Handicapping Rule Change

[bogey5]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

In addition to competition rounds they can return Supplementary Scores (or Extra Day Scores). These have to be formally registered before play and the card marked by someone approved by the Committee. They may be over 18 or 9 holes.

If you're referring to a committee attached to a competition how would this apply here where the vast majority play recreational public golf at a different course every time out? Isn't this an impediment to a world wide system? Or how would the euros respond if asked to change their system if that's what it takes to align everybody/everywhere?

[AlfaGolfer]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

Handicap committees review records of golfers and determine outcomes from transgressors. I would ask a few questions:

How do you suggest a committee police 400+ factors from players who may or may not play rounds outside of their home club. Each club is required to have a Handicap Committee. The club's Handicap Committee has access to the complete scoring record of every member of that club. It doesn't matter if the rounds were played at the home club or elsewhere.

It matters if they weren't posted!

How do you suggest that they do so for public players? Public players belong to their own club.

Where does the percentage of 25 come from; how do you know it's not 75% or more? A number picked from the air to illustrate a point that eliminating 25% of my scores from my personal scoring record would not likely change my handicap factor significantly, and perhaps not change my course handicap at all.

My omnibus response is that unless one plays with someone is a member of a club, that score can't be reported. Even if one plays with someone else, and that person is not a member of a club, the score is not eligible for posting. Or so I believe.

While 25% of rounds may or may not change your factor, not posting rounds renders your factor inaccurate and non-current and therefore not eligible for competitive, handicap play. I trust you can see the potential abuse of maintaining a current and accurate factor, that providing excuses for not posting scores presents.

[rulie]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

My omnibus response is that unless one plays with someone is a member of a club, that score can't be reported. Even if one plays with someone else, and that person is not a member of a club, the score is not eligible for posting. Or so I believe.

While 25% of rounds may or may not change your factor, not posting rounds renders your factor inaccurate and non-current and therefore not eligible for competitive, handicap play. I trust you can see the potential abuse of maintaining a current and accurate factor, that providing excuses for not posting scores presents.

Would appreciate if you would provide a reference for this. No one has yet talked about not posting eligible rounds - is this what you are assuming with that statement?
Of course, all my eligible rounds will be posted - just as they are now. The 25% that I estimated were rounds which I may have played alone, and therefore not eligible scores.

[AlfaGolfer]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

Would appreciate if you would provide a reference for this. No one has yet talked about not posting eligible rounds - is this what you are assuming with that statement?
Of course, all my eligible rounds will be posted - just as they are now. The 25% that I estimated were rounds which I may have played alone, and therefore not eligible scores.

I should have used an impersonal pronoun as I didn't mean you specifically.

I'll edit this thread if and when I find the part of the policy that says one must play with another member of a club. Edits included now

In the meantime, for a player that plays say 50 solo rounds a year and doesn't record them, I believe this this is not an accurate factor as that person has played more than they are reporting.

I have (regular) issues of players reporting only a few rounds a season and shooting scores that are atypical for such little play.

I guessing here but they may require you to identify another USGA member as an attestor , and if not the score would not be valid.

I use GAO which has an attestor drop down list to select from so they could implement a similar process.
GAO doesn't count stores enterred after Nov 1 ( I think ) I have several from this year that don't count towards my cap.

It seems to me that these changes are aimed at club players who regularly play with other members. The fact that many players are not members of a club seems to have been forgotten. [That sounds convoluted, so I'll have to explain some more.]

[I reference the GAO in this assuming that the GAO / Golf Canada will follow what the USGA has implemented.]
These changes are aimed specifically at those players who compete in net-score or flight events - could be club championships or larger events. While clubs may have rules about posting scores attested by other members, such a rule is not enforced by the GAO. Requiring attested scores would enhance the integrity of the system; however, that's not always possible even if not playing solo. As a public player, I regularly play with non-GAO members (I'll assume that is a similar case for USGA regional public player memberships). As the non-members can't be listed as an attestor when I post a score, it really doesn't matter whether I play solo or not. A review of my posted scores - if I were at an event and actually played well for once - would not include any other members as I would have no attested scores. So for the public player, in general, the rule doesn't matter - it just means you may have less rounds to post. A member of a club should have their rounds attested; therefore, those rounds can be reviewed and defended by the attestor. In that light, excluding solo rounds adds integrity to the handicap system by excluding rounds that cannot be defended.

