World handicap updates

[Javs]

https://www.txga.org/2023/11/08/usga-the-ra-announce-2024-world-handicap-system-revisions/?swcfpc=1

[Josh Parker]

@Dead Solid Bogey here is a good link for the changes. I saw your post in the good morning thread.  

[Josh Parker]

I'm interested in seeing how this works with partial play.  If I understand it correctly you could play say 13 holes and stop and it will still calculate.  

[EnderinAZ]

37 minutes ago, jdparker said:

I'm interested in seeing how this works with partial play.  If I understand it correctly you could play say 13 holes and stop and it will still calculate.  

That and after you hit your second ball into the pond on the right of the green and instead of throwing your putter into the pond you tell your playing partners just give me a 7, that is what I would get anyway from here. 

[Dead Solid Bogey]

1 hour ago, jdparker said:

@Dead Solid Bogey here is a good link for the changes. I saw your post in the good morning thread.  

Thanks…. Abnormal course conditions always seems to be more of a “gotcha”than a rule. 

[DaveP043]

1 hour ago, jdparker said:

I'm interested in seeing how this works with partial play.  If I understand it correctly you could play say 13 holes and stop and it will still calculate.  

Starting in 2024, if you play 9 holes, the system will "calculate" your estimated score for the remaining 9 holes, and post an 18-hole score that immediately is counted for your handicap calculation. If you play 11 holes, you post those 11 holes (hole by hole) and the system will calculate the remaining 7 holes, etc.  Once you play 9 holes, you'll be posting what will become an 18 hole score.  The will calculate your "estimated score" for those holes you do not play, it won't simply be (par + handicap strokes) as it is now.  A plus, a 9-hole score won't sit in "limbo" waiting for you to post another 9-hole score to pair it with, it will immediately become part of your scoring record.  

[Josh Parker]

9 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

Starting in 2024, if you play 9 holes, the system will "calculate" your estimated score for the remaining 9 holes, and post an 18-hole score that immediately is counted for your handicap calculation. If you play 11 holes, you post those 11 holes (hole by hole) and the system will calculate the remaining 7 holes, etc.  Once you play 9 holes, you'll be posting what will become an 18 hole score.  The will calculate your "estimated score" for those holes you do not play, it won't simply be (par + handicap strokes) as it is now.  A plus, a 9-hole score won't sit in "limbo" waiting for you to post another 9-hole score to pair it with, it will immediately become part of your scoring record.  

I am assuming it will take a look at your previous attempts at those holes and base an average off of that..... 

What if you haven't played the course before?  

I don't typically post a 9 hole score but find this interesting. 

[GolfSpy_APH]

I'm looking forward to next season and seeing how well this plays out. We have a 6 hole course I love to play and it's never busy so playing it twice only takes 2 hours at most and means I can have some better handicap rounds. 

[Preeway]

Based on what I've read so far, I'm not a fan. Although I don't play many 9 hole rounds and when I do, I will continue to just wait and enter the two nine holes rounds together as an 18. I also don't like the idea of playing 13 holes and then stopping only to have the last 5 get calculated based on how the first 13 holes were played. I understand that there are times when a round gets cut short due to rain or lightning or even darkness. But I've had many rounds where I'm -1 to +2 through 12-14 holes only to blow up on 16-18 and finish with an 80. The new system kinda makes me feel obligated to post a partial round rather than just simply having the option if I choose. Am I being too much of a "purist" for feeling this way? How many among us are getting in partial rounds more than once a year? Other than @GolfSpy_APH, lol

[GolfSpy_APH]

1 minute ago, Preeway said:

Based on what I've read so far, I'm not a fan. Although I don't play many 9 hole rounds and when I do, I will continue to just wait and enter the two nine holes rounds together as an 18. I also don't like the idea of playing 13 holes and then stopping only to have the last 5 get calculated based on how the first 13 holes were played. I understand that there are times when a round gets cut short due to rain or lightning or even darkness. But I've had many rounds where I'm -1 to +2 through 12-14 holes only to blow up on 16-18 and finish with an 80. The new system kinda makes me feel obligated to post a partial round rather than just simply having the option if I choose. Am I being too much of a "purist" for feeling this way? How many among us are getting in partial rounds more than once a year? Other than @GolfSpy_APH, lol

I'll be honest I play a lot. 

