Water Hazard? Correct score?

[MEfree]

Assume that all the grass outside the hazard was short enough that after searching between the hazard and the green the player would either find the ball or be virtually certain it was in the hazard.

what would have happened had he found his ball outside the hazard before putting out?

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by MEfree

Assume that all the grass outside the hazard was short enough that after searching between the hazard and the green the player would either find the ball or be virtually certain it was in the hazard.

what would have happened had he found his ball outside the hazard before putting out?

Man, it seems like we are discussing a lot of similar rules issues today. And, since I have proven I don't know them very well, I am interested in learning about all of these.

This one seems pretty straight-forward, unless there is some trick in there I don't know about.  I voted 5.

My answer to your second question is pending your answer to my question in the other thread.

Just for giggles, I'll guess 7.

[szaino]

If he is not certain that the original ball went into the hazard, then he can not drop a ball as if it did.

He played a wrong ball, and if not corrected before he plays the next hole it is a DQ in medal play.

[David in FL]

I'll preface this by stating that if the situation came up, I'd refer to the rule book before leaving the green to ensure my score was correct...... Having said that, and acknowledging that I'm not a rules expert which is why I carry and refer to the book, it seems to me that he played a ball that was wrongly substituted because he was not virtually certain that it had been lost in the hazard. As a result he incurs a 2 stroke penalty and must complete the hole with the incorrectly substituted ball. Score is 6. Finding the ball on the other side doesn't change anything. Fourputt, am I close?

[Fourputt]

Actually under the circumsatnces as stated, it wasn't a substituted ball, but the second ball was played from a wrong place.   The ultimate penalty depends on whether the player gained a significant advantage from that action.  It's a 2 stroke penaly and he must finish the hole with that ball unless he gained a significant advantage, in which case he must go back and finish the hole correctly or be disqualified before teein goff on the next hole; or in the case of the last hole, before he leaves the green on that hole.  In the case of having to correct his mistake, any strokes taken with the wrong ball are not counted.

So he makes a 6 and faces possible disqualification if he didn't correct his mistake.

1st ball not found

2 stroke penalty for playing from a wrong place

1 stroke to the green

2 putts.

Thus for the poll I picked "none of the above".

[Golfingdad]

If it's a par 3, I presume we're talking about a fairly short distance (100 yards maybe?) between where he's dropping and where his ball might be if it's not in the hazard.  He also said the grass is short enough that he would find it easily ... wouldn't that likely mean that you could see it from across the pond?

Also, how do you define "virtually?"  Seems like a grey area to me.

Is it that you saw a splash?  Or, could it be something like "it's 145 to carry the water and I have my 155 club, and I hit it fat ... there's no way I can hit it 145 if I hit it fat like that, so it has to be in the water even though I didn't see it splash?"

EDIT:  I get it ... you said right in the original that he is "uncertain."

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

Thus for the poll I picked "none of the above".

You must have forgot to press "vote" then.

[David in FL]

Actually under the circumsatnces as stated, it wasn't a substituted ball, but the second ball was played from a wrong place.   The ultimate penalty depends on whether the player gained a significant advantage from that action.  It's a 2 stroke penaly and he must finish the hole with that ball [U] unless [/U] he gained a significant advantage, in which case he must go back and finish the hole correctly or be disqualified before teein goff on the next hole; or in the case of the last hole, before he leaves the green on that hole.  In the case of having to correct his mistake, any strokes taken with the wrong ball are not counted. So he makes a 6 and faces possible disqualification if he didn't correct his mistake.  Thus for the poll I picked "none of the above".

Crud. Where should he have played the 2d ball from? I thought any time you put another ball into play when the rules didn't allow you to, the ball was wrongly substituted. I got the score right and know that he had to finish with the second ball once he put it in play, but I've GOT to take a damn rules Seminar!

[Dormie1360]

Without certainty, the  correct answer is 7 with possible disqualification.

The player played 4 strokes plus 3 penalty strokes.  2 PS for playing from a wrong place and 1 PS under Rule 27, lost ball, which would be the only applicable rule that the player could have played under for dropping another ball.  Because the drop was by the lake and should have been reteed under rule 27, I think there would be a case for a serious breach.  In which case the player would have to re play the hole over adding the 3 PS to his score plus the original tee shot.  If this was not accomplished before the player played a stroke from the next tee he would be disqualified.

As to the question about if the grass was very short and the ball had to be in the hazard if not found, then the case for virtual certainty could be made.  If so, then the ball dropped under Rule 26 was a correct substitution under the rule and the original could NOT be played, regardless of when it was discovered.  The player would have to continue with the dropped ball under rule 26.

