Presentation on theme: "CONGU UNIFIED HANDICAPPING SYSTEM (UHS) ‘2012 Changes’"— Presentation transcript:
1CONGU UNIFIED HANDICAPPING SYSTEM (UHS) ‘2012 Changes’
2...a CONGU handicap identifies the ability of a player under competition play conditions and not that of their social ability
32011 Changes Supplementary Scores available to Category 1 (0-5) no restriction based on previous qualifying scores (previously 7+)9 Hole Qualifying Competition- no restriction on number of events that can be run (previously 10)no restriction on number of 9 hole coursesActive/Inactive- Inactive players have now been removed from CSS calculations
42012 – 2015 Changes Allocation of Handicaps CSS Calculation Based on SSS + Buffer ZoneSmall Field Table Introduced For ‘Reductions Only’ CSS ResultsNine–hole Scores ExtendedExceptional Scores HandlingAnnual Handicap Review (Players With Few Scores)
5Allotment of Handicaps Clause 16 Allocation of a CONGU handicap now permissible from the submission of 9 hole scores.
6Allotment of Handicaps Clause 16 Examples3 x 18 holes2 x 18 holes plus 2 x 9 holes6 x 9 holesHandicap allocated based on the lowest 18 holes of the 54 holes submitted (not best individual holes). Authorisation for a 9 hole SSS must first be obtained.
79 Hole Qualifying Competitions Clause 22 9 hole qualifying competitions may now be submitted at any club in which the player holds playing membershipPreviously Home Club Only
8Clause 25Now referred to as ‘Status of Handicap’ and makes reference to Active/Inactive handicaps
9ACTIVE/INACTIVE HANDICAPS No intention at present to increase the number of qualifying scores required
10COMPETITION STANDARD SCRATCH (CSS) “Identifying the difficulty of the course on the competition day”
11CSS CALCULATION Generally works well for men. The Problem Produces too many occasions where CSS goes up or becomes Reduction Only for ladies.WHY?
12CSS CALCULATIONThe CSS algorithm was not designed for fields with Category 4 players who are more volatile than the other Categories.Composition of ladies fields are different to men and contain a relatively large number of Category 4 players. They also have a high number of very small fields.
13CSS CALCULATION CSS = SSS + Handicap Buffer Zone: Example – SSS 72 Cat 1 Nett 73 and better Cat 2 Nett 74 and better Cat 3 [&4] Nett 75  and betterPreviously 74 for all categories
14CSS CALCULATION Comparing a typical Ladies’ field (0/10/90) R/O SSS+3 CSS=SSSSSS-10-4%5-7%8-11%12-15%16-32%33+%SSS+BZ0-6%7-9%10-15%16-22%23-45%46+%Comparing a typical Mens’ field (10/40/50)R/OSSS+3SSS+2SSS+1CSS=SSSSSS-10-5%6-9%10-14%15-20%21-41%42+%SSS+BZ0-6%7-11%12-17%18-25%26-49%50+%
15Appendix B New Table A (Extract) Cat 1Cat 2Cat 3R/OSSS+3SSS+2SSS+1CSS = SSSSSS-11000 to 67 to 910 to 1516 to 2223 to 4546+1090208030707 to 1011 to 1617 to 2324 to 4748 +4060507 to 1112 to 1718 to 2526 to 4950+12 to 1819 to 2627 to 5152+
16CSS CALCULATION FOR SMALL FIELDS “Defined as competitions in which there are less than 10 competitors (Cats 1,2 3 )”
17SMALL FIELDS Problems CSS previously influenced by one player Too many Reduction Only (RO) eventsSelf-perpetuating as players are then under-handicappedFor fields of 1-5 players, minimum CSS is SSS(as now)If CSS = SSS+3 (R/O) refer to new Table B....
18Best Nett Score Relative to Category Buffer Zone Appendix B – Table BBest Nett Score Relative to Category Buffer ZoneField Size+4+3+2+1R/OSSS+3SSS+2SSS+1123456789Example:CSS = Reduction OnlyCat Pts BZ
20Exceptional ScoresAdjustment based on two nett scores better than -4 within a specified number of qualifying rounds.Suggests Additional Adjustment may be required (ESR).Not applicable to Category 1 and Category 2 can only be reduced to 5.5.
21Exceptional Score Table Additional Decreases Average of the two scores4 or fewer qualifying scores between scores5 to 9 qualifying scores between scores10 or more qualifying scores between scores-4.0 to -5.01 shot0.5 shotNo change-5.5 to -9.52 shots-10 or less3 shots
22Exceptional Score Present System Exceptional Score Process ND Hncp Exceptional Score ProcessNDHncpChangeNew Exact-516.2-(5*0.3)14.7-7-(7*0.3)12.6Average -6 over 2 scores results in further adjustment under ESR of 2.010.650.112.7710.7-3-(1*0.3+2*0.2)12.0-1-(0.2)10.5612.112.28-(5*0.2)11.2-4-(4*0.2)9.9Average -5.5 over 6 scores results in further adjustment under ESR of 1.08.9
23Mixed Golf ‘Appendix O’ The Equality Act does not require Clubs to run all their competitions as mixed competitions.Should clubs run mixed competitions an adjustment is required to take into account the difference between the SSS/Par of the courses being used.