Whether rain or slow play I think I had at least a dozen rounds that were 12 or 15 holes. Part of the way our course is setup but it happens more often then not.

[Dead Solid Bogey]

My take:

Pros: I like that the smaller tracks are being included. I may have to harken back to my younger days and start caring a Sunday bag around with me. There are still many smaller towns /communities in central and south Texas that have 9 hole municipal  or private tracks that now might now  be listed. In fact, whether the course is listed or not, I should have been doing this ever since I started the new work gig. 
 

Negatives: I hate with a passion any rules, clauses, or dictates concerning “ abnormal course conditions “… Just a personal pet peeve, to dang subjective for my liking.  

[DaveP043]

1 hour ago, jdparker said:

I am assuming it will take a look at your previous attempts at those holes and base an average off of that..... 

What if you haven't played the course before?  

I don't typically post a 9 hole score but find this interesting. 

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/handicapping/world-handicap-system/2024-revision/2024-treatment-of-9-hole-scores-FAQ.html#:~:text=Beginning in 2024%2C when a,be considered in the player's

This says "The expected score is based on the average Score Differential of a player with a given Handicap Index and a normal distribution of scores – so it is not specific to each player. "

1 hour ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

I'm looking forward to next season and seeing how well this plays out. We have a 6 hole course I love to play and it's never busy so playing it twice only takes 2 hours at most and means I can have some better handicap rounds. 

I don't know how 6-hole scores might be treated, I'm not sure there are plans for this particular situation.

10 minutes ago, Preeway said:

Based on what I've read so far, I'm not a fan. Although I don't play many 9 hole rounds and when I do, I will continue to just wait and enter the two nine holes rounds together as an 18. 

Why not just post scores in accordance with the Rules, instead of deciding for yourself which rules you need to follow?

 

13 minutes ago, Preeway said:

I also don't like the idea of playing 13 holes and then stopping only to have the last 5 get calculated based on how the first 13 holes were played.

Currently if you play 13 holes, you "calculate" the remainder as par + handicap strokes, which is better than an average score for every player.  As I read this, the new system will post something closer to an "average" score, it will bring really low or high partial scores a little closer to average.

 

14 minutes ago, Preeway said:

The new system kinda makes me feel obligated to post a partial round rather than just simply having the option if I choose.

You don't have an option now, if you play 13 holes you're required to post a score.  THAT won't change a bit.

 

2 minutes ago, Dead Solid Bogey said:

Negatives: I hate with a passion any rules, clauses, or dictates concerning “ abnormal course conditions “… Just a personal pet peeve, to dang subjective for my liking.  

And what in the handicap rules has anything to do with abnormal course conditions?  That's a catch-all term used in the Rules of Golf for Temporary Water, Animal Holes, GUR, and Immoveable Obstructions.  We've had a Playing Conditions Calculation for 4 years now, an adjustment based only on the scores posted on a specific day.

[DaveP043]

BTW, the link posted by @Javs is good, and has some capsule descriptions of the changes, but there's a whole lot of information direct from the USGA here, including the actual 2024 Handicapping Rules:

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/handicapping/world-handicap-system/2024-revision.html

[MaxEntropy]

1 hour ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

I'm looking forward to next season and seeing how well this plays out. We have a 6 hole course I love to play and it's never busy so playing it twice only takes 2 hours at most and means I can have some better handicap rounds. 

I once played a course in Luxembourg that had a front 12, back 6. Presumably the new calcs would better be able to handle strange things like this.

[Josh Parker]

52 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

BTW, the link posted by @Javs is good, and has some capsule descriptions of the changes, but there's a whole lot of information direct from the USGA here, including the actual 2024 Handicapping Rules:

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/handicapping/world-handicap-system/2024-revision.html

Thanks for the info.  

[GolfSpy BOS]

Seems like good revisions.  As someone who plays a lot of 9 hole rounds (my kids get a little too tired when I try to play 18 with them) I like that I won't need to wait to combine scores.  I haven't seen the mechanics of how the other 9 will be calculated, but I'm guessing in average handicaps won't change significantly because of these updates.  But you may skew .5 higher or lower. 

 

[Preeway]

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

Why not just post scores in accordance with the Rules, instead of deciding for yourself which rules you need to follow?

