Match play rules.

[softhands]

During a singles match I had to play an extra hole. Because the game was tied on the 18th.
The extra hole was the first where I received a shot, on the opponent, during the first time round. However, during the next time round it
Was suggested that I should not receive the extra shot. Is this correct and if so why. Because if we squared the hole then we would have continued until someone wone. The stroke index will not have changed during the next time round.

 

[Crow]

It isn't correct, the stroke should have been taken again on the second time round.

This is one of the reasons that stroke indexes on holes 1 and 18 are rarely lower than 8, so that in a match between two fairly close handicaps there won't be an advantage to one of the players on he first play-off hole.

 

[Foxholer]

Yes. You should receive a shot.

Not a hugely desirable situation, which is why guidelines indicate 1, 10 (and 9 and 18) should b above 6 or so. But if it's a hard hole and you are quite a bit higher than your opponent, then you probably need one!

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

You get shots 'allowance' according to your handicap difference and the competition, the allowance is allocated according to the SI. SI is a 'generally' a measure of difficulty of hole. Getting 5 shots, say, means getting shots on holes with SI 1-5. Play any of SI 1-5 twice then you get the shot(s) again - the hole hasn't got any easier or harder.

 

[Hendo007]

During a singles match I had to play an extra hole. Because the game was tied on the 18th.
The extra hole was the first where I received a shot, on the opponent, during the first time round. However, during the next time round it
Was suggested that I should not receive the extra shot. Is this correct and if so why. Because if we squared the hole then we would have continued until someone wone. The stroke index will not have changed during the next time round.

Did you get your shot or were you cheated out of it ?

 

[pbrown7582]

Did you get your shot or were you cheated out of it ?

And did you win the match or would you of done courtesy of the shot?

 

[softhands]

Hi everyone.

Thanks for confiming the rule.
I thought that was the case. Yep I won the match after claiming the shot.
The funny thing was we both pared the hole. Hence the question.

There's nothing worse than thinking you have won dishonestly.
What makes it even beter, on the 16th I declared a shot on myself,
following ball movement after I had addressed my ball.
This allowed my opponent to go 2 up with two to play.

 

[pbrown7582]

Glad you won fair and square.

I had a phone call from my nephew with a similar query in a Volvo matchplay his match had finished all square he was at home and due a shot on hole 2, his oppo says as they walk off 18 when you available for our replay?
Alarm bells ring he says no no we play sudden death which I confirmed for them.
Amazing what tricks some people will pull!

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

As stated above, yes you get your shoy allowance again over the sudden death holes. I don't know why that is the case and it is something I strongly disagree with. In my mind, the match is over 18 holes and if you can't win it with your shots in that time then you've had your chance. Extra holes should be played off scratch, it's bad enough higher handicappers getting full allowance as it is.

...............lights blue touch paper and runs.....................

 

[duncan mackie]

...............lights blue touch paper and runs.....................

we will catch you eventually!

 

[beggsy]

Seems like sour grapes by someone who has been done at the extra first hole a few time

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Seems like sour grapes by someone who has been done at the extra first hole a few time

No...it's worked both for and against me a pretty equal number of times......but I still think it's wrong.

 

[pbrown7582]

There is a case for the extra shots and also against. Pretty much the same argument as full difference and 3/4 difference.
I got beat by on extra hole because of shot in Volvo not happy but it's the rules so accept and sadly move on.

 

[Smiffy]

.but I still think it's wrong.

I don't

 

[rosecott]

As stated above, yes you get your shoy allowance again over the sudden death holes. I don't know why that is the case and it is something I strongly disagree with. In my mind, the match is over 18 holes and if you can't win it with your shots in that time then you've had your chance. Extra holes should be played off scratch, it's bad enough higher handicappers getting full allowance as it is.

...............lights blue touch paper and runs.....................

Surely the objective of the golf handicap system is to create as level a playing field as possible, to then allow a competitor to strive to achieve beyond his current level and reduce his handicap. If, in so doing, he happens to do well in a competition or beat a lower handicapped player in matchplay, that is all part of the process of improvement. To turn round after 18 holes of matchplay with honours even and then throw that concept out of the window seems to be saying that the higher handicap player should not have had the difference in handicaps taken into account in the first place.

If you accept that there is a need for handicaps in golf and that there is a definable difference between two players that requires an adjustment to make a fair contest, it would seem inconsistent to say to the higher handicapper after 18 holes “I’m now pulling the rug from under your feet”.

Perhaps, as a 5 handicap, you should stick to scratch competitions and scratch knockouts and your problem would solve itself.

 

[dufferman]

it's bad enough higher handicappers getting full allowance as it is.

If they didn't, surely the whole handicap system would be for nothing...?

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

If a player works hard on his game to improve and get his handicap down, why should he give that all away to someone who isn't prepared to work as hard on their game?

I don't have an issue with people of all abilities being able to compete against each other but it's only fair that the advantage should lie with those that put more effort into their games.

 

[NWJocko]

If a player works hard on his game to improve and get his handicap down, why should he give that all away to someone who isn't prepared to work as hard on their game?

I don't have an issue with people of all abilities being able to compete against each other but it's only fair that the advantage should lie with those that put more effort into their games.

There's an assumption there that low handicap = someone who practices....

I have a low handicap and never, ever, practice. Many of my friends at the club are high teens/20's handicaps and do work hard.

What happens there?

 

[HomerJSimpson]

If a player works hard on his game to improve and get his handicap down, why should he give that all away to someone who isn't prepared to work as hard on their game?

Many golfers dont have the time to work on their games (work, family etc). Does that mean they should be precluded from a cmatchplay comp because they are off a certain handicap and havent dedicated hours on the range

 

[doublebogey7]

Surely this all depends on why we play the game. Most of us is for nothing more than light entertainment and enjoyment, for us the handicap system works well and we have no problem with players of all abilities receiving their full allowance. For others though its more about the winning and fame/fortune, if that is you then you should try your hand and the professional game and leave the amateur game to the rest of us.