Those who have read my work will know I’m a huge fan of iGolf – England Golf’s nomadic handicap scheme – and I’m more positive than other golfers when it comes to the World Handicap System.
Towards the end of 2023, I wrote an article about how I’d put in a card after every round of golf that year and why I intended to do the same in 2024.
I stuck to that plan diligently until about last September, when I played a couple of courses off the yellow tees and was shocked at how few shots I received. The one that really made me stop and think about my strategy was Worpleson Golf Club – a layout I now play relatively often as a good friend of mine is a member.
It’s a fantastic golf course and rightfully recognised by Golf Monthly as one of the best in the UK and Ireland – it currently ranks 60th in our Top 100 Courses rankings. But it’s also a tricky layout – a product of trees, heather, bunkers and slick putting surfaces with run-off areas.
As such, I expected my course handicap off the white tees to be a few above my handicap index and thought I’d get a couple more than my index off the yellow tees. I’m not exaggerating when I say I was shocked to learn my 9.7 index gave me nine shots off the yellows.
So, I’d lost 0.7 of a shot relative to my handicap index before the start of play. The PCC could of course impact this – in a similar way to the CSS calculation under the old CONGU system – but I struggled to understand why my course handicap was below my handicap index on what I considered to be a pretty tough course off the yellows.
Worpleson is 6,050 yards off the yellows (or ‘gold’ tees as they’re actually known as – one step down from the tips) – a figure I’d consider to be average or marginally above average. But there are quite simply no easy holes and you can get yourself into serious trouble on any one of them.
The current formula
All of this led me to think about how course handicaps are calculated. The equation is: course handicap = handicap index x (slope rating/113) + (course rating - par)
This calculation changed from April 2024, when the ‘+ (course rating - par) bit of the equation was added. This has reduced the number of shots I get at Worplesdon (and other courses where the course rating is deemed to be easier than par).
I asked England Golf to explain why the calculation was changed and they responded with the following (I’ll admit to not being totally sure what it means!):
“England Golf took the decision to add ‘course rating minus par' to the course handicap equation, to align with all other federations around the world.
“This became an option for the home nations to adopt in 2024 as part of the WHS four-year cycle of changes/updates. Prior to the changes, scores were against the course rating value and excluded par, so the golfer was expected to play to the course rating value.
"Now par is included in sums, the golfer plays to an imaginary 36 points, regardless of the par value, as the course rating minus par number brings things back to 36 points. They may start over or under par on the 1st tee.
“For example, using a scratch golfer, playing at a course with a course rating of 79.4 and a par of 72, this golfer stands on the 1st tee at 7-under, based on their course handicap. Previously, as any multiplication of zero is zero, this same golfer started on the 1st tee at level-par prior to the 2024 changes, and played to the rating of 79.4, which would have been rounded to 79.”
Let’s carry on with the Worpleson example. Under the pre-April 2024 system, the equation would be: 9.7 x (127/113) = 10.902. Now, it’s 9.7 x (127/113) + (69.4 - 71) = 9.3. In my view, the number was spot on before and now I feel like I’m being cheated out of at least a shot.
Rough with the smooth
I completely understand that you have to take the rough with the smooth – if you want more shots off the whites, you sometimes have to accept fewer off the yellows. My colleague Jeremy Ellwood sums it up perfectly:
“The system is built around an average slope rating of 113. If we are happy to accept that slopes higher than that plus course ratings above par give us more strokes than our index, we have to also accept that lower slopes and course ratings below par are likely to give us fewer shots than our index.
“For me, you can't willingly accept the extra shots one way then complain about losing them the other way. I have addressed it myself by pretty much refusing to put a card in when I don't think I'm getting enough shots off the yellows.”
My issue is not the system but rather the course rating calculation. I’ve played multiple courses where this seems too low or too high – and I feel I’m in a position to judge that because I have significant experience in the form of tens or even hundreds of rounds at those layouts.
As a result, I either have to put in a card off tees where I don’t feel I’m getting as many shots as I should, not submit a card at all or play off the back tees. Sometimes, the latter option isn't viable as other people in my group are keen to hit from the yellows.
I don’t like taking non-submission option as I prefer to record every round for handicap purposes, but if I feel my rating of a course I know well doesn't match up to the course handicap calculation, I won’t.
The two golf courses I play the most frequently are Worplesdon and Hoebridge. Off the yellows, Worpleson has a slope rating of 127 and a course rating of 69.4. Hoebridge has a slope rating of 126 and a course rating of 70.7.
For me, Hoebridge is much easier, even though it's 6,343 yards – about 300 yards longer than Worplesdon. But it’s only seen as one point easier in terms of slope rating. I’ve no idea how there’s a 1.3-shot difference in the course rating equation. Ask 100 scratch golfers which is the harder test and I’m sure at least 90 (and possibly more) would say Worplesdon.
Not an exact science
This leads me to wonder if distance plays too big a role in the course and bogey rating calculations (course and bogey ratings inform slope rating).
Golf courses are rated as per the USGA’s course rating system, which aims to be as objective as possible and takes into account more than 460 variables from each set of tees.
But, of course, assessments are carried out by humans, who are prone to errors or differences of opinion or interpretation. It’s impossible to be completely objective. Also, courses can sometimes change quicker than they’re able to be re-rated. For example, a series of small tweaks could lead to a set of tees playing differently to how they were assessed.
Appendix G to the Rules of Handicapping, issued by The R&A, states: “Course ratings must be reviewed periodically and revised and reissued as necessary. New golf courses can change frequently during the first years after construction and must be re-rated within five years of the initial rating date. Thereafter, golf courses must be re-rated at least once every 10 years.”
Another factor is that some clubs won’t allow you to play off the white tees on certain days – something I find really irritating. If I’m forced to play off the yellows and I’m not happy with my handicap, I won’t put in a card.
Course rating is a complicated process and it’s never going to be an exact science. The majority of courses I play are rated appropriately, but I’ve come across a fair few where I’ve raised an eyebrow.
So, I’ve now stopped putting in cards as a matter of course. I’d encourage everyone to diligently check the handicap boards before deciding to submit a card for handicap purposes. Once you proceed, there’s no going back!
