Are we turning a “blind eye” to golf’s traditions to chase YouTube players? Are governing bodies “in denial” about criticisms of the World Handicap System?
We marked the fifth anniversary of the WHS’s arrival in Great Britain & Ireland with a two-part interview with England Golf’s head of handicapping and course rating Sarah Barter.
I also argued if you were considering numbers alone – and the intention of handicap chiefs to open up the game to more players – than the system was making progress.
That motivated many of you to send in more messages about WHS and, with another overflowing postbag, we’re again printing a selection of your views below…
‘Golf scores matter to golfers’: Here’s what you’re saying about the World Handicap System
Colin wrote: “I don’t plan on writing war and peace on this handicap system other than I find it awful and a cheat’s charter.
“England Golf have abandoned the traditional golfer to get “bums on seats”. I avoid playing in Handicap competitions and stick with scratch events, team opens are a joke.
“I also feel since COVID the amount of poor etiquette, bunker raking and rule braking has significantly increased. The game is in slow decline and I worry about its integrity going forwards.
“In summary, a blind eye to the traditions of the game is accepted to generate revenue for clubs – too many golf clubs chasing “YouTube golfers”.
“Golf needs to return to a niche sport with some standards, it sounds negative but that’s how I feel about it. I have been playing golf since 1980.”
It’s a view Jeff expanded upon. “The system, especially entering general play scores which increase your handicap, simply invites manipulation. Simply stop those scores which increase it,” he said.
“As for 4BBB, the change where a player has a score entered for the pair having 42 points and comes in on 9 or more holes was welcome but, again, is flawed. Why can’t they hit both players?
Advertisement
“In match play, why is it full handicap difference when it is used to be 3/4?
“Those are the 3 main areas of the game in competitive golf and each one DOES NOT WORK.”
He later added: “The rulers of the game must realise how much discontent there is with the system and not to make amendments is arrogance. For them to say it is for the club to apply its own rules is again preposterous. It needs to come from the top so every club applies the same rules, every time.
“The drive to increase the numbers playing golf is commendable but what they fail to see are the numbers of golfers no longer playing as the WHS system just isn’t working.”
Peter was also to the point.
He said: “Golf scores to golfers MATTER. You fight your way round against yourself, the course and the elements. Golf going one way, downhill. After 60 years of single figures play, I am thinking of putting away my clubs forever.”
Philip opined: “A minority of golfers will always cheat in order to manipulate their handicaps upwards but the fundamental problem is that the WHS has made it far easier for them to do so.
“Those golfers may only be a small minority but they are still having a big impact on the outcome of club competitions.
“This is becoming increasingly apparent to other golfers, posing a real risk that the cancer of manipulating handicaps will spread.”
Phil, meanwhile, wrote in to say: “I have been playing golf for 50 years and the old system was far better. It worked. This system is rubbish.
“I don’t know anybody that says this system is good. It is open to cheating. No disrespect to you or your committee but you have got it wrong. You are destroying good golfers.
“We have noticed now after this has been implemented at our club, and many others, rounds of 14-15 under par are being submitted. 5 years ago this would never happen. You have destroyed the game.”
But it wasn’t all criticism of the World Handicap System. Will, for example, is a big fan.
“The WHS is superb, most people love it, it is very popular,” he explained. “If there is anything the committee should focus on it is how to tackle bandits.
“Perhaps golf club competition winners should be flagged to help identify repeat winners that score significantly better than handicap.”
And if you think the purpose of golf is to get the ball into the hole, cover your eyes. Stephen writes: “I am a big supporter of WHS and used what was almost the same system when living in the US.
“The big difference there was gimmes were acceptable. I’d like to see this here. It speeds up pace of play and I could enter more scores.
“Importantly, this only has the impact of bringing a handicap down rather than sandbagging.”
Adrian suggested one “small” change. “Handicaps should just suspend or even expire if you haven’t submitted a card of any kind after (say) 3 years – 1 or 2 new cards could re-activate or 3 fresh ones restart,” he explained.
“We have quite a few numbers on my handicap list which are pretty meaningless, mostly older members who still want to show up in things like the Turkey Trot but will roll in a solid 22pts and just be there for the mince pies!”
John also suggested a tweak to the cap system. He wrote: “I hear many comments from my golfing friends about handicap manipulation in WHS, suggesting people use general play scores to lower their handicap prior to competition.
Advertisement
“There is the hard cap in the calculation, if it was reduced to 3 shots rather than 5, and the calculation for the increase in WHS score for rounds above WHS was weighted so the reduction happened more slowly much of the criticism would be less warranted. Do you know if it has it been considered?”
Now have your say
What do you think? Do our readers have a point? Do we just need to get used to WHS, or should it be sent out to pasture? Drop us a comment below, email me at s.carroll@nationalclubgolfer.com or leave us a message on X.
Advertisement
