Hole in One and Amateur Status

[Monty_Brown]

Struck by this part of the R&A quote...

"In addition, and as already mentioned, the high financial incentive to win such a prize may well give rise to abuses of the Rules of play in a game which currently benefits
from being largely self-regulating."

Not sure how you can rig a hole in one, so I can only assume they are suggesting collusion and loads of bogus claims of a hole in one. But in these cases, don't the sponsors have someone on the hole watching like a hawk any way?

Seems a spurious argument for a sport based on trust. But maybe I a being naive. When there's big money involved, cheats are drawn like moths to a flame I suppose.

 

[CMAC]

its an old antiquated rule by a bunch of old antiquated individuals stuck in the 1940's.

Clubs are suffering financially, if offering a good prize for a HOLE IN ONE only increases participation and funds (charge a fiver for anyone to be included in the round) then this can only benefit the fun and participation of medal golf.

Waken up R&A, unless you make a living from golf and have passed qualification status and member of the PGA then you are an amateur and how does that threaten golf if a few individuals per annum walk away with a good prize from the sport they love

 

[doublebogey7]

Look out for a change when the new rule book comes out at the end of the year.

 

[HRC99]

Look out for a change when the new rule book comes out at the end of the year.

Let's hope so. I really don't see that such a prize in any way harms golf rather that it would enhance a golf day which often raise considerable sums of money for charity.

 

[JezzE]

its an old antiquated rule by a bunch of old antiquated individuals stuck in the 1940's.

Clubs are suffering financially, if offering a good prize for a HOLE IN ONE only increases participation and funds (charge a fiver for anyone to be included in the round) then this can only benefit the fun and participation of medal golf.

Waken up R&A, unless you make a living from golf and have passed qualification status and member of the PGA then you are an amateur and how does that threaten golf if a few individuals per annum walk away with a good prize from the sport they love

Having got to know a number of guys at The R&A Rules department through various work-related projects over the last few years, I would say that they are neither antiquated nor stuck in the 1940s! Far from it, in fact...

 

[Imurg]

its an old antiquated rule by a bunch of old antiquated individuals stuck in the 1940's.

Clubs are suffering financially, if offering a good prize for a HOLE IN ONE only increases participation and funds (charge a fiver for anyone to be included in the round) then this can only benefit the fun and participation of medal golf.

Waken up R&A, unless you make a living from golf and have passed qualification status and member of the PGA then you are an amateur and how does that threaten golf if a few individuals per annum walk away with a good prize from the sport they love

Having got to know a number of guys at The R&A Rules department through various work-related projects over the last few years, I would say that they are neither antiquated nor stuck in the 1940s! Far from it, in fact...

I think the problem, Jezz, is that's the way they appear. Do they really think that there will be a proliferation of Hole-in-One events with huge prizes when the chances of achieving one are so astronomical...? Can't see it myself.

 

[HRC99]

its an old antiquated rule by a bunch of old antiquated individuals stuck in the 1940's.

Clubs are suffering financially, if offering a good prize for a HOLE IN ONE only increases participation and funds (charge a fiver for anyone to be included in the round) then this can only benefit the fun and participation of medal golf.

Waken up R&A, unless you make a living from golf and have passed qualification status and member of the PGA then you are an amateur and how does that threaten golf if a few individuals per annum walk away with a good prize from the sport they love

Having got to know a number of guys at The R&A Rules department through various work-related projects over the last few years, I would say that they are neither antiquated nor stuck in the 1940s! Far from it, in fact...

I can't see people stuck in the 1940s producing Iphone and Android Rules Apps!

It's just a rule that needs changing. Who knows it might even encourage more people into the game!

 

[HawkeyeMS]

Don't the winners of club comps win cash\vouchers every week of the year. Do we all need to turn pro as well? I don't see the difference

 

[Imurg]

There's a limit of 500 quid per competition.

So if you play 2 comps per week and win 500 quid each time then you could make 50 grand a year in prize money and stay amateur....!!!!!

That's more than most Pro Golfers earn.................

Not likely to happen but.............

 

[palindromicbob]

There's a limit of 500 quid per competition.

So if you play 2 comps per week and win 500 quid each time then you could make 50 grand a year in prize money and stay amateur....!!!!!

That's more than most Pro Golfers earn.................

Not likely to happen but.............

Nope. Limit is £500 in value. Can't be in cash. So you can earn 50 grand in vouchers to spend in the pro shop but it isn't prize money and if you were to sell them on then technically you are converting the prize into cash which is a breech of the rules.

