Red Stakes on Left White on Right Rule clarrification

[Reg5000]

Ok so on the par 4 number 10 tee of my home course there is a woods on the right marked with white stakes which I understand if the ball goes in it's stroke and distance.  But the part that I am confused about are the Red stakes on the left.  To the left of the number 10 hole is the rest of the course so you are still on the course.  If you go passed the red stakes are you able to play the shot where it lies or are you supposed to drop from the closest point of relief on the other side of the stakes.  Also the red stakes only go up so far and if you hit your drive lets say 250 and left you pass the end point of the stakes and everyone considers that playable because it is not marked that far out.  I was just wanting to know if I hit a ball left and go to the left of the stakes must I take a one stroke penalty and drop or can I play the shot as it lies?

[luu5]

Originally Posted by Reg5000

I was just wanting to know if I hit a ball left and go to the left of the stakes must I take a one stroke penalty and drop or can I play the shot as it lies?

Red stakes mark lateral water hazard, and yes you can play inside the hazard. Or you can do other things as per lateral water hazard rules.

ps. HC index of 2?

[Reg5000]

Originally Posted by luu5

Red stakes mark lateral water hazard, and yes you can play inside the hazard. Or you can do other things as per lateral water hazard rules.

ps. HC index of 2?

Ok sounds fair but there is no water to that side.  Just the rest of the golf course

[Reg5000]

And yes a Handicap Index of 2.  I never score higher than a 79 on my home course.  The question I asked may seem odd to you only because it is an arguement between me and another guy and I just wanted to confirm with other people that I was correct you can play as it lies passed those stakes because it is not indicated in the course rules that it is a 1 stroke penalty otherwise.  Just a deal sealer was all the question was lol

[Harmonious]

This sounds like a question best asked of the pro at the golf course, rather than anonymous online people who have never seen what you are talking about.  It is confusing, especially when you say there is no water on that side of the course, but there are red stakes.  Odd, indeed.

[Reg5000]

Originally Posted by Harmonious

This sounds like a question best asked of the pro at the golf course, rather than anonymous online people who have never seen what you are talking about.  It is confusing, especially when you say there is no water on that side of the course, but there are red stakes.  Odd, indeed.

For sure just wanted opinions was all but yes I find it odd too it is marked with red stakes with no water which is why the question arose in the first place =P

[Rulesman]

Originally Posted by Paradox

Tall weeds and natural grass areas will often be marked with red or yellow.  They are considered a hazard.

Not according to the Rules of Golf.

33-8/35

Local Rule Treating Rough as a Lateral Water Hazard

Q. The areas immediately adjacent to the fairways consist of large embedded boulders, thick desert brush and prickly cactus. A player whose ball comes to rest in such areas has no opportunity to play a stroke. Would it be proper to make a Local Rule under which such areas would be treated as lateral water hazards?

A. No. There are many courses where the areas adjacent to the fairways are of such a nature that a ball therein is almost always lost or unplayable. Thus, such a situation is not abnormal.

[Reg5000]

Thanks guys after some more research I think I got my answer appreciate the feedback

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by Reg5000

Ok sounds fair but there is no water to that side.  Just the rest of the golf course

Which means that the course is improperly marked if there is no water or dry watercourse behind those red stakes.

[Paradox]

Originally Posted by Rulesman

Not according to the Rules of Golf.

33-8/35

Local Rule Treating Rough as a Lateral Water Hazard

Q.The areas immediately adjacent to the fairways consist of large embedded boulders, thick desert brush and prickly cactus. A player whose ball comes to rest in such areas has no opportunity to play a stroke. Would it be proper to make a Local Rule under which such areas would be treated as lateral water hazards?

A.No. There are many courses where the areas adjacent to the fairways are of such a nature that a ball therein is almost always lost or unplayable. Thus, such a situation is not abnormal.

I didn't say it was correct..I tried to edit my post to say that..but deleted it instead.  Anyway, its not always "right" but some courses do take liberty with what they consider a lateral water hazard but my main point was that if its marked..all that matters is the color of the stakes which mark the "hazard".

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by Paradox

I didn't say it was correct..I tried to edit my post to say that..but deleted it instead.  Anyway, its not always "right" but some courses do take liberty with what they consider a lateral water hazard but my main point was that if its marked..all that matters is the color of the stakes which mark the "hazard".

The point is, how do you interpret a single row of red stakes with just more golf course on the other side of them?  What are the limits of the so-called water hazard?  A water hazard is a finite entity.  If you cross over the entire hazard, your ball should either be back in play or it should be outside of the course boundary.  A single row of red stakes can't define a lateral water hazard unless the hazard extends all of the way to the course boundary, and if that was the case, then there should be some additional indicator for out of bounds, be it fence or stakes.

