or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Rules of Golf › Hazard Point of Entry- Does "estimate" mean "average" of likely entry points?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hazard Point of Entry- Does "estimate" mean "average" of likely entry points? - Page 2

post #19 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Asheville View Post

A necessary element of taking relief from a lateral water hazard iaw R26-1c is the requirement to either know or be able to estimate the point at which original ball last crossed the margin of the hazard. Absent knowing or being able to estimate the crossing point, then relief must be iaw R26-1a, stroke and distance.

So how precisely to you have to estimate?  

 

 

Quote:

26-1/17

Point Where Ball Last Crossed Margin of Lateral Water Hazard Determined and Ball Dropped and Played; Point Then Proves to Be Wrong Point

Q.In the circumstances described in Decision 26-1/16, what is the ruling if A, having dropped a ball in a wrong place, plays it before his error is discovered?

A.A must continue play with the ball played from a wrong place, without penalty. Applying a penalty under Rule 26-1 for playing from a wrong place (see Rule 20-7) is not appropriate. Otherwise, a competitor would risk incurring a penalty every time he makes an honest judgment as to the point where his ball last crosses a water-hazard margin and that judgment subsequently proves incorrect.

 

You do the best you can.  As I said above, if there is a range of possible points, then you must take the one farthest from the hole.   It would be no different than if the lateral water hazard had an irregular margin and the ball went over a hill at a point where there were two arms of the hazard, either of which could be the place where the ball entered the hazard.  You take the margin farthest from the hole for your reference point.  You do not have to assume that the ball is lost if there is truly no place else for it to be but in the hazard.  Rule 26 doesn't not require that the player observes the ball entering the hazard, only that there is virtual certainty that it is there.

post #20 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourputt View Post

 

 

 

You do the best you can.  As I said above, if there is a range of possible points, then you must take the one farthest from the hole.   It would be no different than if the lateral water hazard had an irregular margin and the ball went over a hill at a point where there were two arms of the hazard, either of which could be the place where the ball entered the hazard.  You take the margin farthest from the hole for your reference point.  You do not have to assume that the ball is lost if there is truly no place else for it to be but in the hazard.  Rule 26 doesn't not require that the player observes the ball entering the hazard, only that there is virtual certainty that it is there.

Where does it say that ?

post #21 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rulesman View Post

Where does it say that ?

Heart?

post #22 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rulesman View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourputt View Post

 

 

 

You do the best you can.  As I said above, if there is a range of possible points, then you must take the one farthest from the hole.   It would be no different than if the lateral water hazard had an irregular margin and the ball went over a hill at a point where there were two arms of the hazard, either of which could be the place where the ball entered the hazard.  You take the margin farthest from the hole for your reference point.  You do not have to assume that the ball is lost if there is truly no place else for it to be but in the hazard.  Rule 26 doesn't not require that the player observes the ball entering the hazard, only that there is virtual certainty that it is there.

Where does it say that ?

 

Why does it have to say it?  It does say that when there is uncertainty, you use your best estimate.  That implies some flexibility when the exact spot isn't or can't be known.  I certainly am not going "guess" at the closest point to the hole where the ball might have entered the hazard, so I'm if I'm erring, I'm doing it on the side of caution.

 

I'll ask you this.  You hit a tee shot over a rise with a strong fade, then when you top that hill you see that there is a hazard which you were unaware of.  The hazard has an irregular margin.  Are you going to take the stroke and distance penalty just because you can't be absolutely certain which of a pair of projections the ball may have entered?  If that is the case, that hole is going to be the worst backup in history, since nobody else who hits a similar shot is likely to have any better an idea where his ball entered the hazard.  

 

When the rules allow for the exercise of common sense, then I feel that it's appropriate to use it.  I point to the following 2 decisions to support my contention, although not specific to this scenario.  The only difference is that in the case in point, there is no confirmation of it being the wrong place.

 

 

Quote:

26-1/16

Point Where Ball Last Crossed Margin of Lateral Water Hazard Determined and Ball Dropped; Point Then Proves to Be Wrong Point

Q.In stroke play, A's ball goes into a lateral water hazard and is not found. A uses his best judgment in determining the point where the ball last crossed the hazard margin. B, A's marker and a fellow-competitor, agrees with that judgment and A drops a ball in accordance with Rule 26-1c, using the agreed point on the margin as the reference point. Before A makes his next stroke, C, another fellow-competitor, says that A's ball last crossed the hazard margin 20 yards beyond the point judged by A to be the point where the ball last crossed. A's ball is then found where C said it would be. What is the ruling?