 

Fair question. I've always posted my two nines as a combined 18 knowing that it was waiting for another 9 hole round anyway. To be fair, this is really only a thing when I play in league and we play 9 holes at a time. For simplicity sake, it seems easier to keep posting my two nines as a combined 18 instead of just posting 9 holes. Perhaps after getting used to the new system it will make more sense to change my habits.

[DaveP043]

Just now, GolfSpy BOS said:

Seems like good revisions.  As someone who plays a lot of 9 hole rounds (my kids get a little too tired when I try to play 18 with them) I like that I won't need to wait to combine scores.  I haven't seen the mechanics of how the other 9 will be calculated, but I'm guessing in average handicaps won't change significantly because of these updates.  But you may skew .5 higher or lower. 

There's more information here, but I don't think they directly answer your question:

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/handicapping/world-handicap-system/2024-revision.html

My best guess is that the "expected score" will be something like an average Differential for a golfer with the same handicap index.  Since its something of an average, it will "temper" an extreme 9-hole score by combining it with a much more "normal" second 9.  

[DaveP043]

5 minutes ago, Preeway said:

Fair question. I've always posted my two nines as a combined 18 knowing that it was waiting for another 9 hole round anyway. To be fair, this is really only a thing when I play in league and we play 9 holes at a time. For simplicity sake, it seems easier to keep posting my two nines as a combined 18 instead of just posting 9 holes. Perhaps after getting used to the new system it will make more sense to change my habits.

In my opinion, a system like this works best when everyone involved plays by the same Rules.  I understand that your current procedure produces an index pretty much identical to that if you actually did post the 9-hole rounds individually.  But starting Jan. 1, it won't, the only way to get the "correct" Handicap Index" will be to post in accordance with the new Rules.  

[Preeway]

16 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

In my opinion, a system like this works best when everyone involved plays by the same Rules.  I understand that your current procedure produces an index pretty much identical to that if you actually did post the 9-hole rounds individually.  But starting Jan. 1, it won't, the only way to get the "correct" Handicap Index" will be to post in accordance with the new Rules.  

I get that. And I get that there are a lot of people who play differently than I do and this approach is designed to get all of us on a level playing field. I think it's just going to take time for me to adjust to a new way of doing things.

[DaveP043]

22 minutes ago, Preeway said:

this approach is designed to get all of us on a level playing field.

Yeah, the handling of 9 hole and other "partial" rounds was one of the things that varied around the world.  I've read that in CONGU areas (the British Isles, primarily), a 9-hole score was paired with a second 9 consisting of (par + handicap strokes + 1 more stroke).  considering that most of us average 2 or 3 strokes over par net, that second nine was pretty close to a player's average score.  And that 9-hole score immediately became a part of the player's handicap calculation.  So to me, the 2024 version unifies one more issue worldwide, and is reasonably close to the CONGU solution in use for the past 4 years.

[Larryw]

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

My best guess is that the "expected score" will be something like an average Differential for a golfer with the same handicap index.  Since its something of an average, it will "temper" an extreme 9-hole score by combining it with a much more "normal" second 9

Do you think that this formula for determining the "expected score" will be released to the public?

If not,  won't this really blow the "unofficial" handicaps as well as all "official" non GHIN handicaps out of the water - if they exist.

[DaveP043]

7 minutes ago, Larryw said:

Do you think that this formula for determining the "expected score" will be released to the public?

If not,  won't this really blow the "unofficial" handicaps as well as all "official" non GHIN handicaps out of the water - if they exist.

Based on what I've read, the calculation of "expected score" will not be published.  Unofficial handicap calculations haven't had the calculation for PCC available for 4 years now, this will be one more way in which they'll deviate from an official handicap index.  I believe at one time a few state or regional handicapping authorities chose not to use GHIN, using instead an internal (still USGA-approved) calculation system, but they still had some kind of data sharing with GHIN so that the PCC could be calculated and applied correctly.  I imagine that if these systems are authorized by the USGA, they'll have access to all the same calculations as GHIN uses.

[Dead Solid Bogey]

7 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/handicapping/world-handicap-system/2024-revision/2024-treatment-of-9-hole-scores-FAQ.html#:~:text=Beginning in 2024%2C when a,be considered in the player's

This says "The expected score is based on the average Score Differential of a player with a given Handicap Index and a normal distribution of scores – so it is not specific to each player. "

I don't know how 6-hole scores might be treated, I'm not sure there are plans for this particular situation.