[Paradox]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

The point is, how do you interpret a single row of red stakes with just more golf course on the other side of them?  What are the limits of the so-called water hazard?  A water hazard is a finite entity.  If you cross over the entire hazard, your ball should either be back in play or it should be outside of the course boundary.  A single row of red stakes can't define a lateral water hazard unless the hazard extends all of the way to the course boundary, and if that was the case, then there should be some additional indicator for out of bounds, be it fence or stakes.

where are you drawing that there was just a single row of red stakes?  From the guys posts I gathered that there was an area marked as a lateral hazard but it only ran so far up the left side of the hole.  I can only assume it completely encircled SOMETHING, however big or small it may be.

[mdl]

The markings may not be correct but my general understanding of that kind of lateral hazard marking is that it's basically just the local committee taking some liberties in pursuit of either saving a somewhat environmentally sensitive area within the course bounds or just speeding (locally legal) play.  If there are some thick woods and the next hole's a good way to the side and it's not too hard to lose a ball in there, but it's not OB, most guys won't take a provisional for a possible lost ball if they pull or hook one in there.  Marking it as a hazard lets guys stay within the (slightly bent, local) rules if they can't find their ball or it's in an unplayable lie and they just go out to the point of entry and take a drop and +1 penalty.  Lots of people do that anyway (including myself for surprise lost balls, as I'm always walking and don't want to walk back to the tee, though I've started taking a +2 then on the theory that it somewhat more approximates having gone back to the tee and hit a tee shot that's playable, sitting 3 instead of sitting 2), but it's incorrect.  Marking it as a hazard makes it the right play at least according to local rules.

And yes, you can't ground your club but you are allowed to play a ball from within a lateral hazard if you so choose.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paradox

where are you drawing that there was just a single row of red stakes?  From the guys posts I gathered that there was an area marked as a lateral hazard but it only ran so far up the left side of the hole.  I can only assume it completely encircled SOMETHING, however big or small it may be.

Because that is what Reg5000 seems to be saying.

Quote:

But the part that I am confused about are the Red stakes on the left. To the left of the number 10 hole is the rest of the course so you are still on the course . If you go passed the red stakes are you able to play the shot where it lies or are you supposed to drop from the closest point of relief on the other side of the stakes.

And

Quote:

Ok sounds fair but there is no water to that side. Just the rest of the golf course

If you see something different, then tell me where it is.

[Paradox]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Because that is what Reg5000 seems to be saying.

And

If you see something different, then tell me where it is.

so you've never seen a lateral water hazard marked in the middle of a course?

Nothing you posted suggested that its just a single line.  It just says to the left of the 10th fairway that there is a lateral hazard marked.  No indication of there just being a single line.  I would assume that any course who has the sense to make markings would mark an AREA and not a line.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by Paradox

so you've never seen a lateral water hazard marked in the middle of a course?

Nothing you posted suggested that its just a single line.  It just says to the left of the 10th fairway that there is a lateral hazard marked.  No indication of there just being a single line.  I would assume that any course who has the sense to make markings would mark an AREA and not a line.

And it says that there is "no water to that side. Just the rest of the golf course".  And "But the part that I am confused about are the Red stakes on the left. To the left of the number 10 hole is the rest of the course so you are still on the course."  Where do you see that it's not a single line?  All he mentions is a line of red stakes with the rest of the course on the other side.  He says absolutely nothing about an "area".  A course which will use hazard markings where there is no water and no watercourse would not necessarily do anything else right either.   Show me different.

If he comes back and clarifies it, then we will know.  Until then it's possible that either one of us is right.

[Paradox]

when he said "you are still on the course"..I take that to mean that its not OB.  From what he asked..he seemed to be confused about what to do once the ball had crossed into the marked hazard.  Can he play it or does he have to take a drop.  I don't think he was confused as to why the stakes were there or why it was marked as a lateral hazard.

[Reg5000]

Originally Posted by Paradox

when he said "you are still on the course"..I take that to mean that its not OB.  From what he asked..he seemed to be confused about what to do once the ball had crossed into the marked hazard.  Can he play it or does he have to take a drop.  I don't think he was confused as to why the stakes were there or why it was marked as a lateral hazard.

Combine both of your logics together and you guys got it lol....Yes I was confused as to did I have to take a drop or can I play it and for the record Its just a straight line of stakes along the left side of number 10 about 60 yards then stops.  I'll take a picture of it today and show you guys but no need to argue about it.