A.When A dropped the ball under Rule 26-1, it was known or virtually certain that his original ball lay in the lateral water hazard. Therefore, Rule 26-1 was the applicable Rule and the player proceeded correctly in that he was permitted to put a ball into play under that Rule. However, as he dropped his ball in a wrong place, A must correct the error under Rule 20-6. He must proceed in accordance with any of the applicable options under Rule 26-1 with respect to the correct reference point (see Decision 20-6/2). A is precluded from playing the original ball from the hazard.

Other Decisions related to whether a player may change a selected relief option after taking further action: See "Ball Dropped or Re-Dropped: changing relief option" in the Index.

26-1/17

Point Where Ball Last Crossed Margin of Lateral Water Hazard Determined and Ball Dropped and Played; Point Then Proves to Be Wrong Point

Q.In the circumstances described in Decision 26-1/16, what is the ruling if A, having dropped a ball in a wrong place, plays it before his error is discovered?

A.A must continue play with the ball played from a wrong place, without penalty. Applying a penalty under Rule 26-1 for playing from a wrong place (see Rule 20-7) is not appropriate. Otherwise, a competitor would risk incurring a penalty every time he makes an honest judgment as to the point where his ball last crosses a water-hazard margin and that judgment subsequently proves incorrect.

post #23 of 38
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asheville View Post

 

What is an estimate? If you neither know or are unable to estimate, then you may not avail yourself of -1c.

You tell me as you were the one who said

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asheville View Post

A necessary element of taking relief from a lateral water hazard iaw R26-1c is the requirement to either know or be able to estimate the point at which original ball last crossed the margin of the hazard. Absent knowing or being able to estimate the crossing point, then relief must be iaw R26-1a, stroke and distance.

 

From my perspective, I was able to estimate- there were two spots the ball was more likely to enter about 60 yards apart from each other and also the possibility that it entered between these spots.  I used the middle point between the two spots as my estimate of where it went in.

 

So, is that estimate legit, OR should I have used Fourputt's conservative estimate approach OR is Rulesman right and you have to play it as a lost ball???  I am tending to side with Fourputt at this point as the competitor will never gain an advantage by taking a conservative drop (and won't be unduly penalized by being forced to take stroke and distance when there is no place else the ball would reasonably be other than the hazard).  

 

I know that everyone but me finds the rules of golf very simple and easy to understand, but I am likely to encounter this again, so I would like to know that I have it right.

post #24 of 38

Apparently, some here disagree, but your description meets the definition of "virtual certainty," at least from my standpoint. Assuming I had done a thorough search of the area surrounding the hazard, I would consider it a lateral drop and not think twice about it.

 

As to the actual spot, if I were in your shoes, I would probably assume (based on my playing partners' assessment) that the ball had kicked left after the second cart path bounce. I would ask him to identify where that spot was and would proceed as if the ball had kicked 90 degrees left from that location, dropping accordingly.

post #25 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourputt View Post

 

Why does it have to say it?  It does say that when there is uncertainty, you use your best estimate.  

 

 

And that is all it says. If you are using your best estimate you don't have to err on the side of caution. Just follow what the rules say.

post #26 of 38
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rulesman View Post

And that is all it says. If you are using your best estimate you don't have to err on the side of caution. Just follow what the rules say.

ok, so where would you drop using Fourputt's example of an irregularly shaped hazard where there are two likely entry points?

post #27 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

ok, so where would you drop using Fourputt's example of an irregularly shaped hazard where there are two likely entry points?

Estimate the most likely based on all available evidence. Line of flight, slope of ground, potential obstacles, any witnesses, local knowledge. 

But I wouldn't make up the rule.

post #28 of 38
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rulesman View Post

Estimate the most likely based on all available evidence. Line of flight, slope of ground, potential obstacles, any witnesses, local knowledge. 

But I wouldn't make up the rule.

So if based upon all available evidence, there was a 60% chance it entered near point A and a 40% near point B, you would drop near point A regardless of whether it was closer or farther from the hole than point B?

post #29 of 38

If you are going to pull percentages out of your @ss (a worthless excercise, since no one is going to be able to assess with that precision the various probabilities associated with each outcome), why stop at 2? Aren't there literally an infinite number of places that your ball might have entered a hazard? I agree with others. You are making the rule way to difficult. Making your best estimate using all the available information is not vague nor is it that difficult. It doesn't mean that you're going to be right every time, however.

post #30 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big C View Post

If you are going to pull percentages out of your @ss (a worthless excercise, since no one is going to be able to assess with that precision the various probabilities associated with each outcome), why stop at 2? Aren't there literally an infinite number of places that your ball might have entered a hazard? I agree with others. You are making the rule way to difficult. Making your best estimate using all the available information is not vague nor is it that difficult. It doesn't mean that you're going to be right every time, however.


