No conceding putts in matchplay?

big_drive

Club matchplay is currently ongoing in our place. Have heard a couple of stories in past week of things getting a bit silly in some games over conceding putts.
Lads getting odd because they weren't given putts etc. seems it turned into a side show and they forgot about playing golf and were more worried about putts given/not given

I think I've asked the question before here, would it be a better idea if all putts had to be holed in matchplay?

Takes the uncertainty out of it and everybody knows where they stand

Freemount09

I think its all part of the psychology of it ! Early on in the round give all the 3 - 4 footers then maybe round hole 12 -13 after you draining in an 8 footer, make him putt out from 3 feet and see the beads of sweat form on his brow and his knees shake just a tad !! :P

big_drive

Funny one I heard was guy complaining about having to play a one foot putt. Thing was though he missed it. But he still maintains he should have been given it!!

L.O.F.T

big_drive wrote: »

Funny one I heard was guy complaining about having to play a one foot putt. Thing was though he missed it. But he still maintains he should have been given it!!

big_drive wrote: »

Thing was though he missed it.

Anyone who misses a one foot putt in matchplay can expect to be holing out all... day.... long....

28064212

What would the penalty be for not holing?

Example: You bring in a rule that says all putts must be holed. A match goes out, A concedes a putt, and B picks his ball up. Match comes back in, and A points out that B didn't hole his putt. What happens?

big_drive

The rule isn't there so that situation couldn't happen. If it was there I'm not sure what you could do after the game

28064212

big_drive wrote: »

The rule isn't there so that situation couldn't happen

? I thought you were asking if such a rule should be brought in?

big_drive

I am asking that?

If it was there I would say loss of hole for picking up a ball without holing out

LLU

Freemount09 wrote: »

I think its all part of the psychology of it ! Early on in the round give all the 3 - 4 footers then maybe round hole 12 -13 after you draining in an 8 footer, make him putt out from 3 feet and see the beads of sweat form on his brow and his knees shake just a tad !! :P

Reminds me of a time when I was playing a match and my opponent had been very relaxed about making me take the short putts. Midway through the round I had a fairly short putt left to finish and was bending down to pick up the ball as I'd done before, although I stopped first to ask him if he'd 'give' me the shot.

Response was: "ah sure have a go at it anyway"! How kind of him!

Mr. Larson

I'd happily hole a 6in putt if it wasn't given. I don't expect to get given anything so if I do get one it's a bonus. I would rarely concede any putt over 18in that was downhill or breaking on fast greens, nor would I expect to be given one. Conversely I would probably concede a straight up-hill 2 footer. If you get miffed at having to hole out in matchplay your attitude needs improving in my opinion.

ssbob

I need all the help I can get, I will make you hole everything!

BigChap1759

big_drive wrote: »

Funny one I heard was guy complaining about having to play a one foot putt. Thing was though he missed it. But he still maintains he should have been given it!!

He is an idiot then :rolleyes:

big_drive

BigChap1759 wrote: »

He is an idiot then :rolleyes:

I knew a long time ago that he was an idiot

Seves Three Iron

Always felt the 'gimmes' should be taken out of match play. Bar a bit of amateur psychology I don't see what purpose it serves. The whole idea of golf is getting the ball into the hole. Why not just do that and hole out each time. Anything else just creates needless confusion. Probably harks back to some old 'gentleman's arrangement' nonsense.

big_drive

I'd agree it can lead to side issues and confusion

Golfgraffix

I never give anything for a win (maybe an inch) other than that it's the grip length rule of thumb for me.

onlyfinewine

I remember reading an article by Jack Nicklaus that he tended to not concede putts on the first few holes as players might be a bit edgy and not fully into their stride, then he would concede putts through the round until it came to the last few holes where, he reasoned, the player might be getting a little uptight and might be more inclined to miss.

