A Sad Day for Golf, No More Stableford
in [Golf in UK]
|
From: Thomas Prufer on 22 Feb 2007 03:21 On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 22:49:50 -0000, "Denis Cary" <dc(a)sky.com> wrote: > 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. Actually, the German system uses the word "Vorgabe" or "Handicap" for -36 past scratch on to plus levels. The players between -37 and -54 have a "Clubvorgabe" -- "club handicap" may be an adequate translation. One site I've found says -45 and better is "Turnierreife", meaning one may play in competitions. Anyone entering with a handicap of more than 36 receives a playing handicap of 36. It seems there are national golf union suggestions that clubs are free to implement in any way they see fit. So they sometimes add their own ideas, more or less thought out, and probably depending on whomever has the most energy and say-so. (Same as with local Rules, CoC etc etc. the world over?) The -54 handicap is an effort to work around the catch-22 of German golf: one may not play without a handicap. Around Munich at least, there are *no* exceptions -- no par-three goat tracks, no pitch-and-putts, nothing. So: no handicap, no play, no improvement, no handicap... Thomas Prufer
From: Mark Myers on 22 Feb 2007 08:54 On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 22:49:50 -0000, Denis Cary said... > > > > > 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. I do not believe that the situation in the UK is any different in principle. My reasons follow. Is not the case that in the UK the handicap limit is 28? Is it not also the case that some golfers with a hc of 28 do not have the skill to play to 28? Is that fair on them? Is it not also the case that some competitions stipulate a handicap limit of 24, or in some cases even 18? Any golfer can enter but if your hc is above 18 it is restricted to 18. Is that fair on the high hc golfer? Does the UK hc system provide the level playing field you are talking about for ALL golfers? No, it does not. How is the above any different in principle to other hc systems that may have higher limits, or split comps? All such systems are a compromise and to talk about a pure level playing field is poppycock. -- Mark Myers usenet2 at mcm2002 dot f9 dot co dot uk I have all the specs and diagrams at home.
From: Pat Williams on 22 Feb 2007 11:01 > > How is the above any different in principle to other hc systems that may > have higher limits, or split comps? All such systems are a compromise > and to talk about a pure level playing field is poppycock. Don't really want to get that much involved in different countries' handicap limitations for they do not affect me and are none of my concern. However here is a time when it does affect me......when I play a holiday round in Spain, Portugal or wherever and I happen to be playing behind a group of four perfectly reasonable and nice people, all of them with 50ish handicaps. They play many more shots than I do and thus take considerably longer. Not their fault, for that is the time that they are used to at home and consider that those behind are used to it as well. Not so, of course. It has happened to me only twice and the quickest round of the two was five hours and twenty five minutes. Unbearable and not in the slightest enjoyable. And I am a long way from being a spring chicken!!! JPW >
From: Thomas Prufer on 22 Feb 2007 12:24 On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:01:41 +0000, Pat Williams <jpwil(a)tiscali.co.uk> wrote: >However here is a time when it does affect me......when I play a holiday round >in Spain, Portugal or wherever and I happen to be playing behind a group of four >perfectly reasonable and nice people, all of them with 50ish handicaps. They >play many more shots than I do and thus take considerably longer. Not their >fault, for that is the time that they are used to at home and consider that >those behind are used to it as well. Not so, of course. But then the converse isn't true either -- that those with lower handicap always play faster? I sport an official handicap of -54 (and probably need it, not having touched club in more than six months). However, I'll have a club ready in my hand as I walk up to the ball. I'll have a ready pocketful of balls to replace wayward ones (yesyes, blob, or not keep score...), tees pocketed, pencil ready, etc etc. That said, five hours!? Egad. I think I may have once taken five hours, playing two-three balls! I was alone on the course, staying until dark... Thomas Prufer
From: The LHC on 22 Feb 2007 17:17
Paul Schmitz-Josten <alossola(a)web.de> wrote in news:544uq9F1us1q4U1(a)mid.individual.net: > 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? No but you could have provided the full story. Besides are you saying the german system is beyond criticism or do you simply not allow anything to be said against it? > 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 :-( So it's not a perfect system then? ;-) LHC. |