Handicaps weren’t always forever. Hark back to the old CONGU days and golfers needed to do a little spadework each year to keep their number ‘active’.
A minimum of three cards were required to keep the wheels turning and some of you are convinced we should return to such a requirement.
Clubs already have some tricks up their sleeves in this regard. There is nothing to stop them demanding a certain number of acceptable scores to enter competitions. Many do this as a way of putting in extra safeguards to their board events.
But does it need to be written down in the Rules of Handicapping? It seems there might be some support for it among grassroots players in GB&I if your views are any guide.
I argued in a recent piece that the only way discontent with the World Handicap System could truly be addressed was to really listen to what golfers using it every day were saying about it.
You read that and then responded in big numbers. Our postbag has been overflowing with your views. We’ve had so many emails we’re printing a selection of them across a series of pieces.
We’ll also feature your views on Golf Ireland’s World Handicap System pilot scheme and what you think about General Play and the Playing Conditions Calculation in subsequent pieces.
This time, we are sharing a selection of your opinions on what needs to happen with WHS in GB&I. Are you happy with the system? Is it a work in progress? Is it beyond redemption? How can it be made better? Is it time for a minimum number of scores to return?
What do you think about the World Handicap System?
Richard emailed to say: “The old CONGU system maintained more integrity by insisting on a minimum of three cards per year. The WHS index appears to be everlasting and requires no minimum number of cards per year! Once a golfer has the WHS Index there is no requirement to input further cards!”
Martin added: “There are still lots of people who have not embraced the ethos of WHS – one of the guiding principles of which is that it should represent an accurate reflection of your current golfing ability.
“This is only achieved by regular submission of cards (not the old three comps a year), a mixture of general play and competitions. I am getting sick of the “my handicap is too low, can you please adjust it” messages: just put some b++++++ cards in!
“Personally, I believe any handicaps > 28 to not be right for entering competitions, so am totally happy with our club’s policy of operating divisions and barring high handicappers from most serious competitions.
“I do not buy into the “all abilities” argument: 54 is not a real handicap and anyone who needs that many shots should be playing mini golf or pitch and putt.”
David wrote: “The WHS in the UK is not fit for purpose for a bunch of reasons, including, if I can add, the accuracy of Slope and Course Ratings. These can and should change dramatically dependent on the season and weather, and yet they don’t!
“I’m sure the WHS was instigated with good ideas, but the unintended consequences outweigh any benefits in my view.”
Mike explained: “I like the WHS but in this country it is not used as it should be. My understanding of it is that it will only truly work if every time you play, you put the score in the system. That will give an up-to-date assessment of your handicap.
“The downside to that is not being able to play social golf, play after injury, or try out a new club or clubs without putting as score in.
“Too many people put in just enough scores to play in knockouts and board comps without it affecting their playing handicaps. Our club mandates three a year, way too few in my opinion.
“I probably put in 30-40 cards a year so my index l think is about right (11.2 in case you’re interested).
“I think leaving it to clubs to legislate the number of cards put in is wrong. It should be a countrywide minimum so all players are equal.”
Gary said: “I should say that I am in favour of the concept of WHS and on balance consider it an improvement on the old system, which I myself used to administer as a club handicap and competition secretary.
“However, the main problems I perceive are:
“1. Inconsistency in course ratings that result in members achieving handicaps that still do not travel well because their home course is rated relatively badly.
“2. What seems to be a built-in weakness with the system is nomadic golfers who play less often achieve artificially higher handicaps than regular golfers who generally play on the same course.
“3. Less importantly, the inability to easily submit cards when playing abroad, as might reasonably be expected of a world handicap system.”
Pat added: “I like the system but find that clubs/handicap committees don’t manage the anomalies e.g. players not putting many qualifiers in – some of our Ladies are still using scores from 2023.
“Also, some men put NR in their score on a weekly basis. When we play abroad every round has to be entered for handicap purposes – this works well because it stops some of the manipulation.”
Peter opined: “At one time people strived to obtain a lower handicap, we were proud to reach milestones and when you entered the single handicap zone, life was good!
“To be a low handicapper brought you entry into representing your Club at better team events such as County and National competitions. Now sadly that’s not the case, there’s simply not the same mentality to be lower.
“The WHS seems to encourage, and is geared to, the higher handicapper. Competitions are won by the 15-24 handicap guys with incredible scores (I expect EG has stats to prove me wrong). Low golfers need to break the course record to stand a chance!
“We’ve always had cheats, ball down the trouser leg, but now we have the quiet manipulator. Legal, but not in the spirit of golf as we’ve known it.
“WHS needs tweaking, let’s hope it’s work in progress and not the final blueprint.”
And, finally, Jerry said: “I am one of the frustrated golfers, but more importantly one who no longer plays in competitions (or in any case only very rarely at away clubs to take advantage of a cheap green fee).
“Why do I no longer play? For more years than I care to remember I’ve been a low handicap golfer (4 to 7 range). [I’m] somebody who could compete well in the handicap section – the very odd major trophy and occasional minor prizes in weekly Stablefords and so on – but a golfer that could never compete in the scratch section.
“Now, with my handicap remaining in that bracket, I can no longer compete at all. Prior to the WHS my club’s monthly medal and Stableford would be commonly won with scores of around nett 69-71(Par 71) or 38-36 points.
“Post WHS winning nett scores are routinely six shots better in the handicap section (the scratch scores have remained constant).
“The implication here is that I need to shoot around level par to compete – almost impossible for me. So, having made months of donations in the form of entry fees I’ve just stopped.”
Now have your say
What do you think of some our reader’s comments? Do you agree. Is the World Handicap System beyond repair, or are golfers being unfair to the system? You can let us know by emailing me at s.carroll@nationalclubgolfer.com or by contacting us on X. If you’re trying out our new website, leave us a comment at the end of this article.
The post Should you have to put in a minimum number of cards each year to keep your handicap? appeared first on National Club Golfer.