Do people remember where he famously conceded Tony Jacklin's 30 inch putt on the 18th in Royal Birkdale to allow GB&I a half in the Ryder Cup? He was quoted as saying afterwards "You probably would not have missed it, but I was not giving you a chance." This was in my view one of the greatest uses of the concession considering the event and it's significance. The U.S. Captain Sam Snead was reportedly not best pleased.

charlieIRL

I played my first ever matchplay event there recently and my opponent mad me putt everything.....even from within 6 inches.

slave1

onlyfinewine wrote: »

Do people remember where he famously conceded Tony Jacklin's 30 inch putt on the 18th in Royal Birkdale to allow GB&I a half in the Ryder Cup? He was quoted as saying afterwards "You probably would not have missed it, but I was not giving you a chance." This was in my view one of the greatest uses of the concession considering the event and it's significance. The U.S. Captain Sam Snead was reportedly not best pleased.

Monty and McGinly gave generous halves also in recent Ryder Cup years, I think the people most upset were those with bets on. I could be mistaken but didn't Couples or Stewart concede to Monty a few Ryder Cups back as a gesture to compensate for the hard time the US crowd gave Monty during their match.
Nice to see, when it's appropriate....

MP62

charlieIRL wrote: »

I played my first ever matchplay event there recently and my opponent mad me putt everything.....even from within 6 inches.

That's his prerogative charlie, the confusion imo arises from some people expecting to be given certain putts, the solution to that is expect to be given nothing.
Concession of putts should not and will not be removed from matchplay IMO.

L.O.F.T

slave1 wrote: »

I could be mistaken but didn't Couples or Stewart concede to Monty a few Ryder Cups back as a gesture to compensate for the hard time the US crowd gave Monty during their match.

That is a great example slave1. It was Payne Stewart.

In the year Stewart died, Stewart not only won his national championship, he came up with a gesture of sportsmanship at the Ryder Cup that sits just behind Jack Nicklaus’s concession of a missable putt to Tony Jacklin to ensure the 1969 match was tied.
Amidst the turmoil of Brookline and some wholly inappropriate behaviour from the winning side, one American stood up and proclaimed with his actions that all was not right.
His opponent, Colin Montgomerie, had been baited continuously and, come the 18th, Stewart had had enough. Recognising what the reaction would be if Monty missed a 20ft putt to lose their match, Stewart picked his opponent’s marker up and shook his hand.
If you want to mark the moment when the Ryder Cup returned from the abyss, that’s as good as any.
My lasting memory of Stewart, however, occurred not in the Boston bearpit but amidst the wondrous scenery in Waterville in the southwest corner of Ireland. It was there that a group of seven pros, including Stewart, Tiger Woods and Mark O’Meara gathered before the 1998 Open.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/golf/article-1221552/DEREK-LAWRENSON-A-decade-game-lost-winning-gentleman-Payne-Stewart.html#ixzz252KUwjve

charlieIRL

MP62 wrote: »

charlieIRL wrote: »

I played my first ever matchplay event there recently and my opponent mad me putt everything.....even from within 6 inches.

That's his prerogative charlie, the confusion imo arises from some people expecting to be given certain putts, the solution to that is expect to be given nothing.
Concession of putts should not and will not be removed from matchplay IMO.

I know that alright. I didn't expect to be given any.

acejeff

This idea of giving 3/4 footers at the start of the round is bizzare. Why would you ever give a 3/4 foot putt, at amateur level a decent percentage of these are missed. I don't see why anyone would offer up such an opportunity to win a hole regardless of the time in the match. I'd rather take the chance on them missing it and being 1up than being all square and thinking "yeah but he'll get some shoc when I don't give him one that length on the 13th!" Anything outside 12/14 inches is missable at amateur level.

Imhof Tank

slave1 wrote: »

Monty and McGinly gave generous halves also in recent Ryder Cup years, I think the people most upset were those with bets on. I could be mistaken but didn't Couples or Stewart concede to Monty a few Ryder Cups back as a gesture to compensate for the hard time the US crowd gave Monty during their match.
Nice to see, when it's appropriate....

It was Seve who stepped in and gave that (60 foot) putt to Scot Hoch in 97 to halve Monty's match as the team just needed the half by that stage.

Monty wasnt best pleased at all but really it was irrelevant as the Cup was won outright.

elberry

Only small minded individuals would ever make an issue over a putt not being given. Your opponent is entitled to see the ball in the hole, respect his right to see it holed and if you're good enough you will knock it in without a problem, if you aren't comfortable over it he is correct to make you putt it.

elberry

onlyfinewine wrote: »

Do people remember where he famously conceded Tony Jacklin's 30 inch putt on the 18th in Royal Birkdale to allow GB&I a half in the Ryder Cup? He was quoted as saying afterwards "You probably would not have missed it, but I was not giving you a chance." This was in my view one of the greatest uses of the concession considering the event and it's significance. The U.S. Captain Sam Snead was reportedly not best pleased.

