[Carl Johnson]

Carl,

Mark, and others, here's my take.

Here is Decision 2-4/3:

2-4/3
Player Lifts Ball in Mistaken Belief That Next Stroke Conceded

Q.In a match between A and B, B made a statement which A interpreted to mean that his (A's) next stroke was conceded.
Accordingly, A lifted his ball. B then said that he had not conceded A's next stroke. What is the ruling?

I am Mr. A.  B, my opponent, where we both have about two foot putts, says: "Good, good?" with an inflection suggesting he's asking a question, without any hint that it is in jest, and I say "Agreed."  Obviously, I cannot read his mind, and the rule/decision should not require that.  So, did I just interpret that he meant to offer a concession, or did he actually make a concession, conditionally, which I clearly accepted and made it a done deal?  How much different is that from my putt being a little shorter, and B saying, "you're good," and I pick up my ball, and then he says, "Hey, didn't you know I was just kidding?"

A.If B's statement could reasonably have led A to think his next stroke had been conceded, in equity (Rule 1-4), A should replace his ball as near as possible to where it lay, without penalty.

So, again, did he "conditionally" concede, which I accepted, or did he simply say something "else" that reasonably led me to think he'd offered the concession?  As a former lawyer, I understand decisions in "equity," but "equity" goes both ways.

Otherwise, A would incur a penalty stroke for lifting his ball without marking its position – Rule 20-1 – and he must replace his ball as near as possible to where it lay.

As I said originally, I do not clearly remember how we resolved the matter.  This was in league play, senior inter-club, but which is not deadly, cut-throat serious to the vast majority of us.  It's a mix of social golf and competitive golf.  We play opponents of about the same handicap.  My opponent and and I were at or near the bottom of our respective rosters for the day -- circa 19s - 21s.  This was my first year in the league and I was still somewhat unsure of the dynamics.  I do know I was flummoxed and somewhat embarrassed.  I think I replaced my ball and putted out, and he putted out, so the outcome was the same, but I would not "swear" to that.  In the years since I've become somewhat better in handling rules issues, mostly, but not always, just by excusing ignorance and biting my tongue.

Carl

[Ken Moum]

Good good?  is not a question that "might" be interpreted as a concession. It is the standard form use by match play golfers to offer a mutual concession.

Once accepted it is an irrevocable concession.

FWIW, I think it's the only place in the rule.book where players are specifically a lower to to a great to do something other than play the ball into the hole.

K

[Jon Wiggett]

There is no place for good-good. I'll give unmissable putts, I'll see missable ones. What has the length of my own putt got to do with it?

Ulrich

Ulrich, surely as long as sportsmanship exists there is room for good-good. See: Sergio's agreement with Rickie Fowler to halve the 7th earlier this year at the WGC match play.

Mark,

I believe Ulrich would see at as following. Both player A and his opponent player B lie with simple, unmissable putts. Normally, one of the two would say 'halves'? To which the other would say 'fine by me'. But for Ulrich this would not be the case but rather player A would say 'I will give you your putt sir but expect no favour be shown me in return' To which player B would say 'No, no kind sir, I feel honour bound to concede your putt too so as not to be in your debt' or words to that effect. Not sure what the difference is though

Ulrich, whether someone accepts a 'halves' offer or not is up to them but I would not question their right to offer, accept or decline. Live and let live
Jon

[Ulrich Mayring]

Mark,

that wasn't a good-good, Sergio told Fowler to pick it up!

Oops, sorry, I just read another article on it and they're saying it was an "offer of a half". I think in that situation the good-good was justified, because Sergio had a 7 footer left. He couldn't give Fowler his putt, because he might have had to putt his anyway and it was definitely missable. But that was certainly an exceptional situation.

Ulrich

[Ulrich Mayring]

Jon,

I don't even see how this situation could even come about that two players lie with unmissable putts. Surely, unmissable putts are given immediately, you would not make your opponent mark it and concede later!

Ulrich

[Ken Moum]

Jon,

I don't even see how this situation could even come about that two players lie with unmissable putts. Surely, unmissable putts are given immediately, you would not make your opponent mark it and concede later!

Ulrich

You need to remember that "real" definition of a gimme is, "An agreement between two golfers who can't putt."

