Handicap question

[Halebopp]

Where does it say that #2 is a prize other than money ?

 

Point one is very clear about amateurs and money. There's simply nothing left to discuss about the subject matter for point two. Also, point two doesn't mention money at all, what makes you think it would be about money?

[nsxguy]

Where does it say that #2 is a prize other than money ?

 

Point one is very clear about amateurs and money. There's simply nothing left to discuss about the subject matter for point two. Also, point two doesn't mention money at all, what makes you think it would be about money?

 

Point 2 says "prize". Prize most certainly does NOT exclude money.

 

And I'll ask again, futilely no doubt, why is #2 even there if #1 is absolute ?

 

Same goes for the cut-and-paste of yours that RK questioned. Prize can be anything,,,,,,,,,,,, including money.

[QEight]

Where does it say that #2 is a prize other than money ?

 

Point one is very clear about amateurs and money. There's simply nothing left to discuss about the subject matter for point two. Also, point two doesn't mention money at all, what makes you think it would be about money?

 

Point 2 says "prize". Prize most certainly does NOT exclude money.

 

And I'll ask again, futilely no doubt, why is #2 even there if #1 is absolute ?

 

Same goes for the cut-and-paste of yours that RK questioned. Prize can be anything,,,,,,,,,,,, including money.

 

Because amateur can receive a prize.

[Halebopp]

Where does it say that #2 is a prize other than money ?

 

Point one is very clear about amateurs and money. There's simply nothing left to discuss about the subject matter for point two. Also, point two doesn't mention money at all, what makes you think it would be about money?

 

Point 2 says "prize". Prize most certainly does NOT exclude money.

 

And I'll ask again, futilely no doubt, why is #2 even there if #1 is absolute ?

 

Same goes for the cut-and-paste of yours that RK questioned. Prize can be anything,,,,,,,,,,,, including money.

 

Because #2 isn't about money. All money prizes are prizes but not all prizes are money prizes. The powers that be want to handle these cases differently and thus point #1 is about money prizes, point #2 is about all sorts of other prizes.

[bladehunter]

Where does it say that #2 is a prize other than money ?

 

Point one is very clear about amateurs and money. There's simply nothing left to discuss about the subject matter for point two. Also, point two doesn't mention money at all, what makes you think it would be about money?

 

Point 2 says "prize". Prize most certainly does NOT exclude money.

 

And I'll ask again, futilely no doubt, why is #2 even there if #1 is absolute ?

 

Same goes for the cut-and-paste of yours that RK questioned. Prize can be anything,,,,,,,,,,,, including money.

 

Because amateur can receive a prize.

 

Prize like a visa gift card. ?

[bladehunter]

This is quite humorous to me. Flame away as I’m sure you will.

 

But it’s just another case of the veil being lifted back and the ugly truth being shown.

 

I say that as the squarest peg you can find who wishes to no end that this game were actually played and handled according to the rules and appearances it has enjoyed. Sadly it’s just not even close to the case. At least in the US. Handicaps and now payouts totally against the rules or spirit of the rules. And in my experiences breach of both is as common as men peeing during a round or cuss words being said. Literally every single round both happens.

[rogolf]

This is quite humorous to me. Flame away as I'm sure you will.

 

But it's just another case of the veil being lifted back and the ugly truth being shown.

 

I say that as the squarest peg you can find who wishes to no end that this game were actually played and handled according to the rules and appearances it has enjoyed. Sadly it's just not even close to the case. At least in the US. Handicaps and now payouts totally against the rules or spirit of the rules. And in my experiences breach of both is as common as men peeing during a round or cuss words being said. Literally every single round both happens.

Painting your own ugly picture (and not the first time)? :rockon: Have it your way then. It seems that some others respect the rules.

[Roadking2003]

Where does it say that #2 is a prize other than money ?

 

Point one is very clear about amateurs and money. There's simply nothing left to discuss about the subject matter for point two. Also, point two doesn't mention money at all, what makes you think it would be about money?

 

Point 2 says "prize". Prize most certainly does NOT exclude money.

 

And I'll ask again, futilely no doubt, why is #2 even there if #1 is absolute ?

 

Same goes for the cut-and-paste of yours that RK questioned. Prize can be anything,,,,,,,,,,,, including money.

 

Because #2 isn't about money. All money prizes are prizes but not all prizes are money prizes. The powers that be want to handle these cases differently and thus point #1 is about money prizes, point #2 is about all sorts of other prizes.

