2 comps in one

[David in FL]

By agreeing not to concede putts they have waived a rule of golf and both are disqualified.

Ding, ding, ding...... We have a winner.

[MEfree]

By agreeing not to concede putts they have waived a rule of golf and both are disqualified.

So what if two guys say before a match that they want to shoot a "legitimate" score and agree not to concede putts- are they both DQed also?

This is one of the ROG that I disagree with.

edit to add:

Great idea for a thread.  I recommend that anytime a rule change is proposed, justification under these principles is a requirement.

Almost every current rule can be tied to one of the two most fundamental principles:

1)  That you play your ball from the tee and never touch it until you remove it from the hole, and...

2)  That you play the course as you find it.

That doesn't mean that the game should be played strictly under those conditions, only that the game adheres to those principles as closely as possible while still maintaining playability.

Based on these two principles, why would agreeing to hole all putts be a breach of the rules leading to disqualification in match play?

If all you are worried about is these two principles, it should be easy to play a legitimate match under stroke play rules.

[David in FL]

So what if two guys say before a match that they want to shoot a "legitimate" score and agree not to concede putts- are they both DQed also. This is one of the ROG that I disagree with.

A) It IS a legitimate score, played under the rules of golf. B) There is nothing that prohibits someone from "practicing" the putt that was just conceded if they so choose.....

[Big C]

MEfree, you need to think through potential unintended consquences of what the OP is describing (and what you appear to be supporting). Let's assume that two players agree to play their match by stroke play principles in the interests of "killing two birds with one stone."

Let's assume that both of them play dreadfully, and by the 17th hole, it is clear that neither of them have a chance in the stroke play competition. Nonetheless, the match is all square after 17. On 18, player A goes first and holes out his chip for birdie. But player B (who is on the green), realizes that he is actually further away. He decides to enforce his match play right to make his opponent replay the shot, and why wouldn't he? It's his only chance to win the hole.

Player A protests, saying that they both agreed beforehand to play under stroke play conditions - in essence, agreeing to waive the rules of match play prior to the match.

You are the head of the competition committee and you are called to make a decision on the matter. What do you do?

[Wansteadimp]

So we have agreed (most of us) that stroke play and match play can't be played at the same time in accordance with the Rules. The rules are as they are because there are some fundamental differences regarding how to proceed after penalties etc.

I still don't understand (and don't think I ever will) how you can then use matchplay rounds for handicap purposes as required in the US.

[MEfree]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big C

MEfree, you need to think through potential unintended consquences of what the OP is describing (and what you appear to be supporting). Let's assume that two players agree to play their match by stroke play principles in the interests of "killing two birds with one stone."

Let's assume that both of them play dreadfully, and by the 17th hole, it is clear that neither of them have a chance in the stroke play competition. Nonetheless, the match is all square after 17. On 18, player A goes first and holes out his chip for birdie. But player B (who is on the green), realizes that he is actually further away. He decides to enforce his match play right to make his opponent replay the shot, and why wouldn't he? It's his only chance to win the hole.

Player A protests, saying that they both agreed beforehand to play under stroke play conditions - in essence, agreeing to waive the rules of match play prior to the match.

You are the head of the competition committee and you are called to make a decision on the matter. What do you do?

I recall a thread where we discussed the playing out of turn match play rule and thought that if opponents agree upon the order that they play, then they waive the right to have the opponent replay.

You create a good scenario in that they could play by stroke play rules and match play rules by simply hitting in the proper order, so that they have not actually agreed to play out of order.

If I was head of the committee, I would ask if they had made any agreement that the guy off the green goes first (either specifically on 18 or for the round in general- i.e. for speed of play reasons).  Short of an agreement, Player A violated the order of play rule for both match play and stroke play.  If this was the first time in the round a player closer to the hole went first out of turn, then I would DQ A from the stroke play comp and let the unsportsmanlike B have him replay the shot.  Had they played out of order earlier in the round, then I would say they had made an implicit agreement to allow this and would not allow B to make A replay.

[Fourputt]

So we have agreed (most of us) that stroke play and match play can't be played at the same time in accordance with the Rules. The rules are as they are because there are some fundamental differences regarding how to proceed after penalties etc.

I still don't understand (and don't think I ever will) how you can then use matchplay rounds for handicap purposes as required in the US.

Because the handicap rules allow for up to 5 holes not played to still be included in a score for handicap purposes.  If I play a match and more holes than that are not played to completion under the rules, then I would not return that score.

[turtleback]

It seems obvious that rulesman provided the answer from a USGA perspective, but honestly, I don't understand the logic of the rule.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Because the handicap rules allow for up to 5 holes not played to still be included in a score for handicap purposes.  If I play a match and more holes than that are not played to completion under the rules, then I would not return that score.

Also, if a hole is not completed, due to being conceded, the rules provide that you post, for that hole, the most likely score.  (I know YOU know that 4putt, this is for the guy you were replying to).

[Wansteadimp]

Because the handicap rules allow for up to 5 holes not played to still be included in a score for handicap purposes.  If I play a match and more holes than that are not played to completion under the rules, then I would not return that score.

Okay thanks, but take one of the examples up thread, if you hit your opponents equipment - matchplay you have the option to re-hit or play the original, no option in stroke play - if you took the option to rehit would you record the score you finished with or estimate what your score would have been with the original ball?

My main concern is that there are scenarios where you'll take on much riskier shots in matchplay which you'd never dream of taking on in a medal round, which will result in inflated scores for the round and therefore inflated handicaps.