K

[Sean_A]

You give putts, when you think your opponent "probably" makes it? So essentially you're saying that you'll give him some putts he wouldn't have made. Interesting concept!

I haven't found anything in the rules of golf concerning good-good. Any decisions that I missed?

Its obvious to me you take the game far more seriously than I do.

I assume we are talking about real competions here, not friendly games. The original poster mentioned the Carnegie Shield. I would hope that everyone takes these contests very seriously in the sense that the rules of golf are observed to the letter.

Ulrich

Ulrich

I am not good enough to play in real comps - you aren't either - and neither are most of the folks on this site.  So don't don't sweat the small beer.  If you are that competitive, get better, otherwise its misplaced competiveness

I offered good-good twice today playing against Spangles.  He accepted once and declined once.  No harm in asking and no offense taken for a refusal.  

Ciao

[Jon Cavalier]

Carl,

Mark, and others, here's my take.

Here is Decision 2-4/3:

2-4/3
Player Lifts Ball in Mistaken Belief That Next Stroke Conceded

Q.In a match between A and B, B made a statement which A interpreted to mean that his (A's) next stroke was conceded.
Accordingly, A lifted his ball. B then said that he had not conceded A's next stroke. What is the ruling?

I am Mr. A.  B, my opponent, where we both have about two foot putts, says: "Good, good?" with an inflection suggesting he's asking a question, without any hint that it is in jest, and I say "Agreed."  Obviously, I cannot read his mind, and the rule/decision should not require that.  So, did I just interpret that he meant to offer a concession, or did he actually make a concession, conditionally, which I clearly accepted and made it a done deal?  How much different is that from my putt being a little shorter, and B saying, "you're good," and I pick up my ball, and then he says, "Hey, didn't you know I was just kidding?"

A.If B's statement could reasonably have led A to think his next stroke had been conceded, in equity (Rule 1-4), A should replace his ball as near as possible to where it lay, without penalty.

So, again, did he "conditionally" concede, which I accepted, or did he simply say something "else" that reasonably led me to think he'd offered the concession?  As a former lawyer, I understand decisions in "equity," but "equity" goes both ways.

Otherwise, A would incur a penalty stroke for lifting his ball without marking its position – Rule 20-1 – and he must replace his ball as near as possible to where it lay.

As I said originally, I do not clearly remember how we resolved the matter.  This was in league play, senior inter-club, but which is not deadly, cut-throat serious to the vast majority of us.  It's a mix of social golf and competitive golf.  We play opponents of about the same handicap.  My opponent and and I were at or near the bottom of our respective rosters for the day -- circa 19s - 21s.  This was my first year in the league and I was still somewhat unsure of the dynamics.  I do know I was flummoxed and somewhat embarrassed.  I think I replaced my ball and putted out, and he putted out, so the outcome was the same, but I would not "swear" to that.  In the years since I've become somewhat better in handling rules issues, mostly, but not always, just by excusing ignorance and biting my tongue.

Carl

I've always assumed the "mistake on concession" rule to apply where something like this happens:
I go to mark my ball, which lies say 2 feet from the hole and near my opponents line. As I'm marking it, my opponent says, "That's good." I pick up. My opponent says, "No. I was saying your mark is good there. Not that the putt was good." In that scenario, in equity, I replace my ball.

Under the good good, I was just kidding scenario, I am taking the putt as conceded.

[Jon Wiggett]

Jon,

I don't even see how this situation could even come about that two players lie with unmissable putts. Surely, unmissable putts are given immediately, you would not make your opponent mark it and concede later!

Ulrich

Ulrich,

you obviously do not play much matchplay then as both players being within a short distance of the hole is a regular occurance in my experience. Taking into account that for a out to be conceded it has to be CLEARLY stated by the opponent by agreeing to halves is a straight forward way to do this, pick up and move on. You would insist on player A saying 'your putt is good' followed by player B saying 'and your putt is also good' which is convoluted at best compared to 'halves'? 'OK'.

I once played against a lad who like you thought everything should be holed out even from a foot. He stated on the first tee he did not agree with giving putts so didn't and did not expect a concession either. For the first 16 holes anything under three foot (about 6 times) I would let him set up to the ball and just before he was about to putt I would concede and move on. On the 17th green he had a two footer which I then did not concede and after being stood over the ball for the best part of a minute he dribbled a weak putt that missed low side to lose the hole.

