Hi Linda
I have a question about when “out of bounds” is “out of bounds!”
On my course in Bahrain in the Middle East, we have an "internal" out of bounds running down the left side of the 5th fairway. This out of bounds also applies on the right side of the parallel 9th fairway (which runs in the same direction as the 5th fairway ). Our local rules on the scorecard states the following:
"The following areas are out of bounds:
a) To the left of the 5th and right of the 9th defined by white posts."
It says nothing about applying the out of bounds rule only when playing those holes.
My question now is the following. If someone is teeing off on our 6th hole, which runs parallel to the 5th fairway but further from the OB stakes, and he hooks his ball very badly and the ball ends up to the left of the white stakes defining out of bounds on the 5th fairway, are they in fact out of bounds even though they are playing the 6th hole?
My way of thinking is that the ball must still be out of bounds. Several golfers from my club have said that the OB area only applies to the 5th hole and therefore the ball played from the 6th tee-box is not OB. My argument is that, if I end up in a water hazard or bunker on a different hole to that which I am playing I don't ignore that hazard but have to play it as a hazard, so why should I ignore the out of bounds stakes on a different hole? Also this out of bounds area to the left of the 5th fairway used to be a lateral water hazard so surely in those days you still regarded your ball being in the lateral water hazard even if you hit the ball from a different fairway to that of the 5th.
Hope you can help. Should our local rules card then not state “out of bounds to the left of the 5th and right of the 9th hole only when playing those respective holes?”
Many thanks
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
Your assessment is correct. Any ball that settles in the area between the 5th and 9th fairways that is marked as out of bounds is, indeed, out of bounds. It is not where you hit your ball from–but rather where your ball ends up–that determines its status. The area is properly marked with white stakes, and your scorecard thoughtfully warns golfers of an internal out of bounds area.
You may be interested to know that a Committee may write a Local Rule declaring a certain area on the golf course out of bounds on one hole, but in play for all other holes. Let me give you an example of a situation where a Committee might write such a Local Rule:
Let’s say your course has a hole that is a dogleg, and that players could aim their drives at an adjacent fairway to “cut” the dogleg. If such drives would pose a danger for players on that adjacent fairway, the Committee might decide to place out of bounds markers as a safety measure. The Local Rule would state that those out of bounds markers are in effect only for play on the dogleg hole. The rule should further state that players on the other hole should treat those markers as immovable obstructions.
In the case of the internal out of bounds at your course, there doesn’t seem to be a clear justification for designating the area out of bounds only during play of the 5th and 9th holes. I can’t imagine why a golfer hitting a wildly errant shot that lands in that area should be less penalized than a player whose shot strayed more understandably off course.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Monday, December 27, 2010
Ask Linda #267-Relief outside hazard, ball in hazard
Hi
My ball was in a hazard but playable. When addressing the ball, my feet were outside the hazard and standing on an exposed drainage pipe. Do I get relief from the pipe even though my ball is in a hazard?
Thank you
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
The preface to the explanation of how to take relief from an immovable obstruction begins by stating: “Except when the ball is in a water hazard or a lateral water hazard” [Rule 24-2, b]. This is your first hint that you will not be entitled to relief from the drainage pipe outside the hazard. The clincher comes along in Note 1 to the same rule, which states unequivocally that a player is not entitled to relief from an immovable obstruction if his ball lies in a water hazard. It is the location of the ball, in this case, that dictates procedure. When your ball is in a water hazard, you may choose to play it as it lies or take relief under the water hazard rule (26-1). There is no relief from an immovable obstruction outside the hazard when your ball lies in the hazard.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
My ball was in a hazard but playable. When addressing the ball, my feet were outside the hazard and standing on an exposed drainage pipe. Do I get relief from the pipe even though my ball is in a hazard?
Thank you
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
The preface to the explanation of how to take relief from an immovable obstruction begins by stating: “Except when the ball is in a water hazard or a lateral water hazard” [Rule 24-2, b]. This is your first hint that you will not be entitled to relief from the drainage pipe outside the hazard. The clincher comes along in Note 1 to the same rule, which states unequivocally that a player is not entitled to relief from an immovable obstruction if his ball lies in a water hazard. It is the location of the ball, in this case, that dictates procedure. When your ball is in a water hazard, you may choose to play it as it lies or take relief under the water hazard rule (26-1). There is no relief from an immovable obstruction outside the hazard when your ball lies in the hazard.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Ask Linda 266-Ball marker sticks to putter
Linda, I have often seen people use their putter to tap down their marker after marking a ball on the green. I've also seen cases where the marker stuck to the sole of the putter and was accidentally lifted from its original spot. In view of the recent ruling in the Dubai championship, I am now wondering if the person who accidentally moved his marker while tapping it down should have been penalized.
Thank you,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
When a ball or ball marker is accidentally moved in the process of marking and lifting a ball, there is no penalty as long as the movement is directly attributable to that specific act. The key to this rule is the meaning of the words “directly attributable.”
When a player marks and lifts a ball and then taps down the marker with the sole of his putter, that tapping down is considered to be part of the process of marking the ball. Therefore, there is no penalty if the marker is moved by the putter [Decision 20-1/6]. The player must replace the marker. If he cannot determine the exact spot, he must use his best judgment to place the marker at the closest spot to where it originally lay, taking care to place it no closer to the hole.
Any accidental movement of the ball or ball marker, which may occur, for example, if a player drops a ball on his marker (your Dubai reference), is not considered to be “directly attributable” and results in a penalty [Decision 20-1/15]. I suspect Ian Poulter was more chagrined at his carelessness than surprised by his penalty.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thank you,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
When a ball or ball marker is accidentally moved in the process of marking and lifting a ball, there is no penalty as long as the movement is directly attributable to that specific act. The key to this rule is the meaning of the words “directly attributable.”
When a player marks and lifts a ball and then taps down the marker with the sole of his putter, that tapping down is considered to be part of the process of marking the ball. Therefore, there is no penalty if the marker is moved by the putter [Decision 20-1/6]. The player must replace the marker. If he cannot determine the exact spot, he must use his best judgment to place the marker at the closest spot to where it originally lay, taking care to place it no closer to the hole.
Any accidental movement of the ball or ball marker, which may occur, for example, if a player drops a ball on his marker (your Dubai reference), is not considered to be “directly attributable” and results in a penalty [Decision 20-1/15]. I suspect Ian Poulter was more chagrined at his carelessness than surprised by his penalty.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Ask Linda #265-Unfair double penalty?
Linda,
Can you answer this question for me? In reading the Decisions book (I know..."get a life"), I came across a decision that I don't understand.
13-4/16 Removal of Loose Impediment in Water Hazard Covering Wrong Ball
Q. A player plays his ball into a water hazard. He finds a ball in the hazard and removes a loose impediment partially covering it. He discovers that the ball is not his ball. He searches for his ball but does not find it. He proceeds under Rule 26-1. Is the player subject to penalty under Rule 13-4 for removing the loose impediment?
A. Yes.
This seems entirely unfair to me. If a player is virtually certain that his ball is in a water hazard, he is permitted to search in the hazard and remove a loose impediment in order to identify his ball (otherwise the player incurs a 2-stroke penalty for striking a wrong ball). However, if the ball is not his and he is not able to locate his ball in the hazard, then he is subject to a 2-stroke penalty for touching the loose impediment? And then, he is subject to that penalty AND an additional stroke penalty for taking relief outside the hazard?
I don't see how a player can be penalized for searching in a hazard and not finding his ball.
Lou Lou
Dear readers,
I wrote the following response to “Lou Lou:”
Lou, I am going to run this by a USGA rules official early next week. On the surface, the double penalty seems unfair. I'll get back to you as soon as I get an explanation. Thanks for a very thought-provoking question.
In the interim, Lou responded:
Linda,
Thanks. Please let me know what you find out.
I did get an email back from someone who has a contact at the R&A [Royal & Ancient, the governing body for golf rules outside the U.S.]. Their explanation was that there is a subtle difference between identifying your ball and searching for your ball. If you are going to identify your ball you must mark it first. But who does this while you are searching? More importantly, they said that they are aware that identifying while searching creates an unfair situation and they are considering addressing it in the next decisions/rules revision.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
Decision 13-4/16 is one of those subtle decisions that can make grown men (and women) cry. It explains an infraction that you are more likely to read about or witness in reference to a complicated ruling in a professional golf tournament than have to deal with in your personal day-to-day golfing experience. I presented this question to a senior rules official at the USGA, and even he had to take time to research the problem before he was able to provide an answer.
The key to the answer is in the wording of the question. In Decision 13-4/16, the loose impediment is partially covering the ball in the hazard. Rule 12-1 permits the golfer to search for a ball in a hazard that is believed to be covered by loose impediments. This is a ball that you cannot see until the impediments are removed. In Decision 13-4/16, the ball was partially visible; it was not necessary to remove the loose impediments to see that a ball was there.
Once a ball is found, the golfer must follow the correct procedure to identify it. Rule 12-2 explains that the golfer must tell a fellow golfer that he plans to identify the ball. Under the watchful eye of this fellow golfer, he must mark, lift, identify, and then replace the ball.
In Decision 13-6/16, the golfer is penalized for removing the loose impediments because it was not necessary to do so to discover the presence of the ball. Had the ball been completely covered and not visible until the impediments were removed, then there would be no penalty for doing so and the impediments would have to be replaced, leaving only part of the ball visible.
The ball in Decision 13-4/6 was not hidden. The player is penalized for touching loose impediments in a hazard when it was not necessary to do so to find the ball. The rule permitting players to remove loose impediments in a hazard is designed to facilitate finding a ball that is completely hidden from view.
Lou, the USGA rules guru I consulted also mentioned (as did your R&A source) that the rules mavens are looking at the possibility of changing this rule in 2012 to allow players to lift a leaf to ID a ball. Until then, if your ball is in a hazard, and you can see a ball in the hazard, don’t touch anything. If you are unable to ID the ball without lifting it or moving a loose impediment, make sure you get a witness and follow the procedures outlined in Rule 12-2.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Can you answer this question for me? In reading the Decisions book (I know..."get a life"), I came across a decision that I don't understand.
13-4/16 Removal of Loose Impediment in Water Hazard Covering Wrong Ball
Q. A player plays his ball into a water hazard. He finds a ball in the hazard and removes a loose impediment partially covering it. He discovers that the ball is not his ball. He searches for his ball but does not find it. He proceeds under Rule 26-1. Is the player subject to penalty under Rule 13-4 for removing the loose impediment?
A. Yes.
This seems entirely unfair to me. If a player is virtually certain that his ball is in a water hazard, he is permitted to search in the hazard and remove a loose impediment in order to identify his ball (otherwise the player incurs a 2-stroke penalty for striking a wrong ball). However, if the ball is not his and he is not able to locate his ball in the hazard, then he is subject to a 2-stroke penalty for touching the loose impediment? And then, he is subject to that penalty AND an additional stroke penalty for taking relief outside the hazard?
I don't see how a player can be penalized for searching in a hazard and not finding his ball.
Lou Lou
Dear readers,
I wrote the following response to “Lou Lou:”
Lou, I am going to run this by a USGA rules official early next week. On the surface, the double penalty seems unfair. I'll get back to you as soon as I get an explanation. Thanks for a very thought-provoking question.
In the interim, Lou responded:
Linda,
Thanks. Please let me know what you find out.
I did get an email back from someone who has a contact at the R&A [Royal & Ancient, the governing body for golf rules outside the U.S.]. Their explanation was that there is a subtle difference between identifying your ball and searching for your ball. If you are going to identify your ball you must mark it first. But who does this while you are searching? More importantly, they said that they are aware that identifying while searching creates an unfair situation and they are considering addressing it in the next decisions/rules revision.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
Decision 13-4/16 is one of those subtle decisions that can make grown men (and women) cry. It explains an infraction that you are more likely to read about or witness in reference to a complicated ruling in a professional golf tournament than have to deal with in your personal day-to-day golfing experience. I presented this question to a senior rules official at the USGA, and even he had to take time to research the problem before he was able to provide an answer.
The key to the answer is in the wording of the question. In Decision 13-4/16, the loose impediment is partially covering the ball in the hazard. Rule 12-1 permits the golfer to search for a ball in a hazard that is believed to be covered by loose impediments. This is a ball that you cannot see until the impediments are removed. In Decision 13-4/16, the ball was partially visible; it was not necessary to remove the loose impediments to see that a ball was there.
Once a ball is found, the golfer must follow the correct procedure to identify it. Rule 12-2 explains that the golfer must tell a fellow golfer that he plans to identify the ball. Under the watchful eye of this fellow golfer, he must mark, lift, identify, and then replace the ball.
In Decision 13-6/16, the golfer is penalized for removing the loose impediments because it was not necessary to do so to discover the presence of the ball. Had the ball been completely covered and not visible until the impediments were removed, then there would be no penalty for doing so and the impediments would have to be replaced, leaving only part of the ball visible.
The ball in Decision 13-4/6 was not hidden. The player is penalized for touching loose impediments in a hazard when it was not necessary to do so to find the ball. The rule permitting players to remove loose impediments in a hazard is designed to facilitate finding a ball that is completely hidden from view.
