This article on golfmonthly.com suggests that the WHS has ruined golf for the low handicappers. I agree that there is some truth to this. The WHS is a version of the system USGA has used in the US for many years but with minor tweaks. I have seen it work without hurting the low handicappers. In this article I want to argue that the implementation of WSH is hurting the low handicapper and not necessary the system.
How it works in the US
I want to argue that problem lies in the implementation of WHS especially in regions that use HowDidIDo. In the US, every round played under the rules of golf is used for handicapping purposes. The player is responsible for entering his scores in the system. To avoid manipulation, peers are free to review the scores anyone enters. The club handicap admin and handicap committee actively review and act of cheats (this includes those who fail to enter their rounds not just wrong scores).
The two checks and balances (peer review and active oversight by the handicap admin) ensures that one’s handicap is not only determined by competition rounds but by ALL THEIR ROUNDS. This means that both competition and casual rounds are used for handicapping purposes. This leads to a fair assessment of their handicap. A handicap is supposed to measure a players potential and it makes sense that all the rounds played within the rules of the games be used to determine this.
Casual Rounds
In regions that use HowDidIDo, and in Kenya specifically, most casual rounds are not entered into the system. These rounds probably account for 60% or more of the golfers scores. This doesn’t make a big difference in the low handicap player as their improvement or lack of doesn’t change that fast. However, it can make a massive impact on high handicappers handicap changes. The chances are the high handicappers play better in their casual rounds vs competition rounds. They just need things to click once in a competition play and they win. This is why it’s easy to find high handicappers shooting 42+ stable ford points in competitions. But if their casual rounds are used in their handicap calculations, chances are they’d be carrying a lower handicap or what I would call their true handicap during competition.
I would contend that if it was mandatory to enter casual rounds in the system, most high handicappers would be playing a lower handicap and thus level the playing field for the low handicappers. Thus the implementation of WHS is hurting the low handicapper and not the system itself.
Other considerations
Allowing casual rounds as part of the scores for calculating the handicaps will play a big part in leveling the playing field. However, that alone might not result in a fully equitable results in competition. The extension of new handicaps from 28 for me and 36 for women to 54 has also resulted in skewed winning by high handicapper. it’s therefore important that competition committees start using divisions in it’s competition. This will also ensure that low handicappers are not competing against players with handicaps in the 30s and 40s.
