3/4 handicap allowance; fair or unfair?

there was an article in golf monthly about this, didn't really understand it though.

I think 3/4 handicap is unfair as it favours low handicappers.
i.e: 20 handicapper has to play of 15
4 handicapper has to play off 3

There seems to be a hell of a lot of comps at my club that is 3/4 allowance and the only thing I have ever won (fortnight ago captains night) was off full allowance which resulted in me being cut from 25 to 22.1 due to a great round of 43 pts.

My modus operandi is to have as low a handicap as possible, not to win 8 quid so I won't achieve this by having 3/4 of my handicap taken into consideration as 36 pts (par) would be based on a handicap of 17 or so, so
A. It is very unlikely that I will ever be in contention for prizes
B. get my handicap reduced by a significant level.

The congu guy says in golf monthly that all club comps should be off full handicap 9granted this is the case for medal) but I don't think I have ever played stableford at my club with full allowance.

I may be wide of the mark here and missing something, if so let me know.

N.B I would love to have a handicap of 15 or so and that is my objective for this year

Fair!

Where is the incentive to try to improve to have a better chance to win competitions if you are going to get full allowance?

Makes no difference to handicap alterations as the CSS will reflect the 3/4 difference ie. it won't be as low as under full handicap comps.

Check out the winners of your club's handicap k/o and I'll bet the majority are single figure golfers

I assume we are talking about matchplay comps here, not strokeplay? The only strokeplay comps at my club that are not full allowance are things like 4BBB and other 'fun' types of competition.

JPX wrote:Makes no difference to handicap alterations as the CSS will reflect the 3/4 difference ie. it won't be as low as under full handicap comps.

Why will it?

I was going to ay the same as D4S
I rarely see strokeplay events (stablefords?) off less than full handicap. I think for matchplay it's fair but i don't really see how it can be justified in a strokeplay event

no I am talking about stableford. has always been 3/4 as far as I can remember.

D4S,
don't understand your point. I do want to improve but there is a difference between getting 22pts at 3/4 and closer to 30 pts which in my opinion is a reasonable performance, although wont win anything. Why not adopt the european standard of 9/10ths allowance

I agree. Your handicap is your handicap, so lets all play with your FULL handicap.

I'm just back from Spain a few ago, and arranged to play the competition with FULL handicaps. There was one point in it in the team event & one point in it in the individual event. The year before we played max 18, & this ruined it for some of the higher handicaps that play with us.
(Our handicaps range from 7 - 25).

So on the first day, One guy off 25 won, Second day one guy off 12, & the last day; a 17 handicapper won.
So FULL handicap allowed everyone to enjoy there games.

r.e my post about Celtic manor golf day last week, I am pretty sure I would have came in the top three if it was full alowance instead of 6th and this would mean that I would have been having a freebe in spain. N>B winners handicaps were 6, 9,10

All individual competition should be off full handicap (even singles matchplay). 3/4 (or any other fraction) should only be used for team events

This only happens in Matchplay, or Bogey or Stableford rounds.

And IMO is completely fair

Our club has recently applied full allowance to the individual matchplay knockout.

No way I am giving someone 17 shots, so I don't enter it anymore!

why do you think its fair Davie? so a high handicapper doesn't have a chance to win? is that not why I wouldn't bother entering a scratch comp

JD - out of interest, if a handicap is designed to represent the score someone is capable of (as is generally agreed on here) and so they will go round 17 shots worse than you on their best day (and your best day), why would you object to having to give them 17 shots?

Did you put my name in the by mistake? Doesn't see to correspond to what I said

tarka wrote:no I am talking about stableford. has always been 3/4 as far as I can remember.

D4S,
don't understand your point. I do want to improve but there is a difference between getting 22pts at 3/4 and closer to 30 pts which in my opinion is a reasonable performance, although wont win anything. Why not adopt the european standard of 9/10ths allowance

tarka

I've never come across any qualifying competition (which means singles strokeplay) where you don't get anything other than full allowance.

The only time i've seen 3/4 allowance is in knockouts, societies and these sort of competitions that you describe at Celtic Manor. Not really bothered about what societies do, they are really just groups of friends playing nothing more than social golf. The Celtic Manor event you describe is a different kettle of fish. That type of competition is run for one reason only and that is for the organiser to make a profit. The policing of handicaps is not done very well, you get a mix club, society and these 'national body' handicaps run by magazines and online companies. Many of those handicaps are VERY dubious and hence the reason these comps are played off 3/4.

Personally, as I have a genuine club handicap, I'd look on the Celtic Manor type of event as just a good day out without any aspirations of winning as I know there will be some very dodgy handicaps on display.

In matchplay, which is generally when 3/4 (of teh difference) is used, then it is unlikely that an 18 handicapper, who i would give 17 shots to) will have 18 Bogeys.

More likely they will have, 6 or 7 pars the odd bird, and a few doubles or worse.

So I think 3/4 sort of levels this out in Matchplay.