Lou, the USGA rules guru I consulted also mentioned (as did your R&A source) that the rules mavens are looking at the possibility of changing this rule in 2012 to allow players to lift a leaf to ID a ball. Until then, if your ball is in a hazard, and you can see a ball in the hazard, don’t touch anything. If you are unable to ID the ball without lifting it or moving a loose impediment, make sure you get a witness and follow the procedures outlined in Rule 12-2.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Friday, December 17, 2010
Ask Linda #264-Tossed ball lands in lake
Linda, Decision 15-2/1 reads as follows:
Q. A player, whose ball was on the putting green, marked the
ball's position, lifted it and threw it to his caddie for cleaning. The
caddie failed to catch the ball and it went into a lake and could not be
retrieved. The player holed out with another ball. Should he be
penalized under Rule 15-2?
A. Yes
The question is what if that ball is retrievable? Is it a penalty stroke?
Does the golfer play from the point of nearest relief?
Thank you for your response,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
There is no penalty if the original ball is retrieved. The player has marked and lifted his ball on the putting green, and he will place that same ball behind his marker when it is his turn to putt. The fact that the ball has taken an unexpected journey into and out of a lake in between being lifted and replaced has no effect on the player’s score or subsequent procedure. The ball is out of play when it is marked and lifted, and is not back in play until it has been replaced. The player in Decision 15-2/1 was penalized two strokes because he was not permitted to substitute another ball.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Q. A player, whose ball was on the putting green, marked the
ball's position, lifted it and threw it to his caddie for cleaning. The
caddie failed to catch the ball and it went into a lake and could not be
retrieved. The player holed out with another ball. Should he be
penalized under Rule 15-2?
A. Yes
The question is what if that ball is retrievable? Is it a penalty stroke?
Does the golfer play from the point of nearest relief?
Thank you for your response,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
There is no penalty if the original ball is retrieved. The player has marked and lifted his ball on the putting green, and he will place that same ball behind his marker when it is his turn to putt. The fact that the ball has taken an unexpected journey into and out of a lake in between being lifted and replaced has no effect on the player’s score or subsequent procedure. The ball is out of play when it is marked and lifted, and is not back in play until it has been replaced. The player in Decision 15-2/1 was penalized two strokes because he was not permitted to substitute another ball.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Ask Linda #263-Raking before hitting
Hi Linda----If your ball is in a large bunker near one end, and the rake is near the other end of the bunker, when you enter the bunker to retrieve the rake are you allowed to rake the sand over from where you entered to retrieve the rake, as long as it is nowhere near your ball at the other end? This would save returning to where you got the rake from. I believe it is allowed. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Kind regards,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
A player is not permitted to smooth the sand in a hazard with a rake prior to hitting his ball that lies in the hazard, regardless of how big or small the hazard may be. This would constitute testing the condition of the hazard [Rule 13-4a; Decision 13-4/0.5]. The penalty is two strokes (loss of hole in match play).
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Kind regards,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
A player is not permitted to smooth the sand in a hazard with a rake prior to hitting his ball that lies in the hazard, regardless of how big or small the hazard may be. This would constitute testing the condition of the hazard [Rule 13-4a; Decision 13-4/0.5]. The penalty is two strokes (loss of hole in match play).
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Friday, December 10, 2010
Ask Linda #262-Ball hits teammate
Hi Linda,
I was playing in a two-person better ball match play interclub competition when unfortunately I hit into the group on the green in front of us. My ball landed, and grazed the bum of another player from our club. It deflected my ball 2 inches from the cup, and after I got to the green and apologized profusely, I tapped the ball in for an eagle. The ruling I was given was that I had hit my partner (because the lady I hit played for our club and it was a team competition) and I was assessed a two-stroke penalty. I parred the hole and our opponents bogeyed so we took the hole anyway. Just curious if that ruling was correct.
Thanks,
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
The golfer playing with you in your better ball match was your partner. The player you hit may have been your teammate, but she was not your partner. As such, she was, by definition, an “outside agency.” When a player’s ball is accidentally deflected or stopped by an outside agency, it is what is known as a “rub of the green.” There is no penalty, and the ball is played as it lies [Rule 19-1]. You should not have been assessed a penalty. Fortunately, the misunderstanding did not affect the outcome of the hole.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
I was playing in a two-person better ball match play interclub competition when unfortunately I hit into the group on the green in front of us. My ball landed, and grazed the bum of another player from our club. It deflected my ball 2 inches from the cup, and after I got to the green and apologized profusely, I tapped the ball in for an eagle. The ruling I was given was that I had hit my partner (because the lady I hit played for our club and it was a team competition) and I was assessed a two-stroke penalty. I parred the hole and our opponents bogeyed so we took the hole anyway. Just curious if that ruling was correct.
Thanks,
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
The golfer playing with you in your better ball match was your partner. The player you hit may have been your teammate, but she was not your partner. As such, she was, by definition, an “outside agency.” When a player’s ball is accidentally deflected or stopped by an outside agency, it is what is known as a “rub of the green.” There is no penalty, and the ball is played as it lies [Rule 19-1]. You should not have been assessed a penalty. Fortunately, the misunderstanding did not affect the outcome of the hole.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Ask Linda #261-Practice round illegal?
My golf group and I work hard to follow and know all the rules of golf.
One question came to mind that we could not find.
Question: When the pros play what's called a practice round during a tournament week, is that score counted or can they play different shots, different balls, etc.? I played a round of golf the other day and I worked on my irons, so I would hit two, sometimes three shots to the hole in order to
figure out how or what I was doing wrong. My playing partner said that it
was illegal to play a round of golf on the course for practice purposes…
Please shed some light on this.
Thank you,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
What a scary concept! To think that there are people who think you are never allowed to practice golf on a golf course! Of course you are, but let’s look at the big picture and discuss some related issues.
1. If you hit extra shots during your practice round, do not post a score. Your score is unacceptable for posting purposes “when a majority of the holes are not played in accordance with the principles of the rules of Golf” [The USGA Handicap System, Section 5-f, iii].
2. Some courses frown on players hitting extra balls. You should check the club’s policy before embarking on a multi-shot practice round.
3. Etiquette-wise, you don’t want to be hitting extra shots if you are delaying the play of your friends (who may not also be practicing) or those playing behind you. Pick a quiet time when the course is fairly empty to fine-tune your game.
4. Here is where your friend’s confusion may lie: You are not permitted to practice on the course prior to your round on the day of a tournament. So if you think it’s a good idea to get out early on tournament day and practice some shots and putts on the course, think again. Such practice on the day of the competition will get you disqualified [Rule 7-1, b].
I was fortunate enough to play in the USGA Women’s Senior Amateur Championship in 2004 at Pasatiempo Golf Club in Santa Cruz, California. Every player was permitted two practice rounds prior to the tournament. All of us took the opportunity to try extra shots, and consequently no one had a score to post.
It is perfectly acceptable to practice golf on a golf course.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
One question came to mind that we could not find.
Question: When the pros play what's called a practice round during a tournament week, is that score counted or can they play different shots, different balls, etc.? I played a round of golf the other day and I worked on my irons, so I would hit two, sometimes three shots to the hole in order to
figure out how or what I was doing wrong. My playing partner said that it
was illegal to play a round of golf on the course for practice purposes…
Please shed some light on this.
Thank you,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
What a scary concept! To think that there are people who think you are never allowed to practice golf on a golf course! Of course you are, but let’s look at the big picture and discuss some related issues.
1. If you hit extra shots during your practice round, do not post a score. Your score is unacceptable for posting purposes “when a majority of the holes are not played in accordance with the principles of the rules of Golf” [The USGA Handicap System, Section 5-f, iii].
2. Some courses frown on players hitting extra balls. You should check the club’s policy before embarking on a multi-shot practice round.
3. Etiquette-wise, you don’t want to be hitting extra shots if you are delaying the play of your friends (who may not also be practicing) or those playing behind you. Pick a quiet time when the course is fairly empty to fine-tune your game.
4. Here is where your friend’s confusion may lie: You are not permitted to practice on the course prior to your round on the day of a tournament. So if you think it’s a good idea to get out early on tournament day and practice some shots and putts on the course, think again. Such practice on the day of the competition will get you disqualified [Rule 7-1, b].
I was fortunate enough to play in the USGA Women’s Senior Amateur Championship in 2004 at Pasatiempo Golf Club in Santa Cruz, California. Every player was permitted two practice rounds prior to the tournament. All of us took the opportunity to try extra shots, and consequently no one had a score to post.
It is perfectly acceptable to practice golf on a golf course.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Friday, December 3, 2010
Ask Linda #260-Bunker next to water hazard
Hi Linda,
We have a couple of bunkers that end at a lake. If you go in one of these bunkers and your ball rolls into the water, do you have to drop in the bunker or do you go to the nearest point of relief out from either hazard?
Have a good winter, Linda.
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
The answer depends on whether the lake is a water hazard or a lateral water hazard, and on which relief option you choose. Let’s look at both situations.
1. Water hazard (yellow stakes)
You have two relief options. You may return to where you last played to hit your next shot, or you may drop a ball behind the hazard on the line-of-sight to the hole. If you choose the line-of-sight option, you may drop your ball on that line as far back as you want. That drop may be taken in or out of the bunker – the choice is yours. Either way, you will add one penalty stroke to your score.
2. Lateral water hazard (red stakes)
You have three relief options for a ball in a lateral hazard. The first two are the same as those listed above for a water hazard, and the same explanation holds true. The third relief option for a ball in a lateral hazard is to drop a ball within two-club-lengths of the point where the original ball last crossed the margin of the hazard. You may also drop a ball on the other side of the hazard that is the same distance from the hole. In either case, you must drop the ball no closer to the hole, and don’t forget to tack on that one-stroke penalty.
If you choose the two-club-length option, then it is entirely possible that you will be dropping a ball in the bunker. Two club-lengths is two club-lengths; there is no getting around that. If you prefer not to drop in the bunker, then choose one of the other two relief options (go back to where you hit your last shot, or drop behind the hazard on the line-of-sight to the hole).
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
We have a couple of bunkers that end at a lake. If you go in one of these bunkers and your ball rolls into the water, do you have to drop in the bunker or do you go to the nearest point of relief out from either hazard?
Have a good winter, Linda.
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
The answer depends on whether the lake is a water hazard or a lateral water hazard, and on which relief option you choose. Let’s look at both situations.
1. Water hazard (yellow stakes)
You have two relief options. You may return to where you last played to hit your next shot, or you may drop a ball behind the hazard on the line-of-sight to the hole. If you choose the line-of-sight option, you may drop your ball on that line as far back as you want. That drop may be taken in or out of the bunker – the choice is yours. Either way, you will add one penalty stroke to your score.
2. Lateral water hazard (red stakes)
You have three relief options for a ball in a lateral hazard. The first two are the same as those listed above for a water hazard, and the same explanation holds true. The third relief option for a ball in a lateral hazard is to drop a ball within two-club-lengths of the point where the original ball last crossed the margin of the hazard. You may also drop a ball on the other side of the hazard that is the same distance from the hole. In either case, you must drop the ball no closer to the hole, and don’t forget to tack on that one-stroke penalty.
If you choose the two-club-length option, then it is entirely possible that you will be dropping a ball in the bunker. Two club-lengths is two club-lengths; there is no getting around that. If you prefer not to drop in the bunker, then choose one of the other two relief options (go back to where you hit your last shot, or drop behind the hazard on the line-of-sight to the hole).
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Ask Linda #259a-Conceding a putt, follow-up
Hi again Linda. I have studied your response, and I wonder if you would be kind enough to give me a further opinion. Yes I agree we should have voiced an objection at the time. Alas we did not do so out of ignorance. My partner and I are new golfers, and were unaware of the rules when applied to a unilateral concession of a putt. Do you think there are grounds for a post match objection on the basis that the opposing player (a very experienced 6 Handicap) infringed the rules by attempting to invalidate a conceded putt and getting away with it, knowing full well that it was not allowed?
Thank you so much for your earliest convenient reply.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
You and your partner lost the option to file a claim as soon as any player in the match teed off on the next hole. A Committee will not consider a later claim unless the facts were previously unknown to you and you had been given wrong information by your opponent.
Don’t assume that just because your opponent was an experienced golfer with a single digit handicap that he was actually aware he was breaking the rules by withdrawing the concession. A good working knowledge of the rules is often more a matter of attention and interest than experience. If he did indeed know that he was not permitted to withdraw his partner’s concession, then he is violating the spirit and integrity of the game.
Knowing the rules can save strokes during your round, and can even help you win a match (as you have ruefully discovered). All golfers, both new and experienced, should take some time to study and learn the rules. You will find it to be time well spent.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thank you so much for your earliest convenient reply.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
You and your partner lost the option to file a claim as soon as any player in the match teed off on the next hole. A Committee will not consider a later claim unless the facts were previously unknown to you and you had been given wrong information by your opponent.
Don’t assume that just because your opponent was an experienced golfer with a single digit handicap that he was actually aware he was breaking the rules by withdrawing the concession. A good working knowledge of the rules is often more a matter of attention and interest than experience. If he did indeed know that he was not permitted to withdraw his partner’s concession, then he is violating the spirit and integrity of the game.
Knowing the rules can save strokes during your round, and can even help you win a match (as you have ruefully discovered). All golfers, both new and experienced, should take some time to study and learn the rules. You will find it to be time well spent.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, November 29, 2010
Ask Linda #259-Conceding a putt
Hi. Please be so kind as to give an opinion on the following situation.
