Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 4998 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

At a links style course I play, there's lots of brush to the sides of the fairways which is often marked with red stakes.  If I'm in the brush marked with red stakes, but have a lucky lie and can play a decent shot from there, am I allowed to play from there, or do I have to take a drop and a penalty stroke?

I ask because a buddy was telling me today that if it's marked with red stakes the drop and penalty is enforced, even if I have a playable lie.

Matt

Mid-Weight Heavy Putter
Cleveland Tour Action 60˚
Cleveland CG15 54˚
Nike Vapor Pro Combo, 4i-GW
Titleist 585h 19˚
Tour Edge Exotics XCG 15˚ 3 Wood
Taylormade R7 Quad 9.5˚

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted


Originally Posted by mdl

At a links style course I play, there's lots of brush to the sides of the fairways which is often marked with red stakes.  If I'm in the brush marked with red stakes, but have a lucky lie and can play a decent shot from there, am I allowed to play from there, or do I have to take a drop and a penalty stroke?

I ask because a buddy was telling me today that if it's marked with red stakes the drop and penalty is enforced, even if I have a playable lie.


Unless it is an area marked to prohibit play because of environmental issues, then you are always allowed to play the ball as it lies if possible.  That is a fundamental premise of the game, and all of the rules are written to hold to that tenet as much as is possible.  There are some restrictions as to what you can do when your ball lies within the margin of a hazard.  You cannot ground your club, nor can you touch or move any loose impediments.  You also do not get relief from interference by an immovable obstruction.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted


Originally Posted by mdl

At a links style course I play, there's lots of brush to the sides of the fairways which is often marked with red stakes.  If I'm in the brush marked with red stakes, but have a lucky lie and can play a decent shot from there, am I allowed to play from there, or do I have to take a drop and a penalty stroke?

I ask because a buddy was telling me today that if it's marked with red stakes the drop and penalty is enforced, even if I have a playable lie.


This kind of marking is in fact contrary to the Rules unless that area is really a water hazard. If it does not fulfil the requirements of the definition of a water hazard then it should not be marked as such.


Posted

Red stakes signify a lateral hazard. You can play your ball from there but you can't ground your club.

The people you play with need to aquaint themselves with the rules of golf.

If it was an environmental issue, there would be signs.

In the race of life, always back self-interest. At least you know it's trying.

 

 


Posted


Originally Posted by Shorty

Red stakes signify a lateral hazard. You can play your ball from there but you can't ground your club.

The people you play with need to aquaint themselves with the rules of golf.

If it was an environmental issue, there would be signs.

Not necessarily.  I've played a number of courses where the only indication that play was prohibited due to environmental issues was that the red stakes were topped with green.  Most places I've played that is an accepted standard for marking environmentally sensitive areas.   It's usually noted somewhere on the scorecard, but most golfers never bother to read the card.

Rick

"He who has the fastest cart will never have a bad lie."

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
I used to work at a course that marked environmental areas as OB. It was a very penalizing target style course and the OB didn't make much sense except that it kept people from playing out from them. They have since removed the OB designation and made them hazards with the red stakes. This is a friendlier way to handle these areas as they are really part of the course. Even though many of these hazards don't have water, they are marked as lateral hazards which speeds up play when a golfer is certain that their ball is lost in the hazard especially if it consists of a palmetto thicket or a sawgrass stand.

Callaway AI Smoke TD Max 10.5* | Cobra Big Tour 15.5* | Rad Tour 18.5* | Titleist U500 4i | T100 5-P | Vokey 50/8* F, 54/10* S,  58/10* S | Scotty Cameron Squareback 1


Posted


Originally Posted by Fourputt

Not necessarily.  I've played a number of courses where the only indication that play was prohibited due to environmental issues was that the red stakes were topped with green.  Most places I've played that is an accepted standard for marking environmentally sensitive areas.   It's usually noted somewhere on the scorecard, but most golfers never bother to read the card.


There are a few places around here that do that.  Others have the rule that desert areas are all environmentally sensitive, so they just tell you that.  There are a couple that have unusual exceptions to the rules --- e.g., providing relief as if it were a hazard but allowing grounding the club.  In all cases they have the rules on the scorecards, and on most if not all the starter (if present) and the clubhouse make a big deal to explain this to the players.  On one in particular, the rather colorful starter explained that "he doesn't give a damn about that environmental crap, but they have two families of coyotes and a whole lot of rattlesnakes living on the course, so it's really best to stay on the grass."

On a different course I actually encountered a coyote coming up the cart path...

