Bunker Rake question

[tefunk]

I'm not sure this is appropriate because we're more so talking about the rules after the fact here, but it makes me think of why a lot of people leave rakes out of the bunkers?  The way I look at it, the bunker is there for a reason, so we shouldn't be leaving rakes out of the bunkers as it may prevent us from entering them (i.e. the rake stops the ball from going in).

Maybe this isn't the right place to discuss... but what does everyone else think?

[mad max]

This post by Johanna explains the thought behind leaving rakes outside bunkers.

Originally Posted by Johanna

That's exactly why the Ruling Bodies advise that rakes be placed outside bunkers:

From the Decision Book:

Miscellaneous 2

Q.Should rakes be placed in or outside bunkers?

A.There is not a perfect answer for the position of rakes, but on balance it is felt there is less likelihood of an advantage or disadvantage to the player if rakes are placed outside bunkers.

It may be argued that there is more likelihood of a ball being deflected into or kept out of a bunker if the rake is placed outside the bunker. It could also be argued that if the rake is in the bunker it is most unlikely that the ball will be deflected out of the bunker.

However, in practice, players who leave rakes in bunkers frequently leave them at the side which tends to stop a ball rolling into the flat part of the bunker, resulting in a much more difficult shot than would otherwise have been the case. This is most prevalent at a course where the bunkers are small. When the ball comes to rest on or against a rake in the bunker and the player must proceed under Rule 24-1, it may not be possible to replace the ball on the same spot or find a spot in the bunker which is not nearer the hole - see Decision 20-3d/2.

If rakes are left in the middle of the bunker the only way to position them is to throw them into the bunker and this causes damage to the surface. Also, if a rake is in the middle of a large bunker it is either not used or the player is obliged to rake a large area of the bunker resulting in unnecessary delay.

Therefore, after considering all these aspects, it is recommended that rakes should be left outside bunkers in areas where they are least likely to affect the movement of the ball.

Ultimately, it is a matter for the Committee to decide where it wishes rakes to be placed.

[Jefferey13]

I think the best thing to do is try and always leave rakes on the greenside of the bunker if the rake is going to be left in the bunker. That way when the rake is moved it rolls down into the middle away from the hole.

If someone leaves a rake in a bunker in a place where I know I will have no drop, I will just "accidentally" push the ball into the sand when removing the rake so the ball doesn't move haha.

[Dormie1360]

Guys, just so everyone is clear we are not talking about taking an Unplayable Rule 28.  You CAN NOT take an unplayable in a water hazard.  You CAN NOT take an unplayable in a bunker without dropping in the bunker, no closer or, if you can not do that,  play the ball from the spot from which the ball was last played.  Rule 20-5  This is all with a one stroke penalty.

What we're talking about in this thread is complying with Rule 24-1, Movable Obstruction.  You must replace your ball after moving the obstruction.  Rule 20-3d covers what to do if you can not replace the ball without the ball moving.

If you can not comply with rule 20-3d, with a ball in a bunker, because you can not find a place where the ball will stay put without being closer to the hole, the rules have a decision which allow you to place the ball outside the bunker with a one stroke penalty.  Whether you agree or not, the rules think you should not get a free get out of bunker card, because of a rake or other obstruction laying against your ball in a bunker.

Allowing you to push the ball into the sand, is allowing you to change your lie.  This creates a whole new can of worms.

[mad max]

Originally Posted by Dormie1360

If you can not comply with rule 20-3d, with a ball in a bunker, because you can not find a place where the ball will stay put without being closer to the hole, the rules have a decision which allow you to place the ball outside the bunker with a one stroke penalty.  Whether you agree or not, the rules think you should not get a free get out of bunker card, because of a rake or other obstruction laying against your ball in a bunker.

I understand but if the decision is based upon 1-4

1-4. Points Not Covered By Rules

If any point in dispute is not covered by the Rules , the decision should be made in accordance with equity.

I think a more equitable choice would be to let the ball come to rest after placing it if their is no where to place the ball where it would not be closer to the hole. I realize this is going to be a rare situation but in my opinion this would closest to what would have occurred if there was no rake in the first place.

I am not trying to rewrite the rules but I am curious as to why they made the decision the way they did.  I actual would have less of a problem with it if they didn't make the exception that you could drop the ball out of the bunker instead of making you go back to where you played your previous shot.  It just seems to me they are already altering the rules by allowing you to drop outside a bunker so why not make the ruling be more in line with what would have happened had the rake not been there.

[Rulesman]

1-4 is not relevant, equity is not required. The principle of equity caused the ruling to be made. The situation is now covered by the rules. Decision 20-3d/2 is a Rule by definition.

Of course, if the rake had not been there, the ball could have finished anywhere in any sort of lie. There is no way of knowing.

[mad max]

Originally Posted by Rulesman

1-4 is not relevant, equity is not required. The principle of equity caused the ruling to be made. The situation is now covered by the rules. Decision 20-3d/2 is a Rule by definition.

Of course, if the rake had not been there, the ball could have finished anywhere in any sort of lie. There is no way of knowing.

I understand that a ruling has been made but I don't get it.  If the principal of equity caused the ruling to be made why wouldn't the most equitable decision be made.  I understand that the ball could have ended up anywhere but most likely the ball would trickle into the bunker and come to rest against the rake so the ball would have most likely ended up rolling forward to a spot where it would stay.  I just don't understand why if they were willing to modify a rule where you could drop out of a bunker in line with the hole why they wouldn't make a decision that was more likely to result in the ball being in a similar position if the rake was not there in the first place.  This would also help avoid confusion because some people thought that you could take an unplayable out of a bunker.

