Posting score for incomplete 9 holes

[Ugly Par]

I know you can submit a card for handicap purposes if you only complete 7 of 9 holes.

 

Do those holes have to be the first seven, or can they be the last 7? My course has a layout with 1,2, then 12-18 all on the "front" of the course. Playing a quick 9 is difficult as the 10th tee is one of the furthest points from the clubhouse. It would be great to play 1 & 2, then jump over to 12 and play to 18 and be able to submit a card for those holes.

 

Thanks

[Augster]

58 minutes ago, Ugly Par said:

I know you can submit a card for handicap purposes if you only complete 7 of 9 holes.

 

Do those holes have to be the first seven, or can they be the last 7? My course has a layout with 1,2, then 12-18 all on the "front" of the course. Playing a quick 9 is difficult as the 10th tee is one of the furthest points from the clubhouse. It would be great to play 1 & 2, then jump over to 12 and play to 18 and be able to submit a card for those holes.

 

Thanks

It can be any 7/9 on a 9. There isn’t a course rating for the “9” that you are playing.
 

Also, you have to be playing with at least one other person to post. 

[Ugly Par]

Thank you!

[Newby]

10 hours ago, Ugly Par said:

I know you can submit a card for handicap purposes if you only complete 7 of 9 holes.

It would be great to play 1 & 2, then jump over to 12 and play to 18 and be able to submit a card for those holes.

 

 

Do holes 10 - 18 have a 9 hole rating?

[nsxguy]

15 hours ago, Augster said:

It can be any 7/9 on a 9. There isn’t a course rating for the “9” that you are playing.
 

Also, you have to be playing with at least one other person to post. 

 

A little unclear here my friend.

 

By "There isn't a course rating for the "9" you're playing",,,,,,,, you actually mean,,,,,,, "No, you can't post that score as the 9 holes you're playing MUST be rated." (as @Newby alluded to)

 

Not so ?

 

@Ugly Par Is the above what you understood ?

[Augster]

Pardon me, I read the OP wrong. If he’s playing 12-18 on the backside, yes, absolutely, he can post his score for the back 9 as 12-18 is 7/9 holes. (I’ll assume the back 9 has its own rating.)

He takes par+ for holes 10 and 11 to fill out the 9. 
 

This assumes, of course, he’s playing with at least one other person to make the score eligible to post. 

Sorry for the confusion. Math. 
 

 

[Ugly Par]

Thanks for all the responses.  Yes, my course has front and back nine ratings.  So, taking my desired scenario, I enter a net par for holes 10 and 11 and then actual scores for 12 thru 18, correct? 

 

But let me complicate this further. According to 3.2, there needs to be a valid reason for the incomplete round, with weather and light being the most obvious. Does this rule still apply if you simply chose to play those 7 (or 14) holes because of convenience or other time restraints?

Edited September 16, 2022 by Ugly Par

[larrybud]

All courses have separate 9 hole ratings.

 

[davep043]

20 minutes ago, Ugly Par said:

But let me complicate this further. According to 3.2, there needs to be a valid reason for the incomplete round, with weather and light being the most obvious. Does this rule still apply if you simply chose to play those 7 (or 14) holes because of convenience or other time restraints?

Look further down the page, to Interpretation 3.2/1, Invalid Reasons for Not Playing a Hole.  The two examples are for situations where the player is attempting to manipulate his score, by either NOT playing difficult holes (to avoid a high score) or simply not playing the last few holes to avoid submitting a score to either extreme.  If you're playing just 7 because you have only so much time, I'd think that's legitimate.  

[Ugly Par]

32 minutes ago, davep043 said:

Look further down the page, to Interpretation 3.2/1, Invalid Reasons for Not Playing a Hole.  The two examples are for situations where the player is attempting to manipulate his score, by either NOT playing difficult holes (to avoid a high score) or simply not playing the last few holes to avoid submitting a score to either extreme.  If you're playing just 7 because you have only so much time, I'd think that's legitimate.  

I saw that but it still leaves a gray area. It gives some legitimate reasons, for incomplete, and it also gives the examples of what would not be considered acceptable. I would have thought that simply choosing to play only 7 holes would be a fairly clear thing to have "legislated" on. But in the absence of such, I tend to agree with you that this likely leaves room for interpretation that it is ok.  

[davep043]

4 minutes ago, Ugly Par said:

I would have thought that simply choosing to play only 7 holes would be a fairly clear thing to have "legislated" on

How do you think this should best be "legislated"?  To me, this is quite logically a judgement call, could you imagine a more specific definition that could apply fairly in all cases?  I'm not trying to give you a hard time, just wondering if you can come up with a more definitive way to write the rule.  If you've seen my posts before, you'd read that I believe that Rules work best when they draw clear lines, when interpretation and judgement are kept to a minimum.  IS that appropriate and possible in this case?

[Ugly Par]

44 minutes ago, davep043 said:

How do you think this should best be "legislated"?  To me, this is quite logically a judgement call, could you imagine a more specific definition that could apply fairly in all cases?  I'm not trying to give you a hard time, just wondering if you can come up with a more definitive way to write the rule.  If you've seen my posts before, you'd read that I believe that Rules work best when they draw clear lines, when interpretation and judgement are kept to a minimum.  IS that appropriate and possible in this case?

The reason I said this is that the acceptable reasons explicitly stated in 3.2 are all very different to consciously choosing to play an incomplete round from the outset. I suppose the question is better framed this way - was the incomplete round rule implemented to protect scores from factors somewhat out of the golfers control, or was it also implemented to give golfers the choice to play an incomplete round. The spirit of the rules (IMHO) seems to suggest the former. 

 

[davep043]

10 minutes ago, Ugly Par said:

The reason I said this is that the acceptable reasons explicitly stated in 3.2 are all very different to consciously choosing to play an incomplete round from the outset. I suppose the question is better framed this way - was the incomplete round rule implemented to protect scores from factors somewhat out of the golfers control, or was it also implemented to give golfers the choice to play an incomplete round. The spirit of the rules (IMHO) seems to suggest the former. 

Its possible I'm reading something that's not there, but it seems to me that the "invalid" reasons for playing fewer than 9 or 18 holes are related to a player trying to manipulate the score in some way, by either eliminating high or low scores.  In my opinion, choosing in advance to play a limited number of holes would be acceptable, as long as you're not making that decision based on avoiding particularly hard or particularly easy holes.  The best course of action for you would be to contact the Handicap Committee and tell them what you prefer to do, and ask for their direction. 

You might also suggest that they get a CR and Slope for that set of 9 holes, if playing just 9 in that way is done frequently.  I know that in my area, the data for each hole is maintained in our State Golf Association, so the number-crunching could be done pretty easily.  I'm not certain that either the club or the association would be willing to do it, but it doesn't hurt to ask the question.

[Ugly Par]

All good points. Thanks for the conversation. 

[Augster]

5 hours ago, Ugly Par said:

I saw that but it still leaves a gray area. It gives some legitimate reasons, for incomplete, and it also gives the examples of what would not be considered acceptable. I would have thought that simply choosing to play only 7 holes would be a fairly clear thing to have "legislated" on. But in the absence of such, I tend to agree with you that this likely leaves room for interpretation that it is ok.  

There’s no gray area. Either the player is manipulating his score, or he isn’t. 
 

If he’s skipping holes to manipulate his cap, he shouldn’t post it. But he will anyway because he’s a cheat. 
 

If he’s skipping holes to save time, and not specifically to manipulate his cap, he should post. 
 

The player posts the score. He’s either a cheat or he isn’t.