In the bag:
FT-iQ 10° driver, FT 21° neutral 3H
T-Zoid Forged 15° 3W, MX-23 4-PW
Harmonized 52° GW, Tom Watson 56° SW, X-Forged Vintage 60° LW
White Hot XG #1 Putter, 33"


Posted

At the course I'm talking about some of the brush is marked both with environmental signs and with red stakes, some just with red stakes.  I'd been assuming you were allowed to play out of the areas marked just with red stakes.  I didn't know you weren't allowed to ground your club in any zone marked with red stakes though.  Good to know!

Matt

Mid-Weight Heavy Putter
Cleveland Tour Action 60˚
Cleveland CG15 54˚
Nike Vapor Pro Combo, 4i-GW
Titleist 585h 19˚
Tour Edge Exotics XCG 15˚ 3 Wood
Taylormade R7 Quad 9.5˚

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted


Not necessarily.  I've played a number of courses where the only indication that play was prohibited due to environmental issues was that the red stakes were topped with green.  Most places I've played that is an accepted standard for marking environmentally sensitive areas.   It's usually noted somewhere on the scorecard, but most golfers never bother to read the card.

I've seen white or yellow stakes with yellow tape connecting them denote environmentally sensitive areas too. I kind of wish it were standardized.

"Golf is an entire game built around making something that is naturally easy - putting a ball into a hole - as difficult as possible." - Scott Adams

Mid-priced ball reviews: Top Flight Gamer v2 | Bridgestone e5 ('10) | Titleist NXT Tour ('10) | Taylormade Burner TP LDP | Taylormade TP Black | Taylormade Burner Tour | Srixon Q-Star ('12)


Posted


Originally Posted by TourSpoon

I used to work at a course that marked environmental areas as OB. It was a very penalizing target style course and the OB didn't make much sense except that it kept people from playing out from them. They have since removed the OB designation and made them hazards with the red stakes. This is a friendlier way to handle these areas as they are really part of the course. Even though many of these hazards don't have water, they are marked as lateral hazards which speeds up play when a golfer is certain that their ball is lost in the hazard especially if it consists of a palmetto thicket or a sawgrass stand.


It is very hard to understand why they have chosen that path to go. The Rule Book Appendix I, Part B says:

An environmentally-sensitive area (ESA) is an area so declared by an appropriate authority, entry into and/or play from which is prohibited for environmental reasons. These areas may be defined as ground under repair, a water hazard , a lateral water hazard or out of bounds at the discretion of the Committee, provided that in the case of an ESA that has been defined as a water hazard or a lateral water hazard , the area is, by Definition, a water hazard .

This means that declaring an area not fulfilling the definition of a water hazard (or lateral water hazard) to be one is clearly against the Rules, even though the intentions are good. Sadly enough that shows that the Committee of that particular club does not have sufficient knowledge of Rules. Why on earth did they not define that area as GUR? That would give a player a free drop even though his ball had been lost on that area (see R25-1).


Posted


Originally Posted by TourSpoon

I used to work at a course that marked environmental areas as OB. It was a very penalizing target style course and the OB didn't make much sense except that it kept people from playing out from them. They have since removed the OB designation and made them hazards with the red stakes. This is a friendlier way to handle these areas as they are really part of the course. Even though many of these hazards don't have water, they are marked as lateral hazards which speeds up play when a golfer is certain that their ball is lost in the hazard especially if it consists of a palmetto thicket or a sawgrass stand.





Originally Posted by Ignorant

It is very hard to understand why they have chosen that path to go. The Rule Book Appendix I, Part B says:

An environmentally-sensitive area (ESA) is an area so declared by an appropriate authority, entry into and/or play from which is prohibited for environmental reasons. These areas may be defined as ground under repair, a water hazard, a lateral water hazard or out of bounds at the discretion of the Committee, provided that in the case of an ESA that has been defined as a water hazard or a lateral water hazard, the area is, by Definition, a water hazard.

This means that declaring an area not fulfilling the definition of a water hazard (or lateral water hazard) to be one is clearly against the Rules, even though the intentions are good. Sadly enough that shows that the Committee of that particular club does not have sufficient knowledge of Rules. Why on earth did they not define that area as GUR? That would give a player a free drop even though his ball had been lost on that area (see R25-1).


Well to be fair, the course just was rescued from being abandoned for a few years.  One thing that I should have said is that some of the areas have disappeared and the remaining ones are more like marshes, at least during the wet season.  Either way, the OB is gone in a place that was clearly part of the course IMO.