Doesn't say what happens if you win a club or buy one with a voucher you won then later decide to change and sell the old club. I think that might be pedantic though.

 

[Imurg]

There's a limit of 500 quid per competition.

So if you play 2 comps per week and win 500 quid each time then you could make 50 grand a year in prize money and stay amateur....!!!!!

That's more than most Pro Golfers earn.................

Not likely to happen but.............

Nope. Limit is £500 in value. Can't be in cash. So you can earn 50 grand in vouchers to spend in the pro shop but it isn't prize money and if you were to sell them on then technically you are converting the prize into cash which is a breech of the rules.

Doesn't say what happens if you win a club or buy one with a voucher you won then later decide to change and sell the old club. I think that might be pedantic though.

So you set up a sideline as a New/2nd hand Club Salesmean.... Same meat, different gravy....

Officially, you're not allowed to play for Prize Money. Only exception is a wager between players with all the money coming from those players and then the amounts can't be "excessive" - which means what? Excessive to me is more than a fiver but to Donald Trump it could mean 5 grand....

Still means you could do Trevino and play wealthy players for a £500 pot - knowing you haven't got it - and still make a living..

Another Grey area in the Rules....

 

[EZprophet]

The rule is absolutely spot on and should never be changed.

In my opinion anyone who thinks differently either doesn't fully understand the implications the change would have on the game or just doesn't care.

 

[Imurg]

The rule is absolutely spot on and should never be changed.

In my opinion anyone who thinks differently either doesn't fully understand the implications the change would have on the game or just doesn't care.

I don't understand - please enlighten me...

 

[palindromicbob]

Here is an interesting one. I assume they got round the rules because it was a bet rather than a prize. Not sure is it falls within the rules though.

Acceptable Forms of Gambling
There is no objection to informal gambling or wagering among individual golfers or teams of golfers when it is incidental to the game. It is not practicable to define informal gambling or wagering precisely, but features that would be consistent with such gambling or wagering include:
- the players in general know each other;
- participation in the gambling or wagering is optional and is limited to the players;
- the sole source of all money won by the players is advanced by the players; and
- the amount of money involved is not generally considered to be excessive.
Therefore, informal gambling or wagering is acceptable provided the primary purpose is the playing of the game for enjoyment, not for financial gain

Tiger Woods Buick Challenge

 

[HawkeyeMS]

The rule is absolutely spot on and should never be changed.

In my opinion anyone who thinks differently either doesn't fully understand the implications the change would have on the game or just doesn't care.

I understand the implications but the OP was talking about a prize for a hole in one, which is more to do with luck than skill.

I could go down the local car dealer, take a test drive and get entered in a draw and subsequently win a car - does that make me a professional driver?

I get why you can't win enough money to earn a living by playing golf but no-one, and I mean no-one is ever going to make a living out of hole in ones. I wouldn't even mind betting that 99% of prizes put up for hole in ones would go un-won it is such a rare event.

 

[EZprophet]

The rule is absolutely spot on and should never be changed.

In my opinion anyone who thinks differently either doesn't fully understand the implications the change would have on the game or just doesn't care.

I understand the implications but the OP was talking about a prize for a hole in one, which is more to do with luck than skill.

I could go down the local car dealer, take a test drive and get entered in a draw and subsequently win a car - does that make me a professional driver?

I get why you can't win enough money to earn a living by playing golf but no-one, and I mean no-one is ever going to make a living out of hole in ones. I wouldn't even mind betting that 99% of prizes put up for hole in ones would go un-won it is such a rare event.

Thats completely different mate because the draw for winning the car doesn't involve ANY skill, it's complete luck. Whereas a hole -in one is not COMPLETE luck. There is some skill involved in it. Golf digest did a study of the odds of gettning a hole in one:

"The Golf Digest study provided many great nuggets of information, even breaking the odds down by quality of play:

•Tour player making an ace: 3,000 to 1

•Low-handicapper making an ace: 5,000 to 1

•Average player making an ace: 12,000 to 1"

If the winner of the car in the draw was the guy who did the best test drive, or the person who did a test drive course in the fastest time or something, then that would be the same. And rest assured you would end up getting great drivers showing up to the car dealership trying to win themselves a car....

I understand that a hole in one is an unlikely event, but where do you draw the line? At events that are predicted to be over certain odds of happening? Should the threshold be events over 3,000-1? Or 100-1? How do you decide?