So, the rule adds integrity to the system for club players but does little for public players. Does anyone know what percentage of USGA or GAO members belong to a club versus public members?

To add a bit of international colour on this:
In Ireland, all rounds posted must be attested by another member. As an overseas member at Enniscrone, in order to get a GUI card, I would have to post three full rounds attested by a full member of the club to get a card and handicap. After that, I would be able to enter any round played at another course, so long as it was attested.

Why is the handicap so important? Most of the rounds played there involve some form of competition; the scoring and format may vary, but handicaps are always involved.

These are the posts that I was thinking of when discussing who is eligible to be an attestor. My concern here was that players could play rounds with a non-member and not be able to post the round. This would be a significant problem and a rather transparent business decision. However, I don't see this specific qualification for an attestor in the new rules and will therefore consider the quoted posts as part of the discussion only.

By the way, it is possible to enter an attestor "manually", i.e. other than via the pull down menu however, it is not (obviously) possible to link to the manually input attestor's scoring record.

[rulie]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

I should have used an impersonal pronoun as I didn't mean you specifically.

I'll edit this thread if and when I find the part of the policy that says one must play with another member of a club. Edits included now

In the meantime, for a player that plays say 50 solo rounds a year and doesn't record them, I believe this this is not an accurate factor as that person has played more than they are reporting.

I have (regular) issues of players reporting only a few rounds a season and shooting scores that are atypical for such little play.







These are the posts that I was thinking of when discussing who is eligible to be an attestor. My concern here was that players could play rounds with a non-member and not be able to post the round. This would be a significant problem and a rather transparent business decision. However, I don't see this specific qualification for an attestor in the new rules and will therefore consider the quoted posts as part of the discussion only.

By the way, it is possible to enter an attestor "manually", i.e. other than via the pull down menu however, it is not (obviously) possible to link to the manually input attestor's scoring record.

I don't believe that the person accompanying you must be a member of GAO or Golf Canada, but we'll wait and see what the details are from Golf Canada; anything else is pure speculation (and likely not accurate ). And I still don't see any reference for making my (or anyone's) handicap "inaccurate and non-current and therefore not eligible for competitive, handicap play."

While fewer scores might reduce the precision of a handicap factor, they don't necessarily impact the accuracy.

[AlfaGolfer]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

I don't believe that the person accompanying you must be a member of GAO or Golf Canada, but we'll wait and see what the details are from Golf Canada; anything else is pure speculation (and likely not accurate ). And I still don't see any reference for making my (or anyone's) handicap "inaccurate and non-current and therefore not eligible for competitive, handicap play."

While fewer scores might reduce the precision of a handicap factor, they don't necessarily impact the accuracy.

Allowing players to cherry pick which scores to post, based on what they believe to be material is terrible policy. Many players don't grasp the concept of differentials and, since one's Factor is based on the best 10 of last 20 rounds played, every score entered plays into which scores contribute to a player's Factor.

Since you insist on a specific reference, here's a screenshot from the website of the competitive handicap tour I play on (both net scores and flights are based on current and accurate Factors):

[QuentinJJ]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

Sometimes I play late afternoon rounds with people that have to leave early and I may continue to complete the round. I guess I will not be able to register the entire round in the future, but just the attested portion.

[rulie]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

Allowing players to cherry pick which scores to post, based on what they believe to be material is terrible policy. Many players don't grasp the concept of differentials and, since one's Factor is based on the best 10 of last 20 rounds played, every score entered plays into which scores contribute to a player's Factor.