 

Obviously, after reading all these posts, the USGA needs to do a better job defining prize restrictions.

[Halebopp]

Where does it say that #2 is a prize other than money ?

 

Point one is very clear about amateurs and money. There's simply nothing left to discuss about the subject matter for point two. Also, point two doesn't mention money at all, what makes you think it would be about money?

 

Point 2 says "prize". Prize most certainly does NOT exclude money.

 

And I'll ask again, futilely no doubt, why is #2 even there if #1 is absolute ?

 

Same goes for the cut-and-paste of yours that RK questioned. Prize can be anything,,,,,,,,,,,, including money.

 

Because #2 isn't about money. All money prizes are prizes but not all prizes are money prizes. The powers that be want to handle these cases differently and thus point #1 is about money prizes, point #2 is about all sorts of other prizes.

 

Obviously, after reading all these posts, the USGA needs to do a better job defining prize restrictions.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are very clear. To me the complaints are the same as complaining how the rules about a ball in motion being stopped or deflected (Rule 19) don't cover the cases regarding a ball at rest being moved (Rule 18). It's not covered there because there's a whole another rule for it.

 

But now I'm starting to believe you truly are serious and really can't understand these two rules. In that case there really is a bigger problem because, "An amateur golfer must not play golf for prize money or its equivalent in a match, competition or exhibition. " is as simple as a rule can get. It would be impossible to write the Rules of Golf more simply. The next, more simple option would have to be a massive flowchart.

[rogolf]

Where does it say that #2 is a prize other than money ?

 

Point one is very clear about amateurs and money. There's simply nothing left to discuss about the subject matter for point two. Also, point two doesn't mention money at all, what makes you think it would be about money?

 

Point 2 says "prize". Prize most certainly does NOT exclude money.

 

And I'll ask again, futilely no doubt, why is #2 even there if #1 is absolute ?

 

Same goes for the cut-and-paste of yours that RK questioned. Prize can be anything,,,,,,,,,,,, including money.

 

Because #2 isn't about money. All money prizes are prizes but not all prizes are money prizes. The powers that be want to handle these cases differently and thus point #1 is about money prizes, point #2 is about all sorts of other prizes.

 

Obviously, after reading all these posts, the USGA needs to do a better job defining prize restrictions.

Imo. they've done a more than sufficient job defining them. The issue seems to be a lack of understanding or appreciation by those reading them.

[Roadking2003]

Obviously, after reading all these posts, the USGA needs to do a better job defining prize restrictions.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are very clear. To me the complaints are the same as complaining how the rules about a ball in motion being stopped or deflected (Rule 19) don't cover the cases regarding a ball at rest being moved (Rule 18). It's not covered there because there's a whole another rule for it.

 

But now I'm starting to believe you truly are serious and really can't understand these two rules. In that case there really is a bigger problem because, "An amateur golfer must not play golf for prize money or its equivalent in a match, competition or exhibition. " is as simple as a rule can get. It would be impossible to write the Rules of Golf more simply. The next, more simple option would have to be a massive flowchart.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are not clear.

 

Why do you need a $750 limit if it's so clear that amateurs must not play for prize money or its equivalent.....?

 

"Must not play" doesn't need a dollar limit.

 

And if the rule is so clear, why are there thousands of violations every weekend all over the country? Are all of these club pros really that stupid?

 

I guess you think you are the only one who knows how to interpret the rules.

[davep043]

Obviously, after reading all these posts, the USGA needs to do a better job defining prize restrictions.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are very clear. To me the complaints are the same as complaining how the rules about a ball in motion being stopped or deflected (Rule 19) don't cover the cases regarding a ball at rest being moved (Rule 18). It's not covered there because there's a whole another rule for it.

 

But now I'm starting to believe you truly are serious and really can't understand these two rules. In that case there really is a bigger problem because, "An amateur golfer must not play golf for prize money or its equivalent in a match, competition or exhibition. " is as simple as a rule can get. It would be impossible to write the Rules of Golf more simply. The next, more simple option would have to be a massive flowchart.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are not clear.

 

Why do you need a $750 limit if it's so clear that amateurs must not play for prize money or its equivalent.....?

 

"Must not play" doesn't need a dollar limit.

 

And if the rule is so clear, why are there thousands of violations every weekend all over the country? Are all of these club pros really that stupid?

