Provisional Ball Question

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

It's not the same, but apparently you are incapable of seeing that.

If the original ball is found that he has no choice but to continue play with that.  If he has a choice between 2 known balls, then it's a different game.

In my example he did have the choice between 2 known balls. The provisional at 1 ft for a tap in 4, or an unplayable with the only option to go back to the tee and re hit. This is exactly the same situation.

I have no idea what you are  taking about.  Are you talking about your proposal, or the rule?  If you are trying to tell us that is what the rule says then you are wrong.  He has no choice to play the provisional ball if he knows where the original ball lies, unless it lies out of bounds.  If the location of the original ball is known, then the provisional ball is abandoned.  There is no choice between balls.  If he chooses not to look for the original ball, then he doesn't know where it is, and again, he is only making a procedural choice because there is only one ball to play.  You can't have it both ways.

Either the original ball is found in bounds and remains the ball in play, or it is lost and the provisional ball is the ball in play.

[phan52]

I don't want to speak for the guy with the idea. But let's say you spray one off the tee to the right, and it goes 8' deep into the woods on the right.

Instead of going up there, finding the ball 8' deep in the woods with absolutely no chance to hack it out, and having to drive back to the tee to hit an unplayable lie stroke and distance, he is saying a provisional ball option should be included for unplayable lie scenarios as well.

You have the option to declare a lost ball in that case and re-tee, hitting 3. In that case, it is not a provisional, it is immediately in play.

[fr0sty]

You have the option to declare a lost ball in that case and re-tee, hitting 3. In that case, it is not a provisional, it is immediately in play.

Actually, you don't have the option to "declare" a ball lost.

What you can do is declare it unplayable (which you can do, unless you ball in in a water hazard) and proceed under  a penalty of stroke and distance and put another (non-provisional) ball into play.

[phan52]

Quote:

Originally Posted by phan52

You have the option to declare a lost ball in that case and re-tee, hitting 3. In that case, it is not a provisional, it is immediately in play.

Originally Posted by fr0sty

Actually, you don't have the option to "declare" a ball lost.

What you can do is declare it unplayable (which you can do, unless you ball in in a water hazard) and proceed under  a penalty of stroke and distance and put another (non-provisional) ball into play.

We are basically saying the same thing. You don't have an obligation to take five minutes to look for a ball that you most probably don't want to find. You can always put another ball in play, taking stroke and distance.

[iacas]

We are basically saying the same thing. You don't have an obligation to take five minutes to look for a ball that you most probably don't want to find. You can always put another ball in play, taking stroke and distance.

That's not the same as "declaring a ball lost."

It's more than just semantics, as saying you can "declare a ball lost" is flat out inaccurate.

[phan52]

That's not the same as "declaring a ball lost."

It's more than just semantics, as saying you can "declare a ball lost" is flat out inaccurate.

No it's not. You mean you never teed up a ball after hitting one astray that you don't have any intention to look for, primarily because you have a pretty good idea where it is and you are going to have to go back to the tee anyway?

Oh, excuse me. That's going to be unplayable and I ain't bothering to look for it. Consider it lost. I'm hitting 3 from here.

It's semantics.

[szaino]

I have no idea what you are  taking about.  Are you talking about your proposal, or the rule?  If you are trying to tell us that is what the rule says then you are wrong.  He has no choice to play the provisional ball if he knows where the original ball lies, unless it lies out of bounds.  If the location of the original ball is known, then the provisional ball is abandoned.  There is no choice between balls.  If he chooses not to look for the original ball, then he doesn't know where it is, and again, he is only making a procedural choice because there is only one ball to play.  You can't have it both ways.

Either the original ball is found in bounds and remains the ball in play, or it is lost and the provisional ball is the ball in play.

Sorry, I will rephrase that post:

In my example, the pro shanked his tee shot on a 220 yd par 3 into a strip of tall fescue and then played a provisional for a lost ball. He hit the provisional to 1ft of the pin. As we walked off the tee he "deemed" the original ball lost without even looking for it (which he is allowed to do). The original in all likelihood would have been found.

So he did in fact, under the current rules, have a choice between 2 known balls. The provisional at 1 ft for a tap in 4, or an unplayable with the only option to go back to the tee and re hit.

My point being that this situation which exists under the current rules would be the same as allowing a provisional for a unplayable.

