A handicap of 18 is "ok" if you "earn" your way back up there...not if you start from it imo.

Firstly shot making skill and skill levels are totally different. Yes a can hit a couple of shots during a round that a lower hc would be proud of. But I don't have the skill of a lower hc. I can't repeat my swing every time my short game is not great and I hit the odd bad shot off the tee. So sorry my Hc is not too or wrong.

eg, hit wood off tee on 18th, the hole was the longest drive hole but I it was too risky. Hit wood but hit it badly. Right discussion wrong out come.

Sorry but the bold above is just wrong to state it. Not one of us high or lower hc plan to play stupid golf as you mentioned. Take this as an example. HC of 18, hits hybrid off tee on par5 to stay out of trouble. Find themselves in light rough, so decides to take 8 iron for position and not distance or the hero shot. Then tops the ball 3 foot still in the rough in front of them. Now that in my opinion is not stupid or ignorant of their ability its just what sometimes happen to golfers of that higher hc. I know I've been there, as has every golfer on the planet because they were not born with a driver and a wedge in there hand.

The game is one of the hardest in the world in my opinion.

you play the game on your own against the course, no team mates.
you start from a static postion
alignment is side on
14 clubs to choose from
swing is not the most natural of movements

Sorry but I actually think the bold is insulting to all golfers as we have all played from a higher handicap at one stage.

GreeBo · 02-10-2013 10:07AM

Ben1977 wrote: »

Firstly shot making skill and skill levels are totally different. Yes a can hit a couple of shots during a round that a lower hc would be proud of. But I don't have the skill of a lower hc. I can't repeat my swing every time my short game is not great and I hit the odd bad shot off the tee. So sorry my Hc is not too or wrong.

eg, hit wood off tee on 18th, the hole was the longest drive hole but I it was too risky. Hit wood but hit it badly. Right discussion wrong out come.

I think you are very wrong if you think you need a repeatable swing to play off 18. Or even off 8 for that matter.

Ben1977 wrote: »

Sorry but the bold above is just wrong to state it. Not one of us high or lower hc plan to play stupid golf as you mentioned. Take this as an example. HC of 18, hits hybrid off tee on par5 to stay out of trouble. Find themselves in light rough, so decides to take 8 iron for position and not distance or the hero shot. Then tops the ball 3 foot still in the rough in front of them. Now that in my opinion is not stupid or ignorant of their ability its just what sometimes happen to golfers of that higher hc. I know I've been there, as has every golfer on the planet because they were not born with a driver and a wedge in there hand.

Ok so in your example the person played safe and it still went wrong, I dont disagree with that, it happens to the best of us. But that doesnt mean the methodology is flawed. If you played that way 10 times I guarantee you would have a better aggregate score than playing it aggressively 10 times. Thats the point, not that it guarantees a good score, but that it will "average" lower scores than the other method, for someone who cannot play to 18.

Its easier for *everyone* to hit an 8iron and not put it into trouble than it is to hit a 3i. sure you will hit some terrible 8 irons and some super 3irons, but the bad 3 irons will leave you in worse positions than the bad 8irons and the good 3irons wont make up for the bad ones.

One of the arguments put forward is that I go for everything to get birdies to make up for my blank holes....do you really think that makes sense? Its massively harder to get a birdie than it is to get a bogey, yet the plan is to try to balance them out somehow...I firmly believe that thinking is flawed.

/edit and the bit in bold doesnt just apply to +18 guys, I see it from 18,15, 13 guys all the time. Guys who would drop shots over the year if they played sensible golf, coming down in -1, -2 shots at a time, rather than trying to play to -8 and getting 6 0.1s in between.

ssbob · 02-10-2013 10:09AM

I have added a poll as I believe we are going around in circles. After 2 days this poll will close and with that I will be closing the thread.

Redzah · 02-10-2013 10:13AM

ssbob wrote: »

I have added a poll as I believer we are going around in circles. After 2 days this poll will close and with that I will be closing the thread.

