Out of hole - can't putt?

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Pointed out to me in a 4BBB match this morning.

All four of us on green and one of opponents gets down in 6. His PP can't better 6 so picks up. I have played 6 but my PP has a putt for a 6. I am inside my PP and on same line as him so go to putt to show him line. One of opponents stop me and tells me as I am out of the hole I cannot putt.

I wasn't sure but conceded to his view. But on reflection I think he was quite correct. Confirm please someone?

 

[chrisd]

If they had conceded your putt then you wouldn't have been able to refuse and been obliged to pick up, I had exactly the same scenario a while back.

 

[Deleted member 15717]

If they had conceded your putt then you wouldn't have been able to refuse and been obliged to pick up, I had exactly the same scenario a while back.

It hasn't been conceded though...I think they pulled a slight fast one. In a way, it makes sense, but you are still 'live' so can have a putt

 

[Foxholer]

It hasn't been conceded though...I think they pulled a slight fast one. In a way, it makes sense, but you are still 'live' so can have a putt

Correct. You are entitled to putt until either holed or conceded. The proper thing for them to do was concede the putt - after which you couldn't putt.

Another 'myth' for that thread.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

They didn't concede. Guy told me that the reason for me being out of the hole was that I could have putted backwards and forwards until I got the putt right.

But of course they could just have conceded. Though if I HAD taken the putt I suspect he would have claimed the hole. Now that would have been interesting.

So ruling is that unless my putt is conceded I am within my rights to putt

 

[chrisd]

It hasn't been conceded though...

I realise that

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Correct. You are entitled to putt until either holed or conceded. The proper thing for them to do was concede the putt - after which you couldn't putt.

Another 'myth' for that thread.

Yup. He told me that he had been pulled on this in a match at his previous club- and that is how myths are propagated

 

[duncan mackie]

They didn't concede. Guy told me that the reason for me being out of the hole was that I could have putted backwards and forwards until I got the putt right.

But of course they could just have conceded. Though if I HAD taken the putt I suspect he would have claimed the hole. Now that would have been interesting.

So ruling is that unless my putt is conceded I am within my rights to putt

there's no point in them conceding a putt that doesn't count - it would be different if your putt was for a half; but it wasn't.

you would be putting purely to assist your partner so you shouldn't do it.

 

[chrisd]

They didn't concede. Guy told me that the reason for me being out of the hole was that I could have putted backwards and forwards until I got the putt right.

But of course they could just have conceded. Though if I HAD taken the putt I suspect he would have claimed the hole. Now that would have been interesting.

So ruling is that unless my putt is conceded I am within my rights to putt

Yes

My situation was identical except we had a rules official walking with us who confirmed I was right after the hole was played - we lost the match on the hole anyway

 

[Deleted member 15344]

there's no point in them conceding a putt that doesn't count - it would be different if your putt was for a half; but it wasn't.

you would be putting purely to assist your partner so you shouldn't do it.

Is that against the rules ? Seen it happen regualry

 

[Foxholer]

there's no point in them conceding a putt that doesn't count - it would be different if your putt was for a half; but it wasn't.

you would be putting purely to assist your partner so you shouldn't do it.

That's exactly the reason they should concede it! If they are daft enough to not realise it, then they deserve the threat of the partner being shown the line for a half! It is Matchplay after all, and a good chunk of that form is 'playing the man!'.

 

[duncan mackie]

Is that against the rules ?

yes

both the relevant rulings are made under 1-4 so it's the principle that's important, and stated.

" if the act would be of assistance to a partner in a four-ball or best-ball match, the partner is, in equity (Rule 1-4), disqualified for the hole".

note that this applies to both the case following a concession 2-4/6 and the case where the act is otherwise within the rules but to gain advantage (deliberately putting over to his line and then putting out) 30-3f/6

 

[duncan mackie]

That's exactly the reason they should concede it! If they are daft enough to not realise it, then they deserve the threat of the partner being shown the line for a half! It is Matchplay after all, and a good chunk of that form is 'playing the man!'.

it's not only matchplay but golf........and a good part of that sport is to play within the spirit of the game. hence "you shouldn't do it"

 

[Deleted member 15344]

yes

both the relevant rulings are made under 1-4 so it's the principle that's important, and stated.

