Matchplay - Can I give a half after winning the hole

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Happened to me today in a match. Not asking whether I should have done what follows - but am I allowed under the rules to do what I did.

My opponent is about 18" from the hole in 5, I am 10ft away in 4. I do not concede the putt, and my opponent marks and picks up his ball. I did not walk closer to check just how close he was.

I hole my putt for a 5; as I walk to the hole to get my ball my opponent walks briskly forward and before I could interject he picks up his marker, and says 'your hole'.

He had a shot on the hole and it was immediately clear to me that he had forgotten. I looked at him and said - you had a shot? Yes - he had forgotten. In matchplay I do not remind opponents on the tee if they have a shot on the hole as some would consider that gamesmanship designed to put pressure on him. So I say nothing,

Before he picked up his marker I was contemplating giving him the putt and was maybe 90:10 that I would when I got up close to it.

As we walk off the green - with me pondering my winning the hole in such a manner and saying to him I was probably going to giver him the putt - he comments to me something like - well you could give me the half if you were going to give me the putt. I hesitated - then decided that I would. And so I gave him the half rather than take the win.

I am sure most will have some thoughts on all aspects of what happened. But just from a rules perspective - am I allowed to do what I did? I am 99% certain that I can...but just wanted to check as I've never in all my years come across the scenario before - certainly never been asked as I was.

 

[Bratty]

I would have thought that is not in the rules, but you could both tee off on the next hole and then offer him the half. That's how I'd approach it if it ever happened.
Will be interesting to hear from the experts now.

 

[rulie]

A concession, such as "your hole", cannot be rescinded or declined. You are not permitted to give a half after he has conceded the hole. It's just that simple.

 

[rulie]

I would have thought that is not in the rules, but you could both tee off on the next hole and then offer him the half. That's how I'd approach it if it ever happened.
Will be interesting to hear from the experts now.

You can't offer him a half on the previous hole at any time, it was either won or lost by score or concession and cannot be changed. Now, if after you tee off on the next hole, you can concede that next hole to him if you wish and want to try for appeasement.

 

[Steven Rules]

...and furthermore, each player is responsible for knowing where they give or get handicap strokes.

Your opponent made two errors. Stop taking pity. Move on. Is this a competition or a benevolent charity?

 

[Bratty]

This from the rules:

You can't offer him a half on the previous hole at any time, it was either won or lost by score or concession and cannot be changed. Now, if after you tee off on the next hole, you can concede that next hole to him if you wish and want to try for appeasement.

I didn't mean the previous hole. I can surely offer a half at any stage once we've tee'd off the next hole? Or do I have to wait to be on the green?
What I meant is the player won the previous hole and so offers a half on the next once the balls are in play.
I know the rules say I can concede a hole before even teeing off, but the OP wanted to halve the previous hole, which he can't do, so wouldn't want to concede the next hole, just halve it.

 

[rulefan]

Rules Issues in Match Play​

(1) Deciding Issues by Agreement.​

During a round, the players in a match may agree how to decide a Rules issue:​

• The agreed outcome is conclusive even if it turns out to have been wrong under the Rules, so long as the players did not agree to ignore any Rule or penalty they knew applied (see Rule 1.3b(1)).

3.2c(2) If the players fail to apply or mistakenly apply handicap strokes on a hole, the agreed result of the hole stands, unless the players correct that mistake in time

​

 

[Steven Rules]

b. Rules Issues in Match Play​

(1) Deciding Issues by Agreement.​

During a round, the players in a match may agree how to decide a Rules issue:​

• The agreed outcome is conclusive even if it turns out to have been wrong under the Rules, so long as the players did not agree to ignore any Rule or penalty they knew applied (see Rule 1.3b(1)).

3.2c(2) If the players fail to apply or mistakenly apply handicap strokes on a hole, the agreed result of the hole stands, unless the players correct that mistake in time

​

I don't think any of that is applicable to this situation.

 

[rulefan]

I don't think any of that is applicable to this situation.

Why wouldn't the words in red apply?

 

[Colin L]

Your opponent conceded the hole.. That cannot be changed - see the last sentence of Rule 3.2b(2). But as you were obviously unaware of this and agreed the match score on the outcome of the hole being as you agreed, a half, the result stands.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Interesting. I was pretty damn certain that in matchplay if I wanted to 'concede' (if that's the correct word) the win to a half then I could, though I can easily see circumstances when that would have wider impact than just the match I was playing and so why it would not be allowed - though this wasn't such a circumstance. That said I was a bit uncomfortable granting the half as I thought I could, but my thinking that we were in essence correcting a score prior to teeing off on the next hole (I realise afterwards that we weren't)

If it makes any difference on the @Colin L point- I am not 100% certain that in picking up his marker he actually said 'your hole' - since though by his action he was conceding the hole, he actually thought he'd lost it and so wasn't conceding it. If he did not verbally concede the hole could I have immediately allowed him to replace his marker and putt out?

I will add that as I walked down the fairway after teeing off on the next hole (the 12th) I was questioning my sanity - in fact I thought I was a bit mad. Even though I was 4up at that point with no further shots to give, there were still 7 holes to play; all are tough and I knew I could easily muck them up. As it happens I won both 12th and 13th to win 6&5.

In truth my opponent should not have asked the question...as to me that implied that he thought I could do as asked...even if it may have been asked slightly tongue-in-cheek. And that raised the uncertainty in my mind that took me down the route I went.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

...and furthermore, each player is responsible for knowing where they give or get handicap strokes.