Callaway AI Smoke TD Max 10.5* | Cobra Big Tour 15.5* | Rad Tour 18.5* | Titleist U500 4i | T100 5-P | Vokey 50/8* F, 54/10* S,  58/10* S | Scotty Cameron Squareback 1


Posted

my best advice would be talk to the greens keeper or to the head pro

Wilson FG Tour 4-SW

Alpha Driver

Adams Speedline 3W
Oddessy #9 Putter

Bridgestone B330-S

 


Posted


Originally Posted by TourSpoon

Well to be fair, the course just was rescued from being abandoned for a few years.  One thing that I should have said is that some of the areas have disappeared and the remaining ones are more like marshes, at least during the wet season.  Either way, the OB is gone in a place that was clearly part of the course IMO.


OB within the course is not forbidden anywhere, it is just bad course design.


Posted


Quote:
Originally Posted by TourSpoon View Post

Well to be fair, the course just was rescued from being abandoned for a few years. One thing that I should have said is that some of the areas have disappeared and the remaining ones are more like marshes, at least during the wet season. Either way, the OB is gone in a place that was clearly part of the course IMO.


OB within the course is not forbidden anywhere, it is just bad course design.

Yes, I know. Some courses use white stakes to separate fairways. It was a bad design that was thankfully changed.

Callaway AI Smoke TD Max 10.5* | Cobra Big Tour 15.5* | Rad Tour 18.5* | Titleist U500 4i | T100 5-P | Vokey 50/8* F, 54/10* S,  58/10* S | Scotty Cameron Squareback 1


Posted


Originally Posted by TourSpoon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignorant

Quote:

Originally Posted by TourSpoon

Well to be fair, the course just was rescued from being abandoned for a few years. One thing that I should have said is that some of the areas have disappeared and the remaining ones are more like marshes, at least during the wet season. Either way, the OB is gone in a place that was clearly part of the course IMO.

OB within the course is not forbidden anywhere, it is just bad course design.

Yes, I know. Some courses use white stakes to separate fairways. It was a bad design that was thankfully changed.



True, especially in the beginning when it is suposed to grow some trees or brush between the fairways. Those white stakes should be temporary, if by any means possible.


Posted

A course I play a lot has a ton of red stakes with signs that say "Environmentally Sensative Area, Please Keep Out."  It pisses me off when they have these signs and then they go and burn it off in the late spring/early summer.  Yeah, it must be real sensative.


Posted


Quote:
Originally Posted by TourSpoon View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignorant View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by TourSpoon View Post

Well to be fair, the course just was rescued from being abandoned for a few years. One thing that I should have said is that some of the areas have disappeared and the remaining ones are more like marshes, at least during the wet season. Either way, the OB is gone in a place that was clearly part of the course IMO.


OB within the course is not forbidden anywhere, it is just bad course design.




Yes, I know. Some courses use white stakes to separate fairways . It was a bad design that was thankfully changed.



True, especially in the beginning when it is suposed to grow some trees or brush between the fairways. Those white stakes should be temporary, if by any means possible.

I have seen it where you have a dogleg right that is outlined by rough and trees with an adjoining fairway "inside" the dogleg. The shortcut would be to play into the other fairway (not that it would give you much of an advantage in this particular case). The white stakes that separate the two holes assures that you don't play into oncoming traffic so to speak. There was no real way to actually carry the dogleg with the length and trees as it is more of a bail out area for slicers. I never liked the OB being used that way, but I can see how it would make more people pay attention to how the hole should be played according to the committee.

Callaway AI Smoke TD Max 10.5* | Cobra Big Tour 15.5* | Rad Tour 18.5* | Titleist U500 4i | T100 5-P | Vokey 50/8* F, 54/10* S,  58/10* S | Scotty Cameron Squareback 1


  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Quote:

Why on earth did they not define that area as GUR? That would give a player a free drop even though his ball had been lost on that area (see R25-1).



Why should they be given a free drop for missing the fairway?