[phan52]

Sorry, I will rephrase that post:

In my example, the pro shanked his tee shot on a 220 yd par 3 into a strip of tall fescue and then played a provisional for a lost ball. He hit the provisional to 1ft of the pin. As we walked off the tee he "deemed" the original ball lost without even looking for it (which he is allowed to do). The original in all likelihood would have been found.

So he did in fact, under the current rules, have a choice between 2 known balls. The provisional at 1 ft for a tap in 4, or an unplayable with the only option to go back to the tee and re hit.

My point being that this situation which exists under the current rules would be the same as allowing a provisional for a unplayable.

He can't do that if he declared a provisional. He had to make that decision before he hit the second ball.

[szaino]

He can't do that if he declared a provisional. He had to make that decision before he hit the second ball.

What can't he do?

He shanked his first shot into deep fescue.

He announced a provisional and hit it to 1 ft.

As we walked off the tee I asked him if he was going to look for the first ball and he said no.

[David in FL]

Sorry, I will rephrase that post:

In my example, the pro shanked his tee shot on a 220 yd par 3 into a strip of tall fescue and then played a provisional for a lost ball. He hit the provisional to 1ft of the pin. As we walked off the tee he "deemed" the original ball lost without even looking for it (which he is allowed to do). The original in all likelihood would have been found.

So he did in fact, under the current rules, have a choice between 2 known balls. The provisional at 1 ft for a tap in 4, or an unplayable with the only option to go back to the tee and re hit.

My point being that this situation which exists under the current rules would be the same as allowing a provisional for a unplayable.

And if his opponent had walked up and found his original ball, it would have remained in play.  No matter what he "deemed".

[Asheville]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

I have no idea what you are  taking about.  Are you talking about your proposal, or the rule?  If you are trying to tell us that is what the rule says then you are wrong.  He has no choice to play the provisional ball if he knows where the original ball lies, unless it lies out of bounds.  If the location of the original ball is known, then the provisional ball is abandoned.  There is no choice between balls.  If he chooses not to look for the original ball, then he doesn't know where it is, and again, he is only making a procedural choice because there is only one ball to play.  You can't have it both ways.

Either the original ball is found in bounds and remains the ball in play, or it is lost and the provisional ball is the ball in play.

Sorry, I will rephrase that post:

In my example, the pro shanked his tee shot on a 220 yd par 3 into a strip of tall fescue and then played a provisional for a lost ball. He hit the provisional to 1ft of the pin. As we walked off the tee he "deemed" the original ball lost without even looking for it (which he is allowed to do). The original in all likelihood would have been found.

So he did in fact, under the current rules, have a choice between 2 known balls. The provisional at 1 ft for a tap in 4, or an unplayable with the only option to go back to the tee and re hit.

My point being that this situation which exists under the current rules would be the same as allowing a provisional for a unplayable.

C'mon, he did not have a choice between two balls. A lost ball is not a ball he can choose to play. The only ball available for him to play was his provisional. Or, as you well know, had he elected to search and find his original ball he must abandon the provisional and, thus, still has only one ball to play. He had a choice, all right, the choice he had was to search or not search. The Rules are craftily constructed so the player never gets to pick which ball he wishes to play. The Rules often give us options, but choosing between balls is never permitted.

[iacas]

It's semantics.

It's very simple: that's not semantics. It's quite literally a different situation, with a different rule coming into play. They just happen to have the same kind of outcome - you hit three from the tee.

But typing the words and saying things like "declare your ball lost" perpetuates the idea that it's possible. It makes people think that they could do something like declare their ball lost as their opponent goes to search for it. They cannot, because you quite literally cannot "declare" your ball lost.

The Rules rely on the basics of language, too, so even if it was semantics (it isn't), those semantics matter.

[szaino]

And if his opponent had walked up and found his original ball, it would have remained in play.  No matter what he "deemed".

Agree 100%.

If I were playing a match against a player I might just take a quick peek for his ball without trying to appear too "obtuse."

[fr0sty]

And if his opponent had walked up and found his original ball, it would have remained in play.  No matter what he "deemed".

There is even a decision on this very point:

27-2b/1

Continuation of Play with Provisional Ball Without Searching for Original Ball

Q. At a par-3 hole, a player hits his tee shot into dense woods. He then hits a provisional ball which comes to rest near the hole. In view of the position of the provisional ball, the player does not wish to find his original ball. He does not search for it and walks directly towards his provisional ball to continue play with it. His opponent (or fellow-competitor) believes it would be beneficial to him if the original ball were found. May the opponent (or fellow-competitor) search for the player's ball?

