A Sad Day for Golf, No More Stableford
in [Golf in UK]
|
From: The LHC on 21 Feb 2007 12:48 Paul Schmitz-Josten <alossola(a)web.de> wrote in news:542cgoF1tpd53U5(a)mid.individual.net: > The "unfairness" is limited, too, because the net results of our comps > are usually divided in several handicap classes, e.g. 0 to 17, 17 to > 30, 30 to 54. By that the better players will receive their prizes > unaffected by the high handicappers. Aha, you should have mentioned that sooner, I had visions of all these low handicappers getting beaten every week by beginners coming in with 60+ points! That would be very annoying! We have a similar thing at our club but the split is 0-14 and 15-28. LHC.
From: Denis Cary on 21 Feb 2007 14:01 "The LHC" <thelhc(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message news:FB%Ch.354704$MO2.168280(a)fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk... > Paul Schmitz-Josten <alossola(a)web.de> wrote in > news:542cgoF1tpd53U5(a)mid.individual.net: > >> The "unfairness" is limited, too, because the net results of our comps >> are usually divided in several handicap classes, e.g. 0 to 17, 17 to >> 30, 30 to 54. By that the better players will receive their prizes >> unaffected by the high handicappers. > > Aha, you should have mentioned that sooner, I had visions of all these low > handicappers getting beaten every week by beginners coming in with 60+ > points! That would be very annoying! We have a similar thing at our club > but the split is 0-14 and 15-28. > > LHC. Following this discussion I am led to ask from where did the 14 and 15 come? Is this completely fair on ALL players? I am led to believe that provided the decisions (as this one) is made by ones own regulatory body it is therefore fair. Denis
From: The LHC on 21 Feb 2007 14:08 "Denis Cary" <dc(a)sky.com> wrote in news:eri4v5$271$1(a)aioe.org: > "The LHC" <thelhc(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message > news:FB%Ch.354704$MO2.168280(a)fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk... >> Paul Schmitz-Josten <alossola(a)web.de> wrote in >> news:542cgoF1tpd53U5(a)mid.individual.net: >> >>> The "unfairness" is limited, too, because the net results of our >>> comps are usually divided in several handicap classes, e.g. 0 to 17, >>> 17 to 30, 30 to 54. By that the better players will receive their >>> prizes unaffected by the high handicappers. >> >> Aha, you should have mentioned that sooner, I had visions of all >> these low handicappers getting beaten every week by beginners coming >> in with 60+ points! That would be very annoying! We have a similar >> thing at our club but the split is 0-14 and 15-28. > Following this discussion I am led to ask from where did the 14 and 15 > come? I'd hazard a guess it's because it's the halfway point. > Is this completely fair on ALL players? I doubt any system is completely fair, but I (a fourteen handicapper, so I fall into the lower category) am happy with it. > I am led to believe that provided the decisions (as this one) is made > by ones own regulatory body it is therefore fair. Well this one is set by the club as it's our club competitions. LHC.
From: Denis Cary on 21 Feb 2007 17:49 > > The "unfairness" is limited, too, because the net results of our comps are > usually divided in several handicap classes, e.g. 0 to 17, 17 to 30, 30 to > 54. By that the better players will receive their prizes unaffected by the > high handicappers. > > Ciao, > > Paul Have you forgotten the purpose of handicapping? The purpose is to create To position where EVERYONE has an equal chance of winning It therefore follows that you must believe that ALL players with a handicap should be allowed to compete in any competition. The statement- 'By that the better players will receive their prizes unaffected by the high handicappers' means that you do not support the principals of handicapping and 'that better players' can win their prizes by an arbitrary decision to exclude high handicappers from some competitions. Or is it perhaps truer that, if you examine what you are saying, you do really think that a figure of 54 is a ridiculous misuse of the word handicap and some other word should perhaps be used to separately describe the ability of players with these very high figures. Denis
From: Paul Schmitz-Josten on 22 Feb 2007 02:24
The LHC schrieb am Wed, 21 Feb 2007 17:48:21 GMT in <FB%Ch.354704$MO2.168280(a)fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk>: >Paul Schmitz-Josten <alossola(a)web.de> wrote: > >> The "unfairness" is limited, too, because the net results of our comps >> are usually divided in several handicap classes, e.g. 0 to 17, 17 to >> 30, 30 to 54. By that the better players will receive their prizes >> unaffected by the high handicappers. > >Aha, you should have mentioned that sooner Did you ask anything before pouring your critics over the German handicap system? >, I had visions of all these low >handicappers getting beaten every week by beginners coming in with 60+ >points! That would be very annoying! We have a similar thing at our club >but the split is 0-14 and 15-28. The spilt frequently depends on the number of players competing and their handicaps - in fact, the number of classes is usually, but not always, given in the C&C (sp?), and the individual limits may be decided according to the participants... And yes, it _is_ annoying to be in the same class with the rookies - you may find yourself in it even with a 25 handicap :-( Ciao, Paul |