Out-of-Bounds Rule Change Discussion

[David in FL]

It's called "having a discussion". I don't see the purpose in penalizing a player simply because he's lost track of his ball in a manner as described here. Allow him to play forward under the assumption that it is lost, and if it is discovered that it is not lost, remove all strokes made on the replacement ball and continue with the original. It's not really creating a new rule per say, you could do it simply by extending the provisional rule to cover these circumstances. Why is that a negative for the game? In other words, discuss the merits, or lack there of, of the idea.

I thought Erik's post regarding the importance of only allowing one ball to be in play at any given time was pretty clear. Was there something there that you didn't understand or with which you disagree? For the sake of discussion......

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by upstategolfer

Was thinking about this some more on the drive home, and it strikes me that actually this would be a simple way to incorporate this situation into the rules, and I admit up front I need to do a bit of research, but off hand you could simply put in a rule that if you put into play a new ball because you were virtually certain that the first was lost or in a hazard, and then find that the first ball was not, that no strokes made on the 2nd ball count, it must be abandoned, and play continue with the first ball. Make this a rule on it's own, and have it take precedence over any rule where there was any doubt as to the condition of the first ball (or original ball in play).

Simple enough.

Originally Posted by upstategolfer

Quote:

Originally Posted by David in FL

You want to incorporate a new rule to change a rule with which you don't happen to agree. Is that it?

It's called "having a discussion".

I don't see the purpose in penalizing a player simply because he's lost track of his ball in a manner as described here. Allow him to play forward under the assumption that it is lost, and if it is discovered that it is not lost, remove all strokes made on the replacement ball and continue with the original. It's not really creating a new rule per say, you could do it simply by extending the provisional rule to cover these circumstances. Why is that a negative for the game? In other words, discuss the merits, or lack there of, of the idea.

I really don't understand your reasoning.  You already state that the player is "virtually certain" that the ball is in the hazard.  Under the rules that means that there is no doubt.  Therefore, there is no possible logical reason for a rule change to address a situation which doesn't need clarification.  The hypothetical that MEFree put up would be encountered only in the rarest of imaginable circumstances.  You want an unnecessary change to a rule where it is unlikely to be needed in a typical golfer's lifetime.

It's the players responsibility to keep track of his ball.  If it becomes lost for any reason, it is his responsibility and his alone.  If he thinks that it's lost, or has come to rest in an untenable position, then there are already procedures to cover that situation.  He is welcome to play under stroke and distance any time he wants, but he can only play a provisional ball when the circumstances are such that if the original ball may not be found in play outside of a water hazard, where stroke and distance is the only penalty option.

In the rare case that the local rule for water hazards is in force, he forfeits his options under Rule 26-1b and 26-1c if he chooses to play a provisional ball.  Even then the local rule should only be in force on certain holes where the situation is such that those drop options would either not be available, or would not be advantageous, and the only reasonable play would be stroke and distance.

By the way, on most properly marked courses, a water hazard over the back of the green would be marked with red as a lateral water hazard to eliminate this situation.  The player would not have to decide on the tee whether his ball was in the hazard or not, because he would have other options when he got to the green and found his ball.

[MEfree]

Yesterday, they guy I was playing a friendly match against declared 2 or 3 times that he was going to hit a "provisional" when it appeared that his shot did not carry a WH.  I allowed him to do this as it seemed to save time.  Although we were not "virtually certain" from 150-200 yards away if the ball was in the hazard or not, virtually certainty would be easily established once we got to the other side of the hazard as there was short grass outside the hazard.  The ball would have either been sitting outside the hazard and be easily found or we would be virtually certain it was in the hazard.

On some course, I believe this happens a LOT more often than some on this board realize.

Originally Posted by iacas

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree

With that said, I see benefit without any potential harm if a player was allowed to play a WH provisional.  As Fourputt said, the USGA permits courses to allow this as a local rule, but to me it makes sense to have it as a regular USGA rule.  Can anyone come up with a reason why they don`t have this as a regular rule?

It's very simple, and it has to do with the simple idea of having one ball in play at any given moment.

If a player hits his ball near OB or where it may be lost, if he finds the ball in bounds, then that ball is in play. If he doesn't, his provisional immediately becomes the ball in play.

If a player hits a ball on a par three near a creek, then hits a "provisional" to two inches, then finds his original ball, he's got a "choice" between two balls that are basically "in play."

THAT is why there's a rule against provisionals except for lost/OB balls. If the ball is lost or OB, you're NOT ALLOWED to play it. It's "out of play" and the provisional becomes "in play."

You can't have players deciding which of their multiple shots they want to play.

