Myth 7
Myth …..
'It is unfair in singles match play to require the lower handicap player to concede full handicap difference to his opponent. Three-quarters of the difference was more equitable.'
· Numerous researchers and golfing bodies including the United States Golf Association, English Golf Union and Scottish Golf Union have investigated the relative merits of full versus three-quarters difference in handicap.
· All of these independent pieces of research have come to a single conclusion – full difference between the handicaps of the two players is clearly the more equitable allowance.
· A Scottish Golf Union survey covering 4000 handicap singles matches showed:
| ¾ Difference | Full Difference | |
| Matches won by lower handicap player |
61% |
55% |
| Matches won by higher handicap player |
39% |
45% |
From the above it can be seen that even when conceding full difference the lower handicap player retains an advantage.
· To further explore the significant advantage given to the lower handicap player by limiting the handicap allowance in match play to ¾ of the difference in handicaps, a handicap match play event with a large entry was analysed in detail.
· The following table tracks the representation, and hence performance of players in respect to Handicap Category at various stages of the competition.
Handicap Category
| Representation |
Cat . 1 |
Cat. 2 |
Cat. 3 |
Cat. 4 | ||||
| No | % | No | % | No | % | No | % | |
| At Competition Start | 27 | 13 | 104 | 50 | 72 | 34.5 | 5 | 2.5 |
| Reached last 32 | 9 | 28 | 21 | 65.5 | 2 | 6.5 | 0 | 0 |
| Reached last 4 | 2 | 50 | 2 | 50 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Finalists | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
· The above is a fairly dramatic example of the bias in favour of the better player but the general trend repeats in the majority of club singles handicap events.
· In addition, the increasing probability of the lower handicap player prevailing with an increase in strokes conceded was clearly demonstrated as follows:
|
Difference in Handicaps |
No. of Matches won by higher handicap player |
No. of Matches won by lower handicap player |
%tage of Matches won by lower handicap player |
|
(Strokes) |
|
|
|
|
1 to 2 |
20 |
28 |
58 |
|
3 to 5 |
19 |
40 |
68 |
|
6 to 8 |
12 |
29 |
71 |
|
9 to 11 |
7 |
22 |
76 |
|
12 to 14 |
0 |
11 |
100 |
|
15 to 18 |
0 |
4 |
100 |
· In 1992 the English Golf Union surveyed clubs and determined the winners by handicap of 870 match play handicap competitions with every club using ¾ allowance
The Cat.4 players notched up 5 wins and consequently Cats. 3 & 4 were combineded together to give the following distribution of winners:
| Winners from Category 1 |
301 |
35% |
| Winners from Category 2 |
427 |
49% |
| Winners from Catergory 3&4 |
142 |
16% |
In summary 8% of the entrants were Cat.1 players. They won 35 % of the match play competitions.
· CONGU now directs that the full difference between the handicaps of the two players in singles match play be applied.