2/1 Players in Singles Match Accompanied by Third Party
Q. Prior to a singles match between A and B, A stated to B that a third player, C, would be playing with them. B played the match under protest and lost. What ruling should the Committee give?
A. A single is a match in which one plays against another. Since B made a timely claim, the Committee should have awarded the match to B. If B had not protested, i.e., had agreed that C accompany the match, the result of the match would stand as played.
Wrong Form of Play Used in Match-Play Event — See 6-1/1.
Match Decided by Wrong Form of Play by Agreement — See 33-1/4.
2/2 Stipulated Round in Match Play
In all forms of match play other than threesomes and foursomes, a player has begun his stipulated round when he makes his first stroke in that round. In threesomes and foursomes match play, the side has begun its stipulated round when it makes its first stroke in that round.
The stipulated round has ended in match play when all of the players in the match have completed the final hole of the round (although a player may lodge a subsequent claim under Rule 2-5 or correct wrong information under Rule 9-2b(iii)). (New)
2-1/1 Players Unable to Resolve Rules Problem Agree to Consider Hole Halved
Q. In a match, A putted to within three inches of the hole and then knocked his ball away. B, the opponent, objected. He stated that he wanted A’s ball left by the hole. A and B were uncertain how to resolve the matter, so they agreed to consider the hole halved. Should A and B be disqualified under Rule 1-3?
A. No. There was no agreement to waive the Rules. Rather, the players were ignorant of the Rules.
2-1/1.5 Players Agree to Consider Hole Halved During Play of Hole
Q. In a match, a player and his opponent play their second shots on a par-5 hole. Unexpectedly, neither ball can be found. Rather than proceeding under Rule 27-1, both players agree to a half. Is this permitted?
A. Yes. An agreement to halve a hole being played does not of itself constitute an agreement to waive the Rules.
However, if the players agree to consider a hole halved without either player making a stroke, they should be disqualified under Rule 1-3 for agreeing to exclude the operation of Rule 2-1 by failing to play the stipulated round.
Hole Not Completed by Either Player — See 2-5/3.
2-1/2 Minus or Zero Net Score
Q. In a handicap match, a player entitled to two handicap strokes at a par-3 hole scores a 2 or a hole-in-one. What would be his net score in each case?
A. The player’s net score would be zero (0) if he scored a 2 or minus one (-1) if he had a hole-in-one.
The same would be true in a four-ball stroke play or Stableford competition since scores are calculated on a hole-by-hole basis.
Determination of Honor in Handicap Match — See 10-1a/1.
2-1/3 Hole Inadvertently Omitted in Match; Error Discovered After Match Concluded
Q. The players in a match inadvertently omitted playing a hole. The error was discovered after the match had been played to a conclusion. What is the ruling?
A. The result should stand.
2-1/4 Two Holes Purposely Omitted in Match
Q. The players in a match agreed to omit two holes, i.e., agreed to settle the match over 16 holes. Is this permitted?
A. No. The players are disqualified under Rule 1-3 for excluding the operation of Rule 2-1 by failing to play the stipulated round.
2-1/5 Three Holes Played Out of Sequence in Match
Q. In an 18-hole match, the players by mistake play three holes out of sequence. The error is discovered before the match concludes. What is the ruling?
A. The holes played out of sequence should be disregarded and the match resumed at the proper hole. However, if such procedure would delay the competition, both players should be disqualified unless one of them concedes the match to the other.
2-1/6 Replaying Match When Play Discontinued Instead of Resuming from Where Play Stopped
Q. A match which was all square after 16 holes was discontinued by agreement due to darkness. The match should have been resumed at the 17th hole. However, the players, thinking it was in accordance with the Rules, replayed the match starting at the 1st tee. The result was posted. At that point the Committee became aware of the improper procedure. What is the ruling?
A. The result of the match as replayed should stand. The players were not subject to disqualification under Rule 1-3 because they were unaware that their procedure was contrary to the Rules.