On the 17th hole, scores were level, when one of our opponents had clearly "given" an 8-10 inch putt in full hearing of the 5 people present (including the match referee). The opponent in question was standing at the flag, together with the match referee, when the ball came to a stop. Before any of our players had time to reach the hole to pick up the ball, our other opponent negated the "gimme" and said he would like the putt played. The match referee remained silent. Our player walked up to the ball, and subsequently missed the putt, which would have halved the hole.
We then halved the 18th, and lost the match by one hole.
My questions are twofold:
1. Was opponent #2 entitled to override opponent #1’s clear "gimme"?
Concession of next stroke, hole or match (Rule 2-4): "When the opponent's ball is at rest or is deemed to be at rest under Rule 16-2, the player may concede the opponent to have holed out with his next stroke and the ball may be removed by either side with a club or otherwise. A player may concede a hole or a match at any time prior to the conclusion of the hole or the match. Concession of a stroke, hole or match may not be declined or withdrawn."
2. What role does a match referee play when a putt is clearly given? Does the match referee have the right/duty to inform the players that the putt has been given?
Referee: The referee is one who is appointed by the Committee to accompany players to decide questions of fact and apply the Rules. He shall act on any breach of a Rule that he observes or is reported to him. A referee's decision is final.
Thank you for your comments.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
I fail to understand why players in matches have trouble with the basic and clearly stated rule that “a concession may not be declined or withdrawn” [Rule 2-4]. If the player’s putt is conceded, then the hole is over for him. He cannot refuse the concession, and neither his opponent nor his opponent’s partner may withdraw the concession. If he attempts the putt after the concession and misses, the putt was still “good.”
The only problem that may be created by putting a ball after the putt was conceded is the possibility that the putt may assist the player’s partner. Should that happen, then the partner loses the hole [Decision 2-4/6]. I always advise players who wish to try an already-conceded putt to lift their ball when it is conceded, wait until play on the hole has finished, and then replace the ball and try the putt.
The referee’s primary responsibility is to answer questions about the rules when asked. When he heard the concession, and then the illegal withdrawal of the concession, he was probably waiting for the team that lost the hole to file a claim. Had they done so, he would have been able to rule on the spot that the putt was indeed conceded, and the concession could not be withdrawn. Since no question was asked, and no objection to the result of the hole was raised, the referee was under no obligation to correct the players’ error. He does not want to be seen as favoring one player or team over another.
If you are playing a match without a referee, and you believe a rule has been breached, you have the option to file a claim. You must do so before any player in the match tees off on the next hole. You will bring this claim to the Committee at the end of the round for a ruling.
If you are lucky enough to have a referee accompanying your match, don’t ever hesitate to ask for an immediate ruling on a disputed procedure. It is his job to assist you with the rules. He will give you a ruling if asked, and his decision will be final.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
On the 17th hole, scores were level, when one of our opponents had clearly "given" an 8-10 inch putt in full hearing of the 5 people present (including the match referee). The opponent in question was standing at the flag, together with the match referee, when the ball came to a stop. Before any of our players had time to reach the hole to pick up the ball, our other opponent negated the "gimme" and said he would like the putt played. The match referee remained silent. Our player walked up to the ball, and subsequently missed the putt, which would have halved the hole.
We then halved the 18th, and lost the match by one hole.
My questions are twofold:
1. Was opponent #2 entitled to override opponent #1’s clear "gimme"?
Concession of next stroke, hole or match (Rule 2-4): "When the opponent's ball is at rest or is deemed to be at rest under Rule 16-2, the player may concede the opponent to have holed out with his next stroke and the ball may be removed by either side with a club or otherwise. A player may concede a hole or a match at any time prior to the conclusion of the hole or the match. Concession of a stroke, hole or match may not be declined or withdrawn."
2. What role does a match referee play when a putt is clearly given? Does the match referee have the right/duty to inform the players that the putt has been given?
Referee: The referee is one who is appointed by the Committee to accompany players to decide questions of fact and apply the Rules. He shall act on any breach of a Rule that he observes or is reported to him. A referee's decision is final.
Thank you for your comments.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
I fail to understand why players in matches have trouble with the basic and clearly stated rule that “a concession may not be declined or withdrawn” [Rule 2-4]. If the player’s putt is conceded, then the hole is over for him. He cannot refuse the concession, and neither his opponent nor his opponent’s partner may withdraw the concession. If he attempts the putt after the concession and misses, the putt was still “good.”
The only problem that may be created by putting a ball after the putt was conceded is the possibility that the putt may assist the player’s partner. Should that happen, then the partner loses the hole [Decision 2-4/6]. I always advise players who wish to try an already-conceded putt to lift their ball when it is conceded, wait until play on the hole has finished, and then replace the ball and try the putt.
The referee’s primary responsibility is to answer questions about the rules when asked. When he heard the concession, and then the illegal withdrawal of the concession, he was probably waiting for the team that lost the hole to file a claim. Had they done so, he would have been able to rule on the spot that the putt was indeed conceded, and the concession could not be withdrawn. Since no question was asked, and no objection to the result of the hole was raised, the referee was under no obligation to correct the players’ error. He does not want to be seen as favoring one player or team over another.
If you are playing a match without a referee, and you believe a rule has been breached, you have the option to file a claim. You must do so before any player in the match tees off on the next hole. You will bring this claim to the Committee at the end of the round for a ruling.
If you are lucky enough to have a referee accompanying your match, don’t ever hesitate to ask for an immediate ruling on a disputed procedure. It is his job to assist you with the rules. He will give you a ruling if asked, and his decision will be final.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Ask Linda #258-Provisional hits original
A player suspects his ball could be out of bounds and hits a provisional ball. People on an adjoining fairway saw that his provisional ball hit his first ball. Is he penalized for hitting his own equipment?
Thank you
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
There is no penalty for hitting your original ball with your provisional ball [Decision 18-5/2]. If the original ball was moved when it was hit, and the observers on the adjacent fairway are able to point out the spot where the ball lay prior to being hit, then the original ball must be replaced.
If you were unaware that your original ball was moved, you played it where it lay, and someone later informed you that it had been hit and moved by your provisional, there is no penalty for not having replaced your ball.
If you’re looking for some rationale as to why there is no penalty, see if this works for you. Since a provisional ball does not meet the definition of “equipment” [Section II: Definitions], you have not moved your original ball with your own equipment. It is also not in play in this case, since you have found your original ball and are now required to abandon the provisional. I would venture to say that a provisional ball would be treated like an “outside agency” until it becomes the ball in play. It is not in play until either your original ball is lost and you continue play with the provisional, or you hit the provisional from where the original is likely to be or from a spot closer to the hole than that area.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thank you
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
There is no penalty for hitting your original ball with your provisional ball [Decision 18-5/2]. If the original ball was moved when it was hit, and the observers on the adjacent fairway are able to point out the spot where the ball lay prior to being hit, then the original ball must be replaced.
If you were unaware that your original ball was moved, you played it where it lay, and someone later informed you that it had been hit and moved by your provisional, there is no penalty for not having replaced your ball.
If you’re looking for some rationale as to why there is no penalty, see if this works for you. Since a provisional ball does not meet the definition of “equipment” [Section II: Definitions], you have not moved your original ball with your own equipment. It is also not in play in this case, since you have found your original ball and are now required to abandon the provisional. I would venture to say that a provisional ball would be treated like an “outside agency” until it becomes the ball in play. It is not in play until either your original ball is lost and you continue play with the provisional, or you hit the provisional from where the original is likely to be or from a spot closer to the hole than that area.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Ask Linda #257-Object indicates line of play
Hi Linda,
We have not corresponded in a while but I always look forward to your rules posts. Hope everything is well with you and your family.
An interesting situation occurred this weekend concerning an "object indicting line of play". As I was preparing to place my tee in the ground I notice that someone from a previous group had left their tee in the ground. I mentioned to my playing partner that I was going to use it as an alignment aid so I teed my ball a few feet behind it on a line that I intended my ball to take. My playing partner said that he was unsure if that was permissible and referred to Rule 8 - "Advice; Indicating Line of Play". I told him that is my understanding that an object cannot be "placed" to indicate the line (8-2a). However, there is no rule against using an object that is already there. The same would hold true if there was a leaf or a twig or anything else that was already there when you go to the teeing ground and you lined up with that object (or if you used a house or a tree in the distance to line up with).
What do you think? Am I OK?
Thanks,
Lou Lou from Atlanta
Dear Lou Lou,
Always nice to hear from you, Lou. And I have good news for you. You are OK. You may use anything that is already there to help you line up your shot – leaves, twigs, trees, houses, abandoned tees, etc. Additionally, you are permitted to place a mark to indicate your line of play as long as you pick it up before you hit the ball.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
We have not corresponded in a while but I always look forward to your rules posts. Hope everything is well with you and your family.
An interesting situation occurred this weekend concerning an "object indicting line of play". As I was preparing to place my tee in the ground I notice that someone from a previous group had left their tee in the ground. I mentioned to my playing partner that I was going to use it as an alignment aid so I teed my ball a few feet behind it on a line that I intended my ball to take. My playing partner said that he was unsure if that was permissible and referred to Rule 8 - "Advice; Indicating Line of Play". I told him that is my understanding that an object cannot be "placed" to indicate the line (8-2a). However, there is no rule against using an object that is already there. The same would hold true if there was a leaf or a twig or anything else that was already there when you go to the teeing ground and you lined up with that object (or if you used a house or a tree in the distance to line up with).
What do you think? Am I OK?
Thanks,
Lou Lou from Atlanta
Dear Lou Lou,
Always nice to hear from you, Lou. And I have good news for you. You are OK. You may use anything that is already there to help you line up your shot – leaves, twigs, trees, houses, abandoned tees, etc. Additionally, you are permitted to place a mark to indicate your line of play as long as you pick it up before you hit the ball.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Ask Linda #256-Practice swing in nearby bunker
A player's ball is in a bunker. There is another bunker, a few steps away. He steps into the other bunker and takes a practice swing, striking the sand. Has he broken a rule?
Thank you
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
Yes, Lou. The player has broken Rule 13-4a, which states that a player may not test the condition of a bunker or any similar bunker before he hits a ball that is in a bunker. This rule applies to any water hazard or bunker. The penalty is loss of hole in match play, two strokes in stroke play.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thank you
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
Yes, Lou. The player has broken Rule 13-4a, which states that a player may not test the condition of a bunker or any similar bunker before he hits a ball that is in a bunker. This rule applies to any water hazard or bunker. The penalty is loss of hole in match play, two strokes in stroke play.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Ask Linda #255-Stepping on ball
My ball in play was lost in thick rough which was all covered by newly mowed grass. While searching, I accidentally stepped on a ball. Upon verification (without touching) I saw that it was my ball (with my marker clearly seen), however, it was embedded due to me stepping onto it. Questions (1) Is there a penalty for stepping on my ball while searching? (2) If it is embedded due to me stepping on it, am I entitled to relief without penalty? (3) If not, can I declare unplayable and take a one-stroke penalty? Appreciate your comments. Thank you
Regards,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
When you step on your ball and push it into the ground you incur a one-stroke penalty for moving your ball in play under Rule 18-2a. Since the original lie of the ball is altered (it wasn’t embedded until you stepped on it), you must place it in the nearest spot that is most similar to your original lie that is within one club-length of your original lie [Rule 20-3b].
There is no penalty if you move another player’s ball in the process of searching for it. If that happens, the ball must be replaced.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Regards,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
When you step on your ball and push it into the ground you incur a one-stroke penalty for moving your ball in play under Rule 18-2a. Since the original lie of the ball is altered (it wasn’t embedded until you stepped on it), you must place it in the nearest spot that is most similar to your original lie that is within one club-length of your original lie [Rule 20-3b].
There is no penalty if you move another player’s ball in the process of searching for it. If that happens, the ball must be replaced.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Ask Linda #254-Lifting another's ball
Hi Linda,
In a two player better ball match play tournament, the following situation occurred. The competition was being held under preferred lies (lift, clean, and place) due to wet conditions. Two balls lay in the fairway. Player A marked a ball, picked it up, and was cleaning the ball as he walked about 10 yards forward to check a sprinkler head for yardage. While doing this Player A realized the ball he had picked up belonged to Player B. Player A returned the ball to the place where it had lain and walked away. Player B noticed what had happened and asked player A if he had picked up the wrong ball and he replied “yes.” Does Player A incur a penalty for picking up the ball that belonged to Player B?
Thank you.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
Yes. Playing preferred lies does not affect other Rules of Golf. Simply because a player is permitted to lift, clean, and place his own ball does not mean he is permitted to do the same to his opponent’s ball. In match play, if a player moves an opponent’s ball, the penalty is one stroke, and the ball must be replaced [Rule 18-3b]. In stroke play, there is no penalty [Rule 18-4].
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
In a two player better ball match play tournament, the following situation occurred. The competition was being held under preferred lies (lift, clean, and place) due to wet conditions. Two balls lay in the fairway. Player A marked a ball, picked it up, and was cleaning the ball as he walked about 10 yards forward to check a sprinkler head for yardage. While doing this Player A realized the ball he had picked up belonged to Player B. Player A returned the ball to the place where it had lain and walked away. Player B noticed what had happened and asked player A if he had picked up the wrong ball and he replied “yes.” Does Player A incur a penalty for picking up the ball that belonged to Player B?