Boooooo, I only have 2 days left of my love in with Greebo, then its back to walking the tightrope coz my views are so different on everything else golf and life related

Ben1977 · 02-10-2013 10:27AM

GreeBo wrote: »

I think you are very wrong if you think you need a repeatable swing to play off 18. Or even off 8 for that matter.

Ok so in your example the person played safe and it still went wrong, I dont disagree with that, it happens to the best of us. But that doesnt mean the methodology is flawed. If you played that way 10 times I guarantee you would have a better aggregate score than playing it aggressively 10 times. Thats the point, not that it guarantees a good score, but that it will "average" lower scores than the other method, for someone who cannot play to 18.

Its easier for *everyone* to hit an 8iron and not put it into trouble than it is to hit a 3i. sure you will hit some terrible 8 irons and some super 3irons, but the bad 3 irons will leave you in worse positions than the bad 8irons and the good 3irons wont make up for the bad ones.

One of the arguments put forward is that I go for everything to get birdies to make up for my blank holes....do you really think that makes sense? Its massively harder to get a birdie than it is to get a bogey, yet the plan is to try to balance them out somehow...I firmly believe that thinking is flawed.

/edit and the bit in bold doesnt just apply to +18 guys, I see it from 18,15, 13 guys all the time. Guys who would drop shots over the year if they played sensible golf, coming down in -1, -2 shots at a time, rather than trying to play to -8 and getting 6 0.1s in between.

My point was that i'm 12 hc for a reason. Unfortunately I don't have all the reasons.

Yes your other points are valid in that thinking and course management and playing to your ability would get cuts. But not the topic as the topic is why we actually need higher HC. And the main reason is the same for all walks of life.

We all do things differently, guess why, yes you got it in one. We are all different. It isn't a perfect world we live in.

I'm totally with you on how we play this game. Course management and playing the right shots at the right time. Just this Saturday gone, all I di was look for the percentage shoots. Only driver on 4 holes.

GreeBo · 02-10-2013 10:28AM

ssbob wrote: »

I have added a poll as I believe we are going around in circles. After 2 days this poll will close and with that I will be closing the thread.

I changed the first option to add "Starting" as I think thats the option we are discussing here...not that you can never go higher than 18.

GreeBo · 02-10-2013 10:31AM

Ben1977 wrote: »

My point was that i'm 12 hc for a reason. Unfortunately I don't have all the reasons.

Yes your other points are valid in that thinking and course management and playing to your ability would get cuts. But not the topic as the topic is why we actually need higher HC. And the main reason is the same for all walks of life.

I dont disagree that some people will need higher handicaps, I disagree that the starting handicap can be higher than 18. I think making poor decisions is not a good enough reason to have a higher handicap. If you start at 18 and cant learn to play more sensible golf then you will crawl your way back up after a year or two. Perhaps you will learn something about scoring on your way up.
If there is a specific reason why you cannot play to 18 then it should be discussed at a handicap review, which should take place on the course IMO. Number lie.

Ben1977 · 02-10-2013 10:31AM

ssbob wrote: »

I have added a poll as I believe we are going around in circles. After 2 days this poll will close and with that I will be closing the thread.

Poll is a good idea, but give the thread a chance, let it live. Some have very good points and are enjoying others opinions.

Ben1977 · 02-10-2013 10:37AM

GreeBo wrote: »

I dont disagree that some people will need higher handicaps, I disagree that the starting handicap can be higher than 18. I think making poor decisions is not a good enough reason to have a higher handicap. If you start at 18 and cant learn to play more sensible golf then you will crawl your way back up after a year or two. Perhaps you will learn something about scoring on your way up.
If there is a specific reason why you cannot play to 18 then it should be discussed at a handicap review, which should take place on the course IMO. Number lie.

People unfortunately make poor decisions all the time. You and me included.

Do you think it would discourage new people to golf if you cap it at 18? Why allow them to crawl back up if you are against giving them the hc the need?