Also, in none of these scenarios is the player playing a wrong ball.  The correct terminology is a substituted ball, either correctly or incorrectly substituted depending on the circumstances.

[Dormie1360]

This decision helps explain the ruling.

26-1/3.7

Ball Dropped Under Water Hazard Rule Without It Being Known or Virtually Certain Ball in Hazard; Original Ball Then Found

Q. A player's ball is struck towards a water hazard and is not found. It is neither known nor virtually certain that the player's ball is in the water hazard, but 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. It was neither known nor virtually certain that the player's ball was in the water hazard when he put the substituted ball into play, and, therefore, that ball was incorrectly substituted under an inapplicable Rule.

The player must correct his error under Rule 20-6 by abandoning the substituted ball and continuing play with the original ball. If the original ball was found inside the water hazard, the player may proceed under Rule 26-1 .

If the player failed to correct his improper procedure and played the dropped ball, he has proceeded under an inapplicable Rule and incurred a penalty (see Decision 34-3/6 ). The ruling would be that the player has proceeded under Rule 27-1 (the only Rule that applied to his situation), incurring the one-stroke penalty under that Rule. Additionally, as he played the ball from a wrong place (i.e., a place not permitted by Rule 27-1 ), he incurred the general penalty, loss of hole in match play or two strokes in stroke play, for a breach of Rule 27-1 . In stroke play, the Committee must determine whether the player committed a serious breach when he played from the wrong place (Rule 20-7c ).

[David in FL]

Without certainty, the  correct answer is 7 with possible disqualification.   The player played 4 strokes plus 3 penalty strokes.  2 PS for playing from a wrong place and 1 PS under Rule 27, lost ball, which would be the only applicable rule that the player could have played under for dropping another ball.  Because the drop was by the lake and should have been reteed under rule 27, I think there would be a case for a serious breach.  In which case the player would have to re play the hole over adding the 3 PS to his score plus the original tee shot.  If this was not accomplished before the player played a stroke from the next tee he would be disqualified. As to the question about if the grass was very short and the ball had to be in the hazard if not found, then the case for virtual certainty could be made.  If so, then the ball dropped under Rule 26 was a correct substitution under the rule and the original could NOT be played, regardless of when it was discovered.  The player would have to continue with the dropped ball under rule 26. Also, in none of these scenarios is the player playing a wrong ball.  The correct terminology is a substituted ball, either correctly or incorrectly substituted depending on the circumstances.

Good grief...... I forgot the penalty stroke for the original lost ball too.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dormie1360

Without certainty, the  correct answer is 7 with possible disqualification.

The player played 4 strokes plus 3 penalty strokes.  2 PS for playing from a wrong place and 1 PS under Rule 27, lost ball, which would be the only applicable rule that the player could have played under for dropping another ball.  Because the drop was by the lake and should have been reteed under rule 27, I think there would be a case for a serious breach.  In which case the player would have to re play the hole over adding the 3 PS to his score plus the original tee shot.  If this was not accomplished before the player played a stroke from the next tee he would be disqualified.

As to the question about if the grass was very short and the ball had to be in the hazard if not found, then the case for virtual certainty could be made.  If so, then the ball dropped under Rule 26 was a correct substitution under the rule and the original could NOT be played, regardless of when it was discovered.  The player would have to continue with the dropped ball under rule 26.

Also, in none of these scenarios is the player playing a wrong ball.  The correct terminology is a substituted ball, either correctly or incorrectly substituted depending on the circumstances.

Dormie is right.  Decision 26-1/4 covers a similar situation.  I missed the stroke for the lost ball.

Quote:

26-1/4

Ball Played Under Water Hazard Rule Without Knowledge or Virtual Certainty That Original Ball in Hazard; Original Ball Then Found in Hazard

Q. A player's ball carried over a water hazard into some trees. It could not be determined whether the ball bounced back into the hazard or came to rest in the trees. Therefore, it was neither known nor virtually certain that the ball was in the hazard.

The player did not search for his original ball. He assumed that it was in the hazard, dropped a ball behind the hazard at a spot that conformed to Rule 26-1b and played that ball onto the green. As he was walking to the green, he found his original ball in the hazard. What is the ruling?

A. The first paragraph of Rule 26-1 states in part: "In the absence of knowledge or virtual certainty that a ball struck towards a water hazard, but not found, is in the hazard, the player must proceed under Rule 27-1 ." Therefore, the player was not entitled to assume that his original ball was in the hazard and the fact that it was subsequently found in the hazard is irrelevant. When the player dropped and played another ball behind the hazard, it became the ball in play and the original ball was lost. The player was required to proceed under Rule 27-1 . In playing the ball dropped under Rule 26-1b , he played from a wrong place.