2-2/1 Player Putting for Half Is Given Advice by Opponent
The following is an example of the application of the second paragraph of Rule 2-2:
In a match, A has holed out. As B, A’s opponent, is preparing to putt for a half, A gives B advice as to his line of putt. A would normally lose the hole for a breach of Rule 8-1, but Rule 2-2 becomes operative in these circumstances and the hole is halved.
Player Incorrectly Believing He Has Won a Hole Lifts Opponent’s Ball-Marker; Opponent Had Putt for Half — See 2-4/5.
Player Reporting Wrong Score Causes Opponent with Chance for Half to Pick Up — See 9-2/6.
2-3/1 Players Under Impression Match Is Over Later Realize It Was All Square
Q. In a match, A and B left the 18th green under the impression that A had won. They later realized that in fact the match was all square. The matter was referred to the Committee. What is the ruling?
A. Since there was no indication that wrong information had been given, the match stands as played, with A the winner.
Players Mistakenly Believing Match Is All Square After 18 Holes Play Extra Hole Without Claim Being Made — See 2-5/6.
Rightful Winner of Match Makes No Claim and Agrees to Play Extra Holes — See 2-5/7.
Match-Play Finalists Both Disqualified — See 33/3.
True State of Match Not Determinable — See 34-3/5.
2-3/2 Result of Match When Player Dormie and Opponent Concedes
Q. In a match between A and B, A is one up playing the last hole. In the following situations and considering B’s actions, does A win by one hole or two holes?
(i) B is on the green in three strokes but a long way from the hole. A plays his third stroke from the edge of the green and it comes to rest about one foot from the hole. B goes over and shakes hands with A.
(ii) B is on the green in two strokes. A holes his third stroke and B shakes hands with A.
(iii) A plays his second shot from the fairway onto the green. B’s second shot misses the green and plugs in a bunker. B immediately walks over to A and shakes his hand.
(iv) B is on the green in six strokes but a long way from the hole. A plays his third stroke from the edge of the green and it comes to rest about one foot from the hole. B goes over and shakes hands with A.
(v) A is on the green in two strokes. B plays his third stroke from the fairway onto the green and the ball comes to rest about one foot from the hole. B goes over and shakes hands with A.
A. The handshake between the players is deemed to represent an agreement to concede each player’s next stroke. Accordingly, in situations (i) to (iii), A wins the match by one hole. In situations (iv) and (v), A has won the final hole and wins the match by two holes.
2-4/1 Player Concedes Opponent’s Next Stroke and Then Knocks Opponent’s Ball into Hole
Q. A player conceded his opponent’s next stroke and then, in attempting to knock the opponent’s ball back to him, he inadvertently knocked the ball into the hole. The opponent, who had played three strokes prior to the concession, claimed a 3 for the hole. Was the claim valid?
A. No. The player conceded the opponent a 4 for the hole and, at that point, the opponent had completed the hole. It is irrelevant that the player subsequently knocked the opponent’s ball into the hole, whether he did so inadvertently or otherwise.
Opponent’s Ball Knocked Away by Player After Concession Moves Player’s Ball — See 18-2a/18.
2-4/2 Ball Falls into Hole After Concession of Next Stroke
Q. A player’s ball overhung the edge of the hole. After elapse of the time allowed in Rule 16-2, the opponent conceded the player’s next stroke for a 5, after which the player’s ball fell into the hole. What was the player’s score for the hole?
A. The player’s score was 5. It is immaterial that the player’s ball fell into the hole after the opponent had conceded the player’s next stroke. If the opponent had not conceded the next stroke, the player’s score would also be 5 because in those circumstances the player would be deemed to have holed out with his last stroke and he would incur a penalty stroke — Rule 16-2.
Ball Overhanging Hole Knocked Away by Opponent Before Player Determines Status — See 16-2/2.
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?
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.
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.
In Four-Ball Match Player with Putt for Half Picks Up in Error at Suggestion of Opponent Based on Misunderstanding — See 30/5.