BigChap1759 · 02-10-2013 10:40AM

I think the bottom line is that, if you made this change, a lot of higher guys would stop playing and so your subs would increase or your course may go bust

PARlance · 02-10-2013 10:44AM

GreeBo wrote: »

No, thats why anyone should be able to have a better than average day and at least play to 18.

GreeBo wrote: »

I changed the first option to add "Starting" as I think thats the option we are discussing here...not that you can never go higher than 18.

This thread isn't about initial handicaps.... where are you getting that!
It's about capping handicaps at 18!
Here's one of countless quotes on it.

GreeBo wrote: »

thats why anyone should be able to have a better than average day and at least play to 18.

You will get a lot more people to agree that starting HC's should be capped at 18.
I for one, would be in favour of capping initial HC's at 18 as long as it was followed by a review within the first year.

There is very little talk about "initial handicaps" on here, that thread was done a few weeks ago, you've changed the option to get a more favorable result there.

FixdePitchmark · 02-10-2013 10:45AM

I would have some sympathy for some of the views expressed by GreeBo and Redzah.

Some
Higher handicap can be a crutch for some,
Higher handicap players do go for crazy shots
Higher handicap players do use their shots poorly.

But you could also say the same for all the above about some low handicap players.

They use their low handicap to make themselves feel good and think they are better than they are,
They are affraid to go for certain shots, they have to keep their handicap low, because how could they deal with being a ten, end of their world.
Some low lads , because they think they are good take on shots they shouldnt , this is not unique to higher lads.

You are never going to have a perfect system, I love that we are not, all robots and approach the game in such a methodical way. As other have said some of the most enjoyable moments we have ever seen in golf was somebody taking on the illogical, we know who they are.

I have had 36 points this year playing boring golf, Ive had 40 playing crazy golf (well a blend),
Which one do you think ill never forget.

But, that is me, we are all different , we have different views and experiences in life, these are all part of the indivdual, I love the way that comes out in a person on a golf course, even after one round just watching a person playing golf, i'll feel i know a little about them.

We are talking about a very small number of people here, the vast majority 95 % (made up), try to score as low as possible, they learn as they go along.
I would have been a guy only 18 mths ago who went for everything, but i listened to the likes of Greebo , Seve3 Iron, Benicetomonty, kph (in his day), Redzah + others.

You live you learn, you change. But, this is not as simple as some people think, whilest some people are certain about their methodical slow way, this does not suit all,

What would snooker have done without a Ronnie, or Jimmy, - lol , now i know we are not saying that 23 handicap lads are a Ronnie, but don't underestimate peoples views of their own ability, some people have a problem judging this. Some are genuinley great low iron strikers, as a young lad i was unreal with them , but poor with wedges.

So , that is why we love the game, some of my best matches this year where against lads in 20s and 30s. And, do you know what, it is true, when the wind picks up or it is a tight situation, the lower lad can turn it on most of the time. (most)

Anyway good debate,

But when the , infractions, black pen and ignore come out - you know who has won the argument here.

Been a blast around here,
Catch ye in the boards Soc thread
Unless banned:)

Redzah · 02-10-2013 10:50AM

BigChap1759 wrote: »

I think the bottom line is that, if you made this change, a lot of higher guys would stop playing and so your subs would increase or your course may go bust

I don't agree with this, people play golf for the love of the game, it is fun competing and once the initial adjustment is made I believe anybody with a basic ability can compete off 18. I disagree with greebo that it is only in relation to starting handicap being 18, i would advocate that the max handicap should be 18 for all (except pensioners and disablilities).

If the max was reduced to 18, I don't believe it would drive many out of the game, potentially those who really have a bee in their bonnet (which would be a minority in my opinion) would play society golf but it wouldnt drive them out of the game and thus wouldn't increase membership fees. There would still be the same supply and demand and the courses that are maintained and run well would substitute any (minor) loss of members who object to this with an increased society supplement.

ssbob · 02-10-2013 10:57AM

Redzah wrote: »

I disagree with greebo that it is only in relation to starting handicap being 18, i would advocate that the max handicap should be 18 for all (except pensioners and disablilities).