He missed because he obviously expected to have his putt conceded despite stating the opposite earlier. Missing a short putt can happen to any player of any standard (think Stadler at the Belfry) yet I would still generally concede an 18" putt were I playing against him although there is a small possibility he might miss. If you want to win a match at matchplay it is as important to know when you should concede a putt as it is to know when you should see it.

Jon

[Ulrich Mayring]

Jon,

you're right in that I don't play much matchplay. But in the 55 matches that I did play (35-18-2), the good-good situation has never once come up. I give putts immediately and so did all my opponents so far. Never once did I encounter someone, who made me stand over the ball or even just mark it, only to concede the putt then. Frankly, that would have been quite off-putting to me.

There may have been a situation or two, where I let my opponent mark his ball, because I was standing too far away from the hole to judge whether it was a missable putt or not and then later concede it, when I got there and saw it was close. But again, it's still a case of me giving a putt and expecting nothing in return.

So if you frame it in that context, you can clearly see that the good-good situation can practically never come up for me. If it's a frequent occurrence in your matches that two markers are close to the hole, then it's a different game from the one I play. You may well be right that in your game a good-good is practical.

Ulrich

[Jon Wiggett]

You actually have counted the number of matchplay matches you have had including the results!!!??? Wow. Of course the 'good-good' situation has never arisen for you as you have already said you do not see how it could.

As for the letting someone stand over the ball before giving the putt I have only ever done it once and the idea was it would be off putting though if the opponent really never expected a putt to be given it would not have been.

Funnily enough in the last match I played last week my opponent and I both hit tee shots on a semi blind par 3 and upon approaching the green I saw first that we both lay within a foot of the hole and so I said 'both inside a foot. You okay with halves?' He saw this was the case and said yes. How would you reply? 'No, but I give you yours' 

Jon

[Ulrich Mayring]

Jon,

no, I would reply as you expect. As I said, situations like that may have come up once or twice for me as well. But I was thinking more of two markers close to the hole, which I understood to be a frequent occurrence in your matches?

Ulrich

[Scott Warren]

Brian,

Ulrich is mid-teens handicap from memory. And he is German. And his putter stands up all by itself.

At least two of those three facts may go some way to explaining why he inexplicably knows his exact Ryder Cup record!

[Ulrich Mayring]

I mentioned the record just to show that you can win matches without conditional concessions or comprehensive strategies on when to give short putts and when not

Handicap is 13. Putter does not stand up by itself (although I do have one that does, a friend of mine makes these and I occasionally take it abroad to promote his business, but even then I never stand it on the green, but handle it like any other putter). And if you read any of my postings, you can find out how I know every score I ever made on any hole

Ulrich

[Ulrich Mayring]

Sorry for that, really. I didn't mean to make anyone feel bad, but apparently that intention hasn't come off as such. I'll sign off from this thread.

Ulrich

[Jon Wiggett]

Jon,

no, I would reply as you expect. As I said, situations like that may have come up once or twice for me as well. But I was thinking more of two markers close to the hole, which I understood to be a frequent occurrence in your matches?

Ulrich

Never mentioned markers Ulrich just 'halves' which usually occur before both markers are placed. If you want to improve then knowing where your good and bad shots end up is more important than the result so if you are not already collecting this data (which I suspect you are) I would recommend starting.

Jon

[Patrick_Mucci]

While watching a match in the Carnegie Shield at Royal Dornoch I heard a player offer a good-good, in which one player had a significantly longer putt.
I understand it is not a rules violation but  is it cheeky, poor form or an acceptable practice in match play to negotiate?

Stan,

Many, many years ago, when I was a very good putter from 6 feet and in, I always felt that an opponent that asked for "good - good", was unsure of his ability to convert.

I'm not talking about one footers, but two, three, four and five footers.

I was inclined to say, "let's putt them out" unless he was a very nice fellow and/or the match was at a point where it didn't matter much.

[Mark Chaplin]

Reasonably generous concessions can be a good tactic until the 2.5 footer on the 15th, the oppo has mentally had it conceded and is made to putt, 50+% of the time they miss!

