Quick Rules Question

[BonoVox]

Saturday I hit the fairway on a par 5. On my second shot I blocked it into a lateral water hazard on the right. (I then dropped a second ball to hit a practice shot and ripped it down the middle. It was a casual round and just me and my buddy playing, we do that sometimes in those circumstances. I know I know )

When I got into the area where I entered the hazard I realized dropping within 2 club lengths of the hazard was no bargain. As it was on a dirt bank and there were trees everywhere. I told my casual playing partner (jokingly) I should play my second (practice) ball I hit from the place of my original 2nd shot. (However I did not declare that ball in play so it was a mute point. But it did spark a conversation and a debate)

He says I could NOT play a ball from that location (distance plus penalty) as it was a lateral hazard and I had to drop within 2 club lengths of the hazard. I say I could have. I even sent him 26-1 from the rule book online but he says that is for yellow staked hazards not lateral ones.

Anyway I figured I would post here and a third party can say who is right. (I want to get it straight for next time we run into this issue)

[Ignorant]

You ALWAYS have the option to play another ball from the place of previous stroke, regardless of the whereabouts of the original ball. As far as water hazard is concerned the relevant Rule is 26-1a, if the ball lies elsewhere the Rule is 27-1 (or 28a).

[BonoVox]

Thanks!

I just realized my "quick" question was not so quick! LOL

[iacas]

Since hitting a practice ball is forbidden (penalized), it seems to me that as soon as you dropped that ball it was the one "in play" automatically.

[Zeph]

You have to inform your opponent, marker or a fellow-competitor when dropping and hitting a provisional ball, but not a new ball. Since practice shots are not allowed, you did drop a new ball that should be played. If you had lost sight of the first ball and it ended up 2 feet from the hole, without you knowing it, and you dropped a new one, the second ball would be the one in play.

[msd3075]

Since hitting a practice ball is forbidden (penalized), it seems to me that as soon as you dropped that ball it was the one "in play" automatically.

Exactly.

That being said though, I think the question he had was more along the lines of if he even has the option to hit his next shot from the previous location. As stated above, you always have the option go back to the previous location to hit your next shot. The color of the stakes only comes into play in determining where you can take your drop.

[BonoVox]

Yeah I confused the issue by mentioning the second practice ball that was hit. Sorry!

Bottom line you ALWAYS have the option to play a second ball under penalty from the original spot. (thanks for clarification and third party back up)

BTW I don't usually hit a practice balls. But it was just the two of us and we were basically playing a casual late twilight practice round.

[wannabe]

Since hitting a practice ball is forbidden (penalized), it seems to me that as soon as you dropped that ball it was the one "in play" automatically.

this is what Ernie Els almost encountered at the Masters, when he thought his chip rolled down the bank and into the water, pulled out another ball to drop it, and the gallery shouted 'no!'

[Ignorant]

this is what Ernie Els almost encountered at the Masters, when he thought his chip rolled down the bank and into the water, pulled out another ball to drop it, and the gallery shouted 'no!'

In Ernie's case it was not that straightforward as one might imagine. The crucial issue there (had he dropped another ball) was if it was known or virtually certain that his orginal ball had entered the water hazard. In the absence of this certainty AND taking into account that the Rule he would have been applying is 26-1a and not 27-1 he would have proceeded under an inapplicaple Rule (as the ball did not enter any water hazard he was not entitled to put another ball in play under 26-1a). In such a case the dropped ball is not in play until it has been hit, which means Els would have had the chance to rectify his error by continuing with his original ball even if he had already dropped another ball. If the certainty was there then the dropped ball would have been in play after having been dropped.

Nomally a ball is in play as soon as it has been dropped (provided it has been dropped according to the Rules) but this case is one of the few exceptions.

[Zeph]

In Ernie's case it was not that straightforward as one might imagine. The crucial issue there (had he dropped another ball) was if it was known or virtually certain that his orginal ball had entered the water hazard. In the absence of this certainty AND taking into account that the Rule he would have been applying is 26-1a and not 27-1 he would have proceeded under an inapplicaple Rule (as the ball did not enter any water hazard he was not entitled to put another ball in play under 26-1a). In such a case the dropped ball is not in play until it has been hit, which means Els would have had the chance to rectify his error by continuing with his original ball even if he had already dropped another ball. If the certainty was there then the dropped ball would have been in play after having been dropped.

But didn't his ball end up outside the hazard?

Source: USGA Q. A player assumes his original ball to be in a water hazard, despite the absence of knowledge or virtual certainty to that effect. Using the option in Rule 26-1a, he plays another ball at the spot from which the original ball was played. He then finds his original ball outside the hazard. What is the ruling? A. The original ball is lost and the other ball is in play under penalty of stroke and distance — see Rule 27-1a.

Lots of decisions on this topic, I haven't quite grasped it yet. http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules...f/Decision-26/

[zeg]

But didn't his ball end up outside the hazard?

In this example, he "played" the ball, which I take to mean he both dropped and made a stroke at the ball. Once you've done that, there's no going back---rule 20-6 only allows you to lift a ball not dropped in accordance with the rules. Under 15-2, whether or not you had the right to substitute a ball, once you've made a stroke, that ball is in play.