 

I guess you think you are the only one who knows how to interpret the rules.

The rules seems reasonably clear to me. Prize money is one thing, a prize is a different thing. Prize money is unacceptable in amateur competitions, prizes are acceptable within limits.

 

As for why there are still competitions that offer cash prizes, that's simple. The professionals do what their membership wants in order to keep their jobs, and in many cases the memberships feel that their wishes are more important than the rules. That attitude is pretty common within the WRX community as well as in the greater golf community, many people express opinions or talk about actions that fly in the face of various rules. Their justification is typically that the rules are just wrong, and the player will do as he damn well pleases.

[Halebopp]

Obviously, after reading all these posts, the USGA needs to do a better job defining prize restrictions.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are very clear. To me the complaints are the same as complaining how the rules about a ball in motion being stopped or deflected (Rule 19) don't cover the cases regarding a ball at rest being moved (Rule 18). It's not covered there because there's a whole another rule for it.

 

But now I'm starting to believe you truly are serious and really can't understand these two rules. In that case there really is a bigger problem because, "An amateur golfer must not play golf for prize money or its equivalent in a match, competition or exhibition. " is as simple as a rule can get. It would be impossible to write the Rules of Golf more simply. The next, more simple option would have to be a massive flowchart.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are not clear.

 

Why do you need a $750 limit if it's so clear that amateurs must not play for prize money or its equivalent.....?

 

"Must not play" doesn't need a dollar limit.

 

And if the rule is so clear, why are there thousands of violations every weekend all over the country? Are all of these club pros really that stupid?

 

I guess you think you are the only one who knows how to interpret the rules.

 

I'm not interpreting the rules, I'm reading what they've written in the rules. Either you simply can't differentiate between money (or its equivalents) and other kinds of prizes, like vouchers or pieces of golf equipment, or you don't understand the word equivalent in this context.

 

I don't know what you do in the States but if they hand out prize money to amateurs, then yes, they are that stupid, don't know the rules or simply don't care.

 

This explanation of the word equivalent might help you understand the rules slightly better, if not, I'm running out of ideas how to explain it. It should also be clear from Rule 3-2 that prize vouchers, for example, aren't considered cash equivalents, otherwise those would be covered in Rule 3-1. Here's also a Decision on Gift Cards to further prove the point.

 

Cash equivalent

October 03, 2017

A cash equivalent is a highly liquid

investment

having a maturity of three months or less. It should be at minimal risk of a change in value. Examples of cash equivalents are:

• Certificates of deposit
  
• Commercial paper
  
• Marketable securities
  
• Money market funds
  
• Short-term government bonds
  
• Treasury bills
  

To be classified as a cash equivalent, an item must be unrestricted, so that it is available for immediate use.

The cash and cash equivalents line item is stated first in the balance sheet, since line items are stated in their order of liquidity, and these assets are the most liquid of all assets.

[HatsForBats]

Obviously, after reading all these posts, the USGA needs to do a better job defining prize restrictions.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are very clear. To me the complaints are the same as complaining how the rules about a ball in motion being stopped or deflected (Rule 19) don't cover the cases regarding a ball at rest being moved (Rule 18). It's not covered there because there's a whole another rule for it.

 

But now I'm starting to believe you truly are serious and really can't understand these two rules. In that case there really is a bigger problem because, "An amateur golfer must not play golf for prize money or its equivalent in a match, competition or exhibition. " is as simple as a rule can get. It would be impossible to write the Rules of Golf more simply. The next, more simple option would have to be a massive flowchart.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are not clear.

 

Why do you need a $750 limit if it's so clear that amateurs must not play for prize money or its equivalent.....?

 

"Must not play" doesn't need a dollar limit.

 

And if the rule is so clear, why are there thousands of violations every weekend all over the country? Are all of these club pros really that stupid?

 

I guess you think you are the only one who knows how to interpret the rules.

Their justification is typically that the rules are just wrong, and the player will do as he damn well pleases.

 

I agree with your assesment but also agree with the sinners on their stance on this one. Honestly I prefer not to play for money but most larger groups I have been involved with can't seem to live without it.

[deadsolid...shank]

Obviously, after reading all these posts, the USGA needs to do a better job defining prize restrictions.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are very clear. To me the complaints are the same as complaining how the rules about a ball in motion being stopped or deflected (Rule 19) don't cover the cases regarding a ball at rest being moved (Rule 18). It's not covered there because there's a whole another rule for it.