" if the act would be of assistance to a partner in a four-ball or best-ball match, the partner is, in equity (Rule 1-4), disqualified for the hole".

note that this applies to both the case following a concession 2-4/6 and the case where the act is otherwise within the rules but to gain advantage (deliberately putting over to his line and then putting out) 30-3f/6

Confused because I have seen it happen in the Ryder Cup in the 80's where one is putting for a bogey and not really going to get a half but has still putted to help his teammate with the pace and line of a putt ?

 

[duncan mackie]

Confused because I have seen it happen in the Ryder Cup in the 80's where one is putting for a bogey and not really going to get a half but has still putted to help his teammate with the pace and line of a putt ?

there's a world of difference between this and 'cannot get a half'; all the difference in the world. In such a situation the opponents can just concede that putt if they so choose.

 

[Foxholer]

yes

both the relevant rulings are made under 1-4 so it's the principle that's important, and stated.

" if the act would be of assistance to a partner in a four-ball or best-ball match, the partner is, in equity (Rule 1-4), disqualified for the hole".

note that this applies to both the case following a concession 2-4/6 and the case where the act is otherwise within the rules but to gain advantage (deliberately putting over to his line and then putting out) 30-3f/6

I certainly agree with that ruling! That act was a deliberate flouting of the 'spirit of the game'! One of the original Rules (7) states that you 'art to play honestly for the hole' (of course Stymies were part of the game then too!).

But that doesn't cover the case where a player can naturally show his/her partner the line! I believe it's the opponents responsibility to be aware of the situation and concede the putt in that case. If they don't do so, then I believe the player is quite entitled to show his partner the line!

there's a world of difference between this and 'cannot get a half'; all the difference in the world. In such a situation the opponents can just concede that putt if they so choose.

That's what I stated that they should do - otherwise 'suffer the consequences of their (lack of) action'!

 

[Deleted member 15344]

there's a world of difference between this and 'cannot get a half'; all the difference in the world. In such a situation the opponents can just concede that putt if they so choose.

So it's very much a very open ended rule as such and Prob one that may well be broken regulary ?

 

[duncan mackie]

But that doesn't cover the case where a player can naturally show his/her partner the line! I believe it's the opponents responsibility to be aware of the situation and concede the putt in that case.

the point here is that in the original post we are clearly told....." I am inside my PP and on same line as him so go to putt to show him line" and that the player cannot contribute to the result of the hole.

1. if he knew the rules he would clearly not do it; or having done it would just concede the hole when he realised.
2. if he didn't know the rules it would be the oppositions option as to whether to pursue it

personally I would hope that they didn't knowingly wait until he had putted before asking innocently "why did you putt out?" with a hope that they would get the response 'to show my partner the line' and claim the hole...

whether they make a point of conceding, or simply point out that you shouldn't because it would assist your partner etc, is a mute point.

if the player's still live in the hole then they get to balance the value of his putt being conceded with the value of the assistance to his partner; simples (and definitely part of the game!)

 

[Foxholer]

the point here is that in the original post we are clearly told....." I am inside my PP and on same line as him so go to putt to show him line" and that the player cannot contribute to the result of the hole.

1. if he knew the rules he would clearly not do it; or having done it would just concede the hole when he realised.
2. if he didn't know the rules it would be the oppositions option as to whether to pursue it

personally I would hope that they didn't knowingly wait until he had putted before asking innocently "why did you putt out?" with a hope that they would get the response 'to show my partner the line' and claim the hole...

whether they make a point of conceding, or simply point out that you shouldn't because it would assist your partner etc, is a mute point.

if the player's still live in the hole then they get to balance the value of his putt being conceded with the value of the assistance to his partner; simples (and definitely part of the game!)

Ah! I see the subtlety of your response now! There's a hint of being 'punished' for knowing the Rule!

I'd like to see what ColinL and Rulefan say though. I don't believe that Decision is totally relevant.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I'm now a little confused. As they had not conceded my putt if I were to have played the shot would I have broken a rule?