2-4/4 Whether Picking Up Opponent’s Ball Is Concession of Next Stroke
Q. In match play, A holes a putt and, thinking he has won the match, picks up B’s ball. B then advises A that he (B) had a putt to win the hole. Did A concede B’s next stroke when he picked up B’s ball?
A. No. A incurred a penalty stroke under Rule 18-3b; B must replace his ball and now has two putts to win the hole.
2-4/5 Whether Lifting Opponent’s Ball-Marker Is Concession of Next Stroke
Q. In a match, A, believing he has won a hole, picks up the coin marking the position of his opponent B’s ball. In fact B had a putt to halve the hole. Should the picking up of B’s ball-marker be considered a concession of B’s next stroke?
A. No. In equity (Rule 1-4), A should be penalized one stroke. Therefore, under the second paragraph of Rule 2-2 the hole is automatically halved.
2-4/6 Putting Out After Concession of Stroke
Rule 2-4 does not cover the question of whether a player may putt out after his next stroke has been conceded. A player incurs no penalty for holing out in such circumstances. However, 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.
Agreement to Concede Short Putts — See 1-3/2.
2-4/7 Concession of Stroke Refused by Player and Withdrawn by Opponent; Player Then Putts and Misses
Q. In a match between A and B, A putts and his ball comes to rest near the hole. B concedes A’s next stroke. A says: “No. I haven’t holed out yet.” B says: “OK. Go ahead and putt.” A putts and misses. In such circumstances, is the concession invalidated?
A. No. When B conceded A’s next stroke, A had completed the hole. Concession of a stroke may not be declined or withdrawn — see Rule 2-4.
2-4/8 Player Concedes Opponent’s Next Stroke and Plays Before Opponent Has Opportunity to Lift Ball
Q. In a match between A and B, A chips and his ball comes to rest about one foot from the hole. B concedes A’s next stroke. A states that he wishes to lift his ball. However, B proceeds to play his next stroke before A has an opportunity to lift his ball and B’s ball strikes A’s ball. What is the ruling?
A. B deprived A of his right to lift his ball after his next stroke was conceded. In equity (Rule 1-4), B lost the hole, whether or not his ball struck A’s ball.
Ball Resting Against Flagstick; Putt Conceded and Ball Removed Before Player Can Remove Flagstick — See 17-4/2.
2-4/9 Player Concedes Hole After Which It Is Discovered Opponent Had Played Wrong Ball
Q. In a match between A and B, A has made two strokes and the ball with which he made his second stroke out of the rough is on the green. B, having played five, concedes the hole to A. A then discovers that he has played a wrong ball to the green. What is the ruling?
A. A lost the hole (Rule 15-3a) before B conceded it to him. Therefore, B’s concession was irrelevant. (Revised)
2-4/10 Player Concedes Hole After Which Opponent Plays Wrong Ball
Q. In a three-ball match, A loses his ball and concedes the hole to B and C. Subsequently, B plays a wrong ball. Is A’s concession to B binding?
A. Yes.
Player Concluding He Played Wrong Ball When Opponent Misread Number on Player’s Ball Concedes Hole — See 9-2/11.
2-4/11 Player with Lost Ball Concedes Hole; Ball Then Found in Hole
Q. In a match, A played his second shot towards the green but he could not find his ball. He conceded the hole to B, whose second shot was on the green. The following players then found A’s ball in the hole. What is the ruling?
A. Since a player may not concede a hole after conclusion of the hole — Rule 2-4 — A holed out in two strokes and won the hole if he made a claim before B played from the next teeing ground (Rule 2-5). If A did not do so, he lost the hole.
2-4/12 Player Concedes Hole on Basis of Invalid Claim
Q. In a match between A and B, A putts out of turn. B incorrectly claims that A loses the hole for putting out of turn. A protests but concedes the hole. Later, A, having consulted the Rules book, lodges an official protest with the Committee. How should the Committee rule?
A. Although B’s claim was invalid — see Rule 10-1c — A lost the hole when he conceded it — Rule 2-4.
Handicap Stroke Claimed After Hole Conceded — See 6-2a/4.
