A thought about "honors " in match play

[Nleary]

think we need to rethink "honors " in match play.  Why not give the winner of the previous hole the choice to hit first or second instead of being required to hit first.  Lets say you on a very windy par 3. Might be nice to see how your opponent is going to play it before you hit. You would still reserve the right to hit first if you want. Some think it would slow down play, but I think it would only take a second to tell your opponent to go ahead or, I'm hitting first.

[MtlJeff]

it's funny i just played in a match play event, and thought exactly this. It's better to tee off 2nd in many cases.

 

Another one is on a tight driving hole, if you watch the guy hit it OB you might want to pull Hybrid off the tee. I did this a couple of times in my matches when i was hitting 2nd.

 

I'm not sure that's why you get honors, IE to have an advantage. But i know what you mean

[Pepperturbo]

Honors on the Opening Match hole are tournament draw, while subsequent holes the tee gives respect to the person with the lowest score on the last hole.  Most cases a player would rather be hitting 2nd, than 1st.  Least that's my understanding.  Has watering down the rules changed it?

Edited August 10, 2022 by Pepperturbo

[davep043]

35 minutes ago, Pepperturbo said:

Honors on the Opening Match hole are tournament draw, while subsequent holes the tee gives respect to the person with the lowest score on the last hole.  Most cases a player would rather be hitting 2nd, than 1st.  Least that's my understanding.  Has watering down the rules changed it?

No, the player who has won a hole most recently must play first off the tee.  If a player plays out of turn, his Opponent may choose to make him replay the shot, with no penalty, or may choose to let the shot stand.

For @Nleary, considering ALL players rather than simply the one with the honor, how would this change make things better?  I understand that you would prefer to have the choice, but beyond your personal preference, why is it enough of an improvement to justify changing a long-standing rule?

 

[Pepperturbo]

29 minutes ago, davep043 said:

No, the player who has won a hole most recently must play first off the tee.  If a player plays out of turn, his Opponent may choose to make him replay the shot, with no penalty, or may choose to let the shot stand.

For @Nleary, considering ALL players rather than simply the one with the honor, how would this change make things better?  I understand that you would prefer to have the choice, but beyond your personal preference, why is it enough of an improvement to justify changing a long-standing rule?

 

Thanks, but reread, essentially I said that.  I just didn't cut-paste or go into detail like you.  I played Interclub match play for over ten years.  Opening hole is tournament decided, and the winner of subsequent holes has the tee.

[davep043]

6 minutes ago, Pepperturbo said:

Thanks, but reread, essentially I said that.  I just didn't cut-paste or go into detail like you.  I played Interclub match play for over ten years.  Opening hole is tournament decided, and the winner of subsequent holes has the tee.

No worries, I was responding to your last question.....

 

1 hour ago, Pepperturbo said:

Has watering down the rules changed it?

 

[Newby]

Thoughts from that ancient guru R S Tufts in The Principles Behind the Rules of Golf

 

Some golfers feel that it is an advantage to play second from the
tee and that, therefore, the winner of the last hole should have the option
of determining the order of play.

The evidence back to the earliest rule makers was not that the honor was meant to convey an advantage to one player over an other in the play of the next hole but rather to establish a procedure so that the game could proceed without delay.

There is enough delay in the game already and the present Rule at least has the advantage of establishing a fixed procedure.

Edited August 10, 2022 by Newby

[david.c.w]

I would agree that it seems obvious that going second seems like a clear advantage.  However I would say that the pressure you can put on your competitor by hitting a good tee ball can be immense.  If you are playing well, going first can be a bigger advantage by inciting you opponent to swing harder, or fire at a tough pin or just plain old sweat it.

 

I would liken it to tennis.  When you are playing someone better you feel like you have to play your absolute best, so you press and try things you normally would not do, and then you pretty much crap the bed and go down in flames.  

 

However I really like @Newby's explanation.  It is just this way to smooth out the process and limit confusion.

[Hawkeye77]

2 hours ago, Newby said:

Thoughts from that ancient guru R S Tufts in The Principles Behind the Rules of Golf

 

Some golfers feel that it is an advantage to play second from the
tee and that, therefore, the winner of the last hole should have the option
of determining the order of play.

The evidence back to the earliest rule makers was not that the honor was meant to convey an advantage to one player over an other in the play of the next hole but rather to establish a procedure so that the game could proceed without delay.

There is enough delay in the game already and the present Rule at least has the advantage of establishing a fixed procedure.

And there you are!

 

 

[davep043]

13 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

And there you are!

As much as I have learned from reading the "Principles....", Mr. Tufts represents only his own opinion and knowledge.  A number of rules have changed in ways that he was opposed to, ways that we find normal now.  In particular, I remember stumbling across an article he wrote opposing changes in the 1960 rules which allowed a ball to be lifted and cleaned when on the Putting Green, and allowing a player to repair ball marks on the green.  The Rules do evolve.  But I see no need to evolve this particular rule, no actual improvement to be offered by changing it.