A. Yes. In equity (Rule 1-4), he may search for five minutes provided that in the meantime the player does not play a stroke with the provisional ball, it being nearer the hole than the place where the original ball is likely to be. The player is entitled to play such a stroke. If he does, the original ball is then lost under Rule 27-2b and further search for it would serve no purpose. In match play, if the player so proceeds and his provisional ball is closer to the hole than his opponent's ball, his opponent may recall the stroke (Rule 10-1c). However, recalling the stroke would not change the status of the original ball, which was lost when the provisional ball was played out of turn. See also Decision 27-2c/2 .

[szaino]

I'll type a little slower, so you can keep up.......

Under your proposed change:

1.  You duff your tee shot onto the next teebox......  Now hitting 2, 170 yards out, over water, but a perfect lie.  Certainly not lost.

2.  You hit a "provisional" because it might be "unplayable", and stuff it close.  Tap in 4.

3.  Do you take the 4, or do you choose to play for a possible (but unlikely) 3 by playing the first ball from 170 yards, over water?

.......of course, you take the 4 and run.  Even top tour pros only get up and down less than 20% of the time from 170 yards, so it would be silly to risk a bigger number for a low chance to improve by one stroke on the guaranteed 4.

Under the current rules:

1. You duff your tee shot onto the next teebox...... Now hitting 2, 170 yards out, over water, but a perfect lie. Certainly not lost.

2.  Do you re-tee hitting 3 (stroke and distance) from 200 yards, or do you play from a perfect lie from 170 yards hitting 2?

......of course, in this scenario, where you don't already KNOW the result of your re-tee, you'll choose to play your original ball from 170 yards.  You won't even consider declaring in unplayable and choosing to hit 3 from 200 instead.  That's the point, knowing the result of the re-tee before having to make the decision is what makes the difference.

I understand your point, but I think that you are wrong in assuming that a golfer would automatically take the provisional and a 4.

This might vary with the level of play for a particular golfer. In your example, I wouldn't take the provisional when I have a clean shot at making a 3 and no worse than a 4.

[David in FL]

I understand your point, but I think that you are wrong in assuming that a golfer would automatically take the provisional and a 4.

This might vary with the level of play for a particular golfer. In your example, I wouldn't take the provisional when I have a clean shot at making a 3 and no worse than a 4.

PGA tour pros get up and down from 170 less than 20% of the time.  But you'd take the chance?  I'm impressed.

Regardless though, the rules aren't there only for the best of the best, they're for all of us......and you asked for an example where your proposal would provide an advantage over the current rule.  This is just one very simple one.....

[iacas]

I understand your point, but I think that you are wrong in assuming that a golfer would automatically take the provisional and a 4.

This might vary with the level of play for a particular golfer. In your example, I wouldn't take the provisional when I have a clean shot at making a 3 and no worse than a 4.

a) All the stuff you typed there is irrelevant to the point that you have two balls in play and get to choose between them.

b) You'd likely be very, very stupid to play the ball from thick rough over water to a par-three green thinking you'd do no worse than a 4. But that's not really the topic, so…

[szaino]

There is even a decision on this very point:

27-2b/1

Continuation of Play with Provisional Ball Without Searching for Original Ball

Q.At a par-3 hole, a player hits his tee shot into dense woods. He then hits a provisional ball which comes to rest near the hole. In view of the position of the provisional ball, the player does not wish to find his original ball. He does not search for it and walks directly towards his provisional ball to continue play with it. His opponent (or fellow-competitor) believes it would be beneficial to him if the original ball were found. May the opponent (or fellow-competitor) search for the player's ball?

A.Yes. In equity (Rule 1-4), he may search for five minutes provided that in the meantime the player does not play a stroke with the provisional ball, it being nearer the hole than the place where the original ball is likely to be. The player is entitled to play such a stroke. If he does, the original ball is then lost under Rule 27-2b and further search for it would serve no purpose. In match play, if the player so proceeds and his provisional ball is closer to the hole than his opponent's ball, his opponent may recall the stroke (Rule 10-1c). However, recalling the stroke would not change the status of the original ball, which was lost when the provisional ball was played out of turn. See also Decision 27-2c/2.

Just to add that, a competitor is under no requirement to look for another players ball.

However, like my last post said and what is highlighted above, you can look for a ball and if found the player must identify it. In head to head match play I have seen this, but in medal play, when someone doesn't want to look for a ball, I have found that players will oblige immediately.