[David in FL]

Okay thanks, but take one of the examples up thread, if you hit your opponents equipment - matchplay you have the option to re-hit or play the original, no option in stroke play - if you took the option to rehit would you record the score you finished with or estimate what your score would have been with the original ball? My main concern is that there are scenarios where you'll take on much riskier shots in matchplay which you'd never dream of taking on in a medal round, which will result in inflated scores for the round and therefore inflated handicaps.

It doesn't matter. It's still golf. A different format than stroke play, but one specified by the rules, and the handicap manual addresses how to deal with it. BTW, the contrary argument would be that the aggressive play results in unnaturally lower scores, and thus, lowered handicaps. ;-)

[Rulesman]

Not saying that a player should be forced to choose an option that's compatible with match play, especially if they want the round to count for a stroke play event.

What I am saying is that if two match play opponents agree to play by stroke play rules, then what is the harm in allowing them to do so?  Are stroke play rules really so much different and so ill suited to match play?  Aren't both sides faced with the same restricted stroke play options?

Trying to play a match and medal at the same time.

Your match is a grudge match for $$$

You are all square on the 18th tee (par 3).

You land on the green 12' from the hole. Your opponent lands in the jungle but played from outside the teeing ground.

In the strokeplay tournament he gets a 2sp and must replay the stroke.

In the match there is no penalty but would you require him to replay the stroke?

[MEfree]

Trying to play a match and medal at the same time.

Your match is a grudge match for $$$

You are all square on the 18th tee (par 3).

You land on the green 12' from the hole. Your opponent lands in the jungle but played from outside the teeing ground.

In the strokeplay tournament he gets a 2sp and must replay the stroke.

In the match there is no penalty but would you require him to replay the stroke?

Good scenario- If we had agreed to play the match by stroke play rules in order to participate in a stroke play comp, then he re-hits and lies 3 for both the stroke play comp and our match.

There are a few cases where different rules for match play and stroke play might make sense, but I really think the reason there are two sets of rules is because golf started mainly as a match play sport and has evolved to the point where stroke play dominates in many areas.  So the stroke play rules were developed later, to take the place of match play rules that made no sense in stroke play (i.e. a loss of hole penalty).

Had stroke play been the original form of golf, then I think you would see a much more uniform set of rules with the stroke play penalties applying to match play situations.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rulesman

Trying to play a match and medal at the same time.

Your match is a grudge match for $$$

You are all square on the 18th tee (par 3).

You land on the green 12' from the hole. Your opponent lands in the jungle but played from outside the teeing ground.

In the strokeplay tournament he gets a 2sp and must replay the stroke.

In the match there is no penalty but would you require him to replay the stroke?

Good scenario- If we had agreed to play the match by stroke play rules in order to participate in a stroke play comp, then he re-hits and lies 3 for both the stroke play comp and our match.

There are a few cases where different rules for match play and stroke play might make sense, but I really think the reason there are two sets of rules is because golf started mainly as a match play sport and has evolved to the point where stroke play dominates in many areas.  So the stroke play rules were developed later, to take the place of match play rules that made no sense in stroke play (i.e. a loss of hole penalty).

Had stroke play been the original form of golf, then I think you would see a much more uniform set of rules with the stroke play penalties applying to match play situations.

Stroke play was developed to address larger fields than was practical in match play.  Nothing more than that.  As clubs got bigger, and as clubs began competing against each other, match play become too cumbersome for a one or two day competition.  Since many of the traditional match play rules were inequitable for those larger fields, they were forced to modify the rules to adapt.  It was a necessity, but the new rules weren't great for the traditional matches, so to make the game work for both styles of play, there was necessary division of the rules.  They are as incompatible now as they were then.

[Rulesman]

Good scenario- If we had agreed to play the match by stroke play rules in order to participate in a stroke play comp, then he re-hits and lies 3 for both the stroke play comp and our match.

He should only lie 1 in matchplay. Assume you match was part of a bigger match between two teams. You have now affected the result of the team match.

But this has been said umpteen times before, if you don't want to play by the rules as written, go ahead but remember if you do the consequences may not be as you wish. If you are found to be playing a match by the strokeplay committee, you will both be DQd.

[MEfree]

He should only lie 1 in matchplay. Assume you match was part of a bigger match between two teams. You have now affected the result of the team match.

But this has been said umpteen times before, if you don't want to play by the rules as written, go ahead but remember if you do the consequences may not be as you wish. If you are found to be playing a match by the strokeplay committee, you will both be DQd.

I thought we were talking about a situation in which both competitors agreed to play their match during a stroke play event.  Now you are saying that they are part of a team match play event that is being competed during a stroke play event?  In that case, I would assume that BOTH TEAMS would have to first agree to compete under stroke play rules, otherwise I would agree with you and it would not be practical to try to pull off the 2 comps in 1 (which is what the OP and his opponent both wanted to do).

I do play by the rules even if I don't agree 100% with all of them.  I agree that it is important for competitors to follow the same set of rules, otherwise the competition is a farce.  If I simply ignored the rules (like I see the majority of golfers do the majority of the time), then I wouldn't bother to argue about them.

FWIW, I do appreciate the knowledge that you (and others like Fourputt) show with respect to the current rules.

[iacas]

ME, you just don't get it. Match and stroke play rules are incompatible. Now you want to add a case where you can play under both so long as you're not playing a team event? The SIMPLER way is what exists now: you play under match play OR stroke play, period. The two modes of play have a different philosophy. A different soul. The OP's question is answered and this thread is done. Though you'll likely disagree, you get a LOT of latitude to discuss semi-relevant things, but they all end up the same way with you. Sometimes the thread is just "what is the rule?" Not "let's endlessly debate the rule and anything tangentially related to it."