|
Re: Aust AC March 2017 - entry open
Nick Chapman
Peter - why has the format changed from best of three knockout? Nick. Sent from my iPhone
On 30 Dec. 2016, at 3:15 pm, Tony Hall <tony.hall@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Aust AC March 2017 - entry open
I'm looking into the issue.
On 30 Dec 2016 6:23 PM, "Nick Chapman" <nc26tp@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Aust AC March 2017 - entry open
The issue has been resolved. Please accept my apologies for the inconvenience.
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 8:11 PM, Tim Murphy <croquetscores@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
Brenda I would suggest that you email your concerns to the CNSW board as many of the questions require official response. Jim
On 22 Dec 2016 11:28 PM, "Brenda Evans" <Brenda@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Aust AC March 2017 - entry open
Alix Verge
Well I've filled in the entry form twice now but each time it says I need to correct my email address - despite putting my correct address - so I'm finding it pretty difficult enter.
Can anybody help me with this?
0400 825 920
AUSTRALIA: RESETTLING BOAT PEOPLE SINCE 1788
-------- Original message --------
From: Tony Hall <tony.hall@...> Date:30/12/2016 3:15 PM (GMT+10:00) To: cnswplayers@groups.io Cc: Subject: Re: [cnswplayers] Aust AC March 2017 - entry open Big fingers.
Merry Christmas.
Tony
Sent from my iPad
|
|
|
|
Re: Aust AC March 2017 - entry open
I'm looking into the issue.
On Fri, Dec 30, 2016 at 9:14 PM, Alix Verge <alixverge@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Aust AC March 2017 - entry open
The latest issue has been resolved. I've personally submitted test entries and am confident the tournament system is now working correctly. I'm very sorry for the inconveniences these errors have created.
On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 6:09 AM, Tim Murphy <croquetscores@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
Brenda, As it is the ACA who are "in charge" of "and responsible for" the introduction of the new system. The (good) questions you have asked are probably being asked by other states and should be answered directly by the ACA. The worse thing that could happen is that CNSW or any other state association issues any form of statement or ruling and gets it wrong. FYI there were no real problems when it was introduced in the UK (I was there when it was both in 2015 when it was being trialled in 2016 shortly after it was introduced). Regards Steve Thornton CNSW
On 30 December 2016 at 20:46, Jimbo <jimbo.croquet@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
Brenda Evans <Brenda@...>
Hi Steve,
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Thank you. I agree that ACA should provide the answers but I also think that CNSW should be asking the questions and chasing ACA for answers. However, of particular concern at the moment is the CNSW pennants series for which the closing date is advertised as 1st March, with div 2 and 3 scheduled to commence on 13th March and finals after the 3rd April introduction of the new rules. Therefore, we need, as a matter of urgency, answers to the following:
I look forward to a speedy response from our governing bodies, so that Golf Croquet players may plan the year ahead with confidence, knowing that the rule changes for handicaps have been clarified and justified. Best wishes Brenda Evans
On 31/12/2016 10:08 AM, Steve Thornton
wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
Len McCallum
Steve thanks for your letter. i agree with what you say but t feel the CNSW get it all ok for all of us to play .
On Saturday, 7 January 2017, 10:10, Brenda Evans <Brenda@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
Peter Freer
Brenda et al – my reading of the revised Rule 16 that will apply from 3 April 2017 (see: https://croquet-australia.com.au/disciplines/golf-croquet/resources/gc-rule16-australian-version.pdf ) is that: · there are no GC handicaps of 13, 15, 17 or 19 – the steps below 12 are in multiples of 2, so you go from 12 to 14, and 14 to 16 (see the revised trigger points on p4); · everyone will now gain or lose points, including at either end of the range (which explains how someone might drop to 14 or 16); and · I gather that CNSW is likely to stick to the 3 existing GC Divisions ie Div 1 would now be -3 to 4; Div 2 stays 5 to 8; and Div 3 is 9 or higher (I suggest that anyone on more than GC 12 shouldn’t be playing GC Pennants until their handicap improves). No doubt CNSW will confirm this before the 2017 GC Pennants entry closes…
Regards, peter
Peter Freer Canberra CC 0412 178 254
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
Jan Sage
Where and when will the new Golf Croquet handicap cards be available to
clubs and players?
The New Golf Croquet Handicapping System - effective 3 April, 2017 Note - new Handicap cards will be printed by the ACA and distributed to State Associations by the end of November
Jan Sage
Captain, Taree Croquet Club
From: Peter Freer
Sent: Monday, January 9, 2017 9:27 PM
Subject: Re: [cnswplayers] New handicaps for GC Brenda et al – my reading of the revised Rule 16 that will apply from 3 April 2017 (see: https://croquet-australia.com.au/disciplines/golf-croquet/resources/gc-rule16-australian-version.pdf ) is that: · there are no GC handicaps of 13, 15, 17 or 19 – the steps below 12 are in multiples of 2, so you go from 12 to 14, and 14 to 16 (see the revised trigger points on p4); · everyone will now gain or lose points, including at either end of the range (which explains how someone might drop to 14 or 16); and · I gather that CNSW is likely to stick to the 3 existing GC Divisions ie Div 1 would now be -3 to 4; Div 2 stays 5 to 8; and Div 3 is 9 or higher (I suggest that anyone on more than GC 12 shouldn’t be playing GC Pennants until their handicap improves). No doubt CNSW will confirm this before the 2017 GC Pennants entry closes…
Regards, peter
Peter Freer Canberra CC 0412 178 254
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
Mary Gibson
Peter et al
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Why the complicated Divisions with minuses. Why can't we extend ranges from 1 (without having to go into minus mode). We should have 4 divisions - 1 to 16. The bottom division (13-16) should be encouraged to experience a competition (we could hold it at Mosman as we have a lot of new members). Regards Mary Gibson Secretary Mosman
On 09/01/2017, at 9:27 PM, Peter Freer wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
JOHN BURGESS
I believe this brings us into line with other countries and a standard needs to be maintained or would be very confusing for those who compete at higher levels. Jenny Woolgoola
From: cnswplayers@groups.io [mailto:cnswplayers@groups.io] On Behalf Of Mary Gibson
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2017 6:07 PM To: cnswplayers@groups.io Subject: Re: [cnswplayers] New handicaps for GC
Peter et al
Why the complicated Divisions with minuses. Why can't we extend ranges from 1 (without having to go into minus mode). We should have 4 divisions - 1 to 16. The bottom division (13-16) should be encouraged to experience a competition (we could hold it at Mosman as we have a lot of new members).