 

But now I'm starting to believe you truly are serious and really can't understand these two rules. In that case there really is a bigger problem because, "An amateur golfer must not play golf for prize money or its equivalent in a match, competition or exhibition. " is as simple as a rule can get. It would be impossible to write the Rules of Golf more simply. The next, more simple option would have to be a massive flowchart.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are not clear.

 

Why do you need a $750 limit if it's so clear that amateurs must not play for prize money or its equivalent.....?

 

"Must not play" doesn't need a dollar limit.

 

And if the rule is so clear, why are there thousands of violations every weekend all over the country? Are all of these club pros really that stupid?

 

I guess you think you are the only one who knows how to interpret the rules.

The rules seems reasonably clear to me. Prize money is one thing, a prize is a different thing. Prize money is unacceptable in amateur competitions, prizes are acceptable within limits.

 

As for why there are still competitions that offer cash prizes, that's simple. The professionals do what their membership wants in order to keep their jobs, and in many cases the memberships feel that their wishes are more important than the rules. That attitude is pretty common within the WRX community as well as in the greater golf community, many people express opinions or talk about actions that fly in the face of various rules. Their justification is typically that the rules are just wrong, and the player will do as he damn well pleases.

 

Can’t prize money be a prize? I don’t see the difference Dave. Not that it really matters, but I have always wondered about the tournaments that pay out in cash.

 

Technically anyway, strictly in regards to the rules.

[Halebopp]

Can’t prize money be a prize? I don’t see the difference Dave. Not that it really matters, but I have always wondered about the tournaments that pay out in cash.

 

Technically anyway, strictly in regards to the rules.

 

Yes it can but the amateurs just can't accept the prize money.

[davep043]

 

Can’t prize money be a prize? I don’t see the difference Dave. Not that it really matters, but I have always wondered about the tournaments that pay out in cash.

 

Technically anyway, strictly in regards to the rules.

I agree, prize money is a specific form of a prize, there are many forms that prizes may take. There is one form of prize, money or its equivalent, that amateurs may not accept under the rules. In fact, amateurs must declare before they play that they will not accept a monetary prize.

[deadsolid...shank]

Can’t prize money be a prize? I don’t see the difference Dave. Not that it really matters, but I have always wondered about the tournaments that pay out in cash.

 

Technically anyway, strictly in regards to the rules.

 

Yes it can but the amateurs just can't accept the prize money.

 

Can’t prize money be a prize? I don’t see the difference Dave. Not that it really matters, but I have always wondered about the tournaments that pay out in cash.

 

Technically anyway, strictly in regards to the rules.

I agree, prize money is a specific form of a prize, there are many forms that prizes may take. There is one form of prize, money or its equivalent, that amateurs may not accept under the rules. In fact, amateurs must declare before they play that they will not accept a monetary prize.

 

That is what I was wondering (not that it really matters all that much). All the small tournaments I mentioned earlier (small town courses with no pro shops), pay out in cash. So those are technically illegal.

[Roadking2003]

Obviously, after reading all these posts, the USGA needs to do a better job defining prize restrictions.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are very clear. To me the complaints are the same as complaining how the rules about a ball in motion being stopped or deflected (Rule 19) don't cover the cases regarding a ball at rest being moved (Rule 18). It's not covered there because there's a whole another rule for it.

 

But now I'm starting to believe you truly are serious and really can't understand these two rules. In that case there really is a bigger problem because, "An amateur golfer must not play golf for prize money or its equivalent in a match, competition or exhibition. " is as simple as a rule can get. It would be impossible to write the Rules of Golf more simply. The next, more simple option would have to be a massive flowchart.

 

I thought you were just acting stupid for the h**l of it because the rules are not clear.

 

Why do you need a $750 limit if it's so clear that amateurs must not play for prize money or its equivalent.....?

 

"Must not play" doesn't need a dollar limit.

 

And if the rule is so clear, why are there thousands of violations every weekend all over the country? Are all of these club pros really that stupid?

 

I guess you think you are the only one who knows how to interpret the rules.

The rules seems reasonably clear to me. Prize money is one thing, a prize is a different thing. Prize money is unacceptable in amateur competitions, prizes are acceptable within limits.