That said, I can say I have seen a medal competition where it has been 3/4 and IMO full allowance should be applicable in every individual medal round.

JDandfries wrote:This only happens in Matchplay, or Bogey or Stableford rounds.

And IMO is completely fair

thats what I wan't you to elaborate on Davie

How can I elaborate on something I didn't say?

Re my earlier post I once made the final of my clubs handicap KO [Jas will know how hard that was as there are usually 250 to 300 entries] playing off 4 to be beaten by a 3 handicapper.

Off the back tees and with greater experience a low handicapper will generally come through. Those who lose generally just use the handicap difference it as an excuse

As I understand it Congu rules not state that it is compulsory for all singles (match play and stroke play) to be played from full handicap.

the Celtic manor event was run by a Pharmaceutical wholesaler I use so was a free day out, not for profit but I would presume done for tax relief purposes and a bit of a hobnobing networking kind of job, with the overall objective in getting you to spend a bit extra cash with them. I spend 45k a month in my shop alone split over two wholesalers and have influence in another seven shops so it is worth their while putting a golf day on, trips to premiership footy etc.

Agree with MPB,

It's unfair and contradicts / undermines the handicap system. High handicappers don't enter 3/4 competitions because they feel compromised and low handicappers don't enter full h/c competitions.......... because they feel compromised!

Yads........looks like they got it right then

Davie wrote:How can I elaborate on something I didn't say?

very sorry Davie

tarka wrote:the Celtic manor event was run by a Pharmaceutical wholesaler I use so was a free day out, not for profit but I would presume done for tax relief purposes and a bit of a hobnobing networking kind of job, with the overall objective in getting you to spend a bit extra cash with them. I spend 45k a month in my shop alone split over two wholesalers and have influence in another seven shops so it is worth their while putting a golf day on, trips to premiership footy etc.

Company days are even worse! Virtually no handicap checks, I've played in them before and you could claim ANY handicap and nobody checks. I've seen so many instances of people turning up and saying they only play 'once in a blue moon so I'll play off 28'. They then come in with over 40 points and a smug grin knowing they are going to pick up a prize of some description. Meanwhile, I have to shoot under par to get close to them

Doon the Water wrote:Yads........looks like they got it right then

I suppose so; sounds a bit like a Committee to me

George1507 wrote:

JPX wrote:Makes no difference to handicap alterations as the CSS will reflect the 3/4 difference ie. it won't be as low as under full handicap comps.

Why will it?

Lets say for arguments sake a course par is 72 and comps normally played on full handicap CSS is usually 72 or thereabouts. Making it 3/4 handicap won't suddenly mean everyone will play to 3/4 less, the majority will by higher (or around their normal hcap) so CSS will naturally be higher. That's the case in my experience anyway. So it's possible for some to play under their usual handicap but over the 3/4 difference and get cut. They're not all going to suddenly start playing 3/4 less just because the comp says so!

JPX wrote:

George1507 wrote:

JPX wrote:Makes no difference to handicap alterations as the CSS will reflect the 3/4 difference ie. it won't be as low as under full handicap comps.

Why will it?

Lets say for arguments sake a course par is 72 and comps normally played on full handicap CSS is usually 72 or thereabouts. Making it 3/4 handicap won't suddenly mean everyone will play to 3/4 less, the majority will by higher (or around their normal hcap) so CSS will naturally be higher. That's the case in my experience anyway. So it's possible for some to play under their usual handicap but over the 3/4 difference and get cut. They're not all going to suddenly start playing 3/4 less just because the comp says so!

I have NEVER seen a qualifying competition played off anything other than full allowance.
What sort of qualifier is played off 3/4 handicap?

Only time I have ever seen 3/4 is on a stableford or Bogey comp, never ever on a medal round

I am not a member of a club, but if i have got this right. You join a club, the club provides with a HC based on your performance. They then run a competition and make you play off 3/4 of the HC they have given you. Where is the sense in that?

JPX - CSS is calculated from your stapleford score with full handicap, regardless of the handicap allowance for the competion. So restricting a competeion to 3/4 allowance has no effecton CSS or whether or not you would be cut.

Maybe it's the case that people try too hard and end up with worse scores than they normally would.

That answers your original hcap quesiton tarka, it makes no difference!

See below,

This is the guidance on handicap allowances and when they should apply:

http://www.englishgolfunion.org/faqs.asp?code=0001000200090010#faq6

This is the evidence which proves that lower handicapper still have the advantage over higher handicappers even with full allowances in singles matchplay...

http://www.congu.com/Myth%207.pdf

So as a result in my opinion any lower handicap player to play with full difference is basically asking for an unfair advantage...

JD - isn't he likely to have as many doubles as pars (or he wouldn't be 18)? Therefore he will win the par holes and you will win the double holes, leaving you to half the holes where you par and he bogies. Obviously therefore if you both play to handicap you half the match.

This means off 3/4 in order to attain the same 'level' you have to play 0 shots better than your handicap (75% of 1 is rounded to 1 - assuming you're not 0.6!) and he has to play 4 shots better than his handicap just to half the match.