[davep043]

BTW, has @Nleary returned to respond to any of this, after he dropped this stinker of a first contribution to Wrx?  I know he started the same conversation on another forum, didn't get much traction there, and stopped responding.

[Hawkeye77]

35 minutes ago, davep043 said:

As much as I have learned from reading the "Principles....", Mr. Tufts represents only his own opinion and knowledge.  A number of rules have changed in ways that he was opposed to, ways that we find normal now.  In particular, I remember stumbling across an article he wrote opposing changes in the 1960 rules which allowed a ball to be lifted and cleaned when on the Putting Green, and allowing a player to repair ball marks on the green.  The Rules do evolve.  But I see no need to evolve this particular rule, no actual improvement to be offered by changing it.

True, and I don’t think the term “honour” was without some idea it was more than a convenience of sorts. 

[Hawkeye77]

12 minutes ago, davep043 said:

BTW, has @Nleary returned to respond to any of this, after he dropped this stinker of a first contribution to Wrx?  I know he started the same conversation on another forum, didn't get much traction there, and stopped responding.

There is no “T(roll)” in honour!

Edited August 11, 2022 by Hawkeye77

[Robert72]

Honor....schmonor.

 

If I'm walking and playing with people in carts, I'm going first.  To speed up play.

 

It's also better for the shortest hitter to go first.  Because they need to get to their ball first.

Edited August 11, 2022 by Robert72

[davep043]

24 minutes ago, Robert72 said:

Honor....schmonor.

 

If I'm walking and playing with people in carts, I'm going first.  To speed up play.

 

It's also better for the shortest hitter to go first.  Because they need to get to their ball first.

That's all fine for casual play, but would you change the Rules for Match Play?  The OP doesn't want to legalize "ready golf" for match play, he merely wants to give the choice, play first of play second, to the player with the Honor.

[huskydawg]

If you look at it another way, it could give person who just lost the hole a chance to decide what to do based on what player #1 did.  But player #1 could put extra pressure on player #2 by hitting a good shot, so I think it's a wash overall.

[larrybud]

I like the concept overall, however making it a "tee shot only" rule would just add confusion, and I think it's impractical to apply it to EVERY shot.

[naval2006]

I think rules of etiquette are meant mostly to make the round smooth. Wether a player is in an advantageous position or not when applying this kind of rules is just food for thought.  But you gotta do what you gotta do when it comes to this aspect of the game. 

[QEight]

I do not know why the person winning the previous hole should have any benefit on the next hole. Why should the result affect next hole? The person has already gained one hole and the next hole is just a new un-related challenge.

 

Honour system just provides a way to state the starting order, not to benefit anybody.

[Newby]

4 minutes ago, QEight said:

I do not know why the person winning the previous hole should have any benefit on the next hole. Why should the result affect next hole? The person has already gained one hole and the next hole is just a new un-related challenge.

 

Honour system just provides a way to state the starting order, not to benefit anybody.

I think that's what Mt Tufts said some years ago 😀

[Imp]

On 8/10/2022 at 2:52 PM, davep043 said:

No, the player who has won a hole most recently must play first off the tee.  If a player plays out of turn, his Opponent may choose to make him replay the shot, with no penalty, or may choose to let the shot stand.

For @Nleary, considering ALL players rather than simply the one with the honor, how would this change make things better?  I understand that you would prefer to have the choice, but beyond your personal preference, why is it enough of an improvement to justify changing a long-standing rule?

 

Player that should be 1st off tee is not ready, says "go ahead, I thought we were playing 'ready golf'? "  (6.4(a) Exception) - fixed typo

Playing out of turn if agreement is made to save time (ready golf) then the player waives the right to cancel the stroke.

I have one guy in my club that is famous for never "being ready" to go 1st. He says what I quoted above almost all the time, and... believe it or not, I can decline the invitation to go 1st (and have on a few occasions due to wind and hole layout, and wanting to see what he does with his shot). That's OK, I'll wait. (While looking at my watch and having him on the 40 second or so shot clock). 

 

Edited August 16, 2022 by Imp

[Colin L]

While the player with the honour may, as you say, allow his opponent to play first, we need to be aware that in match play such an agreement has to  be done on a shot by shot basis.   I expect it's just a typo but it's the Exception to 6.4a that applies.  6.4b applies  to stroke play.

[SNIPERBBB]

If people would get their rear in gear and honor the honors system the game would be much faster.

 

As to the actual OP.. i think the person winning a hole should validate it on the next tee shot. The hardest hole after winning one, or making birdie, is the next one If this was changed, I'd get a chicken hat and offer it to anyone trying to dodge the tee box after winning a hole. 

[Imp]

3 hours ago, Colin L said:

While the player with the honour may, as you say, allow his opponent to play first, we need to be aware that in match play such an agreement has to  be done on a shot by shot basis.   I expect it's just a typo but it's the Exception to 6.4a that applies.  6.4b applies  to stroke play.

yep, fat fingered.