 

As for why there are still competitions that offer cash prizes, that's simple. The professionals do what their membership wants in order to keep their jobs, and in many cases the memberships feel that their wishes are more important than the rules. That attitude is pretty common within the WRX community as well as in the greater golf community, many people express opinions or talk about actions that fly in the face of various rules. Their justification is typically that the rules are just wrong, and the player will do as he damn well pleases.

 

Can’t prize money be a prize? I don’t see the difference Dave. Not that it really matters, but I have always wondered about the tournaments that pay out in cash.

 

Technically anyway, strictly in regards to the rules.

 

I think I could do a much better job than the USGA in writing the amateur status rule. Maybe they will clarify it next year.

[HatsForBats]

I had never read the USGA's policy on Gambling because until about a year ago it really didn't pertain to me. After reading the policy it still doesn't seem to pertain to me. As long as the cash 'prize' is from monies contributed solely by the participants and the amount of money is not considered excessive (vague) then there is not an issue? It even reads like events at a players club that are organized by the committee are not prohibited as long as the prize pool money comes from the players themselves. If an outside source, perhaps a sponsor, would contribute to the money pool then there would be an issue?

[rogolf]

It does say, "Organized events designed or promoted to generate cash prizes are not permitted." It also speaks of "informal wagering or gambling" - contrast this with "organized events".

Their advice is to consult with the governing body if their is any doubt about compliance with the Rules of Amateur Status.

I'm quite certain that there have been many players/groups before us that have tested those Rules and received appropriate advice.

[SkiSchoolPro]

Thanks to Hat for his analysis...while the USGA might be golf experts, it's always good to have someone with a sound, mathematical mind look things over (as many golf experts aren't math experts)

 

Regarding gambling, the USGA is trying to walk a fine line- casual, low stakes gambling is ok, but organized, high stakes gambling is not.

 

Outside prize money is a clear no-no, but shop credit is OK. $ that comes from the players themselves seems ok as long as it is deemed casual, low stakes gambling. So, I think a low stakes, optional $ skins game within a men's league is not a violation of AM rules.

[nsxguy]

I had never read the USGA's policy on Gambling because until about a year ago it really didn't pertain to me. After reading the policy it still doesn't seem to pertain to me. As long as the cash 'prize' is from monies contributed solely by the participants and the amount of money is not considered excessive (vague) then there is not an issue? It even reads like events at a players club that are organized by the committee are not prohibited as long as the prize pool money comes from the players themselves. If an outside source, perhaps a sponsor, would contribute to the money pool then there would be an issue?

 

I think, but am not sure, you MAY have hit upon it. "contributed solely by the members"

 

So a club, of pretty much any type, supported solely by its membership, and therefore ALL its funds are FROM its members, may offer a cash prize of up to $750 for an event ? Covered under the "informal gambling provision ?

 

But if an "outside agency" decides to run a tournament and offers up prize to the sign ups for an entry fee which could not possibly cover the prize pool, that would be an amateur "playing for prize money".

 

I wonder if this theory holds water ? :dntknw:

[davep043]

I had never read the USGA's policy on Gambling because until about a year ago it really didn't pertain to me. After reading the policy it still doesn't seem to pertain to me. As long as the cash 'prize' is from monies contributed solely by the participants and the amount of money is not considered excessive (vague) then there is not an issue? It even reads like events at a players club that are organized by the committee are not prohibited as long as the prize pool money comes from the players themselves. If an outside source, perhaps a sponsor, would contribute to the money pool then there would be an issue?

 

I think, but am not sure, you MAY have hit upon it. "contributed solely by the members"

 

So a club, of pretty much any type, supported solely by its membership, and therefore ALL its funds are FROM its members, may offer a cash prize of up to $750 for an event ? Covered under the "informal gambling provision ?

 

But if an "outside agency" decides to run a tournament and offers up prize to the sign ups for an entry fee which could not possibly cover the prize pool, that would be an amateur "playing for prize money".

 

I wonder if this theory holds water ? :dntknw:

I think your thoughts about an outside agency are absolutely right. However, I think the "excessive amount of money" provision would come into play for many Calcuttas, where the money from the auction can get well into 5 figures, perhaps even higher in more affluent clubs. That money is all raised from the players, and is voluntary, but would probably be deemed "excessive".