24ADJUSTMENT IS MANDATORY Mixed GolfExample:SSS Par ‘to handicap’Men nett 71 (37pts)Ladies nett 74 (36pts)For result purposes only the ladies would have a reduction of 3 strokes in a Stroke play competition and 1 stroke added to their handicap in a Stableford.ADJUSTMENT IS MANDATORY
25Mixed Golf Gross Competitions For result purposes only an adjustment equivalent to the difference in SSS is to be applied to the gross scoreExampleSSS Gross Score Men LadyLadies gross score adjusted to 70 declaring her the winner
26THE ANNUAL REVIEW & GENERAL PLAY Clause 23....the Clause to ensure that all playing members have handicaps that are reflective of their competitive playing ability
27Annual Review EXCLUDE LESS THAN 3 SCORES DECREASE WITH CAUTION DECREASE WITH CAUTIONMEDIAN 3+ BETTER THAN TARGET3 SCORESMEDIAN MORE THAN 6 WORSE THAN TARGETINCREASE4 or 5 SCORESMEDIAN MORE THAN 5 WORSE THAN TARGET6 SCORESMEDIAN MORE THAN 4 WORSE THAN TARGETAS NOW7 SCORES PLUS
28Performance Against Target Gross ScoreHncpNett ScoreStab Adj 19.1Adj Gross ScoreSSSGross DiffNett DiffHcap AdjRev ExactRev Play1002476722840.024.010278-696896517-7-2.821.221Number of ScoresStart HandicapFinish HandicapHandicap ChangeMGDActual Nett Median DifferentialTarget Nett Median DifferentialDifference(Actual minus Target)NSSHFHFH-SHMGD-FH(FH*0.237)+1.57ANMD-TNMD324184.108.40.206-3.79Performance Against Target
29ANNUAL REVIEWCase Study 1 – Handicap 8 25 qualifying scores returned wins club singles match play competitionCase Study 2 – Handicap 20 2 qualifying scores returned wins club singles match play competitionCase Study 3 – Handicap 15 Member diagnosed with arthritis in hands. Requests handicap increase.Case Study 4 – Handicap 6 Wins club singles and better ball match play competitions. Played few qualifying rounds.
30GENERAL PLAYCase Study 1 – Handicap 10 Member recovering from broken arm requests an increase during the rehabilitation period?Case Study 2 – Handicap 16 Member competes in Society day and wins with 45pts. Submits card for handicap reduction?Case Study 3 – Handicap 20 Member who frequently plays in qualifying competitions requests playing handicap reduction due to performing well in friendly games and ‘taking the money’?Case Study 4 – Handicap 28 Member allocated initial handicap of 28. Enters match play competition and wins 2 or 3 matches against lower handicap opponents?
31..........and some other stuff! English version Online version Calendar YearInclusion of CDH Clause16.3 (d) to be deletedPar 6 definition4BBB discussion
32CENTRAL DATABASE OF HANDICAPS (CDH) CENTRAL DATABASE OF HANDICAPS (CDH)
33CENTRAL DATABASE OF HANDICAPS (CDH) CDH Statistics Active Clubs MenLadiesAs at 30th September 2011
34CENTRAL DATABASE OF HANDICAPS (CDH) CDH BenefitsFree of ChargeAutomatic transferral of qualifying scoresNo requirement for Away letters to be sentUpdating of members handicapsAccess to 750,000+ playing handicapsOpportunity for on-line entriesNo requirement for handicap certificates
35CDH ChecklistHas all members within the handicapping system been identified as either ‘Home’ or ‘Away’ players?Has ‘Away’ players CDH numbers been included in your handicapping software?Do you always ensure that ex-members are removed from your handicapping database?Are new members always asked for their CDH number?Is your handicapping data on multiple systems? If so do you ensure that multiple uploads of data is not occurring?Is your system automatically set to send data to the CDH?Do you check for Away scores on a regular basis?Have you notified all your members of their CDH numbers?
36CENTRAL DATABASE OF HANDICAPS (CDH) New for 2012Identify that scores have been sent via CDHFacility to submit one single score rather than re-open the event and submit all scoresto be received to identify submitted scoresHome Club Not Set – numbers deleted after 6 monthsRetention of records – current and previous two calendar years (as per Clause 6.11)
37Rules of Amateur Status Effective 1 January 2012
38An “amateur golfer”, whether he plays competitively or recreationally, is one who plays golf for the challenge it presents, not as a profession and not for financial gain”
39PRINCIPLE CHANGES Rule 4-3 Subsistence Expenses Rule 2-2 Contracts & AgreementsRule 4-3 Subsistence ExpensesRule 3-2 Hole in One PrizesPrize Vouchers
40Rule 3-2 Hole in One Prizes An amateur golfer may accept a prize in excess of the limit in Rule 3-2a, including a cash prize, for a hole-in-one made while playing a round of golf.
41Rule 3-2 Prize VouchersDefinition expanded to allow prize vouchers to be used for the purchase of goods or services from a golf club.
42Organising Committee to define accurately the purpose for which the voucher may be used.... ExamplesPurchase of goods in a professional shop or sporting goods shopAny goods and services from the club or from any retail or food and beverage source
43A voucher may be credited to a Club account and may be used for items such as: Bar billClub subscriptionRestaurant billPayment of entry feesPractice area (Range tokens, lessons)Green FeesBuggy Hire