World Handicapping System - 2020 (next year!)

[rulie]

Variety is the spice of life

We had that before WHS!

[aaagc]

Changing tack a bit. Your southern neighbours seem to be having trouble entering scores into their software. Problems seem to be related to clubs/courses not having up to date pars or stroke indices and entering individual hole scores. Have there been or are there any issues in Canada?

[rulie]

Changing tack a bit. Your southern neighbours seem to be having trouble entering scores into their software. Problems seem to be related to clubs/courses not having up to date pars or stroke indices and entering individual hole scores. Have there been or are there any issues in Canada?

Not that I've heard, but there's not very much golf being played in Canada these days. A weather delay is in effect.

[Ignatius Reilly]

Changing tack a bit. Your southern neighbours seem to be having trouble entering scores into their software. Problems seem to be related to clubs/courses not having up to date pars or stroke indices and entering individual hole scores. Have there been or are there any issues in Canada?

Haven't noticed any issues as of yet.

But a lot of Canadian golfers aren't all that serious. They're fair-weather players and won't get out in any great numbers until the weather is "perfect".

Courses are pretty empty. Sure it's brisk out, but there's still a bright blue sky and it's warmer in the sun.

Bunch of softies.....

[bogey5]

Changing tack a bit. Your southern neighbours seem to be having trouble entering scores into their software. Problems seem to be related to clubs/courses not having up to date pars or stroke indices and entering individual hole scores. Have there been or are there any issues in Canada?

3 month frost delay in most o the country right now.

[aaagc]

doh! I had forgotten

[sikoram]

We are open and playing in Southern British Columbia (The Lower Mainland and South Vancouver Island) albeit with 140% of the normal rainfall for January and we still have another week. Since we are open, I have encouraged our members who enter scores for winter handicaps (it's a thing out here) to enter Hole by Hole. It was pointed out to me that the Hole By Hole entry of scores from the member tees (Men's White) show a change in par allocation to our hole # 9 from a 462 yard par 5 (uphill into the prevailing wind with danger everywhere) to a par 4. The back tee on this hole, Men's Black at 475 yards remains a par 5. This makes the overall par for the Men's White to a par 71 from par 72.

The guide for handicap stroke allocation in the WHS Manual Appendix F has a minimum of 450 yards for par 5. I have queried BCGA as to the change and await their reply. I will be attending the handicap certification course here on 15 April. Standby.

[rulie]

We are open and playing in Southern British Columbia (The Lower Mainland and South Vancouver Island) albeit with 140% of the normal rainfall for January and we still have another week. Since we are open, I have encouraged our members who enter scores for winter handicaps (it's a thing out here) to enter Hole by Hole. It was pointed out to me that the Hole By Hole entry of scores from the member tees (Men's White) show a change in par allocation to our hole # 9 from a 462 yard par 5 (uphill into the prevailing wind with danger everywhere) to a par 4. The back tee on this hole, Men's Black at 475 yards remains a par 5. This makes the overall par for the Men's White to a par 71 from par 72.

The guide for handicap stroke allocation in the WHS Manual Appendix F has a minimum of 450 yards for par 5. I have queried BCGA as to the change and await their reply. I will be attending the handicap certification course here on 15 April. Standby.

Thanks for this post. We have a similar hole that we want left as a par 5 from all tees, and think that the club should have the final say (as opposed to someone or some machine that may have never played the hole or course). I think the issue is around determining the correct "net double bogey" for entering scores for handicap purposes - which I don't think would have any significant impact on a significant number of handicaps.

[sikoram]

Thanks for this post. We have a similar hole that we want left as a par 5 from all tees, and think that the club should have the final say (as opposed to someone or some machine that may have never played the hole or course). I think the issue is around determining the correct "net double bogey" for entering scores for handicap purposes - which I don't think would have any significant impact on a significant number of handicaps.

I attended a WHS seminar this weekend and here is what I took away. We are too wrapped up in the math. The keys for the golfer are: what''s my index, how does that relate to the tees and course I am playing today (what's my course handicap), what is my low index especially if i play really well/poorly, why is this hole a par 4 instead of a par 5 ( because the local committee decides as per the rules of golf not Golf Canada...that's for rulie.) I should get my score in today, the day I played...now where can I do that (cell phone, kiosk etc). Suffice to say that someone (a handicap committee, Golf Canada. my local association, the R & A, the USGA, the WHS etc etc) put a lot of work and a lot of thought into this. Forget the math. Go play.

[ColinL]

I attended a WHS seminar this weekend and here is what I took away. We are too wrapped up in the math. The keys for the golfer are: what''s my index, how does that relate to the tees and course I am playing today (what's my course handicap), what is my low index especially if i play really well/poorly, why is this hole a par 4 instead of a par 5 ( because the local committee decides as per the rules of golf not Golf Canada...that's for rulie.) I should get my score in today, the day I played...now where can I do that (cell phone, kiosk etc). Suffice to say that someone (a handicap committee, Golf Canada. my local association, the R & A, the USGA, the WHS etc etc) put a lot of work and a lot of thought into this. Forget the math. Go play.

That's the reassuring message! I reckon on making sure people know the essential requirements for using and maintaining their handicaps. It's just as you say but with the one change: here they should forget the maths not the math.

The message is don't panic, you don't have to do any complicated sums. But for those who additionally want to know the figuring that goes on below the surface, there will be plenty to take in.

[sikoram]

That's the reassuring message! I reckon on making sure people know the essential requirements for using and maintaining their handicaps. It's just as you say but with the one change: here they should forget the maths not the math.

The message is don't panic, you don't have to do any complicated sums. But for those who additionally want to know the figuring that goes on below the surface, there will be plenty to take in.

So that's what the red underline in math is. Maths it is. I stand corrected. I thought (after 70 years) that maths was an English affectation.

[ColinL]

So that's what the red underline in math is. Maths it is. I stand corrected. I thought (after 70 years) that maths was an English affectation.

I wasn't correcting you! That was just an aside in recognition of the differences between British English and North American English. We refer to maths where you refer to math. I don't suppose either is an affectation. Nor, I suspect, does it make the subject any easier whichever you use. (I'm saying North Americans on the assumption that in this regard at least, you are in step with your more southerly neighbours.)

[sikoram]

I have my speller set for English Canada which still underlines math. So I harbour/harbor no ill will.

[rulie]

I have my speller set for English Canada which still underlines math. So I harbour/harbor no ill will.

I also refer to it as math, and recognize that there are differences between the UK and the USA; Canada is somewhere in between, but I'd suggest closer to the UK than to the USA (my experience, having worked for an US company).

[aaagc]

Which form of English do the French speakers use?