2-4/13 Implied Concession of Hole Withdrawn
Q. A, unable to find his ball after a two-minute search, suggests to B, his opponent, that they move on to the next hole. A’s ball is then found. A withdraws his suggestion to move on to the next hole and play is resumed. Before A plays his ball, B plays a stroke with a wrong ball. What is the ruling?
A. A’s suggestion amounted to a concession of the hole and B won the hole. Concession of a hole may not be withdrawn — Rule 2-4. B’s actions after A’s concession could not deprive him of a hole already won.
2-4/14 Player Concedes Match Due to Misconception as to Opponent’s Score at Last Hole
Q. In a match, A and B were all square playing the last hole. A had a short putt for a 4. B holed a putt for a 4. A, mistakenly believing that B had holed out in three strokes, shook hands with B, conceded the match and lifted his ball. At that point B told A that he (B) had scored a 4. What is the ruling?
A. A conceded the match. Even if A had not conceded the match, he lost it when he lifted his ball without marking its position and thereby incurred a penalty stroke under Rule 20-1.
2-4/15 Player Concedes Match After Winning It When Opponent Lodges Invalid Claim Regarding Strokes Taken
Q. In a match, A and B were all square playing the last hole. A incurred a penalty without knowing it, and accordingly did not advise B of the penalty. B was aware of what had happened but did not realize it was a breach of the Rules either.
A won the hole and the match, and the result was posted.
Subsequently, a spectator informed B that A had incurred a penalty at the 18th hole. B then claimed the hole and the match, and A conceded the match to B.
Who was the rightful winner?
A. A won the match because a match can only be conceded prior to its conclusion (Rule 2-4).
A gave wrong information when he did not advise B that he had incurred a penalty and would have lost the hole had a timely claim been made — Rule 9-2b(i). However, a belated claim by B was not valid for two reasons:
(1) it was not based on facts previously unknown to B, and
(2) the claim was made after the result of the match was announced — see Rule 2-5.
Agreement That Side Losing After 18 Holes of 36-Hole Match Will Concede Match — See 1-3/7.
Conceding Match to Avoid Disqualification — See 2-1/5 and 33-1/6.
2-4/16 Valid Timely Claim Made After Concession of Match
Q. In a match, A and B are playing the last hole. B is 1 up. A holes out for a 4. B putts from a wrong place and holes the putt for a 4. A congratulates B and concedes the match. Before leaving the putting green, A asks B if he (B) had putted from a wrong place. B acknowledges that he did so. A claims that B loses the hole under Rule 20-7b. Is the claim valid?
A. Yes. Concession of a match is not binding if subsequently a valid claim is timely made. A’s valid claim was made within the time limit in Rule 2-5.
Player Omits Penalty Stroke When Advising Opponent as to Score for Hole; Error Discovered After Match Conceded by Opponent — See 9-2/10.
2-4/17 Player in Erroneous Belief Match Is Over Shakes Opponent’s Hand and Picks Up Opponent’s Ball
Q. In match play, A holes a putt and, thinking he has won the match, shakes hands with B and picks up B’s ball. The referee advises B that he had a putt to win the hole and keep the match alive. Has B conceded the match by his acquiescence in A’s action of shaking hands and picking up B’s ball?
A. No. B was entitled to replace his ball and hole out. Since A incurred a one-stroke penalty under Rule 18-3b, B now had two putts to win the hole.
Player’s Conscious Failure to Correct Opponent’s Misunderstanding of State of Match Results in Opponent Conceding Match When in Fact Player Is Dormie — See 9-2/12.
2-4/18 Defaulting Player Plays Informal Match with Opponent and Wins
Q. B concedes a match to A. A and B then play an informal match and B wins it, 5 and 4. Should the Committee post A as the winner by default or B as the winner by 5 and 4?
A. A should be posted as the winner by default.
2-4/19 Winner of Match Wishes to Default to Beaten Opponent
Q. In match play, A defeats B and then concedes the match to B because he (A) cannot continue in the competition. Is this permissible?
