'I'm Beginning To Find The Anti-WHS Rhetoric Quite Grating. Loud Voices Are Sometimes Guilty Of Distorting Reality'

“It seems to have more critics than advocates, and perhaps even more who neither fully understand nor really care how it works.” A quote about handicapping from a minor golf industry figure that will ring true for many in the WHS era if anecdotal evidence and the voices of many WHS detractors are to be believed.

Except... that was written by me 20 years ago about the old CONGU SSS/CSS system. Some things never change, eh? That same article went on to talk about aggrieved low-handicappers gnashing their teeth because high-handicappers were winning everything with ridiculous scores. Sound familiar?

One sensationalist recent headline from a competitor media brand read: “The general consensus in Ireland is the World Handicap System has destroyed club golf.”

Now, I can’t speak for Ireland and that headline turned out to be a quote from one of that publication’s Irish readers, but from my experience, that claim is wide of the mark in England and I’m beginning to find the whole anti-WHS rhetoric just a tad wearing.

On the one hand we have loud voices telling us that many, if not most, golfers dislike WHS; on the other, a press release from England Golf, after a record month in August for WHS usage, saying that “the fact that WHS numbers continue to grow and break records shows that many more golfers are embracing WHS." Who should we believe?

I’m not claiming to have done any extensive research or in-depth analysis into it but would venture that neither have many of the loud voices decrying WHS, and constant repetition is certainly sometimes guilty of distorting, or at least misrepresenting, reality.

At our recent club prize-giving, for example, most of the lowest-handicappers made their way up to the table at least once, all for handicap competitions.

Our lowest man off 1.6 won a medal with a nett 71 (one-under), five shots clear of the field; our next lowest man won three times, once with a meagre 33 Stableford points and nothing starting with a ‘4’; and our two next-lowest won with 40 and 39 points – hardly outrageous scores, but no high-handicapper could better them on the day.

As for me, no joy, although my five-handicap partner and I did make the final of the foursomes knockout, giving many shots along the way before finally succumbing on the 17^th green in the final, betrayed by unwilling putters.

But I have no major gripes with WHS and do feel that my handicap has been about right since it arrived – not in the 5 to 6 band it once was but still hanging on in there between 6 and 8 as certain powers wane and others step up the fight to keep things as low as possible (I’m not quite ready to be put out to pasture just yet).

Loudest voices often get more airtime

Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion, strongly held or otherwise and, hopefully, based on their own lived experience rather than just hearsay.

But it’s definitely true that the loudest voices can often get a disproportionate amount of air time, and if you scratch beneath the surface, you may find that their view is actually the minority view, made to seem like the majority because of the volume of the noise.

That is undoubtedly true on many fronts at many golf clubs. Golf club managers I know well tell me that having to deal with the ‘vocal minority’ is one of the hardest challenges they face.

Obviously, I can’t say for sure if that is what is happening here, but I strongly suspect that those who are perfectly content or happy with WHS are far less likely to get vocal in the clubhouse, on social media or elsewhere about their contentment with, acceptance of, or ambivalence to the system.

Admittedly, mine is a small club and I haven’t spent a huge amount of time in my home clubhouse this year, but I can’t remember a single major conversation or discussion in which anyone has lamented the arrival of WHS and how it has been operating. Perhaps I’ve just been lucky.

My stance may surprise some, as I’m very much the right age to be tieing the knot with the Curmudgeon Club, till death us do part. But I’m trying (not always successfully) to at least put those nuptials on hold, as it does no-one any good to constantly be whinging, for their own sake and the sake of others.

I should also say that I really don’t care if I never win, or contend in, a handicap event again. I appreciate that this is what makes club golf tick, but for me, if you are ‘trying’ to win a handicap event, you are coming at it from the wrong angle.

Don’t misunderstand me – we should all be trying our best every time we go out there but winning should not be the overarching goal in a handicap event. We should all just be trying to play to the best of our ability and seeing where that leaves us.

I’ve always been caught in that no man’s land of not being good enough to win scratch events, but probably being too low to feature often in handicap events.

That doesn’t bother me, as winning handicap events is not something that motivates me – for me, golf has always been a battle between myself, the course and my inner demons rather than any desire to lift trophies.

Yes, perhaps if I’d ever been good enough to really contend in scratch events, winning would have meant something more. For that to have happened, the stars would have had to align in a freakishly unnatural way that would have sent Sir Patrick Moore into a complete tizz.

But winning via a system designed entirely to neutralise the advantage of proper players? It’s not quite the same, is it, even if essential for club golf.

And I speak as someone who has, surprisingly, won one handicap competition this year, scoring 40 points in a golf industry event at Walton Heath New. Did I enjoy it? Yes, of course – it was great to finally do something pretty well on the course. But I 'd have enjoyed it just as much if I'd come 2nd or 3rd.

Of course, I’m not naive – I don’t believe WHS is perfect, but equally, I don’t think any handicap system ever has, or ever will, neutralise the advantage of good players consistently fairly against those of lesser ability who are renowned, above all else, for their raging inconsistency.

In particular, I think the Playing Conditions Calculation (PCC) has been a major failure (even with the apparently modified algorithm) and in no way tallies with my perception of conditions on many a given day; and I think a number of Slope Ratings and Course Ratings are iffy or at least questionable – both inter- and intra-club.

In theory, at least, if loudness of voice is an accurate reflection of reality, I should be very much in the minority here and preparing to take cover before I get shot down in flames. Whether you’re brave enough to say you agree with me, wholly or partly, or think I’m an absolute muppet, do let us know in the comments section below...