Greebo see above, I wil change back the poll option based on the OP's post above.(He afterall set up the thread)

GreeBo wrote: »

I changed the first option to add "Starting" as I think thats the option we are discussing here...not that you can never go higher than 18.

Ben1977 · 02-10-2013 10:58AM

Redzah wrote: »

I don't agree with this, people play golf for the love of the game, it is fun competing and once the initial adjustment is made I believe anybody with a basic ability can compete off 18. I disagree with greebo that it is only in relation to starting handicap being 18, i would advocate that the max handicap should be 18 for all (except pensioners and disablilities).

If the max was reduced to 18, I don't believe it would drive many out of the game, potentially those who really have a bee in their bonnet (which would be a minority in my opinion) would play society golf but it wouldnt drive them out of the game and thus wouldn't increase membership fees. There would still be the same supply and demand and the courses that are maintained and run well would substitute any (minor) loss of members who object to this with an increased society supplement.

I actually think that the societies would follow a handicapping limit if introduced. They generally follow all the other rules, why won't they a hc limited one? When the grooves rule changed, wouldn't it change for us all?

ssbob · 02-10-2013 10:59AM

Ben1977 wrote: »

Poll is a good idea, but give the thread a chance, let it live. Some have very good points and are enjoying others opinions.

Unfortunately Ben from reading the thread we are going around in circles, the reason I have set up the poll is to see what the vast majority of people believe rather than having 2/3 people ferociously not being able to see any other argument other than their own.

Thread will close once the poll closes.

GreeBo · 02-10-2013 11:00AM

ssbob wrote: »

Greebo see above, I wil change back the poll option based on the OP's post above.(He afterall set up the thread)

I was just doing that!

I added in a starting option (and moved my vote down there) as thats what I've been talking about all along!

If anyone else wants to move from option 1 to option 4 let me know.

GreeBo · 02-10-2013 11:01AM

ajcurry123 wrote: »

This thread isn't about initial handicaps.... where are you getting that!
It's about capping handicaps at 18!
Here's one of countless quotes on it.

You will get a lot more people to agree that starting HC's should be capped at 18.
I for one, would be in favour of capping initial HC's at 18 as long as it was followed by a review within the first year.

There is very little talk about "initial handicaps" on here, that thread was done a few weeks ago, you've changed the option to get a more favorable result there.

Its nothing to do with trying to work the poll, it happens to be what I believe in.

BigChap1759 · 02-10-2013 11:03AM

Not sure where you get your belief from but I am telling you I know many players at my club who would not renew their membership if they were cut to 18.

Redzah · 02-10-2013 11:08AM

Ben1977 wrote: »

I actually think that the societies would follow a handicapping limit if introduced. They generally follow all the other rules, why won't they a hc limited one? When the grooves rule changed, wouldn't it change for us all?

Ha, is the grooves rule not being introduced some time after 2020 (not exactly sure when but i know its a while away) for amatuers. A lot of Societies have a law of their own, they cut people and give them extra shots based on society performance in the society. it adds the fun element into it for those who wish to go out and whack it with some friends without too much thought. I enjoy going out and whacking it with friends and going for everything, but i enjoy playing competitively and trying to maintain a score more than this, i think there is a distinct difference and i don't appreciate a society attitude giving an unfair advantage to an individual in competitive GUI golf by virtue of they go out and whack it with no thought and thus their handicap is exceptionally high (and higher than their current ability not potential suggests).

A couple of other thoughts;
What is the GUI's highest handicapped interclub competition? Pierce purcell? Is there one for those over 18 handicap? If there is not then to me that suggests that the GUI does not want to take the risk/backlash of running an interclub for handicaps of over 18 because the banditary and aggression caused because of this would be too much to manage. When i saw banditary, I do not mean this in the sinister way, i mean it in the way i have suggested in this forum that slightly better focus and course management that would come in an interclub competition would make a 24 handicapper more akin to an 18.

Should the maximum handicap be reviewed?

Comments