Relations between Snead and Nicklaus had deteriorated before the conceded putt, in fact that was the reason he conceded it. Nicklaus was hungry for wins and would have wanted Jacklin to play it but he had let it be known he was dissappointed with the spirit that Snead and some of his fellow players approached that particular ryder cup. Nicklaus did believe in the spirit of the game and was strong enough to stick to his principles rather than win at all costs, an approach the American team took that year that lead to ill feeling between the 2 sides. Nicklaus was a gentleman and was also instrumental in getting Seve into the ryder cup to make it more competitive.

elberry

Monty and McGinly gave generous halves also in recent Ryder Cup years, I think the people most upset were those with bets on. I could be mistaken but didn't Couples or Stewart concede to Monty a few Ryder Cups back as a gesture to compensate for the hard time the US crowd gave Monty during their match.
Nice to see, when it's appropriate....[/Quote]
I think Seve was captain that year and conceded the half for Monty, would probably have been a singles win for Monty that year. The match with Stewart was 1999 when Monty was given seriously insulting abuse from the yanks even while he was hitting his shots and it was non stop from when he teed off til he finished and a few of his American opponents were openly encouraging the yobs to insult him more. Stewart did claim to distance himself from that and when he was drawn with Monty in the singles he asked the public not to heckle him. However during the match Monty was in control and going to win but the American team gained 14 and half points before his match ended so I think it ended in a half after it was already irrelevant. Alcohol was being sold during that ryder cup and loads of the American supporters were drunk while shouting abuse at Monty. The abuse he was getting was in exceptionally bad taste with some American players letting themselves down badly. Presumably Stewart didn't approve. Monty was an outstanding ryder cup player for a few years

onlyfinewine

elberry wrote: »

Relations between Snead and Nicklaus had deteriorated before the conceded putt, in fact that was the reason he conceded it. Nicklaus was hungry for wins and would have wanted Jacklin to play it but he had let it be known he was dissappointed with the spirit that Snead and some of his fellow players approached that particular ryder cup. Nicklaus did believe in the spirit of the game and was strong enough to stick to his principles rather than win at all costs, an approach the American team took that year that lead to ill feeling between the 2 sides. Nicklaus was a gentleman and was also instrumental in getting Seve into the ryder cup to make it more competitive.

I was reading about Snead's Captaincy afterwards and it appears that history has not been over kind to him. He made some choices that left his best players on the bench (Nicklaus for one) and had no concept of team spirit as we now perceive it to be, leading to a disgruntled situation on the American side, as you have already mentioned.

onlyfinewine

Imhof Tank wrote: »

It was Seve who stepped in and gave that (60 foot) putt to Scot Hoch in 97 to halve Monty's match as the team just needed the half by that stage.

Monty wasnt best pleased at all but really it was irrelevant as the Cup was won outright.

I remember that there were a lot of punters quite upset by the concessions as these were betting on overall points scores and the concessions affected the outcome.

TheDoc

Mr. Larson wrote: »

I'd happily hole a 6in putt if it wasn't given. I don't expect to get given anything so if I do get one it's a bonus. I would rarely concede any putt over 18in that was downhill or breaking on fast greens, nor would I expect to be given one. Conversely I would probably concede a straight up-hill 2 footer. If you get miffed at having to hole out in matchplay your attitude needs improving in my opinion.

^This

You dont get free putts in strokes, in matchplay its a bonus.

The odd time I might try be a little giving early on, in the hope of setting the mindset " o he gave me one, I owe him one" but would never feel aggrevied been made to putt out

donalg1

I am like Freemount on this topic, I used to play with a neighbour years ago and we would always play matchplay against each other, I would generally give him all the three footers until the 14th or 15th and then make him putt one. He was only saying it the other day and how it used to wreck his head and make him choke everytime.

Webbs

donalg1 wrote: »

I am like Freemount on this topic, I used to play with a neighbour years ago and we would always play matchplay against each other, I would generally give him all the three footers until the 14th or 15th and then make him putt one. He was only saying it the other day and how it used to wreck his head and make him choke everytime.