I am not trying to be argumentative just bored and waiting for the weekend.  I was also curious as to how these decisions are made.  Thanks to all that have responded to a question that probably will never come up.

[Dormie1360]

Originally Posted by mad max

I am not trying to be argumentative just bored and waiting for the weekend.  I was also curious as to how these decisions are made.  Thanks to all that have responded to a question that probably will never come up.

I try to avoid discussions/arguments as to whether or not a rule makes sense or is fair or not.  Above my pay grade.  I just try to understand and explain the rules as written.

How the rules/decisions are reviewed and changed was explained to me once but I forget most of the details.  I can tell you that some very smart and passionate people in the US and Europe discuss the rules and possible changes. It involves a number of committees.  Whether changes are made or not is not always a unanimous decision.

As I've said in other threads, when I talk to people that have been on these committees I usually find out that the reasons for many of the changes (or non changes) involve ramifications that I would have never thought of.

All I know for sure is that my first round singles match is in the morning and my game is currently in the toilet.

[Rulesman]

Originally Posted by mad max

If the principal of equity caused the ruling to be made why wouldn't the most equitable decision be made.   This would also help avoid confusion because some people thought that you could take an unplayable out of a bunker.

Thanks to all that have responded to a question that probably will never come up.

Remember, in golf, equity does not necessarily mean fair. Equity is about treating similar situations in the same (equal) way. It may not be obvious in this case but the RBs will have their reasons. The most obvious is that you can never go nearer the hole (with one odd exception).

You can take an unplayable out of a bunker, under clause (a).

It does happen. I have had to rule twice on this situation in competitions.

[zeg]

Originally Posted by mad max

I understand that a ruling has been made but I don't get it.  If the principal of equity caused the ruling to be made why wouldn't the most equitable decision be made.  I understand that the ball could have ended up anywhere but most likely the ball would trickle into the bunker and come to rest against the rake so the ball would have most likely ended up rolling forward to a spot where it would stay.  I just don't understand why if they were willing to modify a rule where you could drop out of a bunker in line with the hole why they wouldn't make a decision that was more likely to result in the ball being in a similar position if the rake was not there in the first place.  This would also help avoid confusion because some people thought that you could take an unplayable out of a bunker.

I am not trying to be argumentative just bored and waiting for the weekend.  I was also curious as to how these decisions are made.  Thanks to all that have responded to a question that probably will never come up.

I don't think your assertion that "most likely the ball would trickle into the bunker" is quite accurate enough here. Maybe it's most likely, but it's not like "99.9% of the time," so there's not enough certainty to warrant giving the player a perfect bunker lie.

What was said above about "equitable" not meaning "fair" is key here. The ruling as made does not rely on hypotheticals, and I can't think of any rules that do. Furthermore, the rules are quite firm about two things that constrain this decision. First, you may never, under any circumstances, advance the ball toward the hole except by a stroke. Second, you may not exit a hazard without a penalty unless it's by making a stroke.

There are many situations where a bit of bad luck results in extra strokes, whether they be penalty strokes or actual strokes. It sucks, but I think this rule is less annoying than a perfectly struck drive taking a bad bounce and winding up under a tree. :-)

[Rulesman]

There are of course two remedies.

Don't hit your ball into a bunker. Hazards are hazardous places to be.

Don't leave rakes in bunkers.

By the way, as I implied, there is one situation when you can play from in front of where your ball originally lay.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by Johanna

I agree with all Rulesman says. The problems with rakes in bunkers has led the Ruling Bodies to advise that rakes be kept outside bunkers, but greenkeepers don't like that because they have to get off their grass mowers to remove the rakes when mowing.

This is what I was going to add.   I had an ongoing battle with the superintendent at my home course about this issue.  After I'd played there for 20 years with the rakes left outside of the bunkers, he decided unilaterally that he was going to change the policy.  As result, before every tournament, we sent a couple of committeemen out on to the course to remove the rakes from the bunkers.  He would complain to the pro shop, but didn't seem to get much sympathy.  By the end of last season, he seemed to have pretty much given up the fight, as the rakes were generally found outside of the bunkers most of the time.

We did the same thing when I worked as a rules official for the Colorado Golf Association before every tournament round.  The RO's arrive at least 1 to 1½ hours before the first player starts and patrol the course, verifying hole placements against the pin sheets, doing a final check on course markings and any GUR designations, and making sure that rakes are properly located outside of bunkers and parallel to the normal direction of play.

[Jefferey13]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

This is what I was going to add.   I had an ongoing battle with the superintendent at my home course about this issue.  After I'd played there for 20 years with the rakes left outside of the bunkers, he decided unilaterally that he was going to change the policy.  As result, before every tournament, we sent a couple of committeemen out on to the course to remove the rakes from the bunkers.  He would complain to the pro shop, but didn't seem to get much sympathy.  By the end of last season, he seemed to have pretty much given up the fight, as the rakes were generally found outside of the bunkers most of the time.

We did the same thing when I worked as a rules official for the Colorado Golf Association before every tournament round.  The RO's arrive at least 1 to 1½ hours before the first player starts and patrol the course, verifying hole placements against the pin sheets, doing a final check on course markings and any GUR designations, and making sure that rakes are properly located outside of bunkers and parallel to the normal direction of play.

For me this just goes back to if the grounds crew really wants to put the rakes in the bunkers, just put them on the greenside of the bunker.