Thank you.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
Yes. Playing preferred lies does not affect other Rules of Golf. Simply because a player is permitted to lift, clean, and place his own ball does not mean he is permitted to do the same to his opponent’s ball. In match play, if a player moves an opponent’s ball, the penalty is one stroke, and the ball must be replaced [Rule 18-3b]. In stroke play, there is no penalty [Rule 18-4].
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Ask Linda #253-Penalty for one or two?
Hi Linda,
In a 2-player better ball, match play competition, if one player violates a rule where the penalty is loss of hole, does the team lose the hole or is the player that violated the rule out of the hole and the other player allowed to continue and represent the team on that hole?
Thank you.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
1. If one player hits a wrong ball (even if it is his partner's ball), the player is disqualified from the hole but his partner incurs no penalty.
2. Both players will lose the hole if either one breaches Rule 4 (Clubs), Rule 6-4 (Caddie), or any Local Rule or Condition of the Competition where the penalty involves an adjustment to the state of the match.
a. An example of a breach of Rule 4 would be if one player started the round with more than 14 clubs.
b. The caddie rule would be breached if a player were to use more than one caddie at any given time.
c. An example of a violation of a Condition of the Competition would be if a player were found to be using different brands when a one ball condition was in effect.
3. If one player breaches a rule that assists his partner's play or adversely affects an opponent's play, both the player and the partner are penalized. For example, if a player picks up a loose impediment in a bunker, he is disqualified from the hole. If his partner is also in the bunker, and lifting the loose impediment assists the partner’s play, then the partner is also disqualified from the hole.
4. In all other cases where a player's violation causes him to lose a hole, the penalty applies to the player only, and not his partner.
This information can be found in Rule 30-3, Four-Ball Match Play. “Four-ball” is the official designation for what is more commonly called “better ball,” or “better ball of partners.”
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
In a 2-player better ball, match play competition, if one player violates a rule where the penalty is loss of hole, does the team lose the hole or is the player that violated the rule out of the hole and the other player allowed to continue and represent the team on that hole?
Thank you.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
1. If one player hits a wrong ball (even if it is his partner's ball), the player is disqualified from the hole but his partner incurs no penalty.
2. Both players will lose the hole if either one breaches Rule 4 (Clubs), Rule 6-4 (Caddie), or any Local Rule or Condition of the Competition where the penalty involves an adjustment to the state of the match.
a. An example of a breach of Rule 4 would be if one player started the round with more than 14 clubs.
b. The caddie rule would be breached if a player were to use more than one caddie at any given time.
c. An example of a violation of a Condition of the Competition would be if a player were found to be using different brands when a one ball condition was in effect.
3. If one player breaches a rule that assists his partner's play or adversely affects an opponent's play, both the player and the partner are penalized. For example, if a player picks up a loose impediment in a bunker, he is disqualified from the hole. If his partner is also in the bunker, and lifting the loose impediment assists the partner’s play, then the partner is also disqualified from the hole.
4. In all other cases where a player's violation causes him to lose a hole, the penalty applies to the player only, and not his partner.
This information can be found in Rule 30-3, Four-Ball Match Play. “Four-ball” is the official designation for what is more commonly called “better ball,” or “better ball of partners.”
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Vacation notice
Dear readers,
I will be out of the country during the month of November. Please continue to send your questions, but be aware that I will not be able to send you an answer until December.
Don’t be confused by the fact that you will continue receiving my columns during November. While I send personal answers to readers as soon as possible after receiving them, I don’t post those answers immediately. I prefer to post no more than two answers per week on the blog.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Linda
I will be out of the country during the month of November. Please continue to send your questions, but be aware that I will not be able to send you an answer until December.
Don’t be confused by the fact that you will continue receiving my columns during November. While I send personal answers to readers as soon as possible after receiving them, I don’t post those answers immediately. I prefer to post no more than two answers per week on the blog.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Linda
Monday, November 1, 2010
Ask Linda #252-Reach over hole to tap in putt
Hi Linda,
Situation: Player 'just misses' her putt. She reaches her putter over the hole and taps the ball in the hole. The ball moves toward her, as she has not moved from the side of the hole from which she originally putted. Our Pro says that is OK. Some of us "older" Gals remember that being against the rules. What do you think? Thanks for this and all the other great explanations you have published! Lulu
Dear Lulu,
Your pro is correct, Lulu. While it is true that a player is not permitted to putt a ball while straddling the line of putt (the “line of putt” is the path you expect the ball to take on the way to the hole), or while standing on the line of putt [Rule 16-1e], you cannot be violating any part of this rule if your feet are on the other side of the hole. That’s because the line of putt ends at the hole [Definition of Line of Putt]. However, you must be careful to actually stroke the ball. If you place your putter right behind the ball and just push it into the hole, you are violating Rule 14-1, which does not permit you to push, scrape, or spoon the ball.
Reaching over the hole to tap the ball in can be helpful in speeding up play during a casual round of golf, but I would not recommend such an unreliable procedure under tournament conditions.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Situation: Player 'just misses' her putt. She reaches her putter over the hole and taps the ball in the hole. The ball moves toward her, as she has not moved from the side of the hole from which she originally putted. Our Pro says that is OK. Some of us "older" Gals remember that being against the rules. What do you think? Thanks for this and all the other great explanations you have published! Lulu
Dear Lulu,
Your pro is correct, Lulu. While it is true that a player is not permitted to putt a ball while straddling the line of putt (the “line of putt” is the path you expect the ball to take on the way to the hole), or while standing on the line of putt [Rule 16-1e], you cannot be violating any part of this rule if your feet are on the other side of the hole. That’s because the line of putt ends at the hole [Definition of Line of Putt]. However, you must be careful to actually stroke the ball. If you place your putter right behind the ball and just push it into the hole, you are violating Rule 14-1, which does not permit you to push, scrape, or spoon the ball.
Reaching over the hole to tap the ball in can be helpful in speeding up play during a casual round of golf, but I would not recommend such an unreliable procedure under tournament conditions.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Ask Linda #251-Re-tee option, ball in lateral hazard
Linda, if you hit your tee shot and your ball goes into a lateral (red-staked) hazard, do you always have the option to re-tee, or are you limited to either dropping the ball on the line of sight to the hole or dropping it within two club-lengths of the hazard boundary? Thanks, Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
When you are taking relief for a ball in a water hazard, you always have the option to hit a ball from where you played your previous shot [Rule 26-1a]. If the previous shot was your first shot on the hole, you may return to the teeing ground and re-tee a ball. This is true for all water hazards, whether regular (yellow-staked) or lateral (red-staked). Don’t forget to include the one-stroke penalty in your score for the hole.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Dear Lou Lou,
When you are taking relief for a ball in a water hazard, you always have the option to hit a ball from where you played your previous shot [Rule 26-1a]. If the previous shot was your first shot on the hole, you may return to the teeing ground and re-tee a ball. This is true for all water hazards, whether regular (yellow-staked) or lateral (red-staked). Don’t forget to include the one-stroke penalty in your score for the hole.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Ask Linda #250-Provisional ball, how many strokes?
Hi Linda,
I know you've answered this type of question before but for the life of me I cannot remember which posting it was under so here goes:
At any time do you count a provisional ball as a penalty/penalty stroke? Example: a player's tee shot might be OB/lost outside a hazard. The provisional ball ends up in the same area and it too might be OB/lost outside a hazard. So, he hits a second provisional and it is playable. Upon investigation, the tee shot and first provisional are BOTH OB/lost outside a hazard, so what is the second provisional lying? Lying five hitting six or lying three hitting four? The player says even though the first provisional was OB/lost outside a hazard it was a provisional for the tee shot so there is no penalty, therefore he is lying three hitting four. This happened within our group last month and none of us knew how to score the hole for the player.
As always thank you for your time and a great golf blog!
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
The second provisional ball is the player’s fifth stroke. Here is how to do the addition:
1. Original stroke = 1
2. Penalty for lost original ball = 1
3. First provisional ball = 1
3. Penalty for lost provisional = 1
4. Second provisional = 1
Total: 5
The Note to Rule 27-2 explains that when a player hits multiple provisional balls, each one “bears the same relationship to the previous provisional ball as the first provisional ball bears to the original ball.” I will now try to translate this into layman’s terms.
When a player hits a provisional ball, that ball becomes the ball in play if the original ball turns out to be out of bounds or lost outside a water hazard. The player in your question lost his original ball. His first provisional ball became the ball in play. Unfortunately, that ball was also lost. At this point, the second provisional ball became the ball in play.
Here is a scenario where the player’s provisional ball would be lying three:
If the player’s original ball is lost, his first provisional is found, and his second provisional is lost or found, then he would be lying three: the original shot + the penalty for a lost ball + the provisional = 3. The second provisional would not count; this ball was hit as a precaution in case the original and the first provisional were not found.
If the player finds his original ball within five minutes, he must continue play with the original and abandon any provisionals. In this case, any strokes made with the provisional balls do not count in his score.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
I know you've answered this type of question before but for the life of me I cannot remember which posting it was under so here goes:
At any time do you count a provisional ball as a penalty/penalty stroke? Example: a player's tee shot might be OB/lost outside a hazard. The provisional ball ends up in the same area and it too might be OB/lost outside a hazard. So, he hits a second provisional and it is playable. Upon investigation, the tee shot and first provisional are BOTH OB/lost outside a hazard, so what is the second provisional lying? Lying five hitting six or lying three hitting four? The player says even though the first provisional was OB/lost outside a hazard it was a provisional for the tee shot so there is no penalty, therefore he is lying three hitting four. This happened within our group last month and none of us knew how to score the hole for the player.
As always thank you for your time and a great golf blog!
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
The second provisional ball is the player’s fifth stroke. Here is how to do the addition:
1. Original stroke = 1
2. Penalty for lost original ball = 1
3. First provisional ball = 1
3. Penalty for lost provisional = 1
4. Second provisional = 1
Total: 5
The Note to Rule 27-2 explains that when a player hits multiple provisional balls, each one “bears the same relationship to the previous provisional ball as the first provisional ball bears to the original ball.” I will now try to translate this into layman’s terms.
When a player hits a provisional ball, that ball becomes the ball in play if the original ball turns out to be out of bounds or lost outside a water hazard. The player in your question lost his original ball. His first provisional ball became the ball in play. Unfortunately, that ball was also lost. At this point, the second provisional ball became the ball in play.
Here is a scenario where the player’s provisional ball would be lying three:
If the player’s original ball is lost, his first provisional is found, and his second provisional is lost or found, then he would be lying three: the original shot + the penalty for a lost ball + the provisional = 3. The second provisional would not count; this ball was hit as a precaution in case the original and the first provisional were not found.
If the player finds his original ball within five minutes, he must continue play with the original and abandon any provisionals. In this case, any strokes made with the provisional balls do not count in his score.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Ask Linda #249b-Cart path in hazard
Linda, how would your answer to 249 be different if the ball lay in a hazard below a raised cart path?
Dear Lou Lou,
The answer would be the same, except that when taking relief from an immovable obstruction in a hazard you must drop the ball in the hazard to get free relief. The player has the option to take the ball out of the hazard and drop it behind the hazard on a line straight back from the hole, but this option would add a penalty stroke to his score [Rule 24-2b, ii].
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Dear Lou Lou,
The answer would be the same, except that when taking relief from an immovable obstruction in a hazard you must drop the ball in the hazard to get free relief. The player has the option to take the ball out of the hazard and drop it behind the hazard on a line straight back from the hole, but this option would add a penalty stroke to his score [Rule 24-2b, ii].
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Ask Linda #249a-Wrong decisions by the Committee
Thank you for the reply [Ask Linda #249]. I will let the folks who run these events know they indeed ruled incorrectly. The stroke the player was assessed didn't keep him from winning...he still finished a couple of strokes back. However, I would expect folks who run these events to have better insight into the rules and decisions on the rules of golf. I don't know what he looked at to make his decision, but he didn't read the same rules I read...or the rules you've cited here.
Thank you again...Lou Lou.
Lou, interpreting the rules correctly requires an inordinate amount of study and a certain amount of intellectual modesty. While every person running a tournament may not have the time or interest to devote himself to a thorough understanding of the Rules and the Decisions on the Rules, such people need to admit that their knowledge is limited, toss their ego aside, and consult a rules official at the USGA when a difficult or unusual situation arises. That requires a degree of humility and honesty that not everyone has.
On a number of occasions through the years I have encountered golf professionals who are adamant about the correctness of a ruling that I knew for certain was entirely mistaken. I would resolve the problem immediately by calling a USGA official and letting the golf pro hear the answer straight from the horse’s mouth.
When I receive a question from a reader that has a clear answer in the Rules of Golf or in the Decisions book, I cite them as my references and answer the question myself. However, when some questions are not so easily verified, I form an opinion and check directly with the USGA to make sure I am not giving out wrong advice.
Golf professionals and Committee members should do the same. If there are differing or uncertain opinions on how to resolve a rules matter, and no pertinent rule or Decision can be found, then the highest authority –the USGA– should be consulted. The goal should always be to get things right.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thank you again...Lou Lou.