Why not just post scores in accordance with the Rules, instead of deciding for yourself which rules you need to follow?

 

Currently if you play 13 holes, you "calculate" the remainder as par + handicap strokes, which is better than an average score for every player.  As I read this, the new system will post something closer to an "average" score, it will bring really low or high partial scores a little closer to average.

 

You don't have an option now, if you play 13 holes you're required to post a score.  THAT won't change a bit.

 

And what in the handicap rules has anything to do with abnormal course conditions?  That's a catch-all term used in the Rules of Golf for Temporary Water, Animal Holes, GUR, and Immoveable Obstructions.  We've had a Playing Conditions Calculation for 4 years now, an adjustment based only on the scores posted on a specific day.

As I stated at the start of my post.. The subjective nature of abnormal course conditions is a personal pet peeve of mine. I will readily admit to being biased towards subjective additions to hard data collection. In my mind it ends up with results a long the line of  2 is always a 2 in math except when it is a subjective 7. We will have to agree to disagree about this. For my part I will have to do my best to avoid having to use the playing condition calculation gambit. 
   May you find nothing but fairways and greens my friend, fairways and greens. 

[DaveP043]

4 hours ago, Dead Solid Bogey said:

As I stated at the start of my post.. The subjective nature of abnormal course conditions is a personal pet peeve of mine. I will readily admit to being biased towards subjective additions to hard data collection. In my mind it ends up with results a long the line of  2 is always a 2 in math except when it is a subjective 7. We will have to agree to disagree about this. For my part I will have to do my best to avoid having to use the playing condition calculation gambit. 
   May you find nothing but fairways and greens my friend, fairways and greens. 

Let's please use the correct terminology, Abnormal Course Conditions has nothing to do with the subject of this thread, which is upcoming revisions to the Handicap system.  ACCs are covered in Rule 16.1 in the Rules of Golf.

As far as avoiding the PCC "gambit", you've been participating in it for the last 4 years, assuming you've been keeping an official handicap.  You can't "avoid" it, its an automatic calculation.  Sure, the development of the exact calculation is somewhat subjective, but at this stage any adjustment is based only on numbers, on the scores posted at a specific course on a specific day.  Of course the choice to use the best 8 of your last 20 scores was subjective as well, the method for rating golf courses is based on some subjective value judgements, its pretty tough to get away from subjective decisions if you want to keep a handicap.

Edited November 10, 2023 by DaveP043

[KC Golf]

I think it will be helpful for courses under repair where certain holes are not open for play. Does it adjust for tee boxes that are under repair or fairways or greens under repair?  But may be I am wrong.  

[GregGarner]

On 11/9/2023 at 9:59 AM, DaveP043 said:

Since its something of an average, it will "temper" an extreme 9-hole score by combining it with a much more "normal" second 9.  

This will likely hurt me. Most of my 9-hole scores are from my Thursday night league in which I, invariably, play AWFUL. Saturday morning? 75s pretty regularly. Thursday nights? Breaking 40 is unusual... I know, I know, cry me a river, right? But honestly, isn't it much more likely to have a blow-up 9 after a bad front 9? I don't know many guys that can shoot net 45 on the front and then regain their composure to post a net 37 on the back and I'm afraid this new system will likely cause an overall dip in indices.

BUT. To the points made by others, as long as that's how everyone does it, then it's still a level playing field. But this definitely gives folks some more tools in the lead up to Member-Guest

[MrCharles]

On the surface, I think that this is generally an improvement in the system. One thing that troubles me a little bit is that the sample size for actual recorded scores used in calculating someone's handicap who strictly tends to play 9 hole rounds just got cut in half. Their 20 scores are now composed of 20 actual recorded 9 hole scores and 20 'expected' scores, which the WHS has seemingly decided not to publicly disclose exactly how they will be calculated. I am also not a fan of the 'black box' approach to the expected score differential. My opinion is that the handicap system should be entirely transparent with all formulas involved in the calculation made publicly available. This allows the golf population as a whole to effectively audit the system and point out areas that may not be fair. The formula for the expected score differential, to my knowledge, will not be made public, making a system that many golfers (rightly or wrongly) already find mysterious and convoluted, even moreso.