I think I understand what they're trying to do with this, but it is rather subtle and confusing. It seems to me they are trying to avoid penalizing the "harmless" error of incorrectly taking a drop as long as you haven't continued play yet. However, it seems like things would be a lot more straightforward if the rule was simply that a dropped ball was always in play from the moment it was successfully dropped (in the sense that it complied with the rules about not rolling closer to the hole, etc). For most of us, it's pretty unlikely you'd learn something after a drop but before a stroke à la Els, since there's not usually a gallery to warn us we're about to make a mistake. So why not just force the player to think hard before making the drop, rather than sometimes giving him until the stroke to "finalize" the decision?

[Ignorant]

I think I understand what they're trying to do with this, but it is rather subtle and confusing. It seems to me they are trying to avoid penalizing the "harmless" error of incorrectly taking a drop as long as you haven't continued play yet. However, it seems like things would be a lot more straightforward if the rule was simply that a dropped ball was always in play from the moment it was successfully dropped (in the sense that it complied with the rules about not rolling closer to the hole, etc). For most of us, it's pretty unlikely you'd learn something after a drop but before a stroke à la Els, since there's not usually a gallery to warn us we're about to make a mistake. So why not just force the player to think hard before making the drop, rather than sometimes giving him until the stroke to "finalize" the decision?

My view exactly. In this kind of event it would be much clearer to directly follow the Rule 27-1 instead of 26-1a thus putting one in a position to wonder the original thoughts of the player. However, there are other situations where it is well justified to let the player to correct his mistake after a drop but before the stroke. In order to maintain consistency in making interpretations it is important to follow the same basic principle whenever an inapplicable Rule has been applied.

This principle when a ball is in play was changed only a few years ago. Earlier a dropped ball was in play only after a stroke had been made at it. For some reason the lords changed it. I can only assume the reason must be a good one.

[Zeph]

In this example, he "played" the ball, which I take to mean he both dropped and made a stroke at the ball. Once you've done that, there's no going back---rule 20-6 only allows you to lift a ball not dropped in accordance with the rules. Under 15-2, whether or not you had the right to substitute a ball, once you've made a stroke, that ball is in play.

I was talking about Ernie, not OP.

[Ignorant]

I was talking about Ernie, not OP.

Ernie did not even drop the ball but had he done it and NOT had yet made a stroke at it, he would have been entitled to lift it and continue with his original ball IF it was not known or virtually certain that his original ball was in the water hazard.

[Fourputt]

Ernie did not even drop the ball but had he done it and NOT had yet made a stroke at it, he would have been entitled to lift it and continue with his original ball IF it was not known or virtually certain that his original ball was in the water hazard.

I disagree. In Ernie's mind it was known or virtually certain that his ball was in the hazard or he wouldn't have been getting ready to drop a ball. Had he dropped, he would have been proceeding in good faith under an applicable rule. Decision 26-1/3.5 says:

26-1/3.5 Ball Dropped Under Water Hazard Rule with Knowledge or Virtual Certainty; Original Ball Then Found Q. A player's ball is struck towards a water hazard. It is known or virtually certain that the player's ball is in the water hazard, and he drops a ball under Rule 26-1b. Before he plays the dropped ball, his original ball is found within the five-minute search period. What is the ruling? A. As it was known or virtually certain that the ball was in the water hazard when the player put the substituted ball into play, that ball was correctly substituted and he may not play the original ball. If the original ball was found in the water hazard and this discovery affects the reference point for proceeding under Rule 26-1b, resulting in the substituted ball having been dropped in a wrong place, the player must correct the error under Rule 20-6. The player must proceed in accordance with any of the applicable options under Rule 26-1 with respect to the correct reference point (see Decisions 20-6/2 and 26-1/16). Otherwise, Rule 20-6 does not apply and the player must continue play with the dropped ball. In either case, the player incurs a penalty of one stroke under Rule 26-1. In the unlikely event that the original ball was found outside the water hazard, the player must continue with the dropped ball under penalty of one stroke (Rule 26-1).

[Ignorant]

I disagree. In Ernie's mind it was known or virtually certain that his ball was in the hazard or he wouldn't have been getting ready to drop a ball. Had he dropped, he would have been proceeding in good faith under an applicable rule. Decision 26-1/3.5 says:

I thought I wrote just that. Pls. pay attention to the word 'IF' in my previous post.

[Fourputt]

I thought I wrote just that. Pls. pay attention to the word 'IF' in my previous post.

Your previous arguments leaned toward his being able to erase the drop if he hadn't played a stroke at the ball, and I was simply pointing out that had he dropped, it would most likely have been ruled that his intention indicated that HE had the virtual certainty necessary for the drop to be valid. If that was the case, then it didn't matter what the gallery ultimately might say. It is fortunate for him that they were quick enough to stop him from making that mistake.

[Ignorant]

Your previous arguments leaned toward his being able to erase the drop if he hadn't played a stroke at the ball, and I was simply pointing out that had he dropped, it would

You're right, most likely but not necessarily. It is a question of player's intention and understanding of the facts, i.e. what is the Rule he is invoking and is it known or virtually certain that his ball is in the water hazard. One of the cases where player needs to be interviewed to give a correct ruling.

So we agree upon this.