Embedded Ball Relief Question

[JDgolf]

The problem is, there's no mention or clarification of the effect of a 1 club relief. This is key. Such significance would've been mentioned, in my opinion.

[mdl]

37 minutes ago, JDgolf said:

But I've given it some thought and still don't agree.

"When interference by anything other than the ball being embedded makes the 
stroke clearly unreasonable (for example, when a player is unable to make a stroke
because of where the ball lies in a bush"

This doesn't imply a completely unplayable ball. And let's say it did. What exactly are you talking advantage of by unplugging it? You still have to take an unplayable. It makes no sense to add this exception.

For the same reason the OP wasn't sure his relief then better shot option was legal.  Say you've got a ball buried in the mud right near the trunk of a bushy, thorny tree.  If you simply took the ball out of the mud, cleaned it off, and then placed it 1 inch to the side of the plug hole, it would be unplayable.  If you drop it one club length outside the bush, now it's playable.

The exception is to prevent this.  You can't unplug and take a free drop from a spot that would be unplayable even if the ball weren't plugged.

[JDgolf]

23 minutes ago, mdl said:

For the same reason the OP wasn't sure his relief then better shot option was legal.  Say you've got a ball buried in the mud right near the trunk of a bushy, thorny tree.  If you simply took the ball out of the mud, cleaned it off, and then placed it 1 inch to the side of the plug hole, it would be unplayable.  If you drop it one club length outside the bush, now it's playable.

The exception is to prevent this.  You can't unplug and take a free drop from a spot that would be unplayable even if the ball weren't plugged.

I am the OP and thanks

[billchao]

3 hours ago, JDgolf said:

But I've given it some thought and still don't agree.

 

"When interference by anything other than the ball being embedded makes the 
stroke clearly unreasonable (for example, when a player is unable to make a stroke
because of where the ball lies in a bush"

 

This doesn't imply a completely unplayable ball. And let's say it did. What exactly are you talking advantage of by unplugging it? You still have to take an unplayable. It makes no sense to add this exception.

I'm not entirely sure what you're disagreeing with. If your ball is unplayable then being embedded is irrelevant so you get no free relief for the embedded ball.

If the only reason you can't play the ball, even if it's sideways or backwards, is because your ball is embedded, you get relief.

[JDgolf]

27 minutes ago, billchao said:

I'm not entirely sure what you're disagreeing with. If your ball is unplayable then being embedded is irrelevant so you get no free relief for the embedded ball.

If the only reason you can't play the ball, even if it's sideways or backwards, is because your ball is embedded, you get relief.

Appreciate how you used entirely

[David in FL]

5 hours ago, JDgolf said:

But I've given it some thought and still don't agree.

 

"When interference by anything other than the ball being embedded makes the 
stroke clearly unreasonable (for example, when a player is unable to make a stroke
because of where the ball lies in a bush"

 

This doesn't imply a completely unplayable ball. And let's say it did. What exactly are you talking advantage of by unplugging it? You still have to take an unplayable. It makes no sense to add this exception.

Because the relief offered for an embedded ball could allow relief from the position that otherwise caused it to be unplayable.  It’s not simply a matter of unplugging it and replacing it in the original position....

[Rulesman]

The principle applies to all free relief situations.

The question to be answered is:

'If the situation from which I may take free relief (cart path, temporary water, embedded ball etc) didn't exist, would I be able to make a reasonable stroke at the ball?

If the answer is no because something else interferes that you don't get free relief from (eg a tree or OOB wall), then you don't get free relief from the cart path etc.

[iacas]

Right. What @Rulesman said.

Let’s stop using the term “unplayable” too please. It’s “unreasonable to make a stroke”.

A ball beside a tree might mean it’s unreasonable to swing through the tree, so a stance barely on a cart path in that direction may be unreasonable but a chip another direction may be completely good.

[JDgolf]

On 4/18/2019 at 9:44 PM, billchao said:

I'm not entirely sure what you're disagreeing with. If your ball is unplayable then being embedded is irrelevant so you get no free relief for the embedded ball.

If the only reason you can't play the ball, even if it's sideways or backwards, is because your ball is embedded, you get relief.

The 2019 rules of golf don't define this. 

Edited April 20, 2019 by iacas
removed rogue self-quote

[iacas]

17 minutes ago, JDgolf said:

The 2019 rules of golf don't define this. 

Please clarify what you mean by this?

[JDgolf]

Ok let's erase "unplayable" in the vocabulary

[iacas]

Just now, JDgolf said:

Ok let's erase "unplayable" in the vocabulary

Rule 19 is "Unplayable Ball." It's still in the "vocabulary" of golf's rules.

But in the context of an embedded ball, like I said, let's say "unreasonable to play" instead of "unplayable." I think we all knew what those saying "unplayable" meant, but it's best to avoid "golf rules words" when talking about a different thing.