Technically yes, there are an infinite number of points on a line, because a point doesn't have a defined size.

 

But i agree, stop being so precise, or making things tough. Just pick a spot you think it entered. Its not rocket science here.

post #31 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

So if based upon all available evidence, there was a 60% chance it entered near point A and a 40% near point B, you would drop near point A regardless of whether it was closer or farther from the hole than point B?

If I estimated that it entered at  A, my reference point for a drop would be A.

post #32 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rulesman View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

So if based upon all available evidence, there was a 60% chance it entered near point A and a 40% near point B, you would drop near point A regardless of whether it was closer or farther from the hole than point B?

If I estimated that it entered at  A, my reference point for a drop would be A.

 

If you and your fellow competitor had differing views, you could either come to a consensus, or if the dispute was unresolvable, in stroke play you could play a second ball and let the committee sort it out.  Of course not having been there, what are they going to be able to do in a he says - he says scenario?  I actually had that happen in a tournament, and we returned to the scene with 2 of the tournament committeemen - they ruled in my favor, but it was essentially simply taking my word for it.  

 

In a match you could play from where you thought was right and let your opponent make a claim if he was of a mind to.

post #33 of 38
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by saevel25 View Post


Technically yes, there are an infinite number of points on a line, because a point doesn't have a defined size.

 

But i agree, stop being so precise, or making things tough. Just pick a spot you think it entered. Its not rocket science here.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rulesman View Post

If I estimated that it entered at  A, my reference point for a drop would be A.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fourputt View Post

 

If you and your fellow competitor had differing views, you could either come to a consensus, or if the dispute was unresolvable, in stroke play you could play a second ball and let the committee sort it out.  Of course not having been there, what are they going to be able to do in a he says - he says scenario?  I actually had that happen in a tournament, and we returned to the scene with 2 of the tournament committeemen - they ruled in my favor, but it was essentially simply taking my word for it.  

 

In a match you could play from where you thought was right and let your opponent make a claim if he was of a mind to.

ok, so in my original case where I thought my ball entered near point A, near point B (60 yards ahead of A) or somewhere in between, I was not wrong in dropping between points A and B as this was my estimate of where it entered?  I thought some might have said differently before.

post #34 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

 

 

 

ok, so in my original case where I thought my ball entered near point A, near point B (60 yards ahead of A) or somewhere in between, I was not wrong in dropping between points A and B as this was my estimate of where it entered?  I thought some might have said differently before.

 

An estimate can only be A or B, an estimate cannot (A+B)/2. If the player cannot estimate if it was A or if it was B, then 26-1c is not available option for the player.

 

I think that if I was a Rules Official and asked the player where he thought his ball crossed the margin of the hazard and he insisted that he didn't know - that it might have been A or it might have been B - I would have to conclude that the player was unable to estimate the crossing point and would have to avail himself of one of the other relief options from Rule 26.


Edited by Asheville - 8/13/13 at 6:30pm
post #35 of 38

I think the idea was the ball could have crossed anywhere from Point A to Point B.  So one would need to estimate the most likely entry point.  Going half way between A and B would be a good estimated point if one thought the likelihood of crossing was exactly equal in all spots from A to B.  From my experience, if one has a pretty good idea of the line a ball was taking as it went over a hill, one can mentally extrapolate the likely entry point even if one does not see it enter the hazard.  Rarely will one have absolute certainty and that is why we are expected to make our best estimate.

post #36 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by bkuehn1952 View Post

I think the idea was the ball could have crossed anywhere from Point A to Point B.  So one would need to estimate the most likely entry point.  Going half way between A and B would be a good estimated point if one thought the likelihood of crossing was exactly equal in all spots from A to B.  From my experience, if one has a pretty good idea of the line a ball was taking as it went over a hill, one can mentally extrapolate the likely entry point even if one does not see it enter the hazard.  Rarely will one have absolute certainty and that is why we are expected to make our best estimate.

 

It's certainly all right for the player to say that he thought that the ball crossed between pine tree A and oak tree B. We then can, in good faith, "estimate" a crossing point. I can say that in my years as a Rules Official I have never had a player say that the ball might have gone in over here near pine tree A or maybe it went in over there near oak tree B so how about we split the difference? No one is that clueless.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rules of Golf
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Rules of Golf › Hazard Point of Entry- Does "estimate" mean "average" of likely entry points?