A Couple of New Rules

[Ndw7]

I played in a club match last night against Swansea Bay. I had been stuck in standstill traffic on the M4 due to an awful accident and literally got to the tee at 16:55 for a 17:00 tee time. Needless to say my first 2 holes were awful and my partner and I were 2 down after 2.

On the third, we hit the green in regulation, and my partner lagged the first putt to around a foot away from the hole. One of our opponents says to me "I would say you can have it, but its a cup game and that means theres no gimmies", So I just reply that I'm sure thats not the case, I dont mind putting it as I would never ask for a gimmie, but just so everyones aware, it's matchplay format, gimmies are absolutely allowed if you wish to give one. I checked with my partner who is also our team captain and he confirmed it.

Fast forward to the 8th, my partner puts the ball less than 6 inches from the hole. The same opposing player then says to me "Sorry mate, the rules are that if a putt is to win the hole, I'm not allowed to give it, you must hole out" So once again I just reiterate that I'm not asking for the gimmie, but just trying make him aware for future reference that the rule he's referring to actually does not exist. If you want to concede a 100 yard pitch shot, thats your right to do so during matchplay.

It was quite difficult because I was really trying to get the point across that "look, I don't want the gimmie, but the rules you seem to think exist, dont. So I'm just trying to help you out", It's always been an interesting part of matchplay to me, giving putts so that someone may not have a putt for 5 or 6 holes, then make them putt one when it really matters.

Anyway, we won 3&2 after being 3 down after 9 which probably added to his annoyance. Will make for an interesting return leg next Tuesday

 

[duncan mackie]

I've recently introduced a no repeat rule to my playing. I've suddenly realised that some people raise rule issues for the sake of it, and if they develop into a sketch from Monty python all the better (for them).

So my hello hello response is to say it only once, and then completely put it out of my mind.

In this case "I believe that's incorrect but it doesn't matter one bit to me, only the poor sods waiting behind us..." said once.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I've recently introduced a no repeat rule to my playing. I've suddenly realised that some people raise rule issues for the sake of it, and if they develop into a sketch from Monty python all the better (for them).

So my hello hello response is to say it only once, and then completely put it out of my mind.

In this case "I believe that's incorrect but it doesn't matter one bit to me, only the poor sods waiting behind us..." said once.

Which is fine and I agree - but as the OP said - gimmes - when to give and when not to give - are part and parcel of the psychology of matchplay.

 

[duncan mackie]

Which is fine and I agree - but as the OP said - gimmes - when to give and when not to give - are part and parcel of the psychology of matchplay.

They may be but there's no difference between a player deciding not to give anything and one mistakenly asserting the rules don't permit him to give any!

From his side he can continue to concerns he choses, and if appropriate he can even make a claim if the subsequent actions of the opponents give cause!

He hasn't been denied anything of value by the opponents mistaken belief. If he believes he has then he's proven the point that considering such matter as having a potential competitive advantage is always counter productive.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Perhaps its just a "rule" of the opposing club team.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

They may be but there's no difference between a player deciding not to give anything and one mistakenly asserting the rules don't permit him to give any!

From his side he can continue to concerns he choses, and if appropriate he can even make a claim if the subsequent actions of the opponents give cause!

He hasn't been denied anything of value by the opponents mistaken belief. If he believes he has then he's proven the point that considering such matter as having a potential competitive advantage is always counter productive.

I'm not so sure. I will often give an opponent one or more gimmes of 12-18" on the first 4 holes because our fifth is a low stroke index and is difficult - with a very difficult green. I can certainly look to leverage the swings and slopes on that green to my advantage if the first time an opponent has a 12-18" putt is on that green. They are very easily missed.

 

[shortgame]

Perhaps its just a "rule" of the opposing club team.

That's the way I read it too

Eg their captain might've told their team to 'give nothing'

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

That's the way I read it too

Eg their captain might've told their team to 'give nothing'

which is their prerogative - but they cannot surely force their opponents down the same route.

 

[shortgame]

which is their prerogative - but they cannot surely force their opponents down the same route.

Indeed. Interested to hear if the OP's team conceded any putts and if that was 'allowed'

 

[duncan mackie]

which is their prerogative - but they cannot surely force their opponents down the same route.

That was part of my point - no they can't, So you just concede the putt if you want to.

 

[Ndw7]

I don't think it was a rule for the team, as when I challenged him initially about that not being a rule, I think he would have said "it is for us" or something along those lines. Me and my partner did concede putts, and because I couldn't be bothered to argue about it, I would just hit the ball back to them. As I said previously, I wasn't fussed about not being given putts and I don't think I'd be gaining an advantage anyway. Its just the fact that it was just adding needless time to the match, and just wanting to correct someone who was incorrect such that it may actually benefit them in the future.

 

[clubchamp98]

I don't think it was a rule for the team, as when I challenged him initially about that not being a rule, I think he would have said "it is for us" or something along those lines. Me and my partner did concede putts, and because I couldn't be bothered to argue about it, I would just hit the ball back to them. As I said previously, I wasn't fussed about not being given putts and I don't think I'd be gaining an advantage anyway. Its just the fact that it was just adding needless time to the match, and just wanting to correct someone who was incorrect such that it may actually benefit them in the future.

just say one of them had a putt for bogey and the other had a putt for birdie!
If you conceded the bogey put so his pp can’t see the line , is he allowed under “ his rules “ to putt.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

just say one of them had a putt for bogey and the other had a putt for birdie!
If you conceded the bogey put so his pp can’t see the line , is he allowed under “ his rules “ to putt.

Question kind of irrelevant I think because under the rules of matchplay once conceded, a putt cannot be played to show a partner the line. Noting that a concession cannot be declined or withdrawn.

 

[duncan mackie]

Question kind of irrelevant I think because under the rules of matchplay once conceded, a putt cannot be played to show a partner the line. Noting that a concession cannot be declined or withdrawn.

I think clubchamp98 knows that - hence his post....which in turn was in response to the "surely" in post #8 🤔 ie If they could impose the same on their opponents then you couldn't concede the bogey putt and, unless your team had already holed out for a 4, they would be entitled to putt.

 

[clubchamp98]

Question kind of irrelevant I think because under the rules of matchplay once conceded, a putt cannot be played to show a partner the line. Noting that a concession cannot be declined or withdrawn.

how is it irelavent . If you concede his putt he can’t putt.
But under his rules you can’t conceed his putt.
He needed to be put straight.

 

[Ndw7]

Sorry everyone, I should have made this clear. As we play our matches during weekday evenings, in order to improve speed of play, the format is greensomes. Both players in each pair tee off, then each pair chooses their ‘best ball’ then alternate shots are played from there. So there wouldn’t even be the scenario of conceding a bogey putt to not sure the line of a birdie putt.

Apologies, I should have stated that at the start

 

[clubchamp98]

Sorry everyone, I should have made this clear. As we play our matches during weekday evenings, in order to improve speed of play, the format is greensomes. Both players in each pair tee off, then each pair chooses their ‘best ball’ then alternate shots are played from there. So there wouldn’t even be the scenario of conceding a bogey putt to not sure the line of a birdie putt.

Apologies, I should have stated that at the start

its all in the detail!
He is still wrong you can conceed at any time.