I can see why some don't like it!

That said, i can understnad why clubs do it - they want the finals of the matchplay etc to be the best players at the club! Not a couple of 20 handicappers!

JPX wrote:Maybe it's the case that people try too hard and end up with worse scores than they normally would.

That answers your original hcap quesiton tarka, it makes no difference!

17th at Montgomerie, Celtic Manor
This was the only hole I didn't get a shot on, par 4, so anything worse than a 5 would be a blob. I hit sensible drive with rescue and then missed the green right with my second shot due to inability to read strong wind, resulting in a stupid chip over the bunker which I felt I had to leave close( it rolled off fast green, much better and faster than I am used to) and ended up in another bunker. needless to say I didn't score on this hole and I think I could play it 20 times on consecutive days and still not score on it, as I am not a 17 handcapper (3/4 of 22) and the week before I was playing off 25 when I won captains night. I am trying to use the shots given instead of playing crazy TV stuff with little realistic chance of coming off, but this prevented me from playing it to my ability. If I had the full handicap allowance I would have played that hole for a five, chance of a six for a point and added another point to the score. Peed off by this went daft on the 18th and wen't out of bounds with 2nd shot which was a much easier hole for me anyway.
I hope this makes sense...

Doubles was probably not teh right term - disasters is what I meant.

Scoring a 9 in matchplay just loses the hole, where as in stroke play its a quad or worse!

IMO that is why 3/4 should be used in Matchplay, but certainly never in strokeplay!

JD did you see my link with the stats regarding this?

How can you justify playing with 3/4 compared to full when the lower handicap player wins 55% of the time with full and 61% with 3/4.

Surely 3/4 just isn't fair and thats why the guidance suggests full hc should be used?

I'm a 17 handicapper and there honestly aren't many disasters in a round! There are simply as many doubles as there are pars

Were it the case that playing off 3/4 handicaps was 'fair' in matchplay, you would presumably then see as many 28 handicappers on the winners board as you do single figure players.
Is that the case?

This 3/4 thing has always intrigued me. A scratch man still plays off scratch but a 28 man loses 7 shots against him.... can't see the logic in it. Even more absurd is a guy who plays off +4 .. he rises to +3. So everyone else gets a cut but he gains....wtf?

Everyone should play off full handicap End of.

Rossa wrote:JD did you see my link with the stats regarding this?

How can you justify playing with 3/4 compared to full when the lower handicap player wins 55% of the time with full and 61% with 3/4.

Surely 3/4 just isn't fair and thats why the guidance suggests full hc should be used?

The higher handicappers should get down to the range and work on their games! Only got themselves to blame

haystongolfer wrote:. Even more absurd is a guy who plays off +4 .. he rises to +3. So everyone else gets a cut but he gains....wtf?

"Even more absurd is a guy who plays off +4 .. he rises to +3. So everyone else gets a cut but he gains....wtf?"

Points and laughs........
Hee hee hee.........

drive4show wrote:

Rossa wrote:JD did you see my link with the stats regarding this?

How can you justify playing with 3/4 compared to full when the lower handicap player wins 55% of the time with full and 61% with 3/4.

Surely 3/4 just isn't fair and thats why the guidance suggests full hc should be used?

The higher handicappers should get down to the range and work on their games! Only got themselves to blame

Whooooa, you're talking to the man who has come from 27 to 15 in 15 months... no shortage of desire to get cut here... i'm intrigued by low handicappers seem to seek what is (statistically at least) an unfair advantage against less skilled opponents.

I suppose it comes down to what you want from the game...

If I play a guy off +2 and we shoot the same score, but I win because he had to give me 2 shots, that means nothing to me, I want to beat him because I was better than him on the day, not because of a few shots helped me out.

Rossa

what you have achieved is excellent and I'm not having a pop at you, you've show a bit of desire. I'm having a pop at all the others that can't be bothered to improve but still expect to do well in competitions :run1:

JPX,

Thats fine, nobody forces anyone to enter handicap competitions, but if you're going to have a handicap competition, it should be just that. Not a handicap competition where we'll give the low handicapper and unfair advantage over the high handicappers.

I'm of 15 so i'm almost right in the middle of this... I played a 20 hc last weekend in a single matchplay with full handicaps... I gave away 5 shots and lost 5&4, he shot 12 over for 14 holes - one of his best ever. Fair play to him, if i'd of played one of my best i'd have shot maybe 8 over for 14 holes and would have been right there with him. I didn't and got a beating.... Furry muff...

drive4show wrote:Rossa

what you have achieved is excellent and I'm not having a pop at you, you've show a bit of desire. I'm having a pop at all the others that can't be bothered to improve but still expect to do well in competitions :run1:

D4S as you have seen on some of the other posts I have written, and commented on; I am embarassed to have the handicap I have for being such a golf nut, but that is the reality for the time being. Been playing for a year and a half and want to eventually be scratch or as good as I can be but the point in handicaps are to make a level playing field for everyone in my opinion