Your opponent made two errors. Stop taking pity. Move on. Is this a competition or a benevolent charity?

Oh I know that...as I said - prior to teeing off on any hole I very deliberately don't point out to an opponent if he is getting a shot from me. Up to him to know and I know of some who think making such mention is gamesmanship.

 

[Steven Rules]

Why wouldn't the words in red apply?

In my view the bit in red is tenuous at best. The opponent conceded the hole. As far as we know there was no prior discussion between the players of respective scores or net scores for the hole. This was a mistake in the opponent's internal thought process, not a miscommunication between the players.

Even if we do accept there was a 'mistake' around the application of handicap strokes and they do try to correct the 'mistake' in time, the opponent has incurred a one stroke penalty for lifting his ball (or ball marker). 3.2b(2) allows forgiveness if the opponent lifts his/her ball based on a misunderstanding that the player’s statement or action was a concession but that is not the case here.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

In my view the bit in red is tenuous at best. The opponent conceded the hole. As far as we know there was no prior discussion between the players of respective scores or net scores for the hole. This was a mistake in the opponent's internal thought process, not a miscommunication between the players.

Even if we do accept there was a 'mistake' around the application of handicap strokes and they do try to correct the 'mistake' in time, the opponent has incurred a one stroke penalty for lifting his ball (or ball marker). 3.2b(2) allows forgiveness if the the opponent lifts his/her ball based on a misunderstanding that the player’s statement or action was a concession but that is not the case here.

There was no discussion at all as we played the hole on the number of shots we had each played, and as mentioned I did not mention at any point prior to or during playing the hole that my opponent had a shot. Even after he had putted to 18" nothing was said between us, and nothing was said prior to or as I holed my 10footer. He just walked in and picked up his marker. I looked at him and said 'you had a shot!'. By his thoughts he didn't concede the hole to me, he thought he'd lost it.

I guess that I did what I did as I was feeling a little guilty not conceding his 18" putt (yes I know...why???) before I putted or indeed as I walked to the hole having holed my putt. And indeed I most probably would have conceded his putt for a half had he not jumped in so quickly.

Anyway - need to go back through the responses as I'm thinking that from what @Colin L has said that I could do what I did as neither of us knew that I couldn't.

 

[Deleted member 31467]

I would have thought that is not in the rules, but you could both tee off on the next hole and then offer him the half. That's how I'd approach it if it ever happened.
Will be interesting to hear from the experts now.

I understand the point you are describing but don't you mean you would offer him the win on the next hole to cancel out the hole you have just won? You could offer him a half when potentially he could win the hole.

 

[Bratty]

I understand the point you are describing but don't you mean you would offer him the win on the next hole to cancel out the hole you have just won? You could offer him a half when potentially he could win the hole.

Yes, you're right. I must remember not to post when I'm tired!

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Your opponent conceded the hole.. That cannot be changed - see the last sentence of Rule 3.2b(2). But as you were obviously unaware of this and agreed the match score on the outcome of the hole being as you agreed, a half, the result stands.

Does 3.2c(2) quoted by @rulefan not apply because my opponent did not hole out and I did not concede his putt - for it to apply my opponent must have a score for the hole as a result of either of these two events happening.

 

[rulefan]

In my view the bit in red is tenuous at best. The opponent conceded the hole. As far as we know there was no prior discussion between the players of respective scores or net scores for the hole. This was a mistake in the opponent's internal thought process, not a miscommunication between the players.

Even if we do accept there was a 'mistake' around the application of handicap strokes and they do try to correct the 'mistake' in time, the opponent has incurred a one stroke penalty for lifting his ball (or ball marker). 3.2b(2) allows forgiveness if the opponent lifts his/her ball based on a misunderstanding that the player’s statement or action was a concession but that is not the case here.

I'm not convinced but in the light of the later information why would the other clause not apply?

• The agreed outcome is conclusive even if it turns out to have been wrong under the Rules, so long as the players did not agree to ignore any Rule or penalty they knew applied (see Rule 1.3b(1)).

 

[backwoodsman]

Does 3.2c(2) quoted by @rulefan not apply because my opponent did not hole out and I did not concede his putt - for it to apply my opponent must have a score for the hole as a result of either of these two events happening.

???

3.2c(2) does apply. The player can concede a hole at any time. They (normally) just factor in their current situation as regards gross or nett strokes taken so far, and make a decision. They don't need 'a score' in order to concede.

 

[Steven Rules]

Does 3.2c(2) quoted by @rulefan not apply because my opponent did not hole out and I did not concede his putt - for it to apply my opponent must have a score for the hole as a result of either of these two events happening.

That is exactly how I would interpret it. The opponent didn't hole out and the putt wasn't conceded. The opponent has no score or net score for the hole. On the contrary, by his actions (and words - #1), the opponent conceded the hole to SIL Hogan.

My interpretation is that the final bit of 3.2c(2) is geared towards this kind of example scenario:

Two players walking from the putting green to the next tee:

A: "We both had 5s there, therefore the hole was halved. I remain 3 up."
B: "I agree. You are 3 up."

But then at the next teeing area before either player has made a stroke to begin the hole:

B: "Hang on - I just remembered that I should have received a stroke at that previous hole. That would give me a net 4 which means that I won the hole."
A: "Ok. That would make the correct score 2 up."