• Announcements

    • iacas

      Create a Signature!   02/05/2016

      Everyone, go here and edit your signature this week: http://thesandtrap.com/settings/signature/.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
dmp2109

When to re-tee when to drop

7 posts in this topic

I had a argument with a friend about this just looking for a clear definition tried doing a little research just never found the answer When you it a ball OB or in a water hazard etc what determines wether you can take a drop from when it crossed or wether you re-tee and your hitting 3 from the tee box
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

You ALWAYS have the option to replay your stroke under penalty of stroke and distance. If it is not known or virtually certain that your ball is in the hazard you MUST play under stroke and distance. (Or play a provisional)
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought water and OB are two different things, OB is teeing up again and hitting 3 and water you are dropping in the drop zone and hitting 3.. Am I wrong on this? Anyone?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

You are only required to re-tee in two instances. 1. If your shot goes outside of the course boundary (either defined by white boundary stakes or a boundary fence) & 2. If your ball is lost

If you see your ball go into a water hazard, you have the option to drop.

As Dormie indicates above, you always have the option to re-tee playing 3. But you are only required to do so in the two instances above.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

I had a argument with a friend about this just looking for a clear definition tried doing a little research just never found the answer

When you it a ball OB or in a water hazard etc what determines wether you can take a drop from when it crossed or wether you re-tee and your hitting 3 from the tee box

And you can find all of the specific options here: http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Rule-01/

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards and Achievements

I had a argument with a friend about this just looking for a clear definition tried doing a little research just never found the answer

When you it a ball OB or in a water hazard etc what determines wether you can take a drop from when it crossed or wether you re-tee and your hitting 3 from the tee box

Out of Bounds : no choice but to play from where you played your last stroke with a 1 stroke penalty (Rule 27-1b).

Water hazard: as long as you know or are certain your ball is in a water hazard (yellow stakes or line)  you have the option of playing from where you played your last stroke or dropping any distance back on a line  from the hole through where the ball last crossed the margin of the hazard.  If your ball is in a lateral water hazard (red stakes or line), you have these two options plus you can drop within 2 club lengths of where the ball last crossed the margin (not nearer the hole) or 2 club lengths from the point on the other side which is the same distance from the hole.  Have a look at Rule 26-1  http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Rule-26/

If you can't find your ball and  there is any doubt about the ball being in the hazard, you must consider it lost after a maximum of 5 minutes searching and play from where you last played a stroke. (Rule 27-1c)

I suggest you leave Rule 26-2 for the moment - it's a bit complicated.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thnaks for the responses guys that answers my question

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Golf Evolution
  • Posts

    • Iron Game Suffers when Driver Going Well
      For high handicappers myself included, this is typical.   I think it is b/c we don't have the same swing for irons and longer clubs.  If we get them both right in the same round, it is probably by pure luck or coincidence.  Grin and bear, and enjoy the journey.
    • Jack or Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?
      The topic title is the question who is the greatest golfer, the poll is the question who was the best. Two different things in my opinion. There's no doubt to me Tiger was a better golfer. How could he not? Spieth, McIlroy, Day but even guys like Wiesberger, Luiten and Donaldson play better golf than Jack. The game evolved so much over the years, and got so much more professional. If Jack would have been around in this era he would benefit from all that as well and be a better golfer than he was (and probably top those guys I just mentioned). But who was the greatest. How do you measure that (can you)? Tiger was dominant in a stronger field, winning more titles than you can count. Jack was the first of a kind, winning the biggest titles (majors) over an enourmous span and having the most of them. Isn't it mostly a matter of personal who you find 'greater'? For me Johan Cruyff is the greatest Dutch football player of time, but I have no doubt that Dennis Bergkamp and Arjen Robben were/are better because the game evolved. 
    • Making a Murderer Discussion Thread (Spoilers Likely)
      Obvisously... she took his case about a month ago. On one hand I hope Avery is guilty as hell, on the other hand it would be an amazing story and twist if turns out to be set up and she can prove that. I think that chance is less than 1%, but still..... Possibly, good point. Should be quite some blood though since they found 'drops', meaning it was dripping from (in this theory) his glove. Exactly my point. I don't think the blood was freely flowing, because than there should be a lot more blood in the car. They found blood consisting with bloody hair. Seems to me, and I know I'm not an expert, that she was already dead when she was in the car, because that would explain the little amount of blood found (no pumping of the heart, no flow of blood) and the place it was found (in the back). One can easily argue that he killed in the garage, moved her to the car, and only then got the plan to burn her instead and moved her again; to the pit. But the 'problem' is that that's not what the DA said what happenend. In my opinion that blood in the car contradicts the story (or truth) he wants us and the jury to believe, and contradicts also with the story of Dassey which is the only thing that links Dassey to the case: his own words. That doesn't mean Avery is innocent, but it might raise some doubt. The DA should stick with the facts, not filling in the blanks with guessing. If he can't prove exact chronologically he shouldn't state it as 'fact'.   Absolutely. I'm not convinced in anything, not in my opinion, not in yours, not at all in the people who made the documentary. Also not a fan of conspiracy theory's. I don't think the murder was planted on him, but I do think some mistakes were made by the justice system. Mistakes that possibly should have lead to his and maybe even more Dassey's release, even though there's a big chance he did it. That's for me perhaps the most interesting part in this case and in the discussion. If we want a justice system where the chance is close to 0% that we convict someone innocent, and the prosecution and police need to follow the rules, it means sometimes the guilty walk free. I think everything they found on the compount while Manitowoc detectives were present should have been excluded. I think the DNA on the blood of the bullet should have been excluded. I think the 'confession' of Dassey should have been excluded. I think Dassey should have given at least a new trial, but that was denied by the same judge which handled his initial case (?!).
    • Jack or Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?
      A long time ago, by Tiger's own admission,  said a golfer's career is measured by "majors won" . So if Woody does not break Jack's major record, then according to Woody, his career will be second to Jack's. Now Jack has said that he expects (expected) Woody to break his major record. So Jack is saying he expects Woody will have the better career.  These are the only two guys who would know who had the best career.   Neither one is going to be the GOAT. They will just be a GOTE. 
    • Jack or Tiger: Who's the Greatest Golfer?
      Nope, you blindly worship Jack.  It is obvious that you have not read much, if any, of the thread.  But hey, you saw Jack.  In person, yet.  So what.  I did too.  I saw him win his last USGA championship at Cherry Hills.  I saw Tiger play as well - although in person I only saw practice rounds.  So what.  That does not make my assessment of their respective careers more or less credible.  Geee, I never saw Hogan play so I guess we cannot count him in the discussion.   You think Jack was better.  That is fine.  You are entitled to your opinion.  Just don't spoil it with specious reasons or arguments.  Because those we will slice apart like one of Klinger's salamis.  
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    No users celebrating today
  • Blog Entries