You are wrong for 2 reasons:

1.  A ball is never really lost, it is simply not found within 5 minutes or before a stroke is made on the provisional.  i.e. I hit it left of the green side bunker into some thick 1-2 foot grass on Keystone Ranch #11 a few weeks ago and then hit my provisional 3.5 feet from the hole leaving me a par putt that I ended up making.  I looked for my original drive. but may not have looked quite as hard for it as I would have if I had not hit such a good provisional.  I noticed that Snedeker did a similar thing in the Open after yanking one left then hitting (what I think was declared) a provisional down the middle, he did not even bother looking for the original.  Had he hit the provisional poorly, he might have tried to find the original.

2.  A "provisional" WH ball could be played EXACTLY the same was as a provisional OOB/LB- if you find your original outside the hazard, you MUST abandon the provisional and play your original.  If find your original in the hazard or don`t find the original and are virtually certain it is in the hazard, then you MUST play the provisional.

[David in FL]

2.  A "provisional" WH ball could be played EXACTLY the same was as a provisional OOB/LB- if you find your original outside the hazard, you MUST abandon the provisional and play your original.  If find your original in the hazard or don`t find the original and are virtually certain it is in the hazard, then you MUST play the provisional.

No. The difference is that a ball that is OB is, by rule, not in play for the remainder of the hole. A ball in a WH is still in play and you have the right to play it.....something that happens a LOT. Just because the ball is in a WH does not mean that it's either lost or unplayable. As Erik said, the rules cannot allow for a player to have 2 balls in play and then decide for himself, which benefits him the most.

[reedf]

Originally Posted by David in FL

No. The difference is that a ball that is OB is, by rule, not in play for the remainder of the hole.

A ball in a WH is still in play and you have the right to play it.....something that happens a LOT. Just because the ball is in a WH does not mean that it's either lost or unplayable.

As Erik said, the rules cannot allow for a player to have 2 balls in play and then decide for himself, which benefits him the most.

First, why would anyone hit a WH provisional in the first place? The penalty for a ball in a WH is one stroke, not stroke and distance. Seems only logical that you should take your drop from where it crossed the margin and take advantage of the distance. MEfree described a playing partner hitting a provisional because they couldn't tell if the ball crossed the WH from 150-200 yds away. That seems stupid to me when you can take your drop 150-200 yds closer to the hole and still be hitting your 3rd shot.

Second, I agree with your bolded statement, but I think the rules are clear on provisionals and you never have a choice of which ball to play. If the first ball is found, you must play it, no option.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by David in FL

No. The difference is that a ball that is OB is, by rule, not in play for the remainder of the hole.

A ball in a WH is still in play and you have the right to play it.....something that happens a LOT. Just because the ball is in a WH does not mean that it's either lost or unplayable.

As Erik said, the rules cannot allow for a player to have 2 balls in play and then decide for himself, which benefits him the most.

Its my understanding that a provisional is allowed for a potential lost ball also.  A "WH Provisional" would be virtually identical to a potentially lost ball.

Originally Posted by reedf

First, why would anyone hit a WH provisional in the first place? The penalty for a ball in a WH is one stroke, not stroke and distance. Seems only logical that you should take your drop from where it crossed the margin and take advantage of the distance. MEfree described a playing partner hitting a provisional because they couldn't tell if the ball crossed the WH from 150-200 yds away. That seems stupid to me when you can take your drop 150-200 yds closer to the hole and still be hitting your 3rd shot.

Second, I agree with your bolded statement, but I think the rules are clear on provisionals and you never have a choice of which ball to play. If the first ball is found, you must play it, no option.

We knew it crossed INTO the hazard but did not know until arriving at the other side of the hazard if it crossed BACK OUT of the hazard.  In the 2 or 3 times this happened, the guy took his "provisional" drop just behind the margin of the hazard that the ball entered, not where he had played his original shot from.  Each time, this saved him from having to walk around the large hazard and verify that his ball had not exited the hazard before talking his drop.  Here is one of the holes in case a visual helps https://maps.google.com/maps?q=keystone+ranch+restaurant≪=39.577613,-105.994852&spn;=0.001817,0.004128&fb;=1≷=us&hq;=keystone+ranch+restaurant&cid;=0,0,7558897103788721995&t;=h&z;=19&iwloc;=A

The entire area to the left is an ESA hazard.  He was hitting from the just left of center of the wide part of the fairway over the hazard towards the green, but did not hit it well enough to carry the hazard.