[billchao]

22 minutes ago, JDgolf said:

The 2019 rules of golf don't define this. 

What are you talking about? It's right there in the exceptions under 16.3a as @Asheville posted earlier in the thread:

If you're unable to make a stroke then you're not entitled to relief from the embedded ball, in which case you'd declare it unplayable and proceed under 19.2.

In other words, the free relief you get from an embedded ball does not allow you to get free relief from an unplayable ball.

[JDgolf]

Let's start fresh and simple. I apologise for the formatting:

I made a stroke and it landed in the general area. The ball landed in the general area embedded behind a tree that interfered with my intended stance or swing.

Normally, if the ball wasn't embedded you don't get free relief from the tree. 

I could take advantage of the embedded ball rule and knee drop it one club length around the tree (which gives me a good approach to the green). 

BUT, current rules,16.3, makes it unclear to me:

."When interference by anything other than the ball being embedded makes the 
stroke clearly unreasonable (for example, when a player is unable to make a stroke
because of where the ball lies in a bush"

 

 

 

I don't get relief, thank you

[iacas]

17 minutes ago, JDgolf said:

I don't get relief, thank you

You do if you could chip out sideways or backward.

In other words, if the ball weren't embedded, if you have a stroke at the ball that you could reasonably play, you're entitled to relief.

Just because the hole is through the tree or whatever doesn't mean you don't have "a" stroke at the ball.

[Rulesman]

34 minutes ago, JDgolf said:

Let's start fresh and simple. I apologise for the formatting:

I made a stroke and it landed in the general area. The ball landed in the general area embedded behind a tree that interfered with my intended stance or swing.

Normally, if the ball wasn't embedded you don't get free relief from the tree. 

I could take advantage of the embedded ball rule and knee drop it one club length around the tree (which gives me a good approach to the green). 

BUT, current rules,16.3, makes it unclear to me:

."When interference by anything other than the ball being embedded makes the 
stroke clearly unreasonable (for example, when a player is unable to make a stroke
because of where the ball lies in a bush"

 

 

 

I don't get relief, thank you

If your ball was sitting hard up against and OOB wall but not embedded in the ground you would find it difficult to make a reasonable stroke in any direction. If it was embedded in the ground you would therefore not be entitled to free relief.

If the ball was 12" (say) from the wall then you may be able to make a stroke but not necessarily towards the hole. However in the circumstances it would be reasonable and practicable to play in a different direction. Therefore, if the ball was embedded, you would qualify for free relief for the embedded ball which may incidentally get you clear of the OOB wall.

[JDgolf]

2 minutes ago, Rulesman said:

If your ball was sitting hard up against and OOB wall but not embedded in the ground you would find it difficult to make a reasonable stroke in any direction. If it was embedded in the ground you would therefore not be entitled to free relief.

If the ball was 12" (say) from the wall then you may be able to make a stroke but not necessarily towards the hole. However in the circumstances it would be reasonable and practicable to play in a different direction. Therefore, if the ball was embedded, you would qualify for free relief for the embedded ball which may incidentally get you clear of the OOB wall.

It has nothing to do with out of bounds.

[billchao]

33 minutes ago, JDgolf said:

I made a stroke and it landed in the general area. The ball landed in the general area embedded behind a tree that interfered with my intended stance or swing.

From what you're describing, I'm inferring that you had at least some reasonable shot if the ball wasn't embedded (like it's not nestled between two roots you can't get your club into or something). It doesn't have to be your intended shot or towards the hole. If there would have been any reasonable stroke to be made, you're allowed relief from the embedded ball.

37 minutes ago, JDgolf said:

Normally, if the ball wasn't embedded you don't get free relief from the tree. 

Well, yea. You don't get relief from an embedded ball if your ball isn't embedded.

38 minutes ago, JDgolf said:

I could take advantage of the embedded ball rule and knee drop it one club length around the tree (which gives me a good approach to the green). 

Yup. Sometimes the rules (and knowing them) work in your favor.

Let's put it this way, your embedded ball prevents you from chipping backwards, so you get free relief within one club length which can put you to the side of the tree. Then you can play any shot you want from there, not just the original backwards chip previously available to you.

Or you can even just take relief from the embedded ball and drop it right behind the tree, forcing you to chip out. Whatever floats your boat, man.

40 minutes ago, JDgolf said:

I don't get relief, thank you

Assuming my assessment of the situation is correct, you do. It sounds to me like you're looking for a reason to punish yourself when the rules allow a free option. I mean if you really want to take a one stroke penalty, just declare the ball unplayable.

Are you sure this was your ball in this situation and not your opponent's? I've never seen someone try as hard to make the game harder for themselves.