[HatsForBats]

I had never read the USGA's policy on Gambling because until about a year ago it really didn't pertain to me. After reading the policy it still doesn't seem to pertain to me. As long as the cash 'prize' is from monies contributed solely by the participants and the amount of money is not considered excessive (vague) then there is not an issue? It even reads like events at a players club that are organized by the committee are not prohibited as long as the prize pool money comes from the players themselves. If an outside source, perhaps a sponsor, would contribute to the money pool then there would be an issue?

 

I think, but am not sure, you MAY have hit upon it. "contributed solely by the members"

 

So a club, of pretty much any type, supported solely by its membership, and therefore ALL its funds are FROM its members, may offer a cash prize of up to $750 for an event ? Covered under the "informal gambling provision ?

 

But if an "outside agency" decides to run a tournament and offers up prize to the sign ups for an entry fee which could not possibly cover the prize pool, that would be an amateur "playing for prize money".

 

I wonder if this theory holds water ? :dntknw:

 

Here is the wording and link (if it works) - http://www.usga.org/...g-78282bad.html

 

The USGA does not object to informal gambling or wagering among individual golfers or teams of golfers when the players in general know each other, participation in the wagering is optional and is limited to the players, the sole source of all money won by the players is advanced by the players on themselves or their own teams and the amount of money involved is not generally considered excessive such that the primary purpose is the playing of the game for enjoyment.

 

On the other hand, organized events open to the general public and designed or promoted to create cash prizes are not approved by the USGA. Golfers participating in such events without first irrevocably waiving their right to prize money are deemed by the USGA to be playing for prize money, in breach of Rule 3-1.

[HatsForBats]

I had never read the USGA's policy on Gambling because until about a year ago it really didn't pertain to me. After reading the policy it still doesn't seem to pertain to me. As long as the cash 'prize' is from monies contributed solely by the participants and the amount of money is not considered excessive (vague) then there is not an issue? It even reads like events at a players club that are organized by the committee are not prohibited as long as the prize pool money comes from the players themselves. If an outside source, perhaps a sponsor, would contribute to the money pool then there would be an issue?

 

I think, but am not sure, you MAY have hit upon it. "contributed solely by the members"

 

So a club, of pretty much any type, supported solely by its membership, and therefore ALL its funds are FROM its members, may offer a cash prize of up to $750 for an event ? Covered under the "informal gambling provision ?

 

But if an "outside agency" decides to run a tournament and offers up prize to the sign ups for an entry fee which could not possibly cover the prize pool, that would be an amateur "playing for prize money".

 

I wonder if this theory holds water ? :dntknw:

I think your thoughts about an outside agency are absolutely right. However, I think the "excessive amount of money" provision would come into play for many Calcuttas, where the money from the auction can get well into 5 figures, perhaps even higher in more affluent clubs. That money is all raised from the players, and is voluntary, but would probably be deemed "excessive".

 

From the link in my post above:

 

The USGA is opposed to and urges its Member Clubs, all golf associations and all other sponsors of golf competitions to prohibit types of gambling such as: (1) Calcuttas, (2) other auction pools, (3) pari-mutuels and (4) any other forms of gambling organized for general participation or permitting participants to bet on someone other than themselves or their teams

[bladehunter]

This is quite humorous to me. Flame away as I'm sure you will.

 

But it's just another case of the veil being lifted back and the ugly truth being shown.

 

I say that as the squarest peg you can find who wishes to no end that this game were actually played and handled according to the rules and appearances it has enjoyed. Sadly it's just not even close to the case. At least in the US. Handicaps and now payouts totally against the rules or spirit of the rules. And in my experiences breach of both is as common as men peeing during a round or cuss words being said. Literally every single round both happens.

Painting your own ugly picture (and not the first time)? :rockon: Have it your way then. It seems that some others respect the rules.

 

What country of original is that so that I may use google translate.

 

 

 

Come on. Seriously. ? I’m simply a showing you what IS happening everywhere. Has anyone popped up to say it’s not the case ?

 

I’ll give you a well known example. Golf channel am tour. In 2016 I won three flights , three different weeks and was paid with visa gift cards. This is a pretty well sponsored deal , not a local club who has a membership demanding cash. I haven’t played with them since 2016. But it happened. At one point I had a card I hadn’t picked up from the tours director , he finally mailed it to me.

 

 

Mind you I’m not arguing against the rule. In fact I am just now understanding it this way. I understood it to be cash ok but a limit.