A. No. A won the match. A beaten player may not be reinstated in such circumstances. A should be posted as the winner and, since A cannot continue, A’s opponent in the next round would win by default.
Under Rule 2-4, a side may concede a match at any time prior to conclusion of the match, but not thereafter.
2-4/20 Player Unable to Meet Match-Play Schedule Defaults; Schedule Then Changed and Player Requests
Reinstatement
Q. The final matches in a competition were to be played on a Saturday. A was to play B in one match. On Thursday, A defaulted to B, saying that he would be out of town on Saturday.
On Saturday, the course was unplayable and the matches were postponed until the following Saturday. On Monday, A requested that
he be reinstated. Should the Committee reinstate A?
A. No. A conceded the match as provided for in Rule 2-4. In the circumstances concession is irrevocable.
2-4/21 Wrong Form of Play Used to Decide Which Side Concedes Match
Q. In a foursome match, the players are unable to arrange a date to play their match within the prescribed time limit for the round. As a result, the players agree to play a singles match between one player from each side in order to decide which side would concede the match in accordance with Rule 2-4. Is this permissible?
A. There is nothing in the Rules of Golf to prohibit players from agreeing to a method of determining which side will concede a match. However, in view of the intention of Rule 1-3 (Agreement to Waive Rules), if players agree to play a match other than in the form prescribed in the conditions of the competition in order to decide which side will concede, both sides should be disqualified under Rule 1-3 for agreeing to exclude the operation of a condition of competition (Rule 33-1).
If the players agree to use some other method which does not involve playing a match to determine which side will concede, such as a putting competition, tossing a coin, etc., they are not considered to be in breach of Rule 1-3.
Agreement that Side Losing After 18 Holes of 36-Hole Match Will Concede Match — See 1-3/7.
Wrong Form of Play Used in Match-Play Event — See 6-1/1.
Match Decided by Wrong Form of Play by Agreement of Players — See 33-1/4.
2-4/22 Players Agree to Concede Holes to Each Other
Q. Before or during a match, A and B agree to concede one or more holes to each other, thereby enabling them, in effect, to play a shorter match. If A and B know that such an arrangement is not permissible, are they subject to disqualification under Rule 1-3?
A. Yes. Although Rule 2-4 allows a player to concede a hole before playing it, an agreement between players to concede holes to each other exceeds this authority as it undermines the principle in Rule 2-1 of playing a stipulated round. Therefore, such an agreement constitutes an agreement to waive the Rules. (New)
2-5/1 Player’s Obligation Regarding Lodging Claim
In match play, a player may disregard a breach of the Rules by his opponent, provided there is no agreement between the players. There is a difference between overlooking an opponent’s breach and agreement with the opponent to waive a penalty. Rule 1-3 prohibits the latter.
2-5/2 Procedure for a Valid Claim
For a claim to be valid, the claimant must notify his opponent (i) that he is making a claim, (ii) of the facts of the situation and (iii) that he wants a ruling. He must do so within the time required by Rule 2-5. For example, Rule 16-1e prohibits putting from a stance astride an extension of the line of putt behind the ball. In a match between A and B, if A putts from a stance astride an extension of the line and B states “that is not allowed, you are penalized” or “I’m making a claim because of that stroke,” the Committee should consider the claim.
Statements by B such as “I’m not sure that’s allowed” or “I don’t think you can do that” do not by themselves constitute a valid claim because each statement does not contain the notice of a claim, the facts of the situation and an indication that he wants a ruling.
2-5/3 Player Lifts Ball Before Holing Out; Opponent Then Picks Up His Ball Claiming Player Loses Hole
Q. In match play, A’s ball was resting against the flagstick but it was not holed. A, believing he had holed out, lifted his ball without first marking its position. In doing so, A incurred a penalty stroke under Rule 20-1. Since A was not aware that he had incurred a penalty, he did not inform B. B, who had not witnessed A’s actions, played his next stroke. A’s actions were then brought to the attention of B and he picked up his ball, claiming that A’s lifting of his ball entailed a penalty of loss of hole. A and B agreed to continue the match and refer B’s claim to the Committee later. How should the Committee have ruled?