 

[HawkeyeMS]

The rule is absolutely spot on and should never be changed.

In my opinion anyone who thinks differently either doesn't fully understand the implications the change would have on the game or just doesn't care.

I understand the implications but the OP was talking about a prize for a hole in one, which is more to do with luck than skill.

I could go down the local car dealer, take a test drive and get entered in a draw and subsequently win a car - does that make me a professional driver?

I get why you can't win enough money to earn a living by playing golf but no-one, and I mean no-one is ever going to make a living out of hole in ones. I wouldn't even mind betting that 99% of prizes put up for hole in ones would go un-won it is such a rare event.

Thats completely different mate because the draw for winning the car doesn't involve ANY skill, it's complete luck. Whereas a hole -in one is not COMPLETE luck. There is some skill involved in it. Golf digest did a study of the odds of gettning a hole in one:

"The Golf Digest study provided many great nuggets of information, even breaking the odds down by quality of play:

•Tour player making an ace: 3,000 to 1

•Low-handicapper making an ace: 5,000 to 1

•Average player making an ace: 12,000 to 1"

If the winner of the car in the draw was the guy who did the best test drive, or the person who did a test drive course in the fastest time or something, then that would be the same. And rest assured you would end up getting great drivers showing up to the car dealership trying to win themselves a car....

I understand that a hole in one is an unlikely event, but where do you draw the line? At events that are predicted to be over certain odds of happening? Should the threshold be events over 3,000-1? Or 100-1? How do you decide?

I Agree it's not quite the same but you can see my point. I'm just not sure you should have to turn pro just for doing something you will probably never do again.

I have to mates who have got aces, neither of them hit the ball more than 6th off the ground, one even rolled through a bunker on it's way in. They were complete luck. I consider myself considerably more skilled at the game of golf than them and play considerably more than they do. I've hit any number of good shots into par 3s but have never had a hole in one. I've never even holed my 2nd shot from the fairway.

I agree it's difficult to know where to draw the line but a hole in one is more luck than skill and I still don't see why you shouldn't be able to win a prize for doing so without turning pro.

 

[HRC99]

The rule is absolutely spot on and should never be changed.

In my opinion anyone who thinks differently either doesn't fully understand the implications the change would have on the game or just doesn't care.

I understand the implications but the OP was talking about a prize for a hole in one, which is more to do with luck than skill.

I could go down the local car dealer, take a test drive and get entered in a draw and subsequently win a car - does that make me a professional driver?

I get why you can't win enough money to earn a living by playing golf but no-one, and I mean no-one is ever going to make a living out of hole in ones. I wouldn't even mind betting that 99% of prizes put up for hole in ones would go un-won it is such a rare event.

Thats completely different mate because the draw for winning the car doesn't involve ANY skill, it's complete luck. Whereas a hole -in one is not COMPLETE luck. There is some skill involved in it. Golf digest did a study of the odds of gettning a hole in one:

"The Golf Digest study provided many great nuggets of information, even breaking the odds down by quality of play:

•Tour player making an ace: 3,000 to 1

•Low-handicapper making an ace: 5,000 to 1

•Average player making an ace: 12,000 to 1"

If the winner of the car in the draw was the guy who did the best test drive, or the person who did a test drive course in the fastest time or something, then that would be the same. And rest assured you would end up getting great drivers showing up to the car dealership trying to win themselves a car....

I understand that a hole in one is an unlikely event, but where do you draw the line? At events that are predicted to be over certain odds of happening? Should the threshold be events over 3,000-1? Or 100-1? How do you decide?

You don't have to decide. A hole in one is a hole in one and the only permitted competition for a larger prize.

That's it. End of.

There's no thin end of the wedge, slippery slope etc. It's only permitted for a hole in one.

I don't think it would affect the ethos of amateur golf at all.

 

[Leftie]

Can't you just make the prize for a hole in one a raffle ticket?

So, all players who get a hole in one get a raffle ticket and, at the end of the event, all the prize tickets are put into a hat and the lucky winner gets ....... a car.

Surely that is no different to winning a lottery ticket, a voucher, or whatever.

 

[HRC99]

Can't you just make the prize for a hole in one a raffle ticket?

So, all players who get a hole in one get a raffle ticket and, at the end of the event, all the prize tickets are put into a hat and the lucky winner gets ....... a car.

Surely that is no different to winning a lottery ticket, a voucher, or whatever.

No, you can't. That was the way round it until that loophole was specifically blocked - I looked into it when helping organise a charity day earlier this year.