Since you insist on a specific reference, here's a screenshot from the website of the competitive handicap tour I play on (both net scores and flights are based on current and accurate Factors):

That tour is not an handicapping authority. However, it correctly says posting "All acceptable scores." In our discussion, my 25% of scores assumption was stated as an assumption of the number of scores achieved while playing alone, which, under the new handicapping guidelines, are not acceptable scores and should not be posted. The point I was making was that, if those scores had not been acceptable and therefore not posted, my handicap factor wouldn't have changed by more than 0.1, and my course handicap would likely not have changed at all. I still believe that is true, and there is no risk to the accuracy, currency or authenticity of my handicap factor.
If I were to play all of my rounds alone, I wouldn't have any scores to post, but then why would I need an authorized handicap anyway?

[Weirfan]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

i have to think that solo rounds are rare amongst most golfers.

Outside of late in the day or in late fall, when courses are relatively empty , I can't recall seeing a solo golfer on a course in Some time.

I'm sure there are a few folks that hit the course late in the day after work and might not find another player or group waiting to head out with them, but would think in peak season it wouldn't be hard to join up .

[bogey5]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

i have to think that solo rounds are rare amongst most golfers.

Outside of late in the day or in late fall, when courses are relatively empty , I can't recall seeing a solo golfer on a course in Some time.

I'm sure there are a few folks that hit the course late in the day after work and might not find another player or group waiting to head out with them, but would think in peak season it wouldn't be hard to join up .

Most golfers don't keep a Golf Canada handicap either. But the ones that do are IMO more likely more avid golfers and are more likely to go out for some solo golf. So while this change matters little to me it seems more likely to reduce the number of people keeping caps than increase them. And as Golf Canada struggles financially it seems a backward step if reduced fees from public players result.

[mpare]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

I'm not sure that assumption is right. I used to play many solo rounds when I was working for a living, especially in Halifax. I used to play early in the morning and often late in the day. All of those 9 hole rounds were posted. It wouldn't surprise me that others may follow the same practice. More to the point, though, is why the golfing authorities would change their reporting policy, if such rounds are rare. If they are rare, then reporting them couldn't constitute a significant threat to the integrity of the handicapping system. Anything more and I will be repeating what I have already said in earlier posts.

i have to think that solo rounds are rare amongst most golfers.

Outside of late in the day or in late fall, when courses are relatively empty , I can't recall seeing a solo golfer on a course in Some time.

I'm sure there are a few folks that hit the course late in the day after work and might not find another player or group waiting to head out with them, but would think in peak season it wouldn't be hard to join up .

[rulie]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

I'm not sure that assumption is right. I used to play many solo rounds when I was working for a living, especially in Halifax. I used to play early in the morning and often late in the day. All of those 9 hole rounds were posted. It wouldn't surprise me that others may follow the same practice. More to the point, though, is why the golfing authorities would change their reporting policy, if such rounds are rare. If they are rare, then reporting them couldn't constitute a significant threat to the integrity of the handicapping system. Anything more and I will be repeating what I have already said in earlier posts.

From the Golf Canada announcement: (my emphasis added by bolding)

After careful consideration and additional discussion among our Board of Directors and Handicap Committee, Golf Canada will align with all Handicap Rules changes announced by the USGA at the end of last year. This also includes the provision that applies to unaccompanied rounds.
These changes are part of a bigger picture to unify the Handicap rules, and support the possible formation of a World Handicap System, which we wholeheartedly endorse.

[aaagc]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

Yes, I reckon the non USGA authorities would walk away from an 'unattested' system. I suspect that non-solo will move even further by then.

[LOFT]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

John Gordon's take posted today in Golf Canada magazine.

http://golfcanada.ca/blogs/article/gordon-golf/solo-play-a-global-perspective/

[rulie]

Re: Handicapping Rule Change

If you're interested in seeing discussions of reactions to another handicapping authority's changes, read some of the dialogue here...

http://www.golfmagic.com/forum/golf-rules-and-handicapping/9.html

Maybe we have it pretty good!