A. The Committee should have ruled that B won the hole. B’s claim was valid since he notified his opponent that he was making a claim, of the facts that gave rise to the claim (A’s lifting of the ball) and that he wanted a ruling (A and B agreed to refer B’s claim to the Committee). Although the penalty for A’s lifting of the ball without first marking its position is one stroke, he lost the hole for giving wrong information (Rule 9-2b) when he failed to inform B before he (B) played his next stroke that he (A) had incurred the penalty stroke.
2-5/4 Player Wins Hole with Own Ball After Playing Wrong Ball; Opponent Lodges Belated Claim
Q. In a match, A and B are all square playing the last hole. A plays a wrong ball in the rough and discovers the error before his next stroke. A and B go back to look for A’s ball without any question being raised as to whether A had incurred a penalty. A’s ball is found. A plays out the hole with his original ball and wins the hole and the match. Several days later B claims the last hole and the match by virtue of the fact that A played a wrong ball.
Is the claim valid?
A. No. A gave wrong information when he did not advise B that he (A) had incurred a penalty — Rule 9-2b(i). However, a belated claim by B was not valid for two reasons:
(1) it was not based on facts previously unknown to B, and
(2) the claim was made after the result of the match was announced — See Rule 2-5.
Player Wins Hole with Wrong Ball; Error Discovered at Next Hole; Opponent Claims Previous Hole — See 9-2/8.
Player Wins Hole with Wrong Ball and Partner Picks Up; Error Discovered at Next Hole; Opponents Claim Hole — See 30-3c/2.
2-5/5 Invalid Claim Not Disputed
Q. In a match, A played a wrong ball to a green and then found his own ball in the hole. His own ball had been holed in three strokes, which was fewer strokes than B had taken. However, B claimed the hole on the ground that A had played a wrong ball. A did not dispute the claim. A lost the match.
Later, A learned that, because he had completed the hole when his own ball was holed and before play of a wrong ball, the play of the wrong ball was irrelevant and he was the rightful winner of the hole in question. A then lodged a claim with the Committee. Was the claim valid?
A. No. Since A did not dispute B’s invalid claim before B played from the next teeing ground, B’s claim stands and B won the hole in question — Rule 2-5.
Player Concedes Hole on Basis of Invalid Claim — See 2-4/12.
Player Concedes Match After Winning It When Opponent Lodges Invalid Claim Regarding Strokes Taken — See 2-4/15.
2-5/5.5 Breach of 14-Club Rule Discovered After Match Concluded But Before Result Officially Announced
Q. On completion of the 14th hole in a match between A and B, A wins by 5 and 4. The players continue the round. After the 16th hole, it is discovered by the players that A has 15 clubs in his bag.
Before the result of the match has been officially announced, B reports the facts to the Committee and asks for a ruling. Is the claim valid?
A. Yes. Although the players had left the putting green of the last hole of the match, B’s claim is based on facts previously unknown to him and he is deemed to have been given wrong information by A (Rule 9-2b(i)). The players must return to the 15th hole and resume the match. A is penalized under Rule 4-4a and is three up with four holes to play.
2-5/6 Players Mistakenly Believe Match Is All Square After 18 Holes and Play Extra Hole Without Claim Being Made
Q. In a match between A and B, A is 1 up after the prescribed 18 holes. However, both A and B believe the match is all square. So they play extra holes and B wins at the 20th hole. The error is then discovered. What is the ruling?
A. Since A did not make a claim before either player played from the tee at the 19th hole, the match must be considered all square at that point. Thus, B was the winner.
Players Under Impression Match Is Over Later Realize It Was All Square — See 2-3/1.
2-5/7 Rightful Winner of Match Makes No Claim and Agrees to Play Extra Holes
Q. In a match, A and B are all square going to the 18th hole. On completion of the 18th hole, B states that he has scored 7; A states that he (A) has scored 6. A and B go into the clubhouse under the impression that A has won the match. At that point B tells A that, on reflection, he (B) believes A scored 7 at the 18th hole. On recounting, A acknowledges that he had a 7.