Maybe if you had asked him to putt the three footers he would choke from the start you may not have need to go to the 15th .

After reading this thread I used to be in the give the putts early and then make them putt later in round. But am now leaning towards making them putt out from the start. Is going to be more of a headwreck if they miss early on.

donalg1

Webbs wrote: »

Maybe if you had asked him to putt the three footers he would choke from the start you may not have need to go to the 15th .

After reading this thread I used to be in the give the putts early and then make them putt later in round. But am now leaning towards making them putt out from the start. Is going to be more of a headwreck if they miss early on.

Thats true I suppose but I did enjoy knowing that he knew it was coming and knowing that it was annoying him, cruel maybe but fun all the same.

Corkblowin

I don't think you can have a policy of always giving them early etc - each situation is different. I agree it can knock your opponent off balance if you've given him 4 or 5 but then stay quiet on one - but if they're in a rhythm of putting they're unlikely to miss.

Only rule I have is that my opponent has to hole a putt to win a hole, be it 3 feet or 30 feet.

It really playing your opponent though - I played a guy a few years ago and he was so hyped up he was aggressive - just stopped short of giving me a dig on the first tee! You'd swear we were going playing hurling. On the 3rd he hit a great recovery about a foot and walked onto the green without his putter. He conceded mine and stood there looking at me. I leaned on my putter & looked back. He asked was I giving it to him and I said he may as well hole out for a good up & down. He cursed at me and had to walk off the green to get his putter, getting redder and redder with rage and said f-you after tapping it in.......but it worked. I won the next 3 holes in a row while he seethed and the match 6&5. Matchplay is about playing the man as much as the course.

Mr. Larson

Corkblowin wrote: »

I don't think you can have a policy of always giving them early etc - each situation is different. I agree it can knock your opponent off balance if you've given him 4 or 5 but then stay quiet on one - but if they're in a rhythm of putting they're unlikely to miss.

Only rule I have is that my opponent has to hole a putt to win a hole, be it 3 feet or 30 feet.

It really playing your opponent though - I played a guy a few years ago and he was so hyped up he was aggressive - just stopped short of giving me a dig on the first tee! You'd swear we were going playing hurling. On the 3rd he hit a great recovery about a foot and walked onto the green without his putter. He conceded mine and stood there looking at me. I leaned on my putter & looked back. He asked was I giving it to him and I said he may as well hole out for a good up & down. He cursed at me and had to walk off the green to get his putter, getting redder and redder with rage and said f-you after tapping it in.......but it worked. I won the next 3 holes in a row while he seethed and the match 6&5. Matchplay is about playing the man as much as the course.

Well played, sir!

TheDoc

Could just as easy see how he was pissed though...

Mr. Larson

TheDoc wrote: »

Could just as easy see how he was pissed though...

He arrived at the tee pissed [off] by the sounds of it so he got everything that was coming to him if you ask me.

In the same situation I would have just walked up & knocked without looking at him (waiting for an audio queue of 'that's good that would never have come) & knocked it in because I wouldn't have dared set off to the ball without my putter.

Golfgraffix

I think in a serious match play it is lunacy to give anything other than a tap in. If you look at say a 14 handicap who will miss 25% of his 1m putts, if you give him everything within 1m for the 1st 13 holes you are effectively giving him 3.25 holes (if they are for win/draw). I would say make him putt everything and by the time you get to 13 you should statisticaly be 3 holes better off

Corkblowin

TheDoc wrote: »

Could just as easy see how he was pissed though...

Yep -but the mistake he made was that I knew it would piss him off - you should never let your opponent think you're anything but totally in control;

1: don't attempt to physically intimidate your opponent - that's just stupid;
2: unless the ball is in the hole never walk onto a green without your putter;
3: don't assume that because you concede a putt you're entitled to be given yours;
4: don't let something your opponent does affect how you're playing;
and most importantly
5: just because you can play (& this guy has game) don't be a dick on the course. Even his own crowd were embarrassed with his antics.

Russman

Walking to the green without a putter, he was asking for it !
Other than someone being a dick, I'd probably always concede from 12 inches myself.
Conversely I never expect anything or delay over the ball waiting for something to be said, I always mark and/or prepare to putt as normal, if my opponent concedes its a bonus. It's not even by design that I do this, just always have for some reason.

