- Joined
- Jul 31, 2015
- Messages
- 1,175
Believe it or not...my money is on the WHS!!!!
World Handicap System (WHS)
- Thread starter JohnnyDee
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2018
- Messages
- 183
I was discussing WHS with my non golfing brother last night. His ex was a golfer, so he does know a bit.
When I got to the 113 measure being the standard, he looked at me a little puzzled.
So, in order to avoid scrolling through 117 pages on this thread, can someone (Rulefan?) explain why WHS use 113 as the standard measure of a golf course's difficulty?
I am slowly getting my head round the new system, can't say I rate it, it seems far too unnecessarily complicated to me.
When I got to the 113 measure being the standard, he looked at me a little puzzled.
So, in order to avoid scrolling through 117 pages on this thread, can someone (Rulefan?) explain why WHS use 113 as the standard measure of a golf course's difficulty?
I am slowly getting my head round the new system, can't say I rate it, it seems far too unnecessarily complicated to me.
It is a figure plucked out of the air simply because it has to be a number that can be the same, more or less than that number. They probably got some one with some maths knowledge to run a few trials to find the best number. It is also high enough to have a miniscule effect unless there is quite a deviation from that number.
I read somewhere that CONGU (or maybe England Golf) reckoned the average slope to be 125 in GB&I (or England).
The standard or neutral slope of 113 is the point at which a set of tees is equally difficult for both the scratch and bogey golfer to play to handicap.
Why 113? Apparently it relates to the gradient of a line graph plotting scores versus handicap on a standard difficulty course (1.13).
The standard or neutral slope of 113 is the point at which a set of tees is equally difficult for both the scratch and bogey golfer to play to handicap.
Why 113? Apparently it relates to the gradient of a line graph plotting scores versus handicap on a standard difficulty course (1.13).
When the EG transition took place the software was unable to identify a number of courses/tees from the CDH files (either the courses/tees hadn't been set up properly inthe WHS portal by the clubs or had not yet been rated). The software therefore allocated a nominal value of 125 for the slope and 72 for the course rating. These were approximate averages determined from the figures derived from the ratings already done for the men's courses throughout England in the last couple of years.
All other courses in GB&! had already been rated for many years.
I believe the 118 was an unofficial figure estimated from USGA ratings shortly after the implementation of slope.
Yes, the terms used to describe the 113 are 'standard' or 'neutral'.
However, I have never been able to reconcile the following statement
'The USGA calculates Slope Rating with the following formula: bogey course rating minus Course Rating, with the result multiplied by 5.381 for men or 4.24 for women.
with
'113 is the point at which a set of tees is equally difficult for both the scratch and bogey golfer to play to handicap'.
All other courses in GB&! had already been rated for many years.
I believe the 118 was an unofficial figure estimated from USGA ratings shortly after the implementation of slope.
Yes, the terms used to describe the 113 are 'standard' or 'neutral'.
However, I have never been able to reconcile the following statement
'The USGA calculates Slope Rating with the following formula: bogey course rating minus Course Rating, with the result multiplied by 5.381 for men or 4.24 for women.
with
'113 is the point at which a set of tees is equally difficult for both the scratch and bogey golfer to play to handicap'.
Last edited:
I now have the correct answer.
When Knuth introduced the system in 1982, the theoretical average Slope Rating was 113 because USGA data showed that scores go up on average 1.13 strokes per handicap stroke.
Dean Knuth invented today's USGA Course Rating and Slope system.
When Knuth introduced the system in 1982, the theoretical average Slope Rating was 113 because USGA data showed that scores go up on average 1.13 strokes per handicap stroke.
Dean Knuth invented today's USGA Course Rating and Slope system.
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2018
- Messages
- 183
Thank you Rulefan, (and others), that's extremely informative. However, if that was introduced in 1982, (40 years ago virtually), do you think that the difference between a scratch golfer and a bogey golfer in 1982 is the same difference exponentially in 2021? i.e. is there any research, or any proof that the gap has widened or narrowed?
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2020
- Messages
- 3,944
Im that case I'm not overly convinced you've spelt his surname correctly 😡😅
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2018
- Messages
- 183
I had that thought............
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2020
- Messages
- 3,944
🤣
No, that was his cousin Simon Henry Ambles. 🙂
No, that was his cousin Simon Henry Ambles. 🙂
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2012
- Messages
- 23,761
Quick one if I may as I try and get a feel for WHS.
My HI is 8.4 and round my track my CH is 9 (Slope 125). To get my CH to 8 I have to get my HI to 8.3. The oldest round of my 20 had a score differential of 7.6 - so my next counting round will see that go. The highest SD of my remaining 19 is 10.3. What SD do i have to get next counting round to get the 0.1 I need to get my HI to 8.3?
Assuming I play all my golf at my ’home’ track I‘m trying to understand what I need to do to achieve any goal I set myself on a round by round basis. Is there a quick way of working it out - assuming no PCC adjustments are made.
My HI is 8.4 and round my track my CH is 9 (Slope 125). To get my CH to 8 I have to get my HI to 8.3. The oldest round of my 20 had a score differential of 7.6 - so my next counting round will see that go. The highest SD of my remaining 19 is 10.3. What SD do i have to get next counting round to get the 0.1 I need to get my HI to 8.3?
Assuming I play all my golf at my ’home’ track I‘m trying to understand what I need to do to achieve any goal I set myself on a round by round basis. Is there a quick way of working it out - assuming no PCC adjustments are made.
I'm not convinced that this is the best way to go..by all means track your scores and know what you need to do if it helps but I think it's just putting more pressure on you.
Knowing that you've got to shoot, say, 5 over par just to keep your index where it is has to put your game under the spotlight even more than normal, especially if you make your 5th bogey on the 12th, you're not playing that well and there's a tricky run of holes coming up
Play the game, score what you score and let the computer work it out for you.
Personally, I wouldn't want to know that I've got to shoot "X" this round or my index goes to "Y", my course handicap goes to "Z" and my 95% takes me somewhere else.
Knowing that you've got to shoot, say, 5 over par just to keep your index where it is has to put your game under the spotlight even more than normal, especially if you make your 5th bogey on the 12th, you're not playing that well and there's a tricky run of holes coming up
Play the game, score what you score and let the computer work it out for you.
Personally, I wouldn't want to know that I've got to shoot "X" this round or my index goes to "Y", my course handicap goes to "Z" and my 95% takes me somewhere else.
It really depends on the other 7 qualifying SD’s. 6.8 will definitely do it but it could be as high as 7.5.