>
> Thank you, Malcolm, for giving home to my question.
>
>
> As I told you, I have no experience in match play, least of all in
> team matchplay. OTOH, I am very keen to read and learn about it,
> given that I'll have to prepare for my first matchplay start in April.
> Therefore, I read the thread "Match play issue" attentively.
>
> There, the fact puzzles me that the two players of a team make differing
> statements. I consider this to be a crucial point of the story.
>
> Dec. 30-2 a reads:
> "A side may be represented by one partner for all or any part of a match"
> Would it be correct to include declarations (e.g. concessions) and claims
> into this "representation"? After all, these are part of the match(?)
>
> Please tell me: ...

>
> My thanks to you, Peter, and to John for your opinions on this subject.
>
> 2-4/21 tells us that if two sides cannot arrange to play a match by the
> closing date for the round, they need not play at all!!
> All they have to do is toss a coin to decide who concedes the match -
> heads, B must concede the match to A: tails, A must concede the match to
> B!!
> 2-4/21 also says that although the CoC may say the match has to be played
> as a 4-ball match over 18 holes, the sides could decide the result by
> playing tennis, bridge or even with a putting competition.
> Imagine the scene in the clubhouse a year later. A member looks up at the
> honours board and asks how it is that Fred won the singles match-play last
> year when he is considered the worst player in the club. A long-standing
> member tells him Fred won it by playing every round as a tiddlywinks match
> and he is brilliant at tiddlywinks!
>