Playoff hole

[Jake O'Reilly]

I have a question that arose during the first round of my club's handicap knockout on Saturday. Because of our two work commitments and the timing of club competitions that day, my opponent and I started on the 10th tee (I was receiving two shots on the 7th and 16th, so it didn't make the slightest difference to the contest).

As luck would have it we were AS after the 18th, but weren't really sure whether to head down the 1st, or our 1st hole of the day, the 10th. We ended up agreeing the actual 1st seemed the more likely correct option, but were we right?

 

[CMAC]

good, and interesting question. I don't know the answer but.....did you win?

 

[Foxholer]

It really makes no odds and there is no fixed 'rule'. So 'The Committee' can specify - or not as it wishes.

It can also specify whether or not you are allowed to actually start on the 10th in the first place!

That's also why the Stroke Index recommendations are as they are!

 

[Jake O'Reilly]

good, and interesting question. I don't know the answer but.....did you win?

Yes just about, I should have taken it on 18 but 3-putted from 30ft, thankfully saved my best shot of the day for the 19th, a 7-iron to 5ft and a converted birdie for the match.

 

[atticusfinch]

If the committee authorized the change in order then you proceeded correctly. If not, I can think of no rule that authorizes the players to change the order. Consequently, I do not think you played a stipulated round.

 

[rosecott]

Perhaps his committee authorised a stipulated round starting at the 10th because of club competitions preventing a start from the first. If the start from the 10th was authorised, I would have thought it logical to start sudden death from the same starting point.

 

[Jake O'Reilly]

Perhaps his committee authorised a stipulated round starting at the 10th because of club competitions preventing a start from the first. If the start from the 10th was authorised, I would have thought it logical to start sudden death from the same starting point.

Unfortunately it was a case of matches not on the calendar taking place off the 1st and us not having the time to start an hour later than originally planned. While no committee approval was given as it was a spur of the moment decision, I can't think it's something they'd have been against as the two strokes I received would have come on the 7th & 16th holes of the match whichever nine we started on.

Interesting to bear in mind incase it happens again though!

 

[duncan mackie]

Unfortunately it was a case of matches not on the calendar taking place off the 1st and us not having the time to start an hour later than originally planned. While no committee approval was given as it was a spur of the moment decision, I can't think it's something they'd have been against as the two strokes I received would have come on the 7th & 16th holes of the match whichever nine we started on.

Interesting to bear in mind incase it happens again though!

unfortunately they are required to have authorised it prior to play; it should be in the clubs conditions of competition (COC) if it's not there then it's 1-18 starting at the 1st only.

If it is authorised then you would continue from the 10th

EDIT it's probably worth adding that, as neither of you was aware that if it wasn't permitted to play a stipulated round starting at the 10th, it was in breach of the rules the result should stand and there's no breach of 1-3. Likewise the holes played to decide the match etc

 

[chrisd]

unfortunately they are required to have authorised it prior to play; it should be in the clubs conditions of competition (COC) if it's not there then it's 1-18 starting at the 1st only.

If it is authorised then you would continue from the 10th

EDIT it's probably worth adding that, as neither of you was aware that if it wasn't permitted to play a stipulated round starting at the 10th, it was in breach of the rules the result should stand and there's no breach of 1-3. Likewise the holes played to decide the match etc

Should either competitors, or both, be flogged at all for this !

 

[DCB]

Should either competitors, or both, be flogged at all for this !

Flogging is so old hat. We tar & feather the culprits on ocassions like this

 

[atticusfinch]

No breach of R. 1-3, but what about R. 2-1? They failed to play a stipulated round. There is no evidence that the committee authorized their order.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Perhaps his committee authorised a stipulated round starting at the 10th because of club competitions preventing a start from the first. If the start from the 10th was authorised, I would have thought it logical to start sudden death from the same starting point.

I don't know the correct ruling on this but I agree with the above, I think it makes sense to carry on down the 10th. Regarding the (lack of) committee ruling about playing a stipulated round, as it is match play and no other competitors are affected, does it really matter in the grand scheme of things?

 

[duncan mackie]

No breach of R. 1-3, but what about R. 2-1? They failed to play a stipulated round. There is no evidence that the committee authorized their order.

suggest you read 2-1/4

the issue isn't that they breached 2-1, but the penalty (or not) for that breach.

 

[Jake O'Reilly]

So the gist I've got is that we were wrong to play from the 10th without pre committee approval and therefore not playing a stipulated round leads to a DQ under Rule 1-3.

However, under Rule 2-1 ("If they did not know that their action was a breach of the Rules, the match stands as played") I go on to the next round unaffected with a lesson learned?

 

[duncan mackie]

So the gist I've got is that we were wrong to play from the 10th without pre committee approval and therefore not playing a stipulated round leads to a DQ under Rule 1-3.

However, under Rule 2-1 ("If they did not know that their action was a breach of the Rules, the match stands as played") I go on to the next round unaffected with a lesson learned?

yes; you did what you both agreed was right without agreeing to waive a rule of golf, so the result should stand as played.

if your course has a recognised 2nd hole starting point then it would normally be appropriate to have a comment in their CoC regarding play from that tee in certain circumstances and with the agreement of both/all players.

 

[atticusfinch]

I'm not sure I understand you , but it is my under standing that the players did not know they could not alter the order of holes and therefor did not breach 1-3.

EDIT: never mind I get it.