If his ORIGINAL ball had been found OUTSIDE  the hazard, he would have had NO CHOICE but to play the original as my WH Provisional rule would require the player to forfeit his right to play the ball from the hazard (which was the case here as it was an ESA).  OTOH, had his original ball been in the hazard (which would have been virtually certain had we not found the original) then he would have had NO CHOICE but to play the provisional drop.  This is what I thought I said before.  How is this any different than a provisional for a lost ball?

Originally Posted by Fourputt

In a situation where this is a reasonable possibility, the rules allow the course to institute a local rule allowing a provisional ball.  The downside is that if the player uses that option, he no longer has the the other options under rule 26-1.  If he doesn't find his ball in play then he must continue play with the provisional ball.  No dropping back along the line or 2 clublengths from the margin.  It doesn't make sense to allow or use the local rule where the other options would be preferred.

Originally Posted by MEfree

I don`t see the downside to having that as a regular rule as opposed to just a local rule.  I realize the part about losing the other options, but taking a provisional WH drop is still up to the player`s discretion, so it is his choice or not if he wants to forfeit the other options.  If he doesn`t want to forfeit the other options, he can not take a drop until he has had a look on the other side of the hazard just like under the current rules.  Giving the option of a provisional drop seems less penal to the player who wants to try to speed up play on the off chance he finds his original outside the other side of the hazard.

I agree that the rules should cover the most likely scenario over the least likely, but allowing the option of a provisional drop that becomes automatically in play if you don`t find your original outside the hazard seems to cover the most likely and the less likely scenario without any negative side effects.  What am I missing?

[Fourputt]

We knew it crossed INTO the hazard but did not know until arriving at the other side of the hazard if it crossed BACK OUT of the hazard.  In the 2 or 3 times this happened, the guy took his "provisional" drop just behind the margin of the hazard that the ball entered, not where he had played his original shot from.  Each time, this saved him from having to walk around the large hazard and verify that his ball had not exited the hazard before talking his drop.  Here is one of the holes in case a visual helps https://maps.google.com/maps?q=keystone+ranch+restaurant≪=39.577613,-105.994852&spn;=0.001817,0.004128&fb;=1≷=us&hq;=keystone+ranch+restaurant&cid;=0,0,7558897103788721995&t;=h&z;=19&iwloc;=A

The entire area to the left is an ESA hazard.  He was hitting from the just left of center of the wide part of the fairway over the hazard towards the green, but did not hit it well enough to carry the hazard.

If his ORIGINAL ball had been found OUTSIDE  the hazard, he would have had NO CHOICE but to play the original as my WH Provisional rule would require the player to forfeit his right to play the ball from the hazard (which was the case here as it was an ESA).  OTOH, had his original ball been in the hazard (which would have been virtually certain had we not found the original) then he would have had NO CHOICE but to play the provisional drop.  This is what I thought I said before.  How is this any different than a provisional for a lost ball?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

In a situation where this is a reasonable possibility, the rules allow the course to institute a local rule allowing a provisional ball.  The downside is that if the player uses that option, he no longer has the the other options under rule 26-1.  If he doesn't find his ball in play then he must continue play with the provisional ball.  No dropping back along the line or 2 clublengths from the margin.  It doesn't make sense to allow or use the local rule where the other options would be preferred.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree

I don`t see the downside to having that as a regular rule as opposed to just a local rule.  I realize the part about losing the other options, but taking a provisional WH drop is still up to the player`s discretion, so it is his choice or not if he wants to forfeit the other options.  If he doesn`t want to forfeit the other options, he can not take a drop until he has had a look on the other side of the hazard just like under the current rules.  Giving the option of a provisional drop seems less penal to the player who wants to try to speed up play on the off chance he finds his original outside the other side of the hazard.

I agree that the rules should cover the most likely scenario over the least likely, but allowing the option of a provisional drop that becomes automatically in play if you don`t find your original outside the hazard seems to cover the most likely and the less likely scenario without any negative side effects.  What am I missing?

The wording for the allowed local rule does allow for a choice of which ball to play if the original ball is found in the water hazard.  The player can choose between the playing original ball as it lies with no penalty, or playing on with the provisional ball with a one stroke penalty (plus the actual strokes taken).  This is so contrary to the most basic principle of the game that I find it hard to understand why it exists even as an allowed local rule.  There is no place else in the rules where a choice between 2 balls is even hinted at, and the fact that they allow it in this local rule is just astounding to me.  To put such an option into a regular rule is simply unthinkable.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

The wording for the allowed local rule does allow for a choice of which ball to play if the original ball is found in the water hazard.  The player can choose between the playing original ball as it lies with no penalty, or playing on with the provisional ball with a one stroke penalty (plus the actual strokes taken).  This is so contrary to the most basic principle of the game that I find it hard to understand why it exists even as an allowed local rule.  There is no place else in the rules where a choice between 2 balls is even hinted at, and the fact that they allow it in this local rule is just astounding to me.  To put such an option into a regular rule is simply unthinkable.