[Bob_Huntley]

Many years ago there was a member at MPCC name of Buck Henneken; he was always an odds-on favorite to win the club championship. In one year there was a dearth of low handicappers and his opponent came out in the draw playing off an eight handicap. He decided not to play, not wishing to lose at the tenth hole. Buck made the following offer, once his opponent was on the green his putt was given.  He accepted the offer.

Buck won four and three.  

Bob

[Cristian]

If you are one down on the 18th green and you are 20 ft away and your opponent is 10 ft away, then one would never accept a good-good offer, as it would guarantee losing the match. However if the same situation occurs on the tenth hole it might be different, right?

Same thing if you are one up on 15 or 16, even if you are considerably closer to the hole a good-good offer might be smart as it may leave your opponent running out of holes, because you deprive him (or rather you make him deprive himself) of the possibility to make a long one. There is nothing wrong with smart tactics in Matchplay and they have nothing to do with gamesmanship.

[Carl Nichols]

If you are one down on the 18th green and you are 20 ft away and your opponent is 10 ft away, then one would never accept a good-good offer, as it would guarantee losing the match.

. . . .

There is nothing wrong with smart tactics in Matchplay and they have nothing to do with gamesmanship.

If I received this offer on the 18th hole, I would both decline in appropriately evocative terms and assume that it was a bit of gamesmanship. 

[James Boon]

Reasonably generous concessions can be a good tactic until the 2.5 footer on the 15th, the oppo has mentally had it conceded and is made to putt, 50+% of the time they miss!

Mark,

A tactic I've often used myself, until a regular social partner and I teamed up in foursomes recently and he pointed out I was far too generous and he was going to take charge of when to give putts.

We get to the quarter finals of the county inter club foursomes and he chips up to about 3 ft for par. Our opponents follow with a chip to a similar distance, also for par. Its worth noting its the 11th hole and we are 6 up... My partner, quick as you like stalks up to the hole and looks at our opponents and offers a half? He doesn't say good - good, he offers a half. My jaw hits the flaw as everyone walks off. He had forgotten that we had a shot!

Cheers,

James

[James Boon]

While watching a match in the Carnegie Shield at Royal Dornoch I heard a player offer a good-good, in which one player had a significantly longer putt.
I understand it is not a rules violation but  is it cheeky, poor form or an acceptable practice in match play to negotiate?

Stan,

It seems a bit cheeky to me, probably as I've never seen a good - good offer turned down? Did it come from the player closer or further away?

I have been involved in good - good offers of up to 5 or 6 ft in the middle of the round and its never bothered me if I'm playing against a good putter. If I think the opponent isn't a good putter, I would probably just smile and say nice try?

Cheers,

James

[Cristian]

If you are one down on the 18th green and you are 20 ft away and your opponent is 10 ft away, then one would never accept a good-good offer, as it would guarantee losing the match.

. . . .

There is nothing wrong with smart tactics in Matchplay and they have nothing to do with gamesmanship.

If I received this offer on the 18th hole, I would both decline in appropriately evocative terms and assume that it was a bit of gamesmanship. 

The 18th hole example is not realistic of course, but it does illustrate how the score in a Matchplay round can influence tactics and decisions when to offer or accept good-good. Probably one would not accept this offer on the 17th hole either as you are only left with one chance to halve the match, would one still consider the offer gamensmanship however? And on 16?.

[Carl Nichols]

If you are one down on the 18th green and you are 20 ft away and your opponent is 10 ft away, then one would never accept a good-good offer, as it would guarantee losing the match.

. . . .

There is nothing wrong with smart tactics in Matchplay and they have nothing to do with gamesmanship.

If I received this offer on the 18th hole, I would both decline in appropriately evocative terms and assume that it was a bit of gamesmanship. 

The 18th hole example is not realistic of course, but it does illustrate how the score in a Matchplay round can influence tactics and decisions when to offer or accept good-good. Probably one would not accept this offer on the 17th hole either as you are only left with one chance to halve the match, would one still consider the offer gamensmanship however? And on 16?.

I agree with you that it's context specific.  I also don't have a problem with good-goods. 

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()