By agreement, A and B resume the match; A wins it at the 20th hole and the result is posted.
That night, B discovers that, because A gave wrong information after completion of the 18th hole, under Rule 9-2b(iii) he (B) was rightfully the winner of the 18th hole and the match. B reports the matter to the Committee and claims the match. What is the ruling?
A. The match stands as played, with A the winner.
B’s claim was not made within the time limit in Rule 2-5. B’s claim would have been valid if he had refused to play extra holes or had played the extra holes under protest.
2-5/8 Status of Valid Claim If Players Accept Wrong Ruling from Someone Not on Committee and Continue Match
Q. In an 18-hole match between A and B, A’s ball strikes the flagstick which was attended by B. A and B believe that a loss-of-hole penalty is incurred but they are in doubt as to which one of them incurs the penalty. Accordingly, before teeing off at the next hole, they agree to refer the matter to the Committee later.
At the conclusion of 18 holes, A and B agree that if B incurred a loss-of-hole penalty at the hole in question, the match is all square; if A incurred it, B has won the match by two holes. A and B seek a ruling from X, who is not on the Committee. X incorrectly advises A and B that B incurred the penalty and that the match is therefore all square.
A and B accept X’s ruling, play extra holes and A wins.
Subsequently, the incident was brought to the attention of the Committee. What should the Committee do?
A. When A and B accepted X’s incorrect ruling, they, in effect, settled the doubt themselves and, after A and B began playing extra holes, the Committee was no longer entitled to consider a claim. The match stands as played, with A the winner.
Valid Timely Claim Made After Concession of Match — See 2-4/16.
2-5/8.5 Player and Opponent Agree on Incorrect Procedure; Whether Valid Claim May Be Made After Procedure Followed
Q. In a match, a player’s ball comes to rest on an artificially-surfaced road. He is uncertain if the road is to be treated as an immovable obstruction or an integral part of the course. He asks his opponent and they agree that the player should treat the road as an immovable obstruction. The player drops the ball in accordance with the procedure under Rule 24-2b and plays it. Prior to playing from the next tee, the opponent discovers that he and the player were wrong as the Committee had introduced a Local Rule declaring the road to be an integral part of the course and, therefore, the player was not entitled to take relief under Rule 24-2b. The player should have incurred a loss of hole penalty under Rule 18 for lifting his ball without authority and failing to replace it. May the opponent claim the hole?
A. No. The claim must not be considered by the Committee because the opponent and the player agreed that the player was entitled to relief under Rule 24-2b. When this agreement was reached, there was no longer a doubtful or disputed point and there was no basis under Rule
2-5 for making a claim.
The players were not in breach of Rule 1-3 as they believed at the time they were proceeding properly.
Players Unaware Penalty Incurred — See 1-3/5.
Extra Stroke Taken by Mistake in Handicap Match; Status of Late Claim — See 2-5/13.
2-5/9 Player Agreeing with Opponent That Hole Was Halved Later Realizes He Has Won Hole; Player Then Makes Claim
Q. In a match between A and B, at the 16th hole A scored 6 and B scored 5. When leaving the putting green, B commented to A: “A half?” and A replied: “Yes.”
A won the match at the 20th hole and the result was posted. Later, B realized that he had won the 16th hole and, if the mistake had not been made, he would have won the match 1 up.
A admitted that he had made a mistake. B reported the matter to the Committee and claimed the match. Is the claim valid?
A. No. The match stands as played, with A the winner. After the result of the match was posted, the claim by B could have been considered only if A had knowingly given wrong information as to the number of strokes he (A) had taken at the 16th hole — see Rule 2-5.
2-5/10 Player Accepting Erroneous Claim Disputes It After Result Announced
Q. In a match, A was in breach of a Rule. Although the penalty for a breach of the Rule in question was only one stroke, B, his opponent, claimed that A lost the hole. A did not dispute the claim. B won the match and the result was posted. Three days later, A protested to the Committee that B had misinformed him with respect to the Rules. What is the ruling?