I didn`t realize that the local rule still gave that choice and understand what you are saying.  What do you think of the modified local rule that I proposed that does not give a choice?  Found outside the hazard and you must play the original, lost/found within the hazard and you must play your provisional.

Can anyone tell me how this would be any different than a provisional for a lost ball?

[David in FL]

Originally Posted by MEfree

I didn`t realize that the local rule still gave that choice and understand what you are saying.  What do you think of the modified local rule that I proposed that does not give a choice?  Found outside the hazard and you must play the original, lost/found within the hazard and you must play your provisional.

Can anyone tell me how this would be any different than a provisional for a lost ball?

By hitting a provisional for a possible lost ball through the green, you're not changing your options for playing the original ball should you find that ball.

If you were to implement the rule you propose, you would be changing the options available to you under the rules should you find your ball in the hazard. Specifically the ability to play the ball as it lies in the hazard should you choose to do so, or to take relief from the hazard in another manner as allowed by rule 26.  If you were to allow for those options, then the proposed rule falls apart due to having multiple balls in play at the same time and allowing the player to decide which benefits him the most.

[phan52]

Originally Posted by upstategolfer

Was thinking about this some more on the drive home, and it strikes me that actually this would be a simple way to incorporate this situation into the rules, and I admit up front I need to do a bit of research, but off hand you could simply put in a rule that if you put into play a new ball because you were virtually certain that the first was lost or in a hazard, and then find that the first ball was not, that no strokes made on the 2nd ball count, it must be abandoned, and play continue with the first ball. Make this a rule on it's own, and have it take precedence over any rule where there was any doubt as to the condition of the first ball (or original ball in play).

Simple enough.

I believe that IS the rule. Declare a provisional, and you can hit it until you reach where the first ball is. If the original ball is neither lost nor out of bounds, the player must abandon the provisional ball and continue playing the original ball. No strokes count on the provisional ball.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by phan52

I believe that IS the rule. Declare a provisional, and you can hit it until you reach where the first ball is. If the original ball is neither lost nor out of bounds, the player must abandon the provisional ball and continue playing the original ball. No strokes count on the provisional ball.

That is the rule in regards to OB/lost ball, but not for hazards.

[David in FL]

I believe that IS the rule. Declare a provisional, and you can hit it until you reach where the first ball is. If the original ball is neither lost nor out of bounds, the player must abandon the provisional ball and continue playing the original ball. No strokes count on the provisional ball.

Only through the green. NOT in a hazard. That's the discussion here....

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by David in FL

By hitting a provisional for a possible lost ball through the green, you're not changing your options for playing the original ball should you find that ball.

If you were to implement the rule you propose, you would be changing the options available to you under the rules should you find your ball in the hazard.  Specifically the ability to play the ball as it lies in the hazard should you choose to do so, or to take relief from the hazard in another manner as allowed by rule 26.  If you were to allow for those options, then the proposed rule falls apart due to having multiple balls in play at the same time and allowing the player to decide which benefits him the most.

Yes, my proposed rule would give the player the OPTION of playing a WH provisional (either from where you originally hit or behind the entry point) but in doing so, you lose the option of playing it from the hazard (but still would HAVE to play your original if found outside the hazard just like you have to play your original if you find it in bounds).  To me, this would be consistent with the way a provisional is done with a potential lost ball/OOB without the possibility of having two balls in play to choose from.

Quote:

Originally Posted by upstategolfer

Was thinking about this some more on the drive home, and it strikes me that actually this would be a simple way to incorporate this situation into the rules, and I admit up front I need to do a bit of research, but off hand you could simply put in a rule that if you put into play a new ball because you were virtually certain that the first was lost or in a hazard, and then find that the first ball was not, that no strokes made on the 2nd ball count, it must be abandoned, and play continue with the first ball. Make this a rule on it's own, and have it take precedence over any rule where there was any doubt as to the condition of the first ball (or original ball in play).

Simple enough.

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

That is the rule in regards to OB/lost ball, but not for hazards.

Once a ball is officially lost, or you are virtually certain it is in a hazard (and play the next shot), the fact that you find the ball outside the hazard is not recognized under the rules of golf.

Yes this could be changed, but as it stands currently even with a lost ball, once the 5 minutes are up, or you have taken a stroke with the provisional closer to the hole than where you think the ball was lost, finding the original does not let you abandon the provisional and play the original.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by MEfree

Once a ball is officially lost, or you are virtually certain it is in a hazard (and play the next shot), the fact that you find the ball outside the hazard is not recognized under the rules of golf.