Regards
Mary Gibson Secretary Mosman
On 09/01/2017, at 9:27 PM, Peter Freer wrote: Brenda et al – my reading of the revised Rule 16 that will apply from 3 April 2017 (see: https://croquet-australia.com.au/disciplines/golf-croquet/resources/gc-rule16-australian-version.pdf ) is that: · there are no GC handicaps of 13, 15, 17 or 19 – the steps below 12 are in multiples of 2, so you go from 12 to 14, and 14 to 16 (see the revised trigger points on p4); · everyone will now gain or lose points, including at either end of the range (which explains how someone might drop to 14 or 16); and · I gather that CNSW is likely to stick to the 3 existing GC Divisions ie Div 1 would now be -3 to 4; Div 2 stays 5 to 8; and Div 3 is 9 or higher (I suggest that anyone on more than GC 12 shouldn’t be playing GC Pennants until their handicap improves). No doubt CNSW will confirm this before the 2017 GC Pennants entry closes…
Regards, peter
Peter Freer Canberra CC 0412 178 254
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
Hello people out there in croquet land, Just to refresh the message I sent a couple of days ago and add other points:
We've been assured that the ACA will provide resource material and new handicap cards in plenty of time. Regards Steve Thornton
On 10 January 2017 at 18:06, Mary Gibson <mpagibson@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
Peter Smith
As far as I can see Peter, you have hit the proverbial nail on the head. I assume the CNSW tournament committee will advise us of the make-up of the divisions. Personally I liked the idea of players above 10 not losing points in play but its not in the rules so there it goes. Not being the world's most advanced mathematician, I assume the "two steps" involved from 12 up has something to do with making the whole range sound great but not doing much at all. While I'm at it why have the minus numbers ? Surely these clever people who devised the scheme, could have made the scale suit 0 to 20 properly with all numerals in that range included. There ! I've said it and most probably put my big foot right in the middle of where it should not be. I dare say I am not the only one thinking that. THE MAIN THING IS THAT WE HAVE A SYSTEM and we need to support it fully. So we all will need to just shrug off those silly questions and prepare to adopt it fully. Peter Smith
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
Jan Sage
I’m not sure we should blindly follow a SYSTEM that could be
improved.
“The only silly question is the one that you do not ask”.
Jan Sage
From: handicaps@...
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 12:22 AM
Subject: Re: [cnswplayers] New handicaps for GC As far as I can see Peter, you have hit the proverbial nail on the head. I
assume the CNSW tournament committee will advise us of the make-up of the
divisions. Personally I liked the idea of players above 10 not losing points in
play but its not in the rules so there it goes.
Not being the world's most advanced mathematician, I assume the "two steps"
involved from 12 up has something to do with making the whole range sound great
but not doing much at all. While I'm at it why have the minus numbers ? Surely
these clever people who devised the scheme, could have made the scale suit 0 to
20 properly with all numerals in that range included. There ! I've said it and
most probably put my big foot right in the middle of where it should not be. I
dare say I am not the only one thinking that. THE MAIN THING IS THAT WE
HAVE A SYSTEM and we need to support it fully. So we all will need to just shrug
off those silly questions and prepare to adopt it fully.
Peter Smith
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
Hi Jan, I agree with you. I have a mathematical background but I cannot
see a lot of logic in this new system. Also, when introducing a
new system it would be nice if there was some better explanation
of why it was changed. eg if it was thought to be a good idea for
players on handicaps of10 and greater not to lose index points
when they lost a game, why has this been changed? Has there been
some analysis to determine that the previous system was not
working? If so, how about giving us an explanation. One of my beefs with the handicap system is that, in terms of
index points won or lost, there is no differentiation between a
7/6 win and a 7/1 or 7/0 win. In my experience a 7/6 win or lose
means that the two players are virtually equal and so shouldn't
win or lose as many index points as they would with a 7/1 or 7/0
win. It would not be difficult to include the winning margin (eg
net points) into the index point calculation but I don't know
whether this has been considered. Any system can be improved and, although, as Peter(s) indicate, we will have to support this new system, I doesn't seem to be a 'perfect' system and so we should be able to suggest improvements. I intend to be one of those who continues to ask 'silly' questions. Cheers Roger Evans
On 13/01/2017 6:48 AM, Jan Sage wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: New handicaps for GC
Judy McCumstie
Hello everyone Some extra thoughts on the new handicap system
|
|
|
|
Re: Wonderland
Ah Yes, I remember, Queen of Hearts played there.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
It's another variation for us to look at. Not that I'm saying I agree nor disagree with the new system as it stands. I tried to get ACA and CNSW to introduce a greater handicap range in 2013, but hit a brick wall. Took the Pom's to get the ball rolling and good to see some action at last. Wal
On 13/01/2017 7:26 PM, Judy McCumstie
wrote:
|
|
|