Mind you there's nothing ruins a match like opponents being petty with 6 inch tap ins.

8under

I usually work on the principle that if the putt is a lenght that you would normally expect your opponent to get, then concede the putt. (depends on the green and your opponent's ability). If I think there is a good chance of a miss (even a short one footer, e.g. slopey green), then make them putt. I know you can use psychology like conceding 3 footers early or late in round, but that can backfire on you too.

I never worry about asking someone to make a short putt on the above basis. If they miss, then not conceding was the correct approach. I try to be fair as possible, its only a game but sometimes in the heat of matchplay, it's hard to keep your head straight.

I remember a few years ago I was playing in the club H/cap singles matchplay final. My opponent made me putt everything except from inside 3 inches. I, on the other hand conceded everything within 3 feet to him. Although I was annoyed that he made me take a couple of tap ins from 6 inches which I holed out, I decided to not let it bother me and bide my time.

We were level in a close match. On the twelfth hole, he had a 2 & 1/2 feet putt for a win and was almost about to pick the ball up when he stopped. I said nothing and he had to putt out. He missed. The putt was not a straight one.

It rattled him for the rest of the match, not just the miss, but the lack of a concession. I went on to win on a the 16th. I know he was not happy and we discussed it after and I explained that I conceded when I thought there was a good chance of him holing out but did not concede the one on 12 as I felt there was a good chance that he would miss. I was playing off 11 at the time while he was off 18.

harpsman

Golfgraffix wrote: »

I think in a serious match play it is lunacy to give anything other than a tap in. If you look at say a 14 handicap who will miss 25% of his 1m putts, if you give him everything within 1m for the 1st 13 holes you are effectively giving him 3.25 holes (if they are for win/draw). I would say make him putt everything and by the time you get to 13 you should statisticaly be 3 holes better off

Of course-just common sense.
Some people on here watching too much tv-conceding 3 footers to average amateur players??
Not only that but no-one seems to have considered the possibility that alot of people are more jittery at the start of a match than at the end when theyve got into a rythym.
I hope i meet some of you guys who concede everything for the 1st 14 holes-ill get the drinks after

Tones69

Freemount09 wrote: »

I think its all part of the psychology of it ! Early on in the round give all the 3 - 4 footers then maybe round hole 12 -13 after you draining in an 8 footer, make him putt out from 3 feet and see the beads of sweat form on his brow and his knees shake just a tad !! :P

3 and 4 footers? Who gives them now?!?

stockdam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBbKY7FU48U

stringy

unless he'd be able to knock it in with his c0ck I wouldn't give it, and I'm not embarrassed about not giving putts. I also don't buy into the idea of giving 3 foot putts until your opponent really needs one, e.g. on 13 or 14 or whatever. Why would you give putts when you could be clocking up wins early on?!

E.g. matchplay semi-final few weeks ago, we were pretty much out of the hole, we were lying 5 on the green with a 8 footer for bogey, they were lying 3 with a 10 footer for birdie. Dad looked at me to concede, I said nothing. They nursed their putt to 2 feet short. Dad knocked in our putt for bogey. They missed the 2 footer (horrible pin placement btw), and made bogey. Hole halved, that'll do nicely

Final is this Sunday, hoping to defend our father and son title!

IITYWYBMAD

harpsman wrote: »

Of course-just common sense.
Some people on here watching too much tv-conceding 3 footers to average amateur players??
Not only that but no-one seems to have considered the possibility that alot of people are more jittery at the start of a match than at the end when theyve got into a rythym.
I hope i meet some of you guys who concede everything for the 1st 14 holes-ill get the drinks after

Yep common sense.

I think there is real danger here of mixing up the 'traditional' gentlemanly game of golf, with the absolute battle ground that is matchplay.

Personally, I concede nothing, and I expect that nothing is conceded. I'm not good enough to win my club matchplay, but I've done ok, reaching the semis last year and been beaten by a better matchplay opponent.

A degree of reality is needed in this argument to be honest. You have to ask yourself on the green "Will he/she 100% make this?" , any doubt, do not give.

It's called Matchplay for reason lads.