Yes this could be changed, but as it stands currently even with a lost ball, once the 5 minutes are up, or you have taken a stroke with the provisional closer to the hole than where you think the ball was lost, finding the original does not let you abandon the provisional and play the original.

This exact thing happened to me Monday on the first hole.  Flew the green (I thought) into the hazard, only gave a cursory look into the rough behind the green before dropping at the hazards edge and playing from there.  Then found the ball while walking to the green.  But mine isn't really a case for a rule change ... but moreso for dummies to look harder for their balls before declaring them gone.

[David in FL]

Yes, my proposed rule would give the player the OPTION of playing a WH provisional (either from where you originally hit or behind the entry point) but in doing so, you lose the option of playing it from the hazard (but still would HAVE to play your original if found outside the hazard just like you have to play your original if you find it in bounds).  To me, this would be consistent with the way a provisional is done with a potential lost ball/OOB without the possibility of having two balls in play to choose from.   Once a ball is officially lost, or you are virtually certain it is in a hazard (and play the next shot), the fact that you find the ball outside the hazard is not recognized under the rules of golf.   Yes this could be changed, but as it stands currently even with a lost ball, once the 5 minutes are up, or you have taken a stroke with the provisional closer to the hole than where you think the ball was lost, finding the original does not let you abandon the provisional and play the original.

You asked how your proposed change is different than playing a provisional for a suspected lost ball through the green. I answered that. There's a big difference. Since you seem to understand the difference, now all we're left with is that you want to change a rule with which you disagree. I got nuthin' for that.

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

This exact thing happened to me Monday on the first hole.  Flew the green (I thought) into the hazard, only gave a cursory look into the rough behind the green before dropping at the hazards edge and playing from there.  Then found the ball while walking to the green.  But mine isn't really a case for a rule change ... but moreso for dummies to look harder for their balls before declaring them gone.

Not exactly the same thing as you did not look long enough for your ball to be virtually certain it was in the hazard.  Did you assess yourself an additional 2 strokes (on top of the stroke for the hazard) for playing from the wrong spot?

http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Decision-26/#26-1/4

Not taking the time to be virtually certain where your ball is can carry a very big penalty!

The way the rules are written, if you don`t want to take the time to be virtually certain your ball is in a hazard, the safest option is to play it like a lost ball.  Not saying that I agree with the way they are written, but that is the way I interpret them.  Would be much easier IMO to combine the OOB/LB/WH rules so that they could all be played the same way.  This is how I see a lot of real world golfers play anyways, but nobody on this forum seems to like this idea.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by MEfree

Not exactly the same thing as you did not look long enough for your ball to be virtually certain it was in the hazard.  Did you assess yourself an additional 2 strokes (on top of the stroke for the hazard) for playing from the wrong spot?

http://www.usga.org/Rule-Books/Rules-of-Golf/Decision-26/#26-1/4

Not taking the time to be virtually certain where your ball is can carry a very big penalty!

The way the rules are written, if you don`t want to take the time to be virtually certain your ball is in a hazard, the safest option is to play it like a lost ball.  Not saying that I agree with the way they are written, but that is the way I interpret them.  Would be much easier IMO to combine the OOB/LB/WH rules so that they could all be played the same way.  This is how I see a lot of real world golfers play anyways, but nobody on this forum seems to like this idea.

So in my case, it looks like the proper ruling would have been to abandon the dropped ball and continue play with the original ball?  (It was not in the hazard, nor had it been 5 minutes)

Oh I see ... that is only the case after dropping but prior to hitting it.  I found it after hitting it.  No matter I guess, ESC puts me at a double bogey anyway, which I ended up with, and my partner halved the hole for us, so I didn't factor in.

[limoric]

I couldn't read every post...too damn long; if it has not already been mentioned, the penalty for out of bounds is not more severe, it's stroke and distance just like a lateral hazard. By hitting your ball out of bounds, it is not longer in play; therefore you must put another ball in play from where you hit the last shot. When you hit into a lateral hazard, your ball is technically still in play, it's just not playable most of the time, therefore you must put another ball in play, the penalty is as if you had an unplayable lie. You could technically jump in the pound and retreive your ball. It's not about what color stake you hit the ball over, but whether the ball is in play or not. Ever say to a playing partner, "that's one" when they nick there ball off the tee during a practice swing? Even in a tournament, that would not be a penalty, as the ball is not in play, it did not leave the tee box and there was no attempt to put the ball in play. A ball that is not in play cannot be penalized...

So the rule is more about whether the ball is in play, not what type of stake you hit the ball over.