Lou, interpreting the rules correctly requires an inordinate amount of study and a certain amount of intellectual modesty. While every person running a tournament may not have the time or interest to devote himself to a thorough understanding of the Rules and the Decisions on the Rules, such people need to admit that their knowledge is limited, toss their ego aside, and consult a rules official at the USGA when a difficult or unusual situation arises. That requires a degree of humility and honesty that not everyone has.
On a number of occasions through the years I have encountered golf professionals who are adamant about the correctness of a ruling that I knew for certain was entirely mistaken. I would resolve the problem immediately by calling a USGA official and letting the golf pro hear the answer straight from the horse’s mouth.
When I receive a question from a reader that has a clear answer in the Rules of Golf or in the Decisions book, I cite them as my references and answer the question myself. However, when some questions are not so easily verified, I form an opinion and check directly with the USGA to make sure I am not giving out wrong advice.
Golf professionals and Committee members should do the same. If there are differing or uncertain opinions on how to resolve a rules matter, and no pertinent rule or Decision can be found, then the highest authority –the USGA– should be consulted. The goal should always be to get things right.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Ask Linda #249-Relief from raised cart path
Hi Linda,
I was caddying for my son at a tournament recently and one of his playing competitors hit his drive and it finished under a raised wooden part of the cart path. The cart path was paved until it came to a low area of pine straw and rougher, lower terrain...thus the raised wooden section of the cart path which probably ran for no more than 40 or 50 feet. It was not over a water hazard, lateral or regular, so neither his ball nor the cart path were in or above a water hazard. I had never actually encountered this situation, and no one in the group of four players had encountered this. There was confusion about how to proceed and the player eventually took an unplayable at the insistence of another player's caddy father who unfortunately just stated his strong opinion and left the scene, unwilling to discuss that this might be something other than an unplayable lie. My view was that this was an immovable obstruction to which free relief should have been granted. The raised cart path prevented the player from attempting any sort of swing at his ball, and he could have reasonably taken such a swing and advanced his ball toward the hole were if not for the cart path. I suggested he mention this to the committee rep. for the tournament before signing his card. He did; the rep didn't know how this should be ruled and agreed to look into it before issuing his decision. The next morning, I ran into the player in the parking lot and he said they had ruled it was indeed to be considered unplayable and the penalty shot applied.
Based on what I've read in the rulebook, this doesn't seem right. So my question is, should he have been penalized a stroke and proceeded as though the ball was unplayable? Or, was he actually entitled to relief from the "raised wooden cart path" under which his ball came to rest? I haven't been able to find anything on-line that describes this situation and discusses how one should proceed. What is the proper ruling in this case?
Thank you...Lou Lou.
Dear Lou Lou,
From your narrative, it would seem that the player was unfairly penalized. The cart path, by definition, is an immovable obstruction. When an immovable obstruction interferes with a player’s swing, he is entitled to free relief [Rule 24-2a]. The player is permitted to lift the ball and drop it within one club-length of the nearest point of relief that is no closer to the hole.
It appears to me that the situation was confusing because the ball was under a cart path, which is not a common occurrence. However, that does not negate the fact that the cart path is still an immovable obstruction, and that it is interfering with the player’s swing. If the player’s ball had settled under a bench, would there have been any question as to whether he was entitled to free relief?
Let’s look briefly at the rule that addresses this problem, Rule 24-2a. This rule tells us that “interference by an immovable obstruction occurs when a ball lies in or on the obstruction, or when the obstruction interferes with the player’s stance or the area of his intended swing.” The player’s ball in your question was not in the obstruction, nor was it on the obstruction. However, the obstruction interfered with his swing. As such, he was entitled to free relief from an immovable obstruction.
In the future, should you ask for a ruling and the Committee does not know the answer, consider asking the Committee to discuss the situation with the Rules of Golf Committee of the USGA before making a ruling. Rule 34-3 allows a player to make such a request.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
I was caddying for my son at a tournament recently and one of his playing competitors hit his drive and it finished under a raised wooden part of the cart path. The cart path was paved until it came to a low area of pine straw and rougher, lower terrain...thus the raised wooden section of the cart path which probably ran for no more than 40 or 50 feet. It was not over a water hazard, lateral or regular, so neither his ball nor the cart path were in or above a water hazard. I had never actually encountered this situation, and no one in the group of four players had encountered this. There was confusion about how to proceed and the player eventually took an unplayable at the insistence of another player's caddy father who unfortunately just stated his strong opinion and left the scene, unwilling to discuss that this might be something other than an unplayable lie. My view was that this was an immovable obstruction to which free relief should have been granted. The raised cart path prevented the player from attempting any sort of swing at his ball, and he could have reasonably taken such a swing and advanced his ball toward the hole were if not for the cart path. I suggested he mention this to the committee rep. for the tournament before signing his card. He did; the rep didn't know how this should be ruled and agreed to look into it before issuing his decision. The next morning, I ran into the player in the parking lot and he said they had ruled it was indeed to be considered unplayable and the penalty shot applied.
Based on what I've read in the rulebook, this doesn't seem right. So my question is, should he have been penalized a stroke and proceeded as though the ball was unplayable? Or, was he actually entitled to relief from the "raised wooden cart path" under which his ball came to rest? I haven't been able to find anything on-line that describes this situation and discusses how one should proceed. What is the proper ruling in this case?
Thank you...Lou Lou.
Dear Lou Lou,
From your narrative, it would seem that the player was unfairly penalized. The cart path, by definition, is an immovable obstruction. When an immovable obstruction interferes with a player’s swing, he is entitled to free relief [Rule 24-2a]. The player is permitted to lift the ball and drop it within one club-length of the nearest point of relief that is no closer to the hole.
It appears to me that the situation was confusing because the ball was under a cart path, which is not a common occurrence. However, that does not negate the fact that the cart path is still an immovable obstruction, and that it is interfering with the player’s swing. If the player’s ball had settled under a bench, would there have been any question as to whether he was entitled to free relief?
Let’s look briefly at the rule that addresses this problem, Rule 24-2a. This rule tells us that “interference by an immovable obstruction occurs when a ball lies in or on the obstruction, or when the obstruction interferes with the player’s stance or the area of his intended swing.” The player’s ball in your question was not in the obstruction, nor was it on the obstruction. However, the obstruction interfered with his swing. As such, he was entitled to free relief from an immovable obstruction.
In the future, should you ask for a ruling and the Committee does not know the answer, consider asking the Committee to discuss the situation with the Rules of Golf Committee of the USGA before making a ruling. Rule 34-3 allows a player to make such a request.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Ask Linda #248-Multiple penalties
Hi Linda,
In a recent tournament a player was penalized for taking two practice swings under a tree and knocking off leaves each time. The pro at the course indicated it was two stroke penalty each time with a maximum penalty of four strokes. I was not able to find the rule in the rule book that covers this situation. Can you help?
Thank you.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
First of all, if there are more leaves left on the tree that will interfere with the player’s swing, there may not be a penalty at all (please read Ask Linda #246-Hitting branch in hazard). Briefly, if the player must still swing through leaves to make his stroke, the ruling may be that since the area of his intended swing has not been improved, the player will not be penalized.
In most cases, Lou, when a player breaks the same rule more than once prior to hitting the ball, he does not incur multiple penalties. Here are two examples provided in the Decisions book [Decision 1-4/12, #3]:
1. In stroke play, if a competitor takes several practice swings in a bunker, and touches the sand each time, he would get a single two-stroke penalty (Decision 13-4/3). He has broken only one rule (13-4b), so he receives only one penalty.
2. In stroke play, if a player removes sand on his line of play through the green, and also presses down a replaced divot, he has broken only one rule (13-2), and he would get a single two-stroke penalty.
A player would incur multiple penalties if he broke two different rules. For example, if a player takes a practice swing in a bunker and touches the sand, and then he bends a shrub that is in his way, he would be penalized four strokes – two for breaking Rule 13-4, and two for breaking Rule 13-2.
You were unable to find the rule in the rulebook that pertains to this situation because it is not specifically addressed. It comes under Rule 1-4, which tells us that if a situation is not covered by the Rules, then” the decision should be made in accordance with equity.” This means, simply, that the decision must be fair. If a player is unaware that he is not permitted to, for example, move a loose impediment in a hazard, and he moves three pine cones away from his ball, then he has essentially broken only one rule. It is fair and equitable to assess him one penalty; it would be a gross miscarriage of justice to assess him six penalty strokes (two for each pine cone).
In your question, if the player has improved the area of his swing by repeatedly knocking down the leaves, then it will cost him two strokes. The player has broken the same rule more than once; he is penalized only once.
Decision 1-4/12 explains whether a player receives one or multiple penalties when he breaks rules more than once prior to his stroke. I would highly recommend that you take out a few minutes and read it, and perhaps make a copy for the pro at the course where the tournament was played.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
In a recent tournament a player was penalized for taking two practice swings under a tree and knocking off leaves each time. The pro at the course indicated it was two stroke penalty each time with a maximum penalty of four strokes. I was not able to find the rule in the rule book that covers this situation. Can you help?
Thank you.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
First of all, if there are more leaves left on the tree that will interfere with the player’s swing, there may not be a penalty at all (please read Ask Linda #246-Hitting branch in hazard). Briefly, if the player must still swing through leaves to make his stroke, the ruling may be that since the area of his intended swing has not been improved, the player will not be penalized.
In most cases, Lou, when a player breaks the same rule more than once prior to hitting the ball, he does not incur multiple penalties. Here are two examples provided in the Decisions book [Decision 1-4/12, #3]:
1. In stroke play, if a competitor takes several practice swings in a bunker, and touches the sand each time, he would get a single two-stroke penalty (Decision 13-4/3). He has broken only one rule (13-4b), so he receives only one penalty.
2. In stroke play, if a player removes sand on his line of play through the green, and also presses down a replaced divot, he has broken only one rule (13-2), and he would get a single two-stroke penalty.
A player would incur multiple penalties if he broke two different rules. For example, if a player takes a practice swing in a bunker and touches the sand, and then he bends a shrub that is in his way, he would be penalized four strokes – two for breaking Rule 13-4, and two for breaking Rule 13-2.
You were unable to find the rule in the rulebook that pertains to this situation because it is not specifically addressed. It comes under Rule 1-4, which tells us that if a situation is not covered by the Rules, then” the decision should be made in accordance with equity.” This means, simply, that the decision must be fair. If a player is unaware that he is not permitted to, for example, move a loose impediment in a hazard, and he moves three pine cones away from his ball, then he has essentially broken only one rule. It is fair and equitable to assess him one penalty; it would be a gross miscarriage of justice to assess him six penalty strokes (two for each pine cone).
In your question, if the player has improved the area of his swing by repeatedly knocking down the leaves, then it will cost him two strokes. The player has broken the same rule more than once; he is penalized only once.
Decision 1-4/12 explains whether a player receives one or multiple penalties when he breaks rules more than once prior to his stroke. I would highly recommend that you take out a few minutes and read it, and perhaps make a copy for the pro at the course where the tournament was played.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Ask Linda #247a-Wrong format
Linda, my partner and I played in a mixed Ryder Cup this week. The format is six holes each of scramble, better ball, and selected drive/alternate shot. We started under the better ball format. Somehow our foursome went brain dead on the 7th hole and played it as better ball instead of switching to the selected drive/alternate shot format.
As we finished the 7th hole, my partner said we should have played alternate shot. Oops! We were pretty sure there was no remedy as we had finished the hole. We discussed it with the other two in our group, and agreed that we were disqualified. We turned ourselves in to the tournament director after the 9th hole and were disqualified. We actually feel pretty good about ourselves - in the end integrity is more important than winning.
My question is this: Was there anything we could have done to avoid disqualification?
Thanks,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
Yes, Lou. Disqualification was not inevitable; you could have replayed hole #7 before hitting your tee shots on hole #8. Let’s review what really happened under the Rules of Golf, and then I will walk you through the correct procedure.
1. The four of you completed hole #6 correctly under the better ball format.
2. Hole #7 was the start of alternate shot, but you mistakenly continued under better ball. All four of you should have hit your drives, selected which drive to play, and then alternated that ball into the hole.
3. When the first person from each team hit his own ball again on hole #7 instead of alternating shots, the team played in incorrect order. The penalty for doing that is two strokes [Rule 29-3]. As soon as the error is discovered, the team must return to the spot where it first played in incorrect order and proceed correctly.
4. Here is the catch: The error must be corrected before either member of the team tees off on the next hole. Once you hit that next tee shot, your team is disqualified.
When your partner realized as you were finishing hole #7 that everyone had forgotten to switch to alternate shot, all of you could have returned to play the correct format, starting play from the location of the drive you would have selected to alternate. Each team would be penalized two shots for the infraction. Your teams were not subject to disqualification until you teed off on hole #8.
The bottom line for your two teams is that you were disqualified, since you played the following hole without correcting your error.
I hope this is a good lesson for all my readers. There are a number of golf errors can be corrected provided you have not teed off on the following hole. Whenever you suspect (or know) that you have not proceeded properly, you have nothing to lose by returning to the scene of the crime and trying again. These “do-overs” will generally include a two-stroke penalty, but that is a much better outcome than a disqualification.
Again: you are not prohibited from correcting an error because you have finished the hole where the mistake occurred. You don’t lose that chance until you tee off on the following hole.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
As we finished the 7th hole, my partner said we should have played alternate shot. Oops! We were pretty sure there was no remedy as we had finished the hole. We discussed it with the other two in our group, and agreed that we were disqualified. We turned ourselves in to the tournament director after the 9th hole and were disqualified. We actually feel pretty good about ourselves - in the end integrity is more important than winning.