Note: This thread is 4998 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

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


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Posts

    • Day 1: 2025.12.26 Worked on LH position on grip, trying to keep fingers closer to perpendicular to the club. Feels awkward but change is meant to.
    • Please see this topic for updated information:
    • Please see this topic for updated information:
    • When you've been teaching golf as long as I have, you're going to find that you can teach some things better than you previously had, and you're probably going to find some things that you taught incorrectly. I don't see that as a bad thing — what would be worse is refusing to adapt and grow given new information. I've always said that my goal with my instruction isn't to be right, but it's to get things right. To that end, I'm about five years late in issuing a public proclamation on something… When I first got my GEARS system, I immediately looked at the golf swings of the dozens and dozens of Tour players for which I suddenly had full 3D data. I created a huge spreadsheet showing how their bodies moved, how the club moved, at various points in the swing. I mapped knee and elbow angles, hand speeds, shoulder turns and pelvis turns… etc. I re-considered what I thought I knew about the golf swing as performed by the best players. One of those things dated back to the earliest days: that you extend (I never taught "straighten" and would avoid using that word unless in the context of saying "don't fully straighten") the trail knee/leg in the backswing. I was mislead by 2D photos from less-than-ideal camera angles — the trail leg rotates a bit during the backswing, and so when observing trail knee flex should also use a camera that moves to stay perpendicular to the plane of the ankle/knee/hip joint. We have at least two topics here on this (here and here; both of which I'll be updating after publishing this) where @mvmac and I advise golfers to extend the trail knee. Learning that this was not right is one of the reasons I'm glad to have a 3D system, as most golfers generally preserve the trail knee flex throughout the backswing. Data Here's a video showing an iron and a driver of someone who has won the career slam: Here's what the graph of his right knee flex looks like. The solid lines I've positioned at the top of the backswing (GEARS aligns both swings at impact, the dashed line). Address is to the right, of course, and the graph shows knee flex from the two swings above. The data (17.56° and 23.20°) shows where this player is in both swings (orange being the yellow iron swing, pink the blue driver swing). You can see that this golfer extends his trail knee 2-3°… before bending it even more than that through the late backswing and early downswing. Months ago I created a quick Instagram video showing the trail knee flex in the backswing of several players (see the top for the larger number): Erik J. Barzeski (@iacas) • Instagram reel GEARS shares expert advice on golf swing technique, focusing on the critical backswing phase. Tour winners and major champions reveal the key to a precise and powerful swing, highlighting the importance of... Here are a few more graphs. Two LIV players and major champions: Two PGA Tour winners: Two women's #1 ranked players: Two more PGA Tour winners (one a major champ): Two former #1s, the left one being a woman, the right a man, with a driver: Two more PGA Tour players: You'll notice a trend: they almost all maintain roughly the same flex throughout their backswing and downswing. The Issues with Extending the Trail Knee You can play good golf extending (again, not "straightening") the trail knee. Some Tour players do. But, as with many things, if 95 out of 100 Tour players do it, you're most likely better off doing similarly to what they do. So, what are the issues with extending the trail knee in the backswing? To list a few: Pelvic Depth and Rotation Quality Suffers When the trail knee extends, the trail leg often acts like an axle on the backswing, with the pelvis rotating around the leg and the trail hip joint. This prevents the trail side from gaining depth, as is needed to keep the pelvis center from thrusting toward the ball. Most of the "early extension" (thrust) that I see occurs during the backswing. Encourages Early Extension (Thrust) Patterns When you've thrust and turned around the trail hip joint in the backswing, you often thrust a bit more in the downswing as the direction your pelvis is oriented is forward and "out" (to the right for a righty). Your trail leg can abduct to push you forward, but "forward" when your pelvis is turned like that is in the "thrust" direction. Additionally, the trail knee "breaking" again at the start of the downswing often jumps the trail hip out toward the ball a bit too much or too quickly. While the trail hip does move in that direction, if it's too fast or too much, it can prevent the lead side hip from getting "back" at the right rate, or at a rate commensurate with the trail hip to keep the pelvis center from thrusting. Disrupts the Pressure Shift/Transition When the trail leg extends too much, it often can't "push" forward normally. The forward push begins much earlier than forward motion begins — pushing forward begins as early as about P1.5 to P2 in the swings of most good golfers. It can push forward by abducting, again, but that's a weaker movement that shoves the pelvis forward (toward the target) and turns it more than it generally should (see the next point). Limits Internal Rotation of the Trail Hip Internal rotation of the trail hip is a sort of "limiter" on the backswing. I have seen many golfers on GEARS whose trail knee extends, whose pelvis shifts forward (toward the target), and who turn over 50°, 60°, and rarely but not never, over 70° in the backswing. If you turn 60° in the backswing, it's going to be almost impossible to get "open enough" in the downswing to arrive at a good impact position. Swaying/Lateral Motion Occasionally a golfer who extends the trail knee too much will shift back too far, but more often the issue is that the golfer will shift forward too early in the backswing (sometimes even immediately to begin the backswing), leaving them "stuck forward" to begin the downswing. They'll push forward, stop, and have to restart around P4, disrupting the smooth sequence often seen in the game's best players. Other Bits… Reduces ground reaction force potential, compromises spine inclination and posture, makes transition sequencing harder, increases stress on the trail knee and lower back… In short… It's not athletic. We don't do many athletic things with "straight" or very extended legs (unless it's the end of the action, like a jump or a big push off like a step in a running motion).
    • Day 135 12-25 Wide backswing to wide downswing drill. Recorder and used mirror. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.