 

But that doesn’t change the experiences I’ve had , as common place as breathing in AM comps.

[Halebopp]

What country of original is that so that I may use google translate.

 

 

 

Come on. Seriously. ? I'm simply a showing you what IS happening everywhere. Has anyone popped up to say it's not the case ?

 

I'll give you a well known example. Golf channel am tour. In 2016 I won three flights , three different weeks and was paid with visa gift cards. This is a pretty well sponsored deal , not a local club who has a membership demanding cash. I haven't played with them since 2016. But it happened. At one point I had a card I hadn't picked up from the tours director , he finally mailed it to me.

 

 

Mind you I'm not arguing against the rule. In fact I am just now understanding it this way. I understood it to be cash ok but a limit.

 

But that doesn't change the experiences I've had , as common place as breathing in AM comps.

 

Here's the Decision 3-2a/21.5 again:

 

Gift cards that can be exchanged for products and services in specific retail outlets are permissible as prizes, provided the retail value does not exceed the limit in Rule 3-2a.

 

This includes gift cards that can be used in the same way as a credit card to purchase retail items or services from any unspecified retail outlet where that type of card is accepted.

 

However, gift cards and debit cards that are designed to be redeemable for cash only or can be used to withdraw cash from a bank or automated cash machine are deemed to be cash prizes. A player would be in breach of Rule 3-1a if he played for this type of cash gift or debit card. See also Decision 3-1a/5 and Decision 3-1a/6. (New)

[Roadking2003]

What country of original is that so that I may use google translate.

 

 

 

Come on. Seriously. ? I'm simply a showing you what IS happening everywhere. Has anyone popped up to say it's not the case ?

 

I'll give you a well known example. Golf channel am tour. In 2016 I won three flights , three different weeks and was paid with visa gift cards. This is a pretty well sponsored deal , not a local club who has a membership demanding cash. I haven't played with them since 2016. But it happened. At one point I had a card I hadn't picked up from the tours director , he finally mailed it to me.

 

 

Mind you I'm not arguing against the rule. In fact I am just now understanding it this way. I understood it to be cash ok but a limit.

 

But that doesn't change the experiences I've had , as common place as breathing in AM comps.

 

Here's the Decision 3-2a/21.5 again:

 

Gift cards that can be exchanged for products and services in specific retail outlets are permissible as prizes, provided the retail value does not exceed the limit in Rule 3-2a.

 

This includes gift cards that can be used in the same way as a credit card to purchase retail items or services from any unspecified retail outlet where that type of card is accepted.

 

However, gift cards and debit cards that are designed to be redeemable for cash only or can be used to withdraw cash from a bank or automated cash machine are deemed to be cash prizes. A player would be in breach of Rule 3-1a if he played for this type of cash gift or debit card. See also Decision 3-1a/5 and Decision 3-1a/6. (New)

 

Doesn't this decision just show how silly the rule is? I can win $750 and get paid via any means except cash. Silly. And I can get paid $750 an unlimited number of times per year. So I could win thousands of dollars every year.

 

Isn't the objective to divide golfers into two groups; Those who make a living playing golf and those who don't? If so, why not have a VERY SIMPLE RULE that says an amateur can collect prizes in any format including cash as long as the total in any one year does not exceed $5000?

[bladehunter]

Lol. Wow. So as long as it isn’t actual green backs it’s ok ?

 

Good lord. Ambiguous and confusing, borderline hypocritical doesn’t really cover that now does it ?

 

Anyway. So never fear Rogolf. I’m in the clear on a technicality!!! Am status reinstated!

 

 

Reading that agains it’s STILL not clear.

 

So a gift card is ok if it cannot be redeemed for cash ? Or transferred to say Paypal then later directed to your checking account. The Visa cards I got were good for anything. I could have converted them to green money if I wanted. Am I in breach if I didn’t ? I recall using them on amazon mostly. Maybe status gone again ?! Lol.

 

 

Reading that conflagration AGAIN I feel I’m close to passing the bar ..... but it seems that the card needs to be able to be used in an atm ? They don’t specify my idea of an end around. I’m not sure if the normal visa gift cards are atm compatible. I may have to investigate. I still don’t know if I’m in breach. ( that time )

 

All that beside the point. I’ve seen real green money handed over the counter at 4 clubs I’ve played comps at locally. Still say it’s common . Anyone never see it happen in their experience ??