A. The match stands as played. Under Rule 2-5, no claim may be considered after the result of a match has been announced unless the opponent knowingly gave wrong information. Incorrect information on the Rules is not wrong information. It is up to each player to know the Rules.
2-5/11 Wrong Information Given After Play of Last Hole; Claim Made After Result Announced
Q. In a match, A and B came to the last hole all square. After completion of the hole, A stated that he had scored 9 and B stated that he (B) had scored 8, making B the winner, 1 up. The result was recorded by the Committee.
A few minutes later, a spectator told A that B had scored 9 at the last hole. B reviewed the hole and acknowledged that he had made a mistake and that his actual score was 9. What is the ruling?
A. The match stands as played, with B the winner. Under Rule 2-5 no claim may be considered after the result of a match is announced unless wrong information has been given knowingly.
2-5/12 Imposition of Penalty by Referee After Any Player in Match Has Played from Next Tee
Q. In match play, may a referee penalize a player for a breach of a Rule at a hole if he does not become aware of the breach until someone in the match has played from the next teeing ground?
A. Yes, unless the facts giving rise to the penalty were known to the opponent.
2-5/13 Extra Stroke Taken by Mistake in Handicap Match; Status of Late Claim
Q. Prior to the start of a handicap match, the two players correctly advised one another as to the handicaps to which they were entitled. However, during the match, A, by mistake, took a stroke to which he was not entitled at a certain hole. The error was discovered several holes later. Could B, the opponent, then claim the hole in question?
A. No. A late claim would not be valid unless it was based on facts previously unknown to B and B had been given wrong information by A. In this case A did not give B wrong information as to the number of strokes to which he was entitled during the round, and it was B’s responsibility to know the holes at which handicap strokes were to be given (see Note under Rule 6-2). The hole in question stands as played.
Player and Opponent Agree on Incorrect Procedure; Whether Valid Claim May Be Made After Procedure Followed — See 2-5/8.5.
2-5/14 When Match Result “Officially Announced”
Q. Rule 2-5 prohibits a Committee from considering a claim after the result of a match has been “officially announced,” except in cases where a player knowingly gave wrong information. When is the result of a match “officially announced?”
A. It is a matter for the Committee to decide when the result of the match has been “officially announced” and it will vary depending on the nature of the competition. When an official scoreboard exists, Rule 2-5 should be interpreted so that the recording of the winner of the match on the official scoreboard is the official announcement of the result of the match. In such cases where a referee has been assigned by the Committee to accompany a match, any announcement of the result of the match by the referee on the final putting green is not the official announcement. However, there may be cases where an official scoreboard is not used, in which case the Committee must clarify when it considers the result “officially announced.”
In some cases the official scoreboard will be a prominent structure and in other cases it might be a sheet of paper in the golf shop or locker room. The Committee is generally responsible for recording the winner’s name on the scoreboard, but there may be times when the Committee charges the players with this responsibility.
Other Decisions Relating to Rule 2-5:
Player with Lost Ball Concedes Hole; Ball Then Found in Hole and Player Claims Hole — See 2-4/11.
Second Ball Played in Match Play; No Claim Made — See 3-3/9.
Wrong Handicap Used in Match by Mistake; Error Discovered After Result Officially Announced; Status of Claim by Opponent — See 6-2a/5.
Match Discontinued by Agreement Due to Rain; One Player Subsequently Wishes to Resume; Opponent Refuses on Ground Course Unplayable and Makes Claim — See 6-8a/6.
Player Omits Penalty Stroke When Advising Opponent as to Score for Hole; Error Discovered After Match Conceded by Opponent; Opponent Lodges Claim — See 9-2/10.
Doubt Whether Ball Moved by Outside Agency; Opponent Lodges Claim — See 18-1/4.
In Foursome Side Drives for Three Holes in Wrong Order and Then Claim Is Made — See 29-2/2.
Committee Does Not Penalize Player in Breach of Pace of Play Condition Believing Player Had Already Lost Hole — See 34-3/2.