My question is this: Was there anything we could have done to avoid disqualification?
Thanks,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
Yes, Lou. Disqualification was not inevitable; you could have replayed hole #7 before hitting your tee shots on hole #8. Let’s review what really happened under the Rules of Golf, and then I will walk you through the correct procedure.
1. The four of you completed hole #6 correctly under the better ball format.
2. Hole #7 was the start of alternate shot, but you mistakenly continued under better ball. All four of you should have hit your drives, selected which drive to play, and then alternated that ball into the hole.
3. When the first person from each team hit his own ball again on hole #7 instead of alternating shots, the team played in incorrect order. The penalty for doing that is two strokes [Rule 29-3]. As soon as the error is discovered, the team must return to the spot where it first played in incorrect order and proceed correctly.
4. Here is the catch: The error must be corrected before either member of the team tees off on the next hole. Once you hit that next tee shot, your team is disqualified.
When your partner realized as you were finishing hole #7 that everyone had forgotten to switch to alternate shot, all of you could have returned to play the correct format, starting play from the location of the drive you would have selected to alternate. Each team would be penalized two shots for the infraction. Your teams were not subject to disqualification until you teed off on hole #8.
The bottom line for your two teams is that you were disqualified, since you played the following hole without correcting your error.
I hope this is a good lesson for all my readers. There are a number of golf errors can be corrected provided you have not teed off on the following hole. Whenever you suspect (or know) that you have not proceeded properly, you have nothing to lose by returning to the scene of the crime and trying again. These “do-overs” will generally include a two-stroke penalty, but that is a much better outcome than a disqualification.
Again: you are not prohibited from correcting an error because you have finished the hole where the mistake occurred. You don’t lose that chance until you tee off on the following hole.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Ask Linda #247-Waste bunkers
Hi Linda,
At our golf course we have four waste bunkers, but before they were declared waste bunkers they were ordinary sand bunkers.
#1- Does a waste bunker have to be at ground level, or may it have a lip like a regular sand bunker?
#2- Are we allowed to move a ball in a waste bunker if it is too close to the lip and no shot is possible, or do we have to play it as it lies?
Thank you
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
The USGA does not recognize waste bunkers. If an area filled with sand meets the definition of a bunker, then it is a bunker; if it does not, then it is defined as “through the green.” Let’s take a look at the definitions of these terms.
A bunker is defined as “a hazard consisting of a prepared area of ground, often a hollow, from which turf or soil has been removed and replaced with sand or the like.” In other words, if dirt has been dug out and replaced with sand, it is a bunker. Note that the presence or absence of rakes has nothing to do with whether a particular area is considered to be a bunker.
A golf course may not arbitrarily decide to call actual bunkers “waste bunkers” and allow players to get relief from footprints, move loose impediments, ground their clubs, or violate any other rules related to permissible activities in a bunker (see Rule 13-4).
If there is an area on the golf course that is naturally sandy, where no one has made a special effort to construct a bunker, then this area would be considered “through the green.” “Through the green” refers to the whole course except for the teeing ground and the putting green of the hole you are playing, and all hazards. All fairways, areas of rough, wooded areas, etc. are “through the green.” In such naturally sandy areas you would be permitted to ground your club, remove loose impediments, and otherwise engage in any activity that is permissible elsewhere “through the green.”
It sounds to me, from your question, that these so-called “waste bunkers” are actual bunkers. Whether the bunker is level with the surrounding area or has a lip is irrelevant. There is nothing in the definition of a bunker that requires that it have a lip. If turf was at one time removed and replaced with sand, then these are bunkers.
If your ball in a bunker is so close to the lip that you decide that it is unplayable, you have three choices on how to proceed[Rule 28]. Regardless of which procedure you use, you must add one penalty stroke to your score:
1. Play a ball from where you hit your previous shot. (This is the only option under which you can remove the ball from the bunker.)
2. Drop your ball behind where it lay in the bunker, straight back on the line-of-sight to the hole. There is no limit on how far back you may go, but you must drop the ball in the bunker.
3. Drop the ball in the bunker within two club-lengths of where it lay, no closer to the hole.
According to the Rules of Golf, there is no such thing as a “waste bunker.” If your ball is lying in an area that was prepared to be a bunker, then you must treat the area as a bunker and proceed accordingly.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
At our golf course we have four waste bunkers, but before they were declared waste bunkers they were ordinary sand bunkers.
#1- Does a waste bunker have to be at ground level, or may it have a lip like a regular sand bunker?
#2- Are we allowed to move a ball in a waste bunker if it is too close to the lip and no shot is possible, or do we have to play it as it lies?
Thank you
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
The USGA does not recognize waste bunkers. If an area filled with sand meets the definition of a bunker, then it is a bunker; if it does not, then it is defined as “through the green.” Let’s take a look at the definitions of these terms.
A bunker is defined as “a hazard consisting of a prepared area of ground, often a hollow, from which turf or soil has been removed and replaced with sand or the like.” In other words, if dirt has been dug out and replaced with sand, it is a bunker. Note that the presence or absence of rakes has nothing to do with whether a particular area is considered to be a bunker.
A golf course may not arbitrarily decide to call actual bunkers “waste bunkers” and allow players to get relief from footprints, move loose impediments, ground their clubs, or violate any other rules related to permissible activities in a bunker (see Rule 13-4).
If there is an area on the golf course that is naturally sandy, where no one has made a special effort to construct a bunker, then this area would be considered “through the green.” “Through the green” refers to the whole course except for the teeing ground and the putting green of the hole you are playing, and all hazards. All fairways, areas of rough, wooded areas, etc. are “through the green.” In such naturally sandy areas you would be permitted to ground your club, remove loose impediments, and otherwise engage in any activity that is permissible elsewhere “through the green.”
It sounds to me, from your question, that these so-called “waste bunkers” are actual bunkers. Whether the bunker is level with the surrounding area or has a lip is irrelevant. There is nothing in the definition of a bunker that requires that it have a lip. If turf was at one time removed and replaced with sand, then these are bunkers.
If your ball in a bunker is so close to the lip that you decide that it is unplayable, you have three choices on how to proceed[Rule 28]. Regardless of which procedure you use, you must add one penalty stroke to your score:
1. Play a ball from where you hit your previous shot. (This is the only option under which you can remove the ball from the bunker.)
2. Drop your ball behind where it lay in the bunker, straight back on the line-of-sight to the hole. There is no limit on how far back you may go, but you must drop the ball in the bunker.
3. Drop the ball in the bunker within two club-lengths of where it lay, no closer to the hole.
According to the Rules of Golf, there is no such thing as a “waste bunker.” If your ball is lying in an area that was prepared to be a bunker, then you must treat the area as a bunker and proceed accordingly.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Ask Linda #246-Hitting branch in hazard
Hi Linda!
I am a new subscriber to your website. I play college golf and my coach and I often have discussions about the rules of golf. We talked about a situation the other day that I wonder if you can help me with. I have read the rules on the USGA website but I am still confused. Here is the situation: A player hits his ball into a hazard. He has a stance and is able to play the ball. The player takes a practice swing and hits a tree branch with his club, knocking some leaves off. Is there a penalty? Does it matter if the player was unaware of the branch when he took his practice swing?
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
A player is not permitted to improve the area of his intended swing [Rule 13-2]. So the answer to your question depends on whether knocking down those leaves has made it easier for you to swing.
There are situations where knocking down one leaf will cause you to incur a penalty, while knocking down many leaves will not. Suppose you are under a tree that has only one leaf. If you take a practice swing and knock down that leaf, you have improved the area of your intended swing and will incur a two-stroke penalty. This is because you have eliminated the one leaf that might distract you when you hit your ball.
Now suppose you are under a tree with many leaves, and your practice swing knocks down several leaves. If still more leaves remain on the tree in the area where you will swing, there is no penalty for knocking down a few. You have not improved the area of your intended swing; when you hit your ball there will still be leaves in your way [Decision 13-2/22].
In deciding whether you have improved the area of your intended swing and thereby incurred a penalty, the deciding factor is whether you have eliminated the obstacle. If you have, then the penalty is two strokes (loss of hole in match play). If the obstacle remains, there is no penalty.
Note that the fact that you are standing in a hazard makes no difference with respect to this rule. However, in taking a practice swing in a hazard, be very careful not to touch the ground with your club. You may brush the top of the grass, but if your club contacts the ground, the penalty is two strokes (loss of hole in match play).
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
I am a new subscriber to your website. I play college golf and my coach and I often have discussions about the rules of golf. We talked about a situation the other day that I wonder if you can help me with. I have read the rules on the USGA website but I am still confused. Here is the situation: A player hits his ball into a hazard. He has a stance and is able to play the ball. The player takes a practice swing and hits a tree branch with his club, knocking some leaves off. Is there a penalty? Does it matter if the player was unaware of the branch when he took his practice swing?
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
A player is not permitted to improve the area of his intended swing [Rule 13-2]. So the answer to your question depends on whether knocking down those leaves has made it easier for you to swing.
There are situations where knocking down one leaf will cause you to incur a penalty, while knocking down many leaves will not. Suppose you are under a tree that has only one leaf. If you take a practice swing and knock down that leaf, you have improved the area of your intended swing and will incur a two-stroke penalty. This is because you have eliminated the one leaf that might distract you when you hit your ball.
Now suppose you are under a tree with many leaves, and your practice swing knocks down several leaves. If still more leaves remain on the tree in the area where you will swing, there is no penalty for knocking down a few. You have not improved the area of your intended swing; when you hit your ball there will still be leaves in your way [Decision 13-2/22].
In deciding whether you have improved the area of your intended swing and thereby incurred a penalty, the deciding factor is whether you have eliminated the obstacle. If you have, then the penalty is two strokes (loss of hole in match play). If the obstacle remains, there is no penalty.
Note that the fact that you are standing in a hazard makes no difference with respect to this rule. However, in taking a practice swing in a hazard, be very careful not to touch the ground with your club. You may brush the top of the grass, but if your club contacts the ground, the penalty is two strokes (loss of hole in match play).
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Ask Linda #245-"Shoveling" ball
Hi Linda,
In our club championship a player hit her ball into a sand trap near the green. In order to hit the ball out, she ''shoveled'' the ball instead of using a normal back swing. Is this technique allowed?
Thank you,
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
“Shoveling” a ball is not permitted. Rule 14-1 explains that the ball “must not be pushed, scraped or spooned.” The player in your question has incurred a two-stroke penalty (loss of hole in match play).
In making a stroke, a player is required to swing at the ball. When done properly, there is only momentary contact between the clubhead and the ball.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
In our club championship a player hit her ball into a sand trap near the green. In order to hit the ball out, she ''shoveled'' the ball instead of using a normal back swing. Is this technique allowed?
Thank you,
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
“Shoveling” a ball is not permitted. Rule 14-1 explains that the ball “must not be pushed, scraped or spooned.” The player in your question has incurred a two-stroke penalty (loss of hole in match play).
In making a stroke, a player is required to swing at the ball. When done properly, there is only momentary contact between the clubhead and the ball.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Ask Linda #244-Ball moves while repairing ball mark
Dear Linda,
I was playing a round of golf with some friends, came to a par 3 and hit my shot to within a foot. I marked my ball and repaired my ball mark, which was a few inches in front of my ball. I replaced my ball and picked up my marker, I tapped down the repair once more, and as I lifted my club I accidentally hit my ball. I hadn't addressed the ball yet. My friends said I incurred a penalty. I said I hadn't. Who is right?
Thank you,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
You are (probably) right, Lou. If a player accidentally moves his ball or ball marker while he is in the process of repairing a ball mark on the green, there is no penalty and the ball or marker must be replaced [Rule 16-1c]. However, the movement of the ball must be directly attributable to the specific act of repairing the damage. For example, you would not be exempt from the one-stroke penalty for moving your ball in play if you were in the process of repairing a ball mark and your hat blew off and moved your ball. Or, in your case, you would be penalized if you accidentally moved your ball with your putter on your way to repairing the ball mark a second time.
There is a fine line between whether the ball was moved due to the repair or whether the ball was moved due to a careless swinging of the putter. From your account, it sounds like the ball mark was so close to the ball that you would be exempt from penalty for moving it as you lifted your putter upon completion of the repair. Had the ball mark been further away, your friends would be correct in pointing out that you would be assessed a penalty.
By the way, the ruling is the same with respect to marking and lifting a ball. If a ball or ball marker is accidentally moved while you are in the process of marking and lifting, there is no penalty [Rule 20-1]. However, if you were to reach into your pocket for your marker and accidentally drop it on the ball, causing it to move, you would incur a penalty stroke. You are not technically in the process of marking and lifting until you have bent down and begun to place your marker behind the ball.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
I was playing a round of golf with some friends, came to a par 3 and hit my shot to within a foot. I marked my ball and repaired my ball mark, which was a few inches in front of my ball. I replaced my ball and picked up my marker, I tapped down the repair once more, and as I lifted my club I accidentally hit my ball. I hadn't addressed the ball yet. My friends said I incurred a penalty. I said I hadn't. Who is right?
Thank you,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
You are (probably) right, Lou. If a player accidentally moves his ball or ball marker while he is in the process of repairing a ball mark on the green, there is no penalty and the ball or marker must be replaced [Rule 16-1c]. However, the movement of the ball must be directly attributable to the specific act of repairing the damage. For example, you would not be exempt from the one-stroke penalty for moving your ball in play if you were in the process of repairing a ball mark and your hat blew off and moved your ball. Or, in your case, you would be penalized if you accidentally moved your ball with your putter on your way to repairing the ball mark a second time.
There is a fine line between whether the ball was moved due to the repair or whether the ball was moved due to a careless swinging of the putter. From your account, it sounds like the ball mark was so close to the ball that you would be exempt from penalty for moving it as you lifted your putter upon completion of the repair. Had the ball mark been further away, your friends would be correct in pointing out that you would be assessed a penalty.
By the way, the ruling is the same with respect to marking and lifting a ball. If a ball or ball marker is accidentally moved while you are in the process of marking and lifting, there is no penalty [Rule 20-1]. However, if you were to reach into your pocket for your marker and accidentally drop it on the ball, causing it to move, you would incur a penalty stroke. You are not technically in the process of marking and lifting until you have bent down and begun to place your marker behind the ball.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Ask Linda #243-Touching ball at address
Hi Linda,
Thank you very much and keep up the good work.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
The general rule is that a player is not permitted to purposely touch his ball in play. However, there is an exception to that rule: a player is permitted to touch the ball with his club when he addresses it [18-2a, i].
Your buddy is correct in telling you that there is no penalty for touching the ball with his putter as long as he does not move the ball.
Great care must be taken when touching the ball at address that the ball is not accidentally moved. Should that happen, the ball must be replaced and the penalty is one stroke.
Needless to say, the cautious golfer would be advised to break this habit.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Ask Linda #242-Changing balls
Dear Linda,
During a match, my opponent hit a Titleist on the 16th hole. She played an old Nike on the 17th hole (there was a hazard to cross and she didn’t want to use a new ball). On the 18th hole, she put away the old ball and played the same Titleist again. Is she allowed to do that? (We are not required to play the same brand and type of golf ball in our matches.)
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
Your opponent was entitled to use ball A on hole #16, ball B on hole #17, and ball A once again on hole #18.
If the One Ball Condition is not in effect, a player may start a hole with any ball. She must use that same ball for play of the entire hole, unless she loses it or the ball becomes unfit for play. A ball is unfit only if it is visibly cut, cracked, or out of shape.
Interestingly enough, there is no penalty if a player uses a ball that was declared unfit on a subsequent hole. However, if she does so, she loses the right to declare it unfit a second time for the same damage [Decision 5-3/2].
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Ask Linda #241-Good drop, bad drop
Hi Linda,
I was wondering if you could help me with the following situation.
A player hits his tee shot into a lateral hazard located to the left of a dogleg par 5. The last point that the ball crossed the margin of the hazard is about 25 yards in front of the tee. The player goes to the last point the ball crossed the margin of the hazard and drops the ball within two club lengths of that spot. After dropping, another player in the group says that there is a drop zone located to the right of the fairway near the tee. Is the player permitted to lift the ball which has already been dropped and then use the drop area?
If the player lifts the ball and plays from the drop area, is there a penalty and how should the player proceed?
Thank you.
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
My answer is going to make someone very unhappy, Lou.
When the player dropped a ball within two club-lengths of the lateral hazard the ball was in play. He should have played that ball and filed away the existence of a Dropping Zone in his head for future rounds.
When he picked up the ball that he had properly dropped, he incurred a one-stroke penalty for lifting a ball in play [Rule 18-2a]. Even if he realized he wasn’t permitted to do this, and immediately replaced the ball, he would still incur the penalty.
When the player dropped the ball in the Dropping Zone and played it, he was playing from a wrong place, which is a two-stroke penalty [Rule 20-7]. He has now accumulated three penalty strokes, but it could get worse. If the player tees off on the next hole, and it is determined that he gained a significant advantage by playing from the wrong place (the Dropping Zone), he is disqualified.
If the player was unsure whether he was permitted to use the Dropping Zone, he should have played two balls – the one he dropped next to the hazard, and another from the Dropping Zone. At the end of his round, the score he got with the ball he played from next to the hazard would be ruled the player’s score for the hole. There is no penalty for playing the second ball [Rule 3-3].
The only free way out of this mess would be if the Committee had a requirement that players use the Dropping Zone. This is a fairly rare requirement, since the USGA recommends that Dropping Zones be an additional relief option, rather than mandatory [Appendix I, Part B, 8].
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Ask Linda #240-Repairing ball marks
Linda,
When your ball is just off the green and you have elected to putt can you fix ball marks on the green?
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
Yes.
Rule 16-1c states that the player is allowed to “repair damage to the putting green caused by the impact of a ball, whether or not the player’s ball lies on the putting green.”
It makes no difference whether you are putting or chipping onto the green. You are always permitted to repair ball marks that are on the green.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Ask Linda #239 - Different rules for team games?
Linda, our club often holds tournaments where we play as a four-person team.
Are the rules different in a team game? Can you ask a partner for advice such as what club did he use? Can I leave my ball behind the hole if I feel it might benefit my partner who is chipping onto the green?
Thank you, Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
Your first question is simple to answer. A player is entitled to ask his partner for advice, and also to give him advice [Rule 8-1]. If he has three partners, he may give or get advice from any of them.
Your second question is a bit tricky. A player whose chip from off the green strikes another ball on the green incurs no penalty – the player who chipped the ball will play his ball as it lies, and the other ball must be replaced [Rule 18-5]. However, if two players agree to leave a ball in place that might assist another player (regardless of whether they are partners), both players are disqualified [Rule 22-1 and Rule 31-7].
If no discussion has taken place, there is no penalty – the USGA has yet to penalize a player for his thoughts. But if you remark that you are going to leave your ball behind the hole because it may serve as a backstop for your partner’s chip, and your partner says: “Gee, Bob, that’s a great idea,” you are both disqualified. Once you have indicated your intention aloud, you can only avoid disqualification by marking and lifting your ball before your partner chips his.
When a player’s ball is in a position where it might help another player, he is permitted to decide on his own whether to lift it; he is required to lift it if he is asked to do so. If a player sees that another ball might assist a different player, he may request that the ball be lifted, and his request must be granted.
When any ball interferes with your play, you may ask that it be lifted, and the player must lift that ball. However, if your ball is in the way, you are not permitted to lift it unless you have been requested to do so. If you lift that ball without being asked, you are penalized one stroke for lifting a ball in play (Rule 18-2a).
Of course, you are always permitted to mark and lift a ball that lies on the putting green, and you may clean that ball. If you lift a ball any place else on the golf course that is assisting or interfering with play (this lifting is permitted anywhere on the course, including in hazards), you are not permitted to clean it. That ball should be held carefully in two fingers; if you drop it into your pocket, that is tantamount to cleaning it; the penalty is one stroke [Rule 21].
Personally, I am not fond of tournaments with four-person teams. When every person in a group is on the same team, I suspect that there are occasions when penalties are overlooked. For some players it can be psychologically intimidating to call a penalty on a teammate. While we all like to trust that every golfer is policing himself and is knowledgeable about the rules, that is not always the case.I think that tournament results are always more reliable when pairings contain opposing players. Formats with four-person teams are more suited to outings and charity fundraisers.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, September 13, 2010
Ask Linda #238-Cart path relief-right side or left?
Dear Linda: (First, thank you for such a delightful, and informative web site)
A golf colleague and I (both of whom read your advice regularly) still have a difference of opinion regarding a ball that lies along the extreme right side of a cart path in the direction of the hole. As a result, I provided the attached drawing to him to argue my point that the left side of the cart path will most often provide the nearest point of relief. As the Chief Justice of Golf Rule Interpretation, can you kindly tell me if there are any errors in the drawing (although I have not taken the time to laboriously draw it to scale)? Many thanks in advance,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,You are, of course, talking about a right-handed golfer in this question. (Lefties, just reverse everything–I'm guessing you're used to that.)
Generally, the left-hand side of the cart path will provide the nearest point of relief for a right-handed golfer. However, if the cart path is exceptionally wide, the nearest relief may turn out to be on the right side. If it is not obvious which side will provide the nearest relief, you should establish the nearest point of relief on both sides of the path, measure from where the ball lies on the cart path to each nearest point, and then choose the side where your relief point is closest to the ball.
For a ball lying between the left side of the path and the middle, you can bypass the two-sided measuring procedure. The nearest point of relief for such a ball will always be on the left side for a right-handed player.
Don't forget that "nearest point of relief" means exactly that. If the ground to the right side of the cart path is fairway, and the ground to the left is covered in fescue, and your nearest relief is on the left side, then you must drop in the fescue. This is why I always advise readers to assess their relief options before lifting their ball – the best shot you have may be to hit the ball right off the cart path.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Ask Linda #237-Ball ricochets backward into hazard
Hi Linda,
I came across the following interesting scenario during my round a couple of days ago.
Hole #3 is a Par 3 that shares a common tee ground with another hole (#12) facing the other direction. There is a water hazard marked for #12 between the tee and the hole for #12.
The tee-shot of #3 hits the sand box and ricochets all the way backward into the water hazard on hole #12, which is behind the #3 tee.
What is the correct procedure to continue? Should I go across the water hazard to drop?
If I must go across the water to drop, what if that body of water is the Pacific Ocean??
Thank you very much!
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
I will answer your question by first proposing the best solution for your predicament.
Rule 26-1a (Relief for Ball in Water Hazard) offers you the option to play a ball from the spot where you played the original ball. In the case of a ball that was hit from the teeing ground, you would be permitted to tee up another ball and try again. Counting the one penalty stroke for taking relief from the hazard, this would be your third shot.
If you choose to take relief under 26-1b (and I can’t imagine why you would want to), you would have to go to the other side of the hazard and drop a ball behind the hazard on a line directly to the hole. This, too, would be your third shot.
Regardless of whether the hazard is a narrow creek or a large lake, there is most likely no sane reason to do anything other than re-tee.
The Pacific Ocean would never be a water hazard between the teeing ground and the hole, so that theoretical part of your question is unanswerable. When a large body of water such as an ocean or a river is in play on a hole, then it is generally marked as a lateral water hazard.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Ask Linda #236-Recording scores
Greetings Linda,
I have a question about how to record scores on the score card. Is there any rule or decision concerning how to record one’s score on a score card? I play with a group who like to record the number of strokes over/under par on their card. For example: a birdie would be -1 and a bogey +1, etc. They say it makes it easier to total the score card at the end of the round because they have smaller numbers to add to get the over/under par total. I thought I once read a score must be recorded as the number of strokes taken for the particular hole. Granted we're only playing for fun, but it would be nice to know for future reference.
Thank you,
"Lou Lou"
Dear Lou Lou,
When a golfer is competing in a tournament, he is responsible for recording the correct score for each hole on his score card. That number would represent the total number of strokes per hole. The Committee is responsible to add those scores, and they must be written in the traditional way: 5 for a bogey on a par 4, not +1.
When a golfer is playing a casual round, it is his responsibility to post his ESC score (total score minus deductions for Equitable Stroke Control) at the end of the round. As long as he comes up with the correct total, he is at liberty to choose his own system for recording scores.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Ask Linda #235-Playing wrong hole
Hi Linda,
When playing a Stableford competition a group played the wrong hole. They finished the hole and realized their error. What is the penalty? Disqualification? Is it the same for a regular stroke play tournament?
Regards
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
Stableford tournaments are a rarity in the United States. I have never run or played in one, so my knowledge of Stableford rules is sketchy at best. I consulted a rules official at the USGA, and we came up with what we think is the correct answer, which I will share with you. However, I would suggest that you contact an official with the R&A for a definitive ruling.
In a regular stroke play tournament, if a player plays from the wrong teeing ground (the wrong hole), she incurs a two-stroke penalty and must return to the correct hole. However, if she continues play at the wrong hole and does not correct her mistake before she tees off on the following hole, she is disqualified [Rule 11-5 and 11-4b].
While Stableford tournaments are stroke play competitions, the rules vary somewhat from a normal stroke-play event. Rule 32-2 lists all the instances under which a player in a Stableford would be disqualified. Rule 11-5, Playing From the Wrong Teeing Ground, is not on that list, so playing the wrong hole would not result in a disqualification from a Stableford tournament. Rule 32-2b tells us that in all other cases where a violation would result in a disqualification, the competitor is disqualified only for the hole where she broke the rule.
Under the Stableford scoring system, players are awarded points for certain scores, and the player with the most points wins. A competitor playing the wrong hole would receive no points for that hole, and no points for the holes she skipped. So if she completed the third hole and jumped to the sixth, she would receive no points for hole four, five, and six, and would continue play at the seventh hole.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Ask Linda #234a-Illogical golf rule?
Linda,
I read your response to post #234 and was a bit surprised by your answer even though I now agree that it was correct after researching Decisions 16/2 and 16/3. However, I do not understand the logic behind those decisions. Intuitively, I think Decisions 16/2 and 16/3 are backward.
If more than 50% of an embedded ball is within the circumference of the cup, it would seem that the prior shot should be deemed to be holed because placing the ball on the lip would be on a spot that is further away than where it landed. If it were placed exactly vertically upward, it would fall in the hole 100% of the time. I cannot think of another situation where a player would be "REQUIRED" to both mark and play his next shot from a further point on the green. Even in a damaged green or with casual water, the player has the "OPTION" of playing the ball on "the spot" where it landed. Thus, Decision 16/3 seems to be a manufactured anomaly to other Rules.
Decision 16/2 states:
16/2 Ball Embedded in Side of Hole; All of Ball Below Lip of Hole
Q. A player's ball embeds in the side of a hole. All of the ball is below the level of the lip of the hole. What is the ruling?
A. The ball should be considered holed even though all of the ball is not within the circumference of the hole as required by the Definition of "Holed."
This decision also appears illogical. If the ball was not embedded in the side of the hole but rather anywhere else on the green, the spot for the next shot would be vertically above its current position on the surface of the green. So why is a player entitled to spot his ball as much 50% closer to hole (enough to deem it holed) solely because it is embedded below the surface of the green while merely touching the circumference of the hole?
To illustrate the unfairness of these Decisions, consider two situations:
Situation 1: A high arching shot embeds deeply (below the surface of the green) on a wet green next to the cup such that its outer edge is barely touching the circumference of the hole. Under Decision 16/2, that shot is deemed to be holed even though 99%+ of the ball is outside the circumference of the cup.
Situation 2: A high arching shot embeds on a wet green on the lip of the cup such that 7/8 of the ball is hanging over the cup but the ball is not below the surface of the green. Under Decision 16/3, that ball must be placed on the lip which is 3/8" further from the spot in which it came to rest.
Clearly, the shot in Situation 1 was not as good as the shot in Situation 2 but the result is one less stroke. Further, both Decisions 16/2 and 16/3 resulted in an artificial placement of the ball in a spot not consistent with where it landed on the green.
I realize you do not make the rules, but maybe you could lend some insight as to the logic behind these seemingly weird decisions. I would be surprised if I am the only person who responds to this situation.
Thanks,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
I’m glad to learn that I have readers who are motivated to read the Decisions I cite in my answers and to spend quality time analyzing and considering the implications of those Decisions. I will do my very best to try to justify the logic behind these particular Decisions.
Let’s first look at your statement that you “cannot think of another situation where a player would be "REQUIRED" to both mark and play his next shot from a further point on the green.” Here’s one: Rule 17-4 talks about what to do when your ball is resting against the flagstick. If the flagstick is removed and the ball falls in, it is holed. However, if the ball moves away from the hole when the flagstick is removed, the player is required to place it on the lip of the hole without penalty. This is clearly a case of a ball that was partially in the hole being placed further from the hole.
You’re looking for some logic, Lou, so let’s find it. We should start with the definition of “holed.” “A ball is ‘holed’ when it is at rest within the circumference of the hole and all of it is below the level of the lip of the hole.” The ball must be in the hole and below the lip. A ball that dives into the hole and embeds in the side of the hole with all of it below the surface meets the definition of “holed.” The player cannot be held responsible if the cup liner has been sunk too low or if there is no liner in the hole keeping the ball from embedding in the side when conditions are extremely wet, so the requirement that it be within the circumference of the hole is waived. The player’s ball entered the hole first, before embedding, and finished completely below the lip; it is “holed.”
A ball that embeds in the side of a hole and is not below the level of the lip has smashed into the back of the hole. It has not truly entered the hole. Part of it is sitting on top of the green, albeit plugged. This ball has not met the definition of “holed,” since it is not completely below the surface and is partially on top of the green.
So, if a ball cannot be considered “holed” if it did not enter the hole and finish below the lip, what are the rules’ makers supposed to establish as a procedure for a ball embedded in the side but partially above ground? The only possible and logical solution is to place the ball on the lip of the hole, and the player can then tap it in. A player can never be awarded a holed ball – it must have entered the hole as the result of a stroke. While placing a ball “on the spot” is an option elsewhere on the golf course, it can never be an option to place a ball in the hole. Decision 16/3 is not a “manufactured anomaly to other Rules,” as you suggest, but a reasonable and fair relief procedure for a ball that has not met the definition of “holed.”
Now let’s address your examples. In your first situation, the ball embeds in the green next to the cup with part of it within the circumference of the hole. This ball is not considered “holed.” Decision 16/2 is talking about a ball that has entered the hole and embedded in the side. Picture the ball diving into the hole and, with no cup liner to stop it (or a cup liner that has been sunk too deep), plugging in the side. In your example the ball embedded in the green; it did not dive into the hole and embed in the side.
In your second situation, part of the ball is above the surface of the green, and has therefore not met the definition of “holed.”
Sometimes rules have to be made in accordance with what the rulebook calls “equity.” Think about it for a minute. What is the fairest relief for a ball partially within the hole that has not met the requirements for being considered “holed?” I think the answer you will come up with is the same that the rules’ authorities adopted, which is that the ball should be placed on the lip of the hole.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
I read your response to post #234 and was a bit surprised by your answer even though I now agree that it was correct after researching Decisions 16/2 and 16/3. However, I do not understand the logic behind those decisions. Intuitively, I think Decisions 16/2 and 16/3 are backward.
If more than 50% of an embedded ball is within the circumference of the cup, it would seem that the prior shot should be deemed to be holed because placing the ball on the lip would be on a spot that is further away than where it landed. If it were placed exactly vertically upward, it would fall in the hole 100% of the time. I cannot think of another situation where a player would be "REQUIRED" to both mark and play his next shot from a further point on the green. Even in a damaged green or with casual water, the player has the "OPTION" of playing the ball on "the spot" where it landed. Thus, Decision 16/3 seems to be a manufactured anomaly to other Rules.
Decision 16/2 states:
16/2 Ball Embedded in Side of Hole; All of Ball Below Lip of Hole
Q. A player's ball embeds in the side of a hole. All of the ball is below the level of the lip of the hole. What is the ruling?
A. The ball should be considered holed even though all of the ball is not within the circumference of the hole as required by the Definition of "Holed."
This decision also appears illogical. If the ball was not embedded in the side of the hole but rather anywhere else on the green, the spot for the next shot would be vertically above its current position on the surface of the green. So why is a player entitled to spot his ball as much 50% closer to hole (enough to deem it holed) solely because it is embedded below the surface of the green while merely touching the circumference of the hole?
To illustrate the unfairness of these Decisions, consider two situations:
Situation 1: A high arching shot embeds deeply (below the surface of the green) on a wet green next to the cup such that its outer edge is barely touching the circumference of the hole. Under Decision 16/2, that shot is deemed to be holed even though 99%+ of the ball is outside the circumference of the cup.
Situation 2: A high arching shot embeds on a wet green on the lip of the cup such that 7/8 of the ball is hanging over the cup but the ball is not below the surface of the green. Under Decision 16/3, that ball must be placed on the lip which is 3/8" further from the spot in which it came to rest.
Clearly, the shot in Situation 1 was not as good as the shot in Situation 2 but the result is one less stroke. Further, both Decisions 16/2 and 16/3 resulted in an artificial placement of the ball in a spot not consistent with where it landed on the green.
I realize you do not make the rules, but maybe you could lend some insight as to the logic behind these seemingly weird decisions. I would be surprised if I am the only person who responds to this situation.
Thanks,
Lou Lou
Dear Lou Lou,
I’m glad to learn that I have readers who are motivated to read the Decisions I cite in my answers and to spend quality time analyzing and considering the implications of those Decisions. I will do my very best to try to justify the logic behind these particular Decisions.
Let’s first look at your statement that you “cannot think of another situation where a player would be "REQUIRED" to both mark and play his next shot from a further point on the green.” Here’s one: Rule 17-4 talks about what to do when your ball is resting against the flagstick. If the flagstick is removed and the ball falls in, it is holed. However, if the ball moves away from the hole when the flagstick is removed, the player is required to place it on the lip of the hole without penalty. This is clearly a case of a ball that was partially in the hole being placed further from the hole.
You’re looking for some logic, Lou, so let’s find it. We should start with the definition of “holed.” “A ball is ‘holed’ when it is at rest within the circumference of the hole and all of it is below the level of the lip of the hole.” The ball must be in the hole and below the lip. A ball that dives into the hole and embeds in the side of the hole with all of it below the surface meets the definition of “holed.” The player cannot be held responsible if the cup liner has been sunk too low or if there is no liner in the hole keeping the ball from embedding in the side when conditions are extremely wet, so the requirement that it be within the circumference of the hole is waived. The player’s ball entered the hole first, before embedding, and finished completely below the lip; it is “holed.”
A ball that embeds in the side of a hole and is not below the level of the lip has smashed into the back of the hole. It has not truly entered the hole. Part of it is sitting on top of the green, albeit plugged. This ball has not met the definition of “holed,” since it is not completely below the surface and is partially on top of the green.
So, if a ball cannot be considered “holed” if it did not enter the hole and finish below the lip, what are the rules’ makers supposed to establish as a procedure for a ball embedded in the side but partially above ground? The only possible and logical solution is to place the ball on the lip of the hole, and the player can then tap it in. A player can never be awarded a holed ball – it must have entered the hole as the result of a stroke. While placing a ball “on the spot” is an option elsewhere on the golf course, it can never be an option to place a ball in the hole. Decision 16/3 is not a “manufactured anomaly to other Rules,” as you suggest, but a reasonable and fair relief procedure for a ball that has not met the definition of “holed.”
Now let’s address your examples. In your first situation, the ball embeds in the green next to the cup with part of it within the circumference of the hole. This ball is not considered “holed.” Decision 16/2 is talking about a ball that has entered the hole and embedded in the side. Picture the ball diving into the hole and, with no cup liner to stop it (or a cup liner that has been sunk too deep), plugging in the side. In your example the ball embedded in the green; it did not dive into the hole and embed in the side.
In your second situation, part of the ball is above the surface of the green, and has therefore not met the definition of “holed.”
Sometimes rules have to be made in accordance with what the rulebook calls “equity.” Think about it for a minute. What is the fairest relief for a ball partially within the hole that has not met the requirements for being considered “holed?” I think the answer you will come up with is the same that the rules’ authorities adopted, which is that the ball should be placed on the lip of the hole.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Ask Linda #234-Ball embedded in side of hole
Hi Linda,
Another one from Australia.
We have had very wet conditions on our course and today one of our players hit her ball from off the green into the hole where it became embedded in the wall of the hole. The ball was not fully below the surface of the green and was not touching the flag.
We were playing Stableford and she considered she had holed out, therefore lifting her ball.
The women in her group were not sure whether she had proceeded correctly.
We know that the ball was not holed, but how should the player have proceeded?
Kind Regards,
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
In order to be considered “holed,” the ball must be below the level of the lip of the hole [Definition of “Holed”]. If a ball is embedded in the side of a hole, and part of the ball is above the hole, it cannot be considered holed.
The player may play the ball as it lies, although that would not be my recommendation, since you can’t be certain you will be able to dislodge an embedded ball with a short swing.
The safer procedure would be as follows:
The player may lift (and clean) the ball, since it is technically on the putting green [Rule 16-1b]. She may then repair the ball mark, since you are always permitted to repair damage to the green caused by the impact of a ball [Rule 16-1c]. Her next step would be to place the ball on the lip of the hole and putt it into the hole [Decision 16/3].
If the ball had embedded in the side of the hole and the whole ball were below the level of the lip, then it would have been considered to be holed [Decision 16/2].
The other issue here is whether the player would be disqualified. In a Stableford competition, if a player records a score that is lower than she actually took, she would be disqualified unless the score did not affect the result of the hole. In other words, if the fixed score at the hole in question were 5, and the player recorded an 8 (which would have been a 9 had she proceeded correctly), there is no penalty, since no points are earned for scoring 3 over the fixed score. However, if she recorded a 5 (which would have been a 6 had she proceeded correctly), she would be disqualified [Rule 32-2a, referencing rule 6-6d].
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Ask Linda #233-Unplayable confusion
Dear Linda,
Yesterday, at a tournament, a fellow player hit her ball into some very deep, matted down grass. I helped her find it and she immediately picked it up, said she couldn't hit it from there, and said she'd take a penalty. Another player said (and I agree with her) she couldn't pick it up and bring it back to the tee. She could take an unplayable lie, but it had to be dropped within 2 club-lengths and add a one-stroke penalty. She had already picked up the ball, not marking the spot! She hemmed around a bit and put it back in the area where it had been and hit it. What the heck should the consequences have been?
Lulu
Dear Lulu,
A player is entitled to declare her ball unplayable, lift it, and return to the tee to try again [Rule 28a]. It sounds like that is what the player wanted to do. Had she stuck to her guns, she would have been proceeding correctly. She would count the original stroke and add a one-stroke penalty for an unplayable ball. Her next stroke from the tee would be her third shot.
Instead, she got herself into some trouble by not trusting her knowledge of the rules. When she lifted her ball and then replaced it, she incurred a one-stroke penalty for lifting a ball in play under Rule 18-2a. If she did not add that penalty stroke to her score, she would be disqualified for recording a score lower than she had actually taken [Rule 6-6d].
At the end of the round, before signing the scorecard, the player should have consulted a member of the Committee. She would have been properly advised to add a stroke to her score for the hole and everything would have been hunky dory (that’s American slang for “just fine”).
If the player had replaced the ball and then decided to declare it unplayable and drop within two club-lengths, she would incur two penalty strokes–one for lifting a ball in play, and one for taking relief for an unplayable ball.
Linda
Copyright © 2010 Linda Miller. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