In match play, he incurred a penalty of loss of hole (Rule 20-7b ).

In stroke play, he incurred the stroke-and-distance penalty prescribed by Rule 27-1 and an additional penalty of two strokes for a breach of that Rule (Rule 20-7c ). If the breach was a serious one, he was subject to disqualification unless he corrected the error as provided in Rule 20-7c . (Revised)

[MEfree]

Dormie`s interpretation is what I thought when I started the thread, but it does seem harsh- the guy has to take a 7 (or even be DQed) instead of a 5 when, after the fact, it is virtually certain that he played it right if he had just taken the extra time to walk around the hazard and look for his original ball before dropping behind the hazard.

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Man, it seems like we are discussing a lot of similar rules issues today.   And, since I have proven I don't know them very well, I am interested in learning about all of these.

This one seems pretty straight-forward, unless there is some trick in there I don't know about.  I voted 5.

My answer to your second question is pending your answer to my question in the other thread.

Just for giggles, I'll guess 7.

I think what you should have done under the rules when you found your ball outside the hazard after taking a drop before searching enough to be virtually certain it was in the hazard was to go back to the original spot and play it like a lost ball to avoid being DQed- 3 penalty shots total plus the distance penalty and forget about any shots that you made with the ball that you dropped in the wrong spot (by virtue of playing it like it was in the hazard when your only correct options would be to proceed under rule 27 or maybe a similar option under 28?).  Of course, you could continue with the dropped ball and hope it wasn`t deemed a significant breach.

We have some very big hazards with bushes that obstruct the view across the hazard at Keystone and 2 or 3 times when I played the other day my opponent announced that he was playing a "provisional" and dropped behind a hazard that he was not sure whether he carried or not.  I allowed him to do this as it seemed like a reasonable way to maintain the pace of play without giving him any advantage.  Had we found the ball outside the hazard, he would have been forced to pick up the "provisional" and had we not found the original, it would have been virtually certain his ball was in the hazard and  he would have been forced to continue with the "provisional" that was dropped in a proper location for the WH involved.  The only tricky part was if he found it in the hazard and then wanted to play it, but this was a non-issue once or twice as they were ESA hazards where play is prohibited.

Follow up question- If I had been playing this guy in our match play tournament, what would the ruling be if I allowed him to play those "provisional" balls?

[David in FL]

Follow up question- If I had been playing this guy in our match play tournament, what would the ruling be if I allowed him to play those "provisional" balls?

Easy.... You would BOTH be disqualified under rule 1-3 for agreeing to waive the rules. And rightfully so. :-P

[MEfree]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Easy....

You would BOTH be disqualified under rule 1-3 for agreeing to waive the rules.

And rightfully so.

I am not sure if I understand your icon after the rightfully so...I know it is in the rules, but why would disqualifying both players be the "right" thing to do?  It is match play, they both agree on what they deem is fair, who is getting hurt?

So who has actually seen both match play competitors get DQed for agreeing to waive the rules?

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEfree

Follow up question- If I had been playing this guy in our match play tournament, what would the ruling be if I allowed him to play those "provisional" balls?

Easy....

You would BOTH be disqualified under rule 1-3 for agreeing to waive the rules.

And rightfully so.

This depends on whether they agreed to waive the rule that both were aware of, or if they didn't know the procedure and agreed to proceed that way in ignorance of the rule.  In the latter case, there is no penalty and the results of the match would stand.

[David in FL]

This depends on whether they agreed to waive the rule that both were aware of, or if they didn't know the procedure and agreed to proceed that way in ignorance of the rule.  In the latter case, there is no penalty and the results of the match would stand.

I may have misunderstood, but I thought that he meant that they agreed amongst themselves, understanding the correct rule.

[David in FL]

I am not sure if I understand your icon after the rightfully so...I know it is in the rules, but why would disqualifying both players be the "right" thing to do?  It is match play, they both agree on what they deem is fair, who is getting hurt? So who has actually seen both match play competitors get DQed for agreeing to waive the rules?

Because a tournament can't be played under one set of rules for one person/match, and another for the remainder of the field......if they were aware of the correct rule and decided to waive that rule, then under rule 1-3 they are disqualified. I have never seen that happen, because I have never seen anyone playing in any kind of sanctioned tournament